Yesterday, thousands of people gathered in Washington, DC to rally against health care legislation that will be voted in the next 24 hours. The organizers of this rally were members of the Tea Party, the same group that organized a much larger gathering on September 12.
Alternet posted a story about the DC rally and pointed out some of the speakers, their message and the support the rally was given by Fox News. Members of the Kent County Tea Party gathered yesterday in front of the Federal building in downtown Grand Rapids to express their opposition to the proposed legislation as well.
I counted about 30 people during the time I was there, many of which had signs that read “Stop Spending,” “No Big Government Obama,” and “Congress Does Not Measure Up.” I spoke with several people at the rally in Grand Rapids and asked them their thoughts on the proposed health care legislation.
Nancy DeBoer from Conklin said that she wants to see people who don’t have health insurance have access to health care, but she thinks that the proposed bill will force people to have insurance that will be too expensive for taxpayers.
Another person who did not want to give her name said she live in the UK for 10 years and was not impressed with their “socialized” form of health care. “What the government wants to do is adopt a similar health care system, which I didn’t think was very effective.” I asked this woman if she could give me an example of how the proposed legislation in the US is similar to what they have in the UK, but she refused to answer.
I asked a group of four women at one point if they would support some kind of assistance for the 40 million plus people in the US who don’t have health care insurance and they all said they would support that. However, they all thought that the current legislation would not achieve that and that it would give too much power to the government in determining who would get treatment.
At one point one of the Tea Party members made the observation that she was puzzled why the health insurance companies were not more vocal in their opposition to the proposed bill. I mentioned the data from the Center for Responsive Politics and said that the health care sector makes their voice heard through money, not by staging media events.
I looked at the local news media this morning and the only place that the Tea Party rally received any attention was in the Grand Rapids Press. The Press only reported on the DC rally not the one in Grand Rapids. The article does not really discuss what happened at the DC rally, only that Congressman Hoekstra spoke there.
The Press article also had a video statement from Congressman Vern Ehlers, who compared the size of the proposed bill to his family bible.
Local Media Announces Sarah Palin to Visit Grand Rapids
West Michigan news organizations announced today that former Republican Presidential candidate Sarah Palin will make a stop in Grand Rapids as part of her national book tour.
The Grand Rapids Press put the story on the front page and said that Palin will be signing books at the Barnes & Noble store inside the Woodland Mall. Palin’s book, Going Rogue: An American Life, is supposed to be an expose of her time as a running mate with Senator John McCain in the 2008 Election.
The only source cited about the Palin visit is a HarperCollins spokesperson. Harper/Collins is the publisher of Palin’s book. The company also owns the local Christian publishing company Zondervans.
The rest of the local news media also announced Palin’s visit (WOOD TV8, WZZM 13, WXMI 17 & WOOD Radio) and they all relied on either Press Release information or mimicked what was in the GR Press.
None of the local news outlets mentioned why Palin resigned as Governor of Alaska or what influence she has had with the Republican Party in recent months. Mother Jones posted an interesting piece on Tuesday about Palin’s role in a few critical election races around the country. The article focuses on how her support of a third party candidate contributed to the loss of a GOP Congressional seat in New York that hasn’t been won by a Democrat since the 19th century. The story also suggests that Palin and other national figures may create larger divisions with the GOP, since there seems to be a growing rift within Republican ranks.
It’s unfortunate that none of the announcements in the local news about Palin’s visit next week explored any of these issues, but we’ll keep monitoring to see if anything is reported on leading up to and during her visit.
The Road to Copenhagen: Climate Change and Climate Deniers
We are one month away from the international climate change conference that will be taking place in Copenhagen, Denmark. While there have been numerous meetings since Kyoto in 1997, Copenhagen is the main follow-up to what global standards were put in place with the Kyoto Protocol.
We will be following the news coverage leading up to and during Copenhagen, but we also felt it was important to post several stories about different aspects of climate change and climate justice. These articles will look at the current data, climate deniers, what the US government is doing legislatively and an analysis of what local groups are doing to address or not address climate change.
Climate Deniers
Part of the struggle for climate justice and the fact that there are numerous entities – think tanks and corporate front groups – which deny that global warming is even an issue. These groups are so aggressive with their anti-global warming message that many news stories still include the opinions of climate deniers.
In 2004, Fairness and Accuracy in reporting conducted a study on major US media reporting on global warming and found that “53 percent of the articles gave roughly equal attention to the views that humans contribute to global warming and that climate change is exclusively the result of natural fluctuations.”
Since their 2004 study, FAIR also found that there are several national news pundits who also deny global warming, such as John Stossel (ABC), columnist George Will and Glenn Beck (CNN & FOX).
With Climate Deniers being legitimate news sources and some national media pundits denying global warming, no surprise that more and more people in the US are questioning the near-consensus in the scientific community that human actions are contributing to global warming.
Two weeks ago the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press published the finding of a survey they conducted on the current trends amongst Americans on global warming. As the chart here shows there is a significant percentage of people who don’t believe global warming is an issue and the number of those who think that has risen since 2006.
In addition, there are organizations, which deny global warming, primarily because they represent business interests, which would be negatively impacted from policies that sought to curb human actions that contributed to global warming. One group, the Global Climate Coalition, which no longer exists, was made up of oil companies and other industries, which are arguably some of the biggest contributors to global warming.
These front groups are numerous and tend to be funded by big oil companies like Exxon-Mobil. Exxon-Mobil has spent between $17 – 23 million dollars to fund groups that deny global warming, according to the research done by Exxpose Exxon. Exxon Mobil funded global warming deniers have even come to Grand Rapids. In 2007, Media Mouse reported that the local far-right think tank the Acton Institute brought a global warming denier speaker to town representing the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
This brief look into some of the forces behind climate change denial and how it impacts public perception should give us all concern for how this issue will be dealt with politically in the US and internationally at Copenhagen next month.
Healing Children of Conflict Hosts Its First Event
A new group committed to healing the wounds of war has formed in West Michigan and will host its first public event. According to their website, Healing Children of Conflict:
“heals families and communities by facilitating medical treatment for children seriously wounded in conflicts involving the United States, and thereby educates others about the root causes of those conflicts. By taking responsibility for healing children with traumatic injuries from war arsenal we seek to spread healing and reconciliation between one community, the war zone, to another—Grand Rapids and West Michigan.”
The group came together after inspiration and conversation that grew out of a visit from Cole Miller, founder of the group No More Victims. No More Victims has been helping Iraqi children who have been wounded as a direct result of US bombing or military attacks.
Healing Children of Conflict is following a similar model and the group decided to assist children from Iraq and children wounded as a result of the most recent Israeli military attacks on Gaza. The group believes that since the US provides $3 billion a year in funding for Israel and many of the weapons used in the attacks are manufactured in and provided by the US that we have an obligation to heal the wounds of this violence.
The Healing Children of Conflict event is a fundraiser and will be held this Thursday, November 5 at 7pm. For details, visit their website at http://www.healingchildrenofconflict.org/home.html
On Sunday the Grand Rapids Press ran a front page story entitled, “All eyes on endgame as war decision looms.” The story, written by Press reporter Ted Roelofs, begins by focusing on a local soldier who was “singled out for bravery last month” in Afghanistan. The soldier’s father is then cited in the article making comments in support of his son.
Roelofs then writes that the upcoming decision to send more troops to Afghanistan “is dividing US citizens and making it difficult for Obama to follow through on goals outlined in his campaign.” Unfortunately for readers, the Press reporter never states what those campaign goals were as it relates to Afghanistan.
The article then provides readers with comments from another military family, Donna & Bob Roush, who think the US should not pull out of Afghanistan. “Those are bad guys over there. I would like the president to take the advice on the ground. I don’t understand this waffling and waiting.” Here the Press reporter doesn’t bother to verify or clarify what is meant by “bad guys over there.”
The reporter then says that, “a majority of Americans either oppose the war or question whether it is worth continuing to wage.” This statement is based on a Washington Post-ABC News poll, but the Press doesn’t tell readers when the poll was taken, nor which questions were asked of those polled. The Press is providing its own poll with three voting options: 1) Add troops and continue counterinsurgency, 2) Maintain current strength, focus on militants along the Pakistan border, or 3) Pull out of Afghanistan entirely. While it is interesting that the Press is conducting its own poll it should be noted that President Obama has said that withdrawal from Afghanistan is not an option.
The rest of the story is devoted to other comments on what the US should do in Afghanistan. Representatives Vern Ehlers and Pete Hoekstra both support send more troops and Senator Carl Levin wants to “see a large increase in the Afghan army be the major way in which this is successful.” We have pointed out in previous postings how Levin’s position supports the US strategy in Afghanistan, but doesn’t agree with some of the tactics.
Another source cited in the story are Mary Alice Williams, an Obama supporter, who said, “the troops should come home.” However, her comments are drowned out by two more comments from pro-military families. One mom says that her son thinks the US should stay in Afghanistan and “we need to be there and get the job done.” A comment from the military parent who lost a son in Afghanistan in August concludes the article by saying, “His buddies want to finish the job. I would like us to see it through.”
This is the first article written by a Press reporter since President Obama took office that deals with the US war in Afghanistan that didn’t just report on troop deaths. However, like most of the reporting we have seen in the Press in recent months, this story does not deal with the real policy issues that will ultimately determine what the current administration will do in Afghanistan, instead it presents numerous claims about should be done with no evidence to support any of the claims, particularly those made by politicians.
Bailed Out Banks are Financing Cluster Bomb Production
A new report from IKV Pax Christi and Netwerk Vlaanderen was recently release that might give more cause for rage directed at US banks. The report is entitled “Worldwide investments in Cluster Munitions: A Shared Responsibility.” One of the more revealing aspects of this report was the fact that some of the US-based banks that were bailout out by taxpayers last year are also financing the production of Cluster Bombs.
The report found that since January 2007 at least 138 financial institutions from 16 different countries have invested in eight producers of cluster munitions. These companies include: Alliant Techsystems ATK (USA), Hanwha (South Korea), L-3 Communications (USA), Lockheed Martin (USA) Poongsan (South Korea), Roketsan (Turkey), Singapore Technologies Engineering (Singapore) and Textron (USA).
Banks and other financial investment companies were found to be involved in the Cluster Munitions industry in three ways:
- Investment banking services to companies producing cluster munitions: HSBC, Goldman Sachs, Merril Lynch, Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan Chase provided the largest amount of investment banking services since Jan. 2007
- Loans to companies producing cluster munitions: Twelve of the largest banks provided 58% of the loans. Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Barclays and Goldman Sachs provided the largest amount of loans since Jan. 2007
- Asset management services that invest in companies producing cluster munitions: Fidelity, Vanguard Group, AXA, BlackRock and T Rowe Price Group provided the largest asset management services based on their portfolio (by summer 2009).
The US banks and other financial institutions that benefited from the taxpayer bailout last year and are funding cluster bomb munitions are Goldman Sachs, Merril Lynch, Bank of America, Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase. Many of these same institutions also gave their CEO’s huge bonuses, despite the taxpayer bailout and now it is documented that they are war profiteers as well.
We mentioned in a posting last week about the US use of Cluster Bombs in the occupation of Afghanistan, despite the fact that over half of the world’s nations are signatories to the Convention on Cluster Bombs. As of now, the US is not a signatory to that convention.
Local Artists Host “Day of the Dead” Event
Local artists Alynn Guerra and Brett Colley are hosting an art exhibit and celebration of the traditional Mexican festival, Dia de los Muertos – Day of the Dead. The art exhibit features small prints from a variety of people who were invited to create a piece for this show.
The Dead End Prints exhibit is this Friday & Saturday
October 30 & 31
5 – 10 PM (both days)
Location: Red Hydrant Press Studios
314 Straight St. SW, Door M, Grand Rapids
Below are three videos we posted that are related to the event.
The first video is a montage of all the prints submitted for the exhibit.
The second video is with Alynn Guerra talking about print making, the use of skeletons in her work and the Mexican tradition of print making.
The third video is with Brett Colley talking about the Dead End Prints event, print making and the Day of the Dead, and some of the themes represented in the prints that work submitted for this exhibit.
The Grand Rapids Press and the Afghanistan Narrative
On Wednesday, the Grand Rapids Press ran a front-page story from the Associated Press that dealt with the ongoing debate in Washington about whether or not the US should increase troop levels in Afghanistan.
The article is framed with the assumption that what the US and NATO military commanders are doing is to bring more stability to that country. Troop levels should increase, the reporter writes, is because there is a growing Taliban insurgency. However, nowhere in the story does it question whether or not the Taliban’s growing influence is a result of the eight-year US/NATO occupation.
The article does cite to counter-insurgency experts, Andrew Bacevich from Boston University and Ljubomir Stojadinovic, a military analyst from Serbia. The comments from both experts are vague, which is unfortunate, since Bacevich has very clear analysis of why increasing US troops levels would be problematic. Recently, Bacevich was sourced as saying:
Implementing the McChrystal plan will perpetuate the longstanding fundamentals of US national security policy: maintaining a global military presence, configuring US forces for global power projection, and employing those forces to intervene on a global basis. The McChrystal plan modestly updates these fundamentals to account for the lessons of 9/11 and Iraq, cultural awareness and sensitivity nudging aside advanced technology as the signature of American military power, for example. Yet at its core, the McChrystal plan aims to avert change. Its purpose – despite 9/11 and despite the failures of Iraq – is to preserve the status quo. . . .
If the president assents to McChrystal’s request, he will void his promise of change at least so far as national security policy is concerned. The Afghanistan war will continue until the end of his first term and probably beyond. It will consume hundreds of billions of dollars. It will result in hundreds or perhaps thousands more American combat deaths – costs that the hawks are loath to acknowledge.
As the fighting drags on from one year to the next, the engagement of US forces in armed nation-building projects in distant lands will become the new normalcy. Americans of all ages will come to accept war as a perpetual condition, as young Americans already do. That “keeping Americans safe” obliges the United States to seek, maintain, and exploit unambiguous military supremacy will become utterly uncontroversial.
The Press version of the article also omits roughly two-thirds of the original AP story. In addition, there is a box embedded in the article that directs readers to an additional story with the heading, “US officials say militants trying to scare Afghans from voting.” This article affirms the premise that whatever problems confront Afghanistan civil society is due to the behavior of the Taliban and continues a narrative that supports current US policy, which is the same conclusion we came to with a recent 100-day study.
Republic Windows & Doors Workers at GVSU
Last night, union members from Chicago who were involved in the Republic Windows & Doors factory occupation, spoke at GVSU’s downtown campus. Armando, one of the representatives who participated in the occupation, spoke briefly about what happened. He talked about how the company was moving equipment out of the factory and some semi-trailers were hauling equipment outside of Chicago in November of last year and that it what tipped them off to the threat of the factory being closed.
People began to talk and the labor union (UE) suggested that an occupation might be a good strategy. 270 workers appeared the day they decided to occupy the plant. They asked for volunteers to take on certain tasks and discussed the risks involved. Next they went to Bank of America, the bank that had told the company they would not provide any more loans or credit. The workers asked for an extension of the credit to keep the factory open and Bank of America said no, despite the fact that they received $15 Billion in the government bailout.
The workers received thousands of letters and e-mails and roughly 3,000 different people came to bring food and provide support to the workers during the occupation. After six days they won their demands and received back pay, holiday and vacation pay.
Once the occupation was over they began to think, “What could we do after the occupation?” They began doing research about doing research in the area to determine where they might want to organize workers who were also as vulnerable as they were. Abe Mwaura, another organizer from Chicago, asked the audience where their cell phones made and most responded “China.” Abe then asked how these products came to the US. He said after the products are shipped to the US, most of it get sent to warehouses on the west coast or Chicago. In fact, Abe said that 65% of train freight in the US goes through Chicago. He also said there were 100,000 warehouse workers in Chicago alone.
So the UE started doing outreach this year to speak with warehouse workers, most of them temp workers, with a majority being Latina women. Many of these workers make less than minimum wage, have work injuries but don’t ask for help, either because they don’t know their rights or out of fear of deportation. Abe shared the story of one woman who was 6 months pregnant while working in a warehouse. She asked to be moved and they refused. She was sent to the hospital where they induced childbirth and 2 days later the child died. Abe asked those in the audience if their cheap cell phones were worth the price of this dead child?
Organizing warehouse workers in the Chicago area seems to be their next major project. Abe and Armando said this is an opportunity to organize workers and to create a new economy. “Imagine,” Abe said, “if workers in a Wal-Mart warehouse began an occupation just weeks before Christmas demanding change, what impact would that have on the country?”
The workers said that they will have a website up soon at warehouseworkers.org and they encouraged people to get involved in labor struggles locally and build solidarity for more actions like the Republic Windows & Doors occupation.
Afterwards we were able to interview Abe Mwaura. The interview is in two parts.
