Last year, the West Michigan Policy Forum worked with state legislators and helped get legislation passed to undermine pensions for teachers in the public sector. Members of the West Michigan Policy Forum were able to do this by lobbying with their access to state lawmakers, since they have contributed significant amounts of money to their campaigns.
Just as a refresher, the members of the West Michigan Policy Forum who have the most power to influence state policy are John Kennedy (Autocam Medical), Doug DeVos (Amway), Jim Dunlap (Huntington Bank), Matthew Haworth (Haworth Inc.), Jeff Connolly )Blue Cross/Blue Shield), Rick Baker (GR Chamber of Commerce), J.C. Huizenga ( National Heritage Academies), Mike VanGessel (Rockford Construction), Peter Secchia (SIBSCO) and Michael Jandernoa (42 North Patners). These are the guys who make up the Grand Rapids Power Structure, who have their names all over buildings, sit on the board of directors for several other influential entities and some of them have major foundation that fund all manner of far right stuff.
One of the policies they are focused on now and in the coming year, is to attack and undermine public sector worker pensions, specifically government workers.
At the September 2018 West Michigan Policy Forum Conference, the issue of targeting public sector employee pensions was discussed. Heading up this effort from the West Michigan Policy Forum is Michael Jandernoa, CEO of 42 North Partners, located in downtown Grand Rapids. Jandernoa knows a few things about buying access to politicians. In the past three elections cycles, Jandernoa has ranked in the top 15 individuals/families in Michigan to contribute to political committees. In the 2013-2014 election cycle, Jandernoa contributed $649,996, in the 2015-2016 cycle he contributed $827,500 and in the 2017-2018 cycle Jandernoa gave $592,000 (as of August 22).
Jandernoa was interviewed by Comcast about the West Michigan Policy Forum’s goal to undermine government employee pensions, an interview you can watch at this link.
This 5 minute interview is friendly and non-substantive, but Jandernoa says a few things that are worth noting, particularly how he framed the issue of government employee pensions. Jandernoa and the West Michigan Policy Forum want us all to believe that government employee pensions are “an unfunded mandate.” This is the language that Jandernoa uses in the brief interview. It is also instructive that Jandernoa keeps saying in the interview that he believes that government employees are entitled to their pensions, but that those pensions should not be paid by taxpayers.
Here is the thing. Government employee unions fought to get pensions and other benefits for government employees decades ago. Now the far right wants to implement more austerity measures against the public sector and one way is to not have government employee pensions paid for by the government. Instead, as Jandernoa states in the interview, the West Michigan Policy Forum now has a formula for how to get this done. What Jandernoa is referring to was the way they got Public Schools to no longer pay teacher pensions, which meant that pensions would now be part of a 401k policy that put it within the realm of speculative capital and subjected to the whims of the so-called free market.
We will continue to follow this issue closely by monitoring any state legislation that is proposed in Michigan to undermine the pensions of government employees. We will continue to monitor the West Michigan Policy Forum as well, since their members, like Michael Jandernoa, are part of the capitalist class, which ultimately benefits from such policies.
Michigan Student Power Network statement: Lame duck, Ballot Measures, and Michigan Democracy
Below in italics is a statement from the Michigan Student Power Network. The statement is important on numerous fronts, especially with their conclusion that we should rely on the changes we seek through the ballot box.
There has been plenty of national and local coverage on Michigan’s Lame Duck session and how the GOP is attempting to undo some of the recent gains made. The Bridge has an interesting article about how many members of the Democratic Party base are not happy with the lack of action from the party’s leadership. The GOP did the same thing at the end of 2012, where they shoved a Right to Work policy on the public, even though there was massive opposition with 10,000 people protesting. Unfortunately, the labor unions decided to play nice and allow lawmakers to operate in a business as usual climate, much like what we are seeing today. The Michigan Student Power Network provides some interesting analysis here.
This past month, Michigan Republicans launched confidently into the Lame Duck Session proposing a slew of legislation. Among this torrent of bills, conservative legislators have aimed primarily at gutting progressive policies and subverting the outcomes of the 2018 election. They have targeted issues that are particularly important to Michigan students and working people: The two ballot measures: for paid sick time and the $12 minimum wage, as well as removing Line 5 from popular control, and attacking the rights of teachers unions. Being able to earn a higher wage, not being forced to choose between our health and a day’s pay, the end of a dangerous oil pipeline, and the rights of our teachers, all of these things would be clear tangible improvements or impacts on our lives.
Given the history of the Lame duck period, we expected this attack on Michigan’s people. Unilaterally passing legislation during lame duck has been at the core of the conservative strategy for at least the past decade.. In previous lame duck sessions they passed right to work and the emergency financial manager law, both critical attacks on the ability of working class communities of color to organize. They’ve even made a practice of overturning ballot measures having in the past defeated a popular attempt to end Emergency Financial Management by repealing the law and then re-passing a nearly identical law after the election during Lame Duck.
When viewed alongside long standing support for gerrymandering, voter id laws, and emergency management, it seems that ignoring and subverting the democratic process is critical to the conservative strategy. Sadly the response of progressive forces is plead for decency, and ask supporters to call legislators that are unlikely to listen (given that they will many will never again face the voters), and ask us all to go vote again in two years. This approach seems all the more ridiculous as we watch French protesters bringing their government to heel via direct confrontations in the streets, while reading daily of the latest abhorrent policy making its way through Michigan’s legislature.This back and forth cycle between conservative policies, elections, voter suppression, and ineffective opposition leads us to question whether our state is infact a democracy. We seem to increasingly live in an open oligarchy, our futures decided from above, and our our democratic aspirations subverted by the system that claims to represent us.
The Michigan Student Power Network, has long held that young people must engage in the electoral process, while maintaining a strong focus on long term organization, radicalization, and power building. This latest attack only underlines what we have known all along: that this process and this system was not built for us, and will not work for us; that we must use what little power we have at the ballot box to strike back against conservative policies; and that we must also seek more direct means to fight for a state that serves its people- not wealthy predominantly white political donors.
We will use the coming days to organize and publicize what is happening during this lame duck session, while laying the groundwork both locally and that the statewide level to demand the radical change our state needs through more direct means. Our futures depends on the redistribution of wealth and power through progressive taxation, historic reparations, free education and healthcare, and a restructuring of our democracy beyond the reach of the rich- we shouldn’t expect these things to just come from a ballot box.
GRIID Winter 2019 Class: US Immigration Policy, History and an End to Border Imperialism
Immigration policy has been front and center with the current administration as it has been for many others over the past 150 years. One can hardly go a week without hearing about asylum seekers, ICE violence against immigrant families, private detention centers or the targeting of immigration justice activists by police.
Considering how much attention immigration policy is getting, we are offering an 8-week GRIID class, which will include the following themes; 1) a history of US immigration policy; 2) Facts vs Propaganda on US immigration and immigrants; 3) How US Foreign Policy is often the cause of immigration; and 4) Immigration Reform vs Immigrant Justice.
The class will use chapters from a variety of books, online resources and documentaries. GRIID will provide PDFs of all the book chapters we will use.
The class format includes readings for each week along with open and informal discussion during the 2 hour classes, which are facilitated by GRIID.
The class is designed for people who want to expand and challenge their understanding of US immigration policy and practice. The class is also designed for people who want to
participate in immigrant justice and practice solidarity with the immigrant community.
GRIID is asking a suggested $25 for the 8 week class per person. However, the cost is negotiable and no one will be turned away based on contribution. Class size is limited to 15 people.
The class will be held on Monday evenings from 7pm – 9pm, beginning on Monday, January 28 and running through March 18. The class will be held at 940 Clancy Ave NE, Grand Rapids, MI 49503.
For more information about the class or to sign up, please contact Jeff Smith jsmith@griid.org.
The Fight against Enbridge’s Line 5 and the Future of Climate Justice in Michigan Part II
Last week, in Part I, we looked at what the State of Michigan is doing to support the Enbridge Corporation’s Line 5 project, with the recent decision to provide $4.5 million of taxpayer money to construct a tunnel under the lake to connected the lower peninsula with the upper peninsula.
We discussed the Enbridge Line 5 project within the context of recent reports on global Climate Change, which states that current fossil fuel consumption needs to be reduced by at least 50% within the next 12 years or humanity will not be able to reverse the global warming trend.
There are two additional reports that are also rather alarming as it relates to Climate Change. One report, published in the journal Nature, shows that the Greenland Ice Sheet hasn’t melted this fast for more than 7,000 years.
The second recent report comes from the US Global Change Research Program, which published its Fourth National Climate Assessment. The summary of findings in this report are rather sobering, which includes this statement:
Communities, governments, and businesses are working to reduce risks from and costs associated with climate change by taking action to lower greenhouse gas emissions and implement adaptation strategies. While mitigation and adaptation efforts have expanded substantially in the last four years, they do not yet approach the scale considered necessary to avoid substantial damages to the economy, environment, and human health over the coming decades.
With all of this new information and analysis, the logical conclusion that one could draw , especially as it relates to Michigan, is that Line 5 cannot continue to operate and must be shut down.
Climate Justice and Resistance to Line 5
Many of the mainstream environmental organizations don’t seem to have the urgency around Climate Justice, particularly when it comes to resisting Enbridge’s Line 5. The Michigan Environmental Council in their Energy and Climate Change section, has some information about Line 5 and its risks, but there is no clear call for it to be shut down and no clear steps and actions that need to be taken for it to be shut down.
The Michigan Sierra Club has great information about Enbridge’s Line 5 on their main page and even more educational material on the pipelines section. However, the only actions that the Sierra Club is encouraging people to take to Shut Down Line 5 is to contact the Governor’s office, the State’s Attorney General and to sign a petition.
Closer to home, there is the West Michigan Environmental Action Council (WMEAC), which does not have any information about Line 5 easily accessible on their website. The only thing related to Climate Change that you can find quickly is a report about Grand Rapids and Climate Resiliency.
The group FLOW (For the Love of Water), which is based out of Traverse City, also has a lot of great information on Line 5, like the graphic below, and a clear demand for the pipeline to be shut down. However, when it comes to taking action, they suggest signing a petition, writing Michigan lawmakers, getting your group to endorse shutting down Line 5, or putting a Shut Down Line 5 yard sign in front of where you live.
The only group that we have come across that advocates anything other than signing petitions or pressuring state lawmakers is the group known as Anishinaabek Camp – Shut Down Line 5. This is
an indigenous-led effort that is made up of Anishinaabek people, many of whom were involved with the indigenous resistance at Standing Rock. They are advocating for direct action to shut down Line 5 and have set up a base camp in Levering, Michigan, just south of Mackinac City.
The group is engaging in rallies, educational work, but more importantly they are using direct action as the larger tactic, with plans to actively shut down Line 5 and not wait for lawmakers to make that happen. You can support them by contributing to their resistance work at this link. They also welcome visitors to the camp, but have made it very clear that this is an indigenous-led movement to shut down Line 5, like to many of the other campaigns that are taking place, which are also led by indigenous people. This seems to be the most important work that those of us who are allies can support, with our money, resources and solidarity. You can contact the group by going to their Facebook page www.facebook.com/groups/207551026772509/.
Last night Movimiento Cosecha GR and the GR Rapid Response to ICE hosted a protest/vigil to make the connection to the tear gassing of asylum seekers at the US/Mexican border and the violence of family separation being perpetrated by ICE agents in Kent County.
After a brief informational gathering, the group walked to three different ICE offices located in the downtown area, offices that ICE operates out of, offices that ICE rents from local property management companies that we previously reported on.
However, before the protest/vigil began one member of Movimiento Cosecha GR was interviewed by WOOD TV 8. We recoded the entire interview, which lasted 8:55 and is posted here below.
We think it is important to contrast the interview that we did, with the interview that WOOD TV 8 conducted, which you can view at this link.
There are several differences between the full interview that we video taped with Movimiento Cosecha GR member Karla Barberi and what WOOD TV 8 aired on their channel and posted on their website.
First, WOOD TV 8 felt it was necessary to early on in their story and at the very end to use language from the US Border Patrol to frame their actions against asylum seekers at the US/Mexican border, language that places the blame on those who were coming to the US seeking asylum.
Second, in the WOOD TV 8 interview we never hear Karla talk about what the purpose of the action last night was and why Movimiento Cosecha GR organized the event, along with GR Rapid Response to ICE.
Third, WOOD TV 8 chose to focus on the more emotional comments from Barberi. And while there is nothing wrong with using emotional comments, those comments were taken out of context, thus making it difficult for viewers of the channel 8 story to fully understand what was happening and what the focus of the protest/vigil.
Fourth, in the video tape of Karla Barberi, she clearly discusses what local ICE violence is doing to immigrant families and why it is important for Kent County to end their contract with ICE. Those points, unfortunately are not very clear in the WOOD TV 8 story.
Lastly, since WOOD TV 8 did not accompany the march/vigil to the three ICE locations, they also missed the important information and analysis that was provided at each location by members of Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE. At the last ICE office that the protestors visited, in the old Waters Building, they were met by members of the GRPD, which escorted them out of the building, stating that if they stayed in the building, they would be arrested.
Movimiento Cosecha GR was live streaming the entire action, which you can watch at this link.
Kent County Administrative Staff and Commissioners establish Immigration Focus Group
During the November 29th Kent County Board of Commissioners meeting, it was announced near the end that the County administration and the Commissioners have now formed a Immigration Focus Group
Kent County Commissioner Bolter made the announcement, when she said:
I also wanted to make mention that if anyone happened to miss our Executive Team meeting this morning, staff is focusing on an immigration focus group that they have started…….and staff has met with the Sheriff and a few others, but they are putting together an action plan and planning to meet with community leaders and any other commissioners who want to be involved…..and that should be kicking off in January.
(You can watch the video from the 11/29/2018 meeting, with the comments beginning at 55:20 in the video.)
This decision by Kent County is the result of members of the immigrant community and allies pressuring them to end the Sheriff Department’s contract it has with ICE, a contract that has been in place since 2012 and is set to be renewed in September of 2019.
I want to make several points in response to this announcement.
First, Commissioner Bolter states that this is an immigration focus group, which is different than what we had been hearing for months. We were told that the County would establish a Task Force.
Second, when they say they are planning to meet with community leaders, what exactly does that mean? There are no defined community leaders in the immigrant community. What this usually means is people who have name recognition or those who work in the non-profit sector. However, community leaders can mean all kinds of things to all kinds of people, especially to those most affected by the contract that Kent County has with ICE. Who do you think that those most impacted by the ICE contract view are the “community leaders?”
Lastly, while some might see the immigration focus group as a positive, those who have been confronting the County to End the Contract with ICE view this announcement with skepticism and frustration. People are skeptical that it will not put the focus on the ICE Contract and they are frustrated that this announcement seems to minimize the actual harm that has been done, and is being done to the immigrant community by ICE in Kent County, including the Sheriff Department’s contract.
Legislative Republicans passed two bills, SB 1171 and SB 1175, gutting citizen-led ballot initiatives that were passed into law back in September. SB 1171 reduced the minimum wage in Michigan from what was decided back in September and SB 1175 reversed the earned paid sick leave improvements that were also established in September.
All of this has happened in the Lame Duck session by Gov. Synder and the Michigan Legislature. There have been protests against these actions, but no direct action in the form of occupying the State Capital or organized civil disobedience.
These measures taken by the Republican controlled legislature has infuriated people across the state. Such actions by the GOP speaks to the limitations of electoral politics, in terms of following the will of the people.
One thing that has not received much attention is who are the primary financial backers of the Republican controlled House in Michigan. In looking at the data provided by the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, we were able to determine that of the 60 Republican Legislators in the House, 41 of them have received funding from the DeVos family or one of the other members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure – Peter Secchia, John Kennedy or Michael Jandernoa.
To many political observers, the fact that the DeVos family has been contributors to most of the GOP members in the Michigan Legislator, this is fairly well known. However, there are many people in West Michigan who are unaware of the DeVos family influence in Michigan politics. The question people should be asking themselves is: 1) were they aware that the majority of the GOP members of the Michigan Legislature have received significant financial backing by the DeVos family; and 2) what would they think if they knew that the same Republican Legislators who are backed by DeVos, recently voted to reduced the minimum wage and repeal the earned paid sick leave?
What follows is a list of the GOP members of the Michigan House that voted for SB 1171 and SB 1175. If there is a NO after their name then they did not receive funds from the DeVos family or other members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure. The link after each name allows you to look at their top funding sources as elected officials.
Rep. Chris Afendoulis http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=137
Rep. Thomas Albert http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=104
Rep. Julie Alexander http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=129
Rep. Sue Allor http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=94
Rep. Tom Barrett http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=124
Rep. John Bizon http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=8
Rep. Tommy Brann http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=133
Rep. Julie Calley http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=105 NO
Rep. Ed Canfield http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=102
Rep. Lee Chatfield http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=88
Rep. Triston Cole http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=90 NO
Rep. Laura Cox http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=70 NO
Rep. Kathy Crawford http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=79
Rep. Diana Farrington http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=78
Rep. Ben Frederick http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=103
Rep. Daniela Garcia http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=108
Rep. Gary Glen http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=109 NO
Rep. Joseph Graves http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=148
Rep. Beth Griffin http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=10
Rep. Roger Hauck http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=4
Rep. Shane Hernandez http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=101 NO
Rep. Michelle Hoitenga http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=6
Rep. Pam Hornberger http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=84
Rep. Gary Howell http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=97
Rep. Holly Hughes http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=113
Rep. Brandt Iden http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=118
Rep. Larry Inman http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=89
Rep. Steve Johnson http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=138
Rep. Bronna Kahle http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=130
Rep. Tim Kelly http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=112 NO
Rep. Klint Kesto http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=17
Rep. Beau LaFave http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=91
Rep. Kim LaSata http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=98
Rep. Dan Lauwers http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=100 NO
Rep. Tom Leonard http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=115
Rep. Eric Leutheuser http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=120 NO
Rep. Jim Lilly http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=106
Rep. James Lower http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=136
Rep. Pete Lucido http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=81 NO
Rep. Steve Marino http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=75
Rep. David Maturen http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=119 NO
Rep. Mike McCready http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=127
Rep. Aaron Miller http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=125 NO
Rep. Jeff Noble http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=71
Rep. Dave Pagel http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=128 NO
Rep. John Reilly http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=144 NO
Rep. Daire Rendon http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=93
Rep. Brett Roberts http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=13 NO
Rep. Jim Runestad http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=121
Rep. Jason Sheppard http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=131 NO
Rep. Jim Tedder http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=143
Rep. Lana Theis http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=122
Rep. Curt VanderWall http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=95
Rep. Scott VanSingel http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=96 NO
Rep. Henry Vaupel http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=123 NO
Rep. Rob VerHeulen http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=116
Rep. Roger Victory http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=9 NO
Rep. Mike Webber http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=141
Rep. Jason Wentworth http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=110
Rep. Mary Whiteford http://mcfn.org/donor-tracking?candidate=99
The Fight against Enbridge’s Line 5 and the Future of Climate Justice in Michigan Part I
A little over a week ago, MLive ran a story stating that Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder was requesting that “lawmakers earmark $4.5 million for “radar current mapping, as well as planning, oversight and legal services related to the proposed Mackinac Straits utility tunnel project.”
The same MLive article also stated:
The outgoing governor called it a “common-sense solution” to safeguard the Straits from an oil spill while maintaining the pipeline connection.
The notion that this is a common-sense solution is ridiculous and it is in clear contrast to the recent reports from the global climate scientific community, which stated:
We have just 12 years to make massive and unprecedented changes to global energy infrastructure to limit global warming to moderate levels, the United Nation’s climate science body said in a monumental new report released Sunday.
“There is no documented historic precedent” for the action needed at this moment, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) wrote in its 700-page report on the impacts of global warming of 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, or 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Therefore, building new oil pipelines, even if the Line 5 proposal would just be just be a re-routing of the current pipeline is not sustainable if we are to take serious the warning from the scientific community that we have a 12-year window to drastically alter our consumption of fossil fuels. Unfortunately, no where in the MLive article is there even a discussion of information about climate change and the recent IPCC report.
Not that this is what you would expect from MLive when it comes to challenging corporate power. Just after the Enbridge Kalamazoo River disaster in 2010, MLive did an interview with the CEO of Enbridge that was nothing more than an opportunity for the company to promote it’s own propaganda. We reported on that interview and provide a deconstruction, which you can read here.
What is the track record of Enbridge?
According to a report from Tar Sands Watch:
Between 1999 and 2008, across all of Enbridge’s operations there were 610 spills that released close to 132,000 barrels of hydrocarbons into the environment. This amounts to approximately half of the oil that spilled from the oil tanker the Exxon Valdez after it struck a rock in Prince William Sound, Alaska in 1988.
Since then the company has continued to have oil disasters, like the Kalamazoo River disaster in 2010 and additional accidents since then.
However, if you listed to commercial radio stations throughout Michigan, you will likely here Enbridge commercials telling us all how safe their pipelines are. The company has gone to great lengths to convince the public of how wonderful and responsible Enbridge is. If you spend anytime on their Line 5 website, you can see how sophisticated the propaganda is.
Over the years Enbridge has also used numerous lawsuits against citizens and communities of people to gain access to land to run their pipelines through. They have used eminent domain as a way to force people from their land and lawsuits against numerous communities, particularly indigenous communities in Canada and the US.
In addition, we know that Enbridge, like all oil related companies, spends a great deal of money on lobbying and channeling money to support candidates. In May, there was a pretty good article that explored some of this Dark Money, which is limited, since Michigan is one of the worst states in the country when it comes to government transparency.
The incoming Michigan Attorney General, Dana Nessel, has said that she plans to shut down Line 5. In fact, Nessel said it was her top priority while campaigning. It would be great if that were the case, but we also know how long it could take, considering how Enbridge will fight the closing of Line 5 in the courts, and that could take years. We also know that often candidates say things during an election that they don’t do when in office. The point being, we should not put our hopes in the Michigan government being the ones to shut down Line 5.
In Part II, we will look at what actions are being taken to resist Line 5 in Michigan.
A missed opportunity with the GM layoffs: What US Labor Unions could learn from Unions around the world
In the fall of 2003, I was interviewing a labor leader with the UAW about the closing of the Electrolux plant in Greenville. When I asked the woman with the UAW, why the union did not fight harder to keep the plant open, even if it meant for workers to occupy the plant. The UAW representative responded by saying that those kind of tactics have been outlawed ever since the Labor Management Relations Act, also known as the Taft-Hartley Act, was signed into law in 1947.
I share this story, because it reflects the general attitude by the large, mainstream unions in the US that have failed working people for a long time on numerous fronts. So what if US law prohibits using those kinds of tactics. The Taft-Hartley Act was designed to break unions and to limit their ability to engage in sit-down or wildcat strikes, like the UAW use to do in the early days of that union.
GM Layoffs and Missed Opportunities
The mass layoffs recently announced by General Motors was a cruel, callous action that once again demonstrated how businesses view workers…….as disposable.
What made these layoffs so insidious was the fact that GM had received huge tax benefits, totally $514 million, plus the company has been given a total of $50 billion in taxpayer funded subsidies over the last decade, according to a recent article posted on Common Dreams.
A total of 14,700 jobs have been cut with this latest GM announcement and what did the UAW do? So far, the only thing they have done is to write statements objecting to the massive worker layoffs. Here is what UAW President Gary Jones said:
We have been clear that the UAW will leave no stone unturned and use any and all resources available to us regarding the future of these plants. Today, we wrote to GM formally objecting to its unilateral decision regarding four U.S. manufacturing facilities. There are issues related to this and to collective bargaining that we cannot discuss in detail at this point. But UAW members across this country are committed to using every means available to us on behalf of our brothers and sisters at Lordstown, Hamtramck, Baltimore and Warren, MI. UAW members and U.S. taxpayers invested in GM during their darkest days. Now it is time for them to invest in us!
My question is, what does it mean when he says that they are committed to using every means available to us on behalf of our brothers and sisters?”
Here is a thought. How about if workers occupied the factories and ran it as if they owned the factories. This is exactly what factory workers did in Argentina after the economic crash in 2001. Workers occupied the factories and began to run them as worker collectives. This amazing story is captured in a documentary film by Avi Lewis and Naomi Klein, entitled, The Take, which you can watch here.
Since the documentary came out in 2004, there is a book that has also been written about how the
decision by the workers at this one factory has led to a movement of worker-owned and worker-run cooperatives. These cooperatives include all kinds of business and the majority of them are run by women. The worker-run factories of Argentina offer an inspirational example of a struggle for social change that has achieved a real victory for working people confronting corporate globalization. Sin Patrón gives an insider’s account of this important movement.
This is exactly the tactic and the kind of strategy that organized labor needs to use here in the US, if they plan on staying relevant. Don’t you think that of the 14,700 GM workers who just lost their jobs would have nothing to lose by taking such an action? Unfortunately, we may never know, since the UAW is not likely to use every means available to defend their union members.
Understanding the History & Context of US Immigration Policy: Part III – We have to Stop saying that tear-gassing asylum seekers is unAmerican
In Part I of this series we provided some background information on the asylum seekers who were tear gassed by US Customs and Border agents last Sunday. In Part II, we looked at the history of the US/Mexican border and how it has become so militarized. In today’s post we want to look at how the US immigration policy has been unfriendly to many immigrants and refugees, especially if those immigrants and refugees have come from non-European counties.
It is important to note that US immigration policy, apart from being driven by white supremacy, has at times allowed non-European immigrants and refugees to come to the US, but this has often been motivated by politics. For instance, since the Cuban revolution in 1959, the US welcomed Cubans into the US, primarily because it was a matter on wanting to marginalize Cuba in the eyes of the world community. However, during the same period of time, the US has not been very receptive to Haitians wanting to come to the US, even though the political repression has been significantly worse there in the past several decades.
One last thing to point out before getting to the main focus of this article, is that the US is essentially based on Settler Colonialism, since the US took Native lands (by force or through treaties). Native scholar Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz describes Settler Colonialism this way:
“The objective of settler colonialism is always the acquisition of indigenous territories and resources, which means the native must be eliminated. This can be accomplished in overt ways including biological warfare and military domination but also in more subtle ways; for example, through national policies of assimilation.”
The dominant narrative about the US is that “we are a nation of immigrants,” but we rarely include in that narrative that these same immigrants forcibly removed native people from their land and then settled on that land, thus settler colonialism.
US immigration policy that has been anti-immigrant
- The Chinese Exclusion Act was a United States federal law signed by President Chester A. Arthur on May 6, 1882, prohibiting all immigration of Chinese laborers. However, the Chinese Exclusion Act did not include the Chinese upperclass, like diplomats and business people.
While the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882, there had been decades of anti-Chinese racism that was normalized in US newspapers, academic journals and popular fiction at the time. In 1866, the Anthropological Review referred to the Chinese as “an inferior and infantile race.” Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune stated in 1854, “The Chinese are uncivilized, unclean, and filthy beyond all conception.”
The social, political and cultural climate was profoundly anti-Chinese and often led to violence against the Chinese community – beatings, murder, burning businesses, etc. After the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act was signed, the US Army was also involved in enforcing the law, rounding up Chinese people for deportation. The US Army was even recruiting others to come to California to assist them in their efforts. In fact, here is an ad posted in the Grand Rapids Evening Leader, dated December 24, 1885:
- Anti-German hysteria during WWI – At the beginning of World War I, there were about 900,000 German-born Americans, but many of them changed their names to avoid the anti-German hysteria. Restaurants changed their menus from hamburgers to Liberty Burgers and sauerkraut to Liberty Cabbage. As WWI proceeded, the anti-German hysteria ramped up as more and more Germans were being questioned about the relationship with Germany and lots of Germans were being accused of acting as spies. On June 14, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson issued a warning to Congress stating, that German Americans “filled our unsuspecting communities with vicious spies and conspirators and sought to corrupt the opinion of our people in their own behalf.” The Anti-German League was attempting to ban books published by German authors and most schools in the US no longer taught German as a foreign language.
US refuses to take in Jews during WWII – There has always been anti-semitism in the US, but one of the worst examples was during WWII. Anti-Semitism was growing in the 1930s, partly because of the field of Eugenics. Numerous businesses and Foundations (like the Rockefeller Foundation) were funding eugenics research, research that was based on racist assumptions to support the racist values of White Supremacy. In 1939, there was a bill Congress called the Children’s Bill, which would allow 20,000 children to escape Nazi Germany and come to the US. The bill was eventually defeated because of growing anti-semitism by groups like the American Legion and the American Immigration Restrictionist League, both of which were using the battle cry of “America First” and referred to the bill as the “Jewish bill.” In the early 1940s, as it became public that Germany was going to institute their “Final Solution” policy and exterminate millions of Jews, the US State Department blocked numerous efforts to allow thousands of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany to come to the US. This dark part of US history is documented in David Wyman’s important book, The Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust 1941 – 1945.- The Japanese Americans put forced into Internment Camps during WWII – The Japanese who had come to the US beginning in the late 19th Century, never felt welcomed. Anti-Japanese sentiment grew, similar to Anti-Chinese fears in the US in popular media and because of groups like the Japanese Exclusion League. With the Immigration Act of 1924, Congressed prohibited Japanese immigration and limited European migration as well. Then, on February 19, 1942, President Roosevelt issued Order 9066, which paved the way for the forced removal and internment of an estimated 120,000 Japanese, most of whom were American citizens. In addition to being interned in camps, the Japanese Americans also lots their homes and businesses in the process. Most people in the US did not oppose the internment camps, because anti-Japanese propaganda was no normalized as is evidenced by these images, which were widely used in the media and by civic groups.

- Anti-Mexican immigration has been part of US history since the Mexican/American War – Like we discussed in Part II of this series, as White America took land from Mexico, the Mexicans who had been living there faced discrimination constantly. Between 1929 and 1936, the US government engaged in a massive deportation campaign directed at Mexicans, with some two million being sent back during this seven year period, on the pretext that the Mexicans were “taking our jobs.” This pattern has repeated itself over the decades and then the US welcomed Mexican laborers during WWII, it what was known as the Bracero Program. The most recent wave of anti-Mexican sentiment has come since the 1980s, as a result of the US military and economic policy towards Mexico and Central America. After the terrorist attacks in September of 2001, the US created the Department of Homeland Security, which includes Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Bush administration deported some 2 million people from 2001 – 2008, but that number increased to 2.5 million during the next eight years with the Obama administration. Most of those deported were Mexican.
Central American wars of the 1980s – During the 1980s, the Reagan administration was obsessed with what was happening in Central America. Hundreds of thousands of Salvadoran and Guatemalan refugees fled during the US-back counterinsurgency wars, yet the US would not recognize Guatemalans or Salvadorans as political refugees, so most were denied asylum and many were either deported or forced to live underground in constant fear of possible deportation. This crisis led to the 1980s Central American Sanctuary Movement, which consisted of about 400 different sanctuaries being established across the US for Guatemalan and Salvadoran refugees who had fled political violence. Grand Rapids was part of that movement.- Anti-Muslim/Anti-Arab racism since the 1970s – Anti-Arab/Anti-Muslim racism began in the 1970s, primarily due to the OPEC Oil crisis, where American motorists had to wait in line because of gas being rationed. This Anti-Arab/Anti-Muslim racism escalated during the Iran Hostage crisis and has continued throughout the 1980s to the present, with an additional escalations during the Gulf War in 1991, the Oklahoma City bombing in 1994, the 2001 War on Terror and the most recent Muslim Travel ban initiated by the Trump administration in early 2017. The rise of Islamophobia has been well documented by groups like Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting and the work of Jack Sheehan, most notably in his documentary Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People.
This is just a sample of the way in which US government policy, white supremacy, along with cultural and religious institutions have treated immigrants in the US for more than a century. Therefore, while we should be outraged at the tear-gassing of asylum seekers, we have to STOP saying that such behavior is un-American, because this simply is not true. In fact, it could arguably be said that the gassing of asylum seekers is consistent with the treatment of immigrants in US. Lastly, not only do we need to become more familiar with the historical treatment of immigrants int he US, we should not forget the recent history of the Obama administration’s use of tear gas against immigrants at the US/Mexican border, as was recently reported in Newsweek.






