Ban Great Lakes Drilling
(This action alert is from Progress Michigan.)
When U.S. Rep. Joe Barton apologized to BP executives for the “shakedown” they suffered – meaning the money the reckless drilling company set aside to begin paying for their oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico – he wasn’t, as he later backpedaled, speaking only for himself.
He was speaking for all 114 members of the Republican Study Committee, a caucus for extreme right lawmakers that includes Michigan Congressman Pete Hoekstra. The caucus issued a press release in defense of BP, making it clear the group and its members — like Barton and Hoekstra — are on the side of Big Oil.
Pete turned his back on the people in Gulf by defending BP. He turned his back on the people of the Great Lakes, where BP has dumped waste and toxins. It’s only a matter of time before he offers BP the keys to the kingdom and tries to open the Great Lakes for drilling. Tell Pete and his pals we won’t stand for “Drill, baby, drill” in Michigan, by signing this petition and sharing it with others.
USSF addresses women’s issues
“]
It’s often said, “You can tell a lot about a society by the role its women play.” The community of folks gathered at the US Social Forum are an example of an adage in action, showing by example that a just world is possible for women.
In the meantime, a lot of work needs to be done. Scores of USSF workshops are sharing how to do that work. Several of them spoke to the issue of women and poverty.
In the workshop, “Women’s Poverty through th e Lens of Social Documentary photographer Milton Rogovin,” facilitator Toma Lynn Smith, of the Louisville National Organization of Women, presented some striking facts about how women are undervalued in the US.
- Women annually contribute $15 trillion worth of unpaid work to the US economy in the form of care-giving and housework.
- Though the first equal pay for equal work bill was introduced in 1950, women in 2010 only earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn.
- Traditional “women’s work” is valued less than “men’s work” requiring comparable skill. For example, a male van driver earns $1,382 a month while a female clerk typist earns $1,115.
- Women performing jobs traditionally held by men face many challenges from co workers and often lag in advancement.
- Men performing jobs traditionally held by women often are chosen for advancement over women co-workers.
From 1952 to 2002, Rogovin traveled the world taking photos of the working poor because, as he said, “The rich have their own photographers.” His photos show poor women toiling as coal miners, a bartender, a storefront preacher, sex workers, steel millers and caregivers.
One middle-aged woman attending the workshop wisely commented about a photo of a woman doing grueling work in a factory, “She seems to be saying ‘this is the length I will go to make things work for my family, so my daughter can become a teacher and my son an attorney… and that’s personal.”
Other worlds are possible
Attending the US Social Forum now taking place in Detroit has one major drawback. With around a thousand workshops to choose among, how do you decide which nine or ten to attend? The bright side of this dilemma is that you are bound to find some topics that exceed your wildest workshop dreams.
That’s how I felt when I took part in “Other Worlds Are Possible: Visionary Fiction, Organizing and Imagining the Future.” I confess, I am a science fiction geek. When I stare at the two thousand worthwhile non-fiction titles on the shelves of The Bloom Collective during my shift, I am shamed that I can better describe the history and peoples of the planet Arakis than the roots of anarchism and its major players.
Imagine my delight in hearing the facilitators, including poet and journalist, Walidah Imarisha, and Morrigan Phillips, editor and contributor to LeftTurn magazine, describe the role of visionary fiction in creating social change.
What is visionary fiction? Visionary fiction explores current social issues. It raises consciousness about identity in terms of race, class, gender and power. The plots involve social transformations happening from the bottom up. Ultimately, power will be wielded by the oppressed.
Did you know W.E. B. DuBois wrote a sci-fi short story, “The Comet” in the 19-teens where a working class black man and a rich white woman are the only two people left on earth? Other writers of visionary fiction discussed included Octavia Butler, Derrick Bell and Ursula LeGuin.
“White male sci-fi writers say visionary fiction bastardizes the genre,” one facilitator noted. “And authors of color are not acknowledged as writing that genre as their books are often shelved in the “Black” section in bookstores.”
After reading the introductory pages of Derrick Bell’s short story, “Space Traders,” workshop attendees discussed how the story addresses the historical oppression of people of color, the role of religion and hierarchy in colonialism and how racism shapes people’s judgments of themselves and others.
Unlike a non-fiction treatise of any of those issues, visionary fiction can engage a wider audience and remove barriers to seeing empire, militarism, racism, environmental concerns and gender inequity issues in a new and realistic light.
Another world is possible–but we have to envision it first. Write on!
I just finished participating in an amazing workshop with highly skilled organizers from New York City, known as Shift NYC. The workshop was designed primarily for people who could be allies with those who are most impacted/targeted by gentrification.
The session began with an exercise asking participants questions like – how long have you lived in the neighborhood you are in now? Have you ever found yourself intimidated by police coming into your neighborhood? Have people, homes or green space been displaced because of gentrification in your neighborhood? Are there organizations in your community working on anti-gentrification? Have you supported people who have been most impacted/targeted because of gentrification?
The session organizers then provided people with some working definitions of gentrification and acknowledged that it is a systemic problem and therefore it needs a response that calls for systemic change.
Gentrification – The phenomenon in which low-cost or “low-value” neighborhoods are developed and “improved” through purchase and renovation of land and businesses. This process transforms the neighborhood into a “high-value” neighborhood causing the displacement of long-term residents and businesses who are often low-income, poor, and people of color, to make way for the influx of middle class and upper class communities. Gentrification also involves and relies on the support of other institutions like police, education/schools, transportation, housing, etc to effectively pave the way for middle and upper class communities to move in.
The session organizers also pointed out that in addition to people being displaced by gentrification, cultures can be displaced as well as natural habitat by new structures or parking lots.
Shift NYC has worked with Right to the City, a national organization established in 2007 that focuses on urban justice and movement building. They session organizers stressed the importance of working with existing entities who do anti-gentrification work if they exist in your community.
The bulk of the session was devoted to small group discussion around what it means to be an ally with those that are negatively impacted/targeted by gentrification. They stressed the importance of accountability and self-interest for those who are allies, especially since being an ally inherently means we are acting from a position of privilege.
“If you have come to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.” Australian Aboriginal Group
The small group discussion had each group arguing different ways in which people of privilege can respond. Some people of privilege will say that there is nothing they can do and therefore do nothing. A second response is when individuals decide to do something to help and that might include signing petitions or sharing skills that those individuals have. A third response was for people or privilege to use that privilege, but from a distance – not developing a relationship with those most impacted/targeted by gentrification. The fourth position was a form of solidarity, where people of privilege develop relationships with those impacted/targeted, listen to the needs/desires of that community and then using the resources/power of our privilege to work with those most impacted/targeted by gentrification.
The session did not deal with specific tactics used in fighting gentrification, because the organizers felt that since every community where this occurs has unique dynamics that makes it difficult to provide a simple blueprint for this kind of work.
The session participants seem very animated and inspired by the information and activities. It was clear that people felt better equipped to move forward to fight gentrification having participated in this session.
The True Cost of Coal – A Beehive Collective work
Here is a short video with footage of the latest Beehive Collective work called the True Cost of Coal. Another great example of the power of art to inspire and inform us about acts of injustice and acts of resistance around the world.
Anti-Imperialism is Green: USSF workshop
Global Exchange hosted a session to discuss and analyze the impact of US-based policies that impact other countries negatively with Climate Change. They showed a video that looked at the People’s Climate Summit in Bolivia, which points out that imperialist policies make climate disparities greater for the poorer countries of the world and that those of us in the US should pay massive reparations for what this country’s policies have meant abroad.
Michigan policies to confront this – Lansing Bike Co-op formed recently to provide affordable bikes to people, tools for repair, bartering, skill share and workshops for the community on a variety of topics. The bike co-op also has a garden and fair trade coffee project, which delivers the coffee by bicycle.
Another presenter talks about the Highland Park project, which is based in Detroit. The presenter asks people what barriers there are changing the culture in the US. Some identify a power imbalance, poverty, racism, corporate media, intertwining of economic and political power and the education system.
The question is then asked what solutions can we come up with to confront these imperialist projects. One person suggested identified local polluters and then engaging in various forms of direct action. People also mention it is important to not by into the idea that just changing personal behavior is enough to create systemic change. Another person pointed out that US militarism is a huge contributor to the climate crisis and that anti-war, anti-imperialist groups need to build alliances with environmental-focused groups when possible.
The presenter then begins to engage people about localized examples of truly sustainable communities. In the Highland Park area they are working to transform neighborhoods with their Green Economy Training. The project includes creating garden space and sustainable demolition, where resources from the homes demolished would be used for any new projects. Another component of the project is to create some alternative energy sources that would allow people to get off the grid of DTE and Consumers Energy.
Highland Park is a predominantly African American community, with about 75% of the population living in poverty. The project is a partnership with residents and other entities that have a commitment to transforming that community. It is evolving and may take a direction of its own, but the intent is to provides skills and resources to people from Highland Park the opportunity not only transform their community, but to create alternative futures through education and economic opportunities.
Besides Highland Park, they discussed another project in the Appalachian part of West Virginia. Since mountaintop coal removal is the biggest issue facing them, this project is not only confronting the coal mining industry, but looking at ways create a green economy that truly benefits to residents of works of Appalachia.
Another speaker shared stories of another project in the Washington, DC area. This project is called weatherize DC and is designed to build more equity in communities that are currently devastated by poverty. By doing weatherizing and education about energy efficiency, people not only can save on energy costs, it provides employment for people.
One of the presenters also mentions that there are other campaigns like one in Utah that is challenging tar sands mining, a bike caravan project in the New England states and a project in Cleveland that is similar to the one in Highland Park.
While there was interesting information about local projects around the country, the session did not really present any serious anti-imperialist analysis or strategy. Working at the local level to transform our communities is extremely important, but it is not enough to combat what US consumption and US militarism abroad has done to communities. In addition, not challenging US imperialism abroad is often because of privilege. People who have privilege in this society, even if they are working on climate change work in their communities, are the “beneficiaries” of US imperialism, which in the case of climate change means that they don’t feel the brunch of global warming to the degree that communities around the world do. As the Bolivians in the video screened at the beginning of the session said, the US must pay massive reparations to countries that US imperialism has impacted.
Separation of Oil & State
(This article is re-posted from Oil Change International.)
Last week, Barack Obama joined every President since Richard Nixon in calling for an end to our dependence on oil. Like both Bushes, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Ford and Nixon, the rhetoric was great, but the specifics were…lacking.
We all know we need to end our dependence on oil. To get there, we need not only good ideas for clean energy policy and innovation, we need a separation of oil and state.
The Separation of Oil & State campaign is about breaking the co-dependent, dysfunctional, destructive relationship between the oil industry and the US government.
The sad fact is that after 40 years of tough talk from Presidents, the oil industry is giving and getting more money than ever before. Just two weeks ago, with the Gulf disaster spewing away, the US Senate defeated a measure that would have eliminated some oil subsidies. It’s outrageous.
Enough is enough. To break our nation’s addiction to oil, our Representatives will have to break their addiction to oil money. No more oily Congress. No more subsidies as rewards for campaign contributions. Our government should represent us, not the fossil fuel industry.
Join the Separation of Oil and State campaign and write your representatives in Washington today.
After you’ve taken action, please tell your friends about the campaign. We need to build a movement to demand that our government represent us, not the fossil fuel industry. Please help us.
Over the next several weeks, we’ll be providing new and updated tools to help you hold Washington accountable. We’ve heard enough promises, it’s time to demand action.
Candidate Profiles for the 3rd Congressional District
(This article was submitted by Josh Sadowski)
As congressperson Vern Ehlers has publicly announced his retirement, the seat for Michigan’s 3rd Congressional district has been left open for the November 2010 election season. There are seven candidates running for the office in the fall (five Republicans and two Democrats), however little is known about them.
The debates that have been held scantily covered by the local media and focused primarily on the Republican candidates (the district is considered “safely Republican” by most observers and with disorganized participation by the Democrats, it’s easy to see why). Many potential voters may be wondering where the candidates fall on a variety of issues and where they get their funding from.
Justin Amash is, by many estimates, the front-runner for the Republican Party and thus the front-runner in the race to fill Ehlers seat. Amash announced his intention to run prior to Ehlers announcement to retire, and received early support from Dick and Betsy DeVos. Amash’s early announcement may serve as an indication that he is aiming right of the current political establishment, looking to fill Ehlers seat with a more conservative voice.
By and large, what most distinguishes Amash from his opponents is his vehement support of the free market and criticism of government intervention, regulation, and social programs in all areas of the economy.
Amash’s voting record is particularly reactionary, leaving him sometimes standing alone as the only dissenting vote. Amash has gone as far as to vote “No” against subsidized healthcare for Autism, a ban on texting while driving, and Hire Michigan First legislations in Michigan.
Amash is considered a “tea party” candidate, as his stance on most issues is framed as anti-big-government and pro-free-market. However, in step with traditional right wing values, this philosophy is not extended to abortion or national defense, where Amash is pro-life and pro-military. Amash makes a point on his website to criticize government spending on healthcare, environment, and education, but not on the defense budget, (which accounts for nearly half of all federal discretionary spending).
With such a shift in public perception on the environment in recent years, all candidates at least attempt to appear “green”, and Justin Amash is no exception. On his website, he states that “government should punish businesses and individuals that pollute the land, water, or air of their neighbors”. However, Amash is one of the few members of the Michigan House to receive a 0% on Michigan League of Conservation Voters annual scorecard (43 Michigan congressmen and women were able to obtain a 100% rating).
Amash occasionally tries to appear in favor of popular government programs, however his record and contributions illustrate he is more in favor of big businesses running society. In Amash’s run for the Michigan House, he received contributions from the DeVos and Van Andel families, with much of his money (over $70,000) coming from his family’s own Michigan Industrial Tools. In this race thus far, Amash has received $25,000 from Michigan Industrial tools, nearly $20,000 from various health care providers, and a thousand each from Amway and AT&T.
Steve Heacock is a former Kent County Commissioner and a leader in the Van Andel Institute. To date, little is known about Heacock given his lack of voting record or political presence in the area. Given his previous rolls, it can be assumed that Heacock believes in a partnership between the public and private sectors. He was the chairman of the Convention and Arena Authority in Grand Rapids and has helped to bring the Van Andel arena, the DeVos place, and MSU’s college of human medicine to the downtown area.
Heacock has received campaign dollars from the Van Andel institute, as well as the law firm Warner, Norcross & Judd, who’s contributed over $40,000, making them the largest single contributor to any candidate, dwarfing the $25,000 Amash has received from his own Michigan Industrial Tools. Warner, Nocross & Judd is one of the largest law firms in Michigan.
Heacock’s stated views (per his website: http://heacockforcongress.com/the-issues/) do little to distinguish him from a run of the mill Republican. He does occasionally try to tap into populist attitudes by listing jobs and health insurance reform (or the repeal of) among his top priorities, but these stances are repeated by the other candidates and contradicted by Heacock’s positions on other issues.
For example, Heacock has proposed an “Eight Step Plan” to fix Michigan’s failing economy. The plan includes extending the “Bush Tax Cuts”, removing regulations on businesses, and passing any pending Free Trade Agreements to open up trade with any foreign nations we have neglected up to now, all of which have proven to be detrimental to Michigan workers by accelerating (or even causing) the collapse of the financial sector, concentrating wealth in corporate pockets, and exporting jobs to other nations with less labor regulations and lower costs to the business.
Ultimately, Heacock is will be seeking to define himself more fully in the debates and campaign ads that are sure to come. With little record to stand on, it can be expected that Heacock will follow the current republican talking points, which encourage Bush era deregulation and hawkish foreign policy.
“Hi, I’m Bob Overbeek and I’m not for sale.” If you’ve heard Bob Overbeek speak once since May, you’ve heard him say those words. Overbeek claims to be on the side of working class Americans and the working poor, and thus will not be accepting more than one dollar from any contributor. By this logic, as of March 31st, 478 people had contributed to Overbeek’s campaign, which is the dollar amount he has purportedly raised from outside investors. The remaining $2,071 in his war chest was self-contributed (this compared to $116,063 raised by Justin Amash and $88,187 by Steve Heacock).
While Overbeek claims to be in support of market solutions to societal issues (such as healthcare), he is by no means a tea party candidate. His website proclaims he is opposed to “continued action in Afghanistan with the deployment of US ground troops en masse”. He is the only candidate to mention either Iraq or Afghanistan so far in the campaign.
Overbeek also supports “card check”, which is largely considered a pro-union measure supported by some democrats (including Barrack Obama and Paul Krugman) and opposed by big business advocates such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Restaurant Association.
Overbeek gained some media attention during the first public debate between candidates for the Third Congressional District when he pulled out a pair of vice-grips made by Justin Amash’s Michigan Industrial Tools, which were made in China. Overbeek criticized his opponent for supporting China as a Most Favored Nation in free trade. Amash failed to respond.
While Overbeek remains conservative on many issues (marriage, abortion, immigration, markets, guns) he is the most progressive of the Republican candidates in the race, giving the working poor the most to grasp onto. This is sure to be a target of his opponents, who are likely vying for the tea party vote. Considering Overbeek was the first to submit the required signatures to run in the election, he may have more support than his bank account suggests.
Bill Hardiman is a Michigan state senator and a former mayor of Kentwood Township. He is the only non-white candidate on the Republican side. Hardiman’s website features a picture of the senator posing with Sean Hannity, however the conservative pundit might be disappointed with mixed voting record.
According votesmart.org, Hardiman has supported such “liberal” and “big-government” legislation as Prohibiting Text Messaging While Driving (HB 4394), Renewable Electricity Standards (SB 213), and Tuition Assistance for Students in High Poverty Areas (SB 861), among others.
Hardiman’s voting record suggests most of all that he likes to be on the winning team, whether that be Democrats or Republicans. He has rarely supported a losing bill (and vice versa), voting with Democrats only when there were enough other republicans doing so to pass the legislation at hand (Hardiman works in the republican led Michigan senate). Hardiman is a populist among other senators, going along with whatever is popular at the time. There is little to suggest that his behavior in Washington will be different than it has been in Lansing.
In Hardiman’s campaign for state senator, he received contributions most often from Blue Cross Blue Shield, and often from DeVos family members, Realtor groups, and the Comcast Cable Company.
Ultimately, with Amash and Louise Johnson vying for the ultra-right wing, anti-government vote, Heacock coming from outside the political establishment, and Overbeek playing populist, Hardiman is going to be hard pressed to distinguish himself as a strong Republican people can trust in Washington.
Polls show people are frustrated with incumbents and America’s institutions in general. Hardiman, having allied with big businesses and worked to put Michigan where it is economically, may have his work cut out for him.
Louise Johnson is the only female in the race and she seems to be taking a far right, political outsider approach. However, this is difficult to discern considering an extreme lack of available information on the candidate. Her website suggests she is pro-life, pro-gun, and anti-government (she describes government as a “cancer” on her homepage, which begs the question, why try to work in government?).
Johnson is a member of the West Michigan Tea Party and a local lawyer at a law firm that specializes in criminal defense. She was characterized as a tea party candidate by the local press after the recent debate. However, considering the diverse range of views the tea party can attract, this information does little to inform voters of Johnson’s stance on any issues (other than perhaps taxes and the size of government, but that’s even arguable).
If Johnson is going to be a serious contender in the August primary she has some serious footwork in the coming months. As of March 31st, she had not yet reported any campaign financing information. Currently, Johnson is struggling to inform even interested voters of her positions on any of the issues facing West Michigan. Johnson’s lack of preparedness is eclipsed only by that of the Democratic contenders for the 3rd Congressional district.
Patrick Miles is the first of two Democrats registered for the August primary election. He is a Harvard Law School graduate (a class mate of President Obama) with no political record to speak of. Mile’s fundraising efforts are second only to Amash, and he has received contributions mostly from lawyers and law firms, the food and beverage industry, and non-profits. Other than these points, little is available on Miles.
Miles was the only candidate not to participate in a recent debate between those seeking Ehlers seat, and his website, though neat and sleek, does not give a basic rundown on his positions. It does feature a section called “Vision”, which is a sort of political abstract of the candidate. However, the section does little more than define Miles as a democrat who believes in vague ideas such as “job growth” and “investment in clean energy”.
Miles’ vision is also a bipartisan one, because according to his website “partisanship rules the day and things are not getting done right… we must work together to get results”. This suggests Miles is really a moderate who believes in compromising with the right, but it’s hard to tell.
According to opensecrets.org Miles has spent almost none of his $107,230 in campaign contributions. It seems as if the cannon is loaded and Miles, for reasons unknown, is waiting to fire.
Paul Mayhue is Miles’ only other Democratic contender and is a former Kent County Commissioner. As of March 31st, Mayhue had reported no campaign contributions and, as of June, has done very little to establish himself as a viable candidate. Mayhue’s website is difficult to find on the web (www.mayhue4u.com) and contains little content about what the former commissioner is proposing.
Mayhue’s website contains his positions on four issues: healthcare, education, jobs, and senior issues. Each section contains one or two sentences on the given issue, not giving the candidate much room to elaborate on anything other than the general importance of the issue at hand. Mayhue did come out in favor of universal healthcare early in the debate, but has since vowed to “inform our nation of the benefits of the recently passed legislation.” If Mayhue is willing to compromise on such an issue before even getting into office, this suggests that while he may have leftist ideals, he is more than willing to compromise and move right with the whole of the Democratic party. Again, with voters disliking the current political establishment, this move comes off as particularly weak and ineffectual.
Mayhue did participate in a recent debate with the five republican candidates. There he stated that he believed corporations such as BP should be criminally punished as citizens since they are treated as people under the law. Mostly however, Miles’ lack of participation in the debate left Mayhue to be outnumbered and outgunned by the Republicans, adding evidence to the perception that Democrats in the district are truly outmatched, in every sense, by Republicans.
Ultimately, the efforts of both Democratic candidates combined hardly compare to the work done by either Amash or Heacock separately. Thus far, Miles and Mayhue’s efforts are resembling those of the Democrats who have failed for the past 35 years to capture the 3rd district: insufficient, unorganized, and late from the starting gate. One has to wonder if the Democrats running in the 3rd district even believe they can win the seat.
Obama carried Kent County in 2008, which demonstrates some local willingness to vote Democrat. However, local candidates have failed to give West Michigan what Obama did – an inspiring and well organized candidate who believes he can beat Republicans in even the most conservative areas.
It is well known that the personality and presence of a candidate is as much or more important than their stance on the issues. Candidates who are timid and doubtful from the start are unlikely to garner any real support. Obama was a confident candidate who aspired to progressive ideals during the campaign, and he won over this “safely Republican” district. This makes the lack of a strong leftist candidate in this election seem like a missed opportunity for the left, especially for those disappointed with Obama’s retreat to the right while in office.
All things considered, with no sign of a confident candidate even left of center, November is shaping up to be a winning month for the far right in the 3rd district once again.
The US Social Forum got underway Tuesday with a jubilant march through the streets of Detroit. Thousands of people joined the march, which started at Warren and Woodward and ended at Cobo Hall, where an expected 20,000 people are gathering for workshops, plenaries, parties and cultural activities focused on social justice and systemic transformation.
The march united black, white, Latino, and indigenous peoples– as well as anarchists, socialists, union locals and activist mothers, youth and immigrants and dozens of affinity groups. One theme ignited the hopes of all, “Another world is possible!”
(Jeff Smith produced the video)
Reporting from the US Social Forum
Some of us who write for GRIID arrived today at the US Social Forum along with an estimated 12 – 15,000 people. There is a march at 3pm today, followed by an opening ceremony, which we plan to report on.
We will write about what we can, conduct interviews and write pieces based on the sessions we attend. GRIID will be reporting from the US Social Forum until Friday night.
Another World Is Possible! Another US Is Necessary!
