Cannabis compassion centers could get green light


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Medical marijuana compassion centers may be able to open soon thanks to a compromise deal between legislators and Governor Chafee that would limit the amount of marijuana a compassion center could on its premises.

“Basically the compromise sets out stricter guidelines for the compassion centers,” said Rep. Scott Slater, D- Providence, the sponsor of the bill in the House. “One of the major hangups that the governor had and the feds is the profits the compassion centers listed in their applications.”

By limiting the amount of medical cannabis that a compassion center could have on site, lawmakers hope that federal authorities would not have reason to intervene. It would also allow caregivers, or medical marijuana growers, to provide the compassion centers with marijuana they grow. He said it was unclear whether they will be able to sell their product to the compassion centers.

The original medical marijuana compassion center law was approved in 2009, but after a long process to select the three state-approved centers, Governor Chafee then declined to give final approval for the centers after federal authorities threatened to intervene if the compassion centers opened. Medical marijuana is still not recognized by federal law.

Chafee, according to a press release, now seems to be more comfortable with the way the centers would operate. “I look forward to passage of a bill that will avoid federal intervention and bring needed medicinal relief to those who stand to benefit,” he said.

Slater, whose father sponsored the existing law, said the bill will be heard in committee sometime in the next few weeks and then will have to be voted on by both the House and Senate before the compromise bill becomes law.

Senator Whitehouse explains the Buffett Rule


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, sponsor the so-called Buffett Rule, sat down with the Center for American Progress to discuss his bill for a mandatory income tax rate of 30 percent for millionaires.

“Regular folks,” he said, think politics has become rigged to favor the richest Americans “and that’s a bad framework for people to be looking at this United States government from. Unfortunately in a lot of ways, it’s a very accurate framework, and the tax code is one of the ways to prove that is really the case right now.”

The substantial change to the tax code, he said, would be that capital gains would be taxed just like any other kind of income for those who make more than a million dollars in a year. So a CEO who gets paid in stock options, would still have to pay taxes on that if they earned more than a million.

He said the proposal could come up for a vote “in the three or four  months on either side of the New Year” when Democrats will could be negotiating from a position of strength because of the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. Right now, he said, the bill isn’t likely to get substantial floor time, unless the American people demand it.

Prompted by a question at the very end of the discussion, Whitehouse, who it turns out was once considered a candidate for the Supreme Court, threw a jab at the Citizens United decision: “Corporations are not people. I think the decision claiming that they were will go down in history as one of most grievous errors of the Supreme Court.”

Interestingly, Ted Nesi reports this morning that National Journal recently ranked Whitehouse as the 19th most liberal senator after two consecutive years of being ranked as the most liberal.

Occupy PVD to protest Pfizer, ALEC today


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
An Occupy Providence protester at an action against Pfizer in Groton Conn. (photo courtesy Occupy Providence)

Occupy Providence crosses state lines today for a protest at a Pfizer facility in Groton, Conn. The action is being endorsed by several Occupy groups from Connecticut and Massachusetts, and will include “protest, street theater, puppetry, teach-ins, speakers, music, food, and more,” according to a press release sent this morning.

“Pfizer feels it is their right to control our government with money, have their interests held above the interests of the people,” according to the press release. “Now it is our time to show them we want our cities, our state, and our country back. Plans are being made to show Pfizer we are no longer silent, and refuse to allow their horrors to continue any longer.”

The protest is part of a national day of action designed to target corporations that are involved with ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council. Funded by companies like Pfizer, Exxon Mobil and Koch Industries, ALEC writes and then, through local supporters, advocates for legislation at the state level.

“It is no coincidence that so many state legislatures have spent the last year taking the same destructive actions: making it harder for minorities and other groups that support Democrats to vote, obstructing health care reform, weakening environmental regulations and breaking the spines of public- and private-sector unions,” according to a New York Times editorial earlier this month. “All of these efforts are being backed — in some cases, orchestrated — by a little-known conservative organization financed by millions of corporate dollars.”

The Times wrote that ALEC “had been involved with” writing a bill in Virginia that would “require voters to show a form of identification.” A similar bill passed in Rhode Island last legislative session and its sponsor, Rep Jon Brien, D-Woonsocket, has been identified as one of two state chairmen of ALEC in Rhode Island by SourceWatch.org.

“ALEC that has modeled hideous anti-consumer protection laws, anti-democracy voter suppression laws and even disinformation programs about global warming,” according to the Occupy Providence press release. “We call on people to target corporations that are part of the American Legislative Exchange Council which is a prime example of the way corporations buy off legislators and craft legislation that serves the interests of corporations and not people.”

The Dirty Dozen Tax Scams of 2012

Today the IRS released its annual “Dirty Dozen” ranking of tax scams, reminding taxpayers to protect themselves against a wide range of schemes, from identity theft to return preparer fraud.

IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman advises, “Scam artists will tempt people in-person, on-line and by e-mail with misleading promises about lost refunds and free money. Don’t be fooled.”

The following is the Dirty Dozen tax scams for 2012:

1. Identity Theft
2. Phishing
3. Return Preparer Fraud
4. Hiding Income Offshore
5. “Free Money” from the IRS & Tax Scams Involving Social Security
6. False, or Inflated Income or Expenses
7. False Form 1099 Refund Claims
8. Frivolous Arguments
9. Falsely Claiming Zero Wages
10. Abuse of Charitable Organizations and Deductions
11. Disguised Corporate Ownership
12. Misuse of Trusts

1. Identity Theft

Topping this year’s list Dirty Dozen list is identity theft. In response to growing identity theft concerns, the IRS has embarked on a comprehensive strategy that is focused on preventing, detecting and resolving identity theft cases as soon as possible. In addition to the law-enforcement crackdown, the IRS has stepped up its internal reviews to spot false tax returns before tax refunds are issued as well as working to help victims of the identity theft refund schemes.

Identity theft cases are among the most complex ones the IRS handles, but the agency is committed to working with taxpayers who have become victims of identity theft.

The IRS is increasingly seeing identity thieves looking for ways to use a legitimate taxpayer’s identity and personal information to file a tax return and claim a fraudulent refund.

An IRS notice informing a taxpayer that more than one return was filed in the taxpayer’s name or that the taxpayer received wages from an unknown employer may be the first tip off the individual receives that he or she has been victimized.

The IRS has a robust screening process with measures in place to stop fraudulent returns. While the IRS is continuing to address tax-related identity theft aggressively, the agency is also seeing an increase in identity crimes, including more complex schemes. In 2011, the IRS protected more than $1.4 billion of taxpayer funds from getting into the wrong hands due to identity theft.

In January, the IRS announced the results of a massive, national sweep cracking down on suspected identity theft perpetrators as part of a stepped-up effort against refund fraud and identity theft.  Working with the Justice Department’s Tax Division and local U.S. Attorneys’ offices, the nationwide effort targeted 105 people in 23 states.

Anyone who believes his or her personal information has been stolen and used for tax purposes should immediately contact the IRS Identity Protection Specialized Unit.  For more information, visit the special identity theft page at www.IRS.gov/identitytheft.

2. Phishing

Phishing is a scam typically carried out with the help of unsolicited email or a fake website that poses as a legitimate site to lure in potential victims and prompt them to provide valuable personal and financial information. Armed with this information, a criminal can commit identity theft or financial theft.

If you receive an unsolicited email that appears to be from either the IRS or an organization closely linked to the IRS, such as the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS), report it by sending it to phishing@irs.gov.

It is important to keep in mind the IRS does not initiate contact with taxpayers by email to request personal or financial information. This includes any type of electronic communication, such as text messages and social media channels.  The IRS has information that can help you protect yourself from email scams.

3. Return Preparer Fraud

About 60 percent of taxpayers will use tax professionals this year to prepare and file their tax returns. Most return preparers provide honest service to their clients. But as in any other business, there are also some who prey on unsuspecting taxpayers.

Questionable return preparers have been known to skim off their clients’ refunds, charge inflated fees for return preparation services and attract new clients by promising guaranteed or inflated refunds. Taxpayers should choose carefully when hiring a tax preparer. Federal courts have issued hundreds of injunctions ordering individuals to cease preparing returns, and the Department of Justice has pending complaints against many others.

In 2012, every paid preparer needs to have a Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN) and enter it on the returns he or she prepares.

Signals to watch for when you are dealing with an unscrupulous return preparer would include that they:

  • Do not sign the return or place a Preparer Tax identification Number on it.
  • Do not give you a copy of your tax return.
  • Promise larger than normal tax refunds.
  • Charge a percentage of the refund amount as preparation fee.
  • Require you to split the refund to pay the preparation fee.
  • Add forms to the return you have never filed before.
  • Encourage you to place false information on your return, such as false income, expenses and/or credits.

For advice on how to find a competent tax professional, see Tips for Choosing a Tax Preparer.

4. Hiding Income Offshore

Over the years, numerous individuals have been identified as evading U.S. taxes by hiding income in offshore banks, brokerage accounts or nominee entities, using debit cards, credit cards or wire transfers to access the funds. Others have employed foreign trusts, employee-leasing schemes, private annuities or insurance plans for the same purpose.

The IRS uses information gained from its investigations to pursue taxpayers with undeclared accounts, as well as the banks and bankers suspected of helping clients hide their assets overseas. The IRS works closely with the Department of Justice to prosecute tax evasion cases.

While there are legitimate reasons for maintaining financial accounts abroad, there are reporting requirements that need to be fulfilled. U.S. taxpayers who maintain such accounts and who do not comply with reporting and disclosure requirements are breaking the law and risk significant penalties and fines, as well as the possibility of criminal prosecution.

 

Since 2009, 30,000 individuals have come forward voluntarily to disclose their foreign financial accounts, taking advantage of special opportunities to bring their money back into the U.S. tax system and resolve their tax obligations. And, with new foreign account reporting requirements being phased in over the next few years, hiding income offshore will become increasingly more difficult.

At the beginning of this year, the IRS reopened the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) following continued strong interest from taxpayers and tax practitioners after the closure of the 2011 and 2009 programs. The IRS continues working on a wide range of international tax issues and follows ongoing efforts with the Justice Department to pursue criminal prosecution of international tax evasion.  This program will be open for an indefinite period until otherwise announced.

The IRS has collected $3.4 billion so far from people who participated in the 2009 offshore program, reflecting closures of about 95 percent of the cases from the 2009 program. On top of that, the IRS has collected an additional $1 billion from up front payments required under the 2011 program.  That number will grow as the IRS processes the 2011 cases.

“Free Money” from the IRS & Tax Scams Involving Social Security

Flyers and advertisements for free money from the IRS, suggesting that the taxpayer can file a tax return with little or no documentation, have been appearing in community churches around the country. These schemes are also often spread by word of mouth as unsuspecting and well-intentioned people tell their friends and relatives.

Scammers prey on low income individuals and the elderly. They build false hopes and charge people good money for bad advice. In the end, the victims discover their claims are rejected. Meanwhile, the promoters are long gone. The IRS warns all taxpayers to remain vigilant.

There are a number of tax scams involving Social Security. For example, scammers have been known to lure the unsuspecting with promises of non-existent Social Security refunds or rebates. In another situation, a taxpayer may really be due a credit or refund but uses inflated information to complete the return.

Beware. Intentional mistakes of this kind can result in a $5,000 penalty.

6. False/Inflated Income and Expenses

Including income that was never earned, either as wages or as self-employment income in order to maximize refundable credits, is another popular scam. Claiming income you did not earn or expenses you did not pay in order to secure larger refundable credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit could have serious repercussions.  This could result in repaying the erroneous refunds, including interest and penalties, and in some cases, even prosecution.

Additionally, some taxpayers are filing excessive claims for the fuel tax credit. Farmers and other taxpayers who use fuel for off-highway business purposes may be eligible for the fuel tax credit. But other individuals have claimed the tax credit when their occupations or income levels make the claims unreasonable. Fraud involving the fuel tax credit is considered a frivolous tax claim and can result in a penalty of $5,000.

7. False Form 1099 Refund Claims

In this ongoing scam, the perpetrator files a fake information return, such as a Form 1099 Original Issue Discount (OID), to justify a false refund claim on a corresponding tax return. In some cases, individuals have made refund claims based on the bogus theory that the federal government maintains secret accounts for U.S. citizens and that taxpayers can gain access to the accounts by issuing 1099-OID forms to the IRS.

Don’t fall prey to people who encourage you to claim deductions or credits to which you are not entitled or willingly allow others to use your information to file false returns. If you are a party to such schemes, you could be liable for financial penalties or even face criminal prosecution.

8. Frivolous Arguments

Promoters of frivolous schemes encourage taxpayers to make unreasonable and outlandish claims to avoid paying the taxes they owe. The IRS has a list of frivolous tax arguments that taxpayers should avoid. These arguments are false and have been thrown out of court. While taxpayers have the right to contest their tax liabilities in court, no one has the right to disobey the law.

9. Falsely Claiming Zero Wages

Filing a phony information return is an illegal way to lower the amount of taxes an individual owes. Typically, a Form 4852 (Substitute Form W-2) or a “corrected” Form 1099 is used as a way to improperly reduce taxable income to zero. The taxpayer may also submit a statement rebutting wages and taxes reported by a payer to the IRS.

Sometimes, fraudsters even include an explanation on their Form 4852 that cites statutory language on the definition of wages or may include some reference to a paying company that refuses to issue a corrected Form W-2 for fear of IRS retaliation. Taxpayers should resist any temptation to participate in any variations of this scheme. Filing this type of return may result in a $5,000 penalty.

10. Abuse of Charitable Organizations and Deductions

IRS examiners continue to uncover the intentional abuse of 501(c)(3) organizations, including arrangements that improperly shield income or assets from taxation and attempts by donors to maintain control over donated assets or the income from donated property. The IRS is investigating schemes that involve the donation of non-cash assets –– including situations in which several organizations claim the full value of the same non-cash contribution. Often these donations are highly overvalued or the organization receiving the donation promises that the donor can repurchase the items later at a price set by the donor. The Pension Protection Act of 2006 imposed increased penalties for inaccurate appraisals and set new standards for qualified appraisals.

11. Disguised Corporate Ownership

Third parties are improperly used to request employer identification numbers and form corporations that obscure the true ownership of the business.

These entities can be used to underreport income, claim fictitious deductions, avoid filing tax returns, participate in listed transactions and facilitate money laundering, and financial crimes. The IRS is working with state authorities to identify these entities and bring the owners into compliance with the law.

12. Misuse of Trusts

For years, unscrupulous promoters have urged taxpayers to transfer assets into trusts. While there are legitimate uses of trusts in tax and estate planning, some highly questionable transactions promise reduction of income subject to tax, deductions for personal expenses and reduced estate or gift taxes. Such trusts rarely deliver the tax benefits promised and are used primarily as a means of avoiding income tax liability and hiding assets from creditors, including the IRS.

IRS personnel have seen an increase in the improper use of private annuity trusts and foreign trusts to shift income and deduct personal expenses. As with other arrangements, taxpayers should seek the advice of a trusted professional before entering a trust arrangement.

The Myth of the Progressive


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Go to Wikipedia today, and you’ll discover the myriad groups that have utilized the word “progressive” today. Search for “Progressive Party” in the US and you’ll find three different ones, led by such disparate figures as Theodore Roosevelt, Robert M. La Follette, Sr., and Henry Wallace; none of which represented the same thoughts. The use of the word “progressive” for members of the left-wing of the Democratic Party seems to have come into vogue as the word used to replace “liberal” by those who are ashamed to use the latter.

A Pew Research poll released in December found, that despite conservative commentator Glenn Beck’s Fox News-sponsored hit job on the word, “progressive” is the most popular political term, with 67% of respondents saying that they had a positive reaction to it (22% had a negative one). “Conservative” received a 62% positive reaction, while 30% had a negative reaction. Given this popularity, it should come as no surprise that politicians are quite willing to describe themselves as progressives. The word is all encompassing that it contains both politicians who are pro-worker and those who oppose labor, both those that favor progressive income tax and those that don’t, both those that support public education and those who want to destroy it.

Used as a catch-all, “progressive” is shorn of all meaning. Candidates are free to label themselves “progressive” in an attempt to appeal to the largest possible demographic. The regular citizen can use “progressive” to simply mean “what I believe,” and say that someone who believes differently just isn’t a progressive. Progressive is perhaps the word that requires the most contextualization in American society.

Once again, this is largely due to a lack of discipline. During the debt ceiling crisis at the end of the last summer, Nate Silver, the political numbers guru, predicted that the Congressional Progressive Caucus in the House could easily prevent the compromise’s passage and gain concessions for the left. Instead the vast majority of the Progressives voted in-step with the House leadership. That lack of discipline blew a chance to gain much needed-concessions. Instead the Progressive Caucus won for the American people an austerity-riddled bill that backloads the budget cuts to 2013, at which point a “new” Congress will be seated.

Progressive is a buzzword, like “the 99%” (witness both words’ proliferation on various groups attached to the Democratic Party). When a candidate or organization defines themselves based on these terms, it’s up to us ask what they means to them. Letting it sit there, undefined, is folly. We cannot take such people at face value.

Likewise, here in Rhode Island, we must start pushing for “progressive” to mean something more than “wants to be liked”. We need a Progressive Club, one that has a clear agenda and candidates who support that agenda. Now, extreme ideological rigor is a dangerous thing, and I don’t want to be interpreted as suggesting that’s what we need. But I am advocating consistency. Take a look at the sponsors of various legislation throughout the General Assembly. You’ll find the same folks who sponsor death penalty bills sponsoring bills to protect the homeless. You’ll find Republicans who introduce zero-based budget proposals introducing funding for low-income housing. And sometimes you won’t even find a legislator who describes them as “progressive” on the “progressive” bills.

Without a disciplined, consistent progressive constituency, we will continue to face a jumbled reality, where political chameleons will thrive and those more concerned with holding power than using it well will rise.

Beyond Occupy


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

About half a decade ago, I sat in my college freshman orientation class and it was discussed that my generation was apathetic, detached, and essentially unresponsive to the issues that faced us. This is a common refrain about my generation, the Millennial Generation, and typically, newspaper articles have been written about it. That day we argued back. And one student (who dropped out later that semester) made the point that in the past, there had been leaders to rally behind; Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, John Lennon, etc., etc. She said, “where are our leaders? We’re all concerned about these issues, but who do we rally behind?”

It’s a question which has haunted me. But I believe they’re out there. Right now, they’re being shaped. But the question is whether they’ll rise to their full potential or be cut down before they can grow.

The national actions that united under the banner of Occupy Wall Street present an interesting dilemma for my generation, and indeed the larger nation. I was present at the first meeting of Occupy Providence, and for a few weeks after that. I marched on October 15th, and in a different capacity, again on December 10th. These were the first marches in my life I’ve ever attended. Believe me when I say that I am often dispassionate about much of anything, but on these marches, especially on the 15th, it was a wonderful feeling.

That joy has largely waned, and I suspect that Octobert 15th was the high watermark of the Occupies in the USA. Occupy needed a Valley Forge, and it has not gotten one. Valley Forge, remembered mostly for the number of deaths the battered revolutionaries faced, is also where the revolutionary army became a true army. It is where it learned discipline, where its officers integrated themselves into the rest of the forces, and where America’s fortunes went from near-defeat to victory; all in the span of a single winter.

Occupy, instead, is freezing to death. Most of its encampments are gone, and only its die-hard supporters still know what the score is. It has managed to shift the national conversation to where most Americans think it should be; jobs and fairness. But the tactics it used were unpopular, and I believe the encampments (the whole “occupation” part of Occupy) divided those who couldn’t afford to encamp from those who could.

Commentators have used the term “Occupy Movement” to describe Occupy, but that is inaccurate. It was a series of actions, across the nation. It resisted leadership, it resisted giving itself a purpose. That resistance has cost it support, it has cost it a true rallying cry. There is no such thing as a movement without leadership. Instead, what happens is that the power of activists becomes utilized by every cause that sees potential in their gathering, no matter how just that cause. Various organizations around them become their de facto leadership. When Occupy is finished, it will look good on a resume, and everyone will say, “well, it’s a shame it just died off.”

Occupy instead should be the open salvo in a larger justice movement that desperately needs to come back to life. 1968 was the last year this justice movement was truly going on. With the deaths of Dr. King and then Robert Kennedy, that movement ground to a halt. Democrats backed away after the crushing defeat of 1972. By 1974, inequality was on the rise. The policies of Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan and their Democratic Congresses inaugurated it and every president since then has presided over its expansion. The movement which King and Kennedy and McGovern was forgotten.

Until now. Occupy has given it a desperately needed opening, at precisely the moment when it most needs to return. But we must not be afraid to do what Occupiers don’t desire. A movement without purpose is masturbation. What Occupy cannot do, citizens should not be afraid to do. Let’s draw an example from the Civil Rights Movement.

The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee was formed from a conference sponsored by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. But SNCC was not a branch of the SCLC. They were encouraged to be their own organization. In our shortened memory, we forget how long it takes for movements to germinate, for organizations to spring forth. The Civil Rights Movement had been waged for years before the 1960s, but it came to a head at that moment. And most crucially of all, it was not waged by any one particular organization. An alignment of many organizations, from CORE to the NAACP to the SCLC to many others and a myriad of local organizations helped to build it.

Our new Justice Movement must likewise take on new organizations. Organizations unafraid to stand for solutions, to make demands. We must not be afraid to organize, and to organize well. Occupy has feared aligning with any one organization, and for good reason; it lacks discipline. Without discipline, it cannot say “we march with you, but not for you.” It has been an important vent for frustrations, but those frustrations need to be heard by politicians, not just fellow citizens. And yet, in 2012, it refuses to even threaten the politicians who can do something about it.

If our Justice Movement is to complete the work of 1968, it must not be afraid to voice the concerns and the demands for economic fairness that most Americans have. It must not be afraid to wade into electoral politics, for American revolutionaries have long since given up the gun for the ballot box. If Occupy is to truly bring change, it must learn how to embrace the average American, not make them feel despised. If it cannot, then other people must. It is imperative for the country that we do, since we cannot allow another 40 years of this, or else there will be no country left.

In Rhode Island, we can see the problem clearly. Our politicians openly deny their citizens’ demands for higher taxes on the wealthy. They cite the faulty premise of flight based on taxes. And they press for tax breaks for “development” that builds nothing but empty towers, leaving behind mute monuments to mediocrity. Our best hopes in the political realm have wandered away, or betrayed us, or are else unwilling to take a stand. Now, we as citizens must bring the heat.

It is time to start thinking beyond Occupy, to say that the tactic is played out, the name is meaningless, and better organizations can serve. We can form our own. It is time to foster our leadership, to understand that it’s not bad to be a follower, to listen and to understand. If we want to build a truly meritocratic society, we must allow those better at leading to lead, and those better at organizing to organize, and those better at healing to heal. We all have skills. We need to utilize them.

We can no longer afford to be afraid of utilizing the assistance of politicians, labor unions, corporations, churches or anyone else who is willing to assist us in getting to the goal of a fair and meritocratic United States of America. Obviously, if the conditions of that assistance in unacceptable, then reject it. But there’s no sense in rejecting allies in the current climate.

I worry that my generation will see these protests, see their defeat, and decide that the system is immovable; that despondence is the right answer. This is the first most of us have known of real protest, and yet, the American Occupy “Movement” was probably the least successful and least attended of the popular protest movements that happened around the world in 2011. We need more than occupations. We need new ideas, new people, and new organizations.

It is time for the citizen to once again go into the streets, with a protest sign in one hand and a ballot in the other and march to freedom.

It’s Black History Month and the Sankofa Bird Speaks


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

History is a clock that people use to tell their political and cultural time of day. It is also a compass that people use to find themselves on the map of human geography. History tells a people where they’ve been and what they’ve been; where they are and what they are. History tells a people where they still must go and what they still must be. The relationship of history to the people is the same as the relationship of a mother to her child.
~ Dr. John Henrik Clarke

Conscious memory is the prerequisite for human behavior.
~ Professor Greg Carr

As we sit in the middle of Black History Month I confess that I’ve spent the entirety of it thinking about the possibilities of how we might enter into a more progressive conversation on the topic of Black History. But please realize this month is not merely about the recognition of the achievements of African Americans, or a perfunctory gesture to insert Black faces in as missing chapters of American history. To be clear, most people, African Americans and people of non-color alike, tend to engage the month at equal levels of indifference. That said, for many, Black history in a US context, typically begins with the usual slavery narrative:

  1. Once upon a time Black people were slaves…
  2. Civil War, blah-blah…
  3. Civil Rights, blah-blah…
  4. Now we finally have a Black president.
  5. The End.

My claim is a small one: the moment you initiate a conversation on Black history with chattel slavery as the port of origin you are always already affirming a short range historical position which ensures that you will (re)fabricate a limiting (and limited) scope from which to view Black (African) history and future. I can best liken it to walking into a football game after halftime and thinking the third quarter kickoff was the beginning of the game.

Professor Greg Carr stresses three critical indexes rendered in the work of Dr. Theophile Obenga which assert that in order to exist with agency in the world a people must be skilled practitioners of their own history, historiography and historicity.

– History: meaning memory; how do you remember your identity as an individual and as a part of a group.

– Historiography: how do you write that memory; how do you construct it and pass it on from generation to generation.

– Historicity: a sense of yourself in time and space; what’s your vision for the future.

If we, as people of African ancestry, only remember ourselves as former slaves and never recall ourselves as the first constructors of highly advanced civilizations with great centers of learning (philosophy, science, mathematics, agriculture and medicine), then we are condemned to remain a people who are only free due to the so-called benevolence of an American president.

Hubert Harrison, a brilliant early twentieth century West Indian writer whose political work influenced figures such as Marcus Garvey and A. Philip Randolph, penned these words in an article from December of 1920…

When white people today talk of civilizing Africa and assert that the Africans are uncivilized [they] awaken in the minds of well-informed Africans a doubt as to whether white people know what is meant by the term. For, no matter how it may be defined, it is clear to the instructed that various “civilizations” not only have existed in Africa, but do exist there today, independently of that particular brand which white people are taking there in exchange for the untold millions of dollars which they are taking from there.

If by civilization we mean a stable society which supports itself and maintains a system of government and laws, industry and commerce, then the Hausas and Mandingoes, the people of the Ashanti and Dahomey, and the Yorubas of the Gold Coast had and have all these, and they are consequently civilized.”

 

What America means to an individual depends in large part on the historical perspective from which it has been introduced to them. And perhaps by now you’ve heard it mentioned in various mainstream media sources and talked about in numerous context, that is, Arizona’s new education law banning Ethnic Studies which went into effect this January, but will apparently be enforced as of 1 February. In this case, we see the deployment of a political, legal, and economic structure controlled by white political elites. But the fact that it is controlled by this political cohort should be subordinated to the fact that it exist and is maintained by thought norms which are American exceptionalist — that is to say, they are ideas which imagine the nation in a particularly narrow and ahistorical conception. The danger of this perception is not that it is reductionist, for clearly it is, but that it rebuffs attempts at expanding a democratic ethos. No proper understanding of our contemporary moment as a nation can be had unless we are willing to dig through the archives unafraid of what we shall find.

One More Step Toward Prop 8’s Doom


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

In the summer of 2010, when I skimmed Judge Walker’s ruling on Prop 8, I said, “It’s all over but the crying.” The 9th Circuit’s decision on February 7, 2012 was another inevitable move in the legal end-game of marriage equality.

I also predicted that the US Supreme Court would decline to hear the case. I’m sticking to my guns. Here’s why…

Walker’s Opinion Mostly Not an Opinion

The bulk of Walker’s opinion is not an opinion at all; it consists of findings of fact. And they are crushing. In order for a law to treat different classes of people differently, the legislating body must demonstrate a compelling interest in doing so. In this case, the basic argument that “traditional marriage” should be upheld is based primarily on religious concepts that have no standing in a court of law. By the “traditional” reasoning, segregation should have been allowed to continue; it’s the way it had always been in the South.

Similarly, the argument that homosexuality is a personal choice also had no evidentiary support. Nor did the assertion that children are better off with opposite-sex parents.

In fact, nothing that the defendants brought to the table passed muster. It was a rout.

The Juriprudence is Clear

Many, many cases along these basic lines have been heard in the US Federal Courts, producing a wealth of precedents on which Walker could base his ruling. The main precedent here is Brown vs Board of Education, which ruled that “separate but equal is inherently unequal”.

Brown had overturned Plessy vs Ferguson, a late 19th century decision that allowed for segregation so long as states provided equal facilities. Brown found that the act of separation invariably produced unequal results. The bar for creating distinct legal classes is exceptionally high.

I should note that the dissenter in the 9th Circuit’s decision did say, “The optimal parenting rationale could conceivably be a legitimate governmental interest”. This argument was clearly refuted in Walker’s findings of facts and, while I haven’t read the dissent, it would be a pretty big deal if the appellate court were to overrule a finding of fact.

It’s all in the language. “Could conceivably…” Not a particularly ringing endorsement. It’s like he needed to throw the anti-equality side a bone.

Walker’s Sexuality Not an Issue

The 9th Circuit also found nothing in the argument that Walker’s sexuality had biased his opinion. That is such a legal loser that it’s just laughable. By that logic, nobody could have ruled on Brown vs Board because they were all either white or black!

Like the dissent’s weak tea with the optimal parenting line, this is a sign of increasing desperation from the anti-equality camp. Here’s why they’re desperate…

US Supreme Court Won’t Hear This Case

This is actually an easy call, because it’s a no-win situation for the court. If they take this case, they have two basic options, 1) uphold marriage equality with a Federal precedent that will instantly obsolete all other state efforts in to ban same-sex marriages or 2) be the court that overturned Brown vs Board of Education. Neither of those two things will occur.

Despite their protestations to the contrary, this is a spectacularly political and activist court. The conservative forces are out to put their stamp on the jurisprudence and pull the court back from what they see as an overreaching authority. If the Scalito brothers thought for one hot second that they could uphold this blatantly unconstitutional ban without overturning Brown, they would. But they can’t, and they know it.

And they’ll be damned if they’re going to put their seal of approval on marriage equality. They’ll be happy to watch years of legal shenanigans as state after state goes through this same process with this same result. Perhaps they’re hoping that other facts will be found or some new legal argument will be invented to demonstrate a compelling governmental interest in creating this class of citizens with limited rights. That also is not going to happen.

The most likely outcome is that the court will refuse to hear the case. It will sting the anti-equality camp, no doubt, but it will leave them to fight another day. I suppose it’s possible that the court will use some obscure option to hear the case without having to rule or something like that. It seems virtually impossible that this US Supreme Court will rule on this case.

So cry all you want, Righty. It’s over.

 

Philadelphia-based Feminist Media Activist Group Led By Providence Native, Nuala Cabral, Launches Campaign Supporting Ethnic Studies in Arizona

Click here to check out my recent interview with Nuala Cabral and Denice Frohman of FAAN Mail, a Philadelphia-based media activist group that has launched a social media campaign (on Twitter, primarily, #WishiLearnedinHS), “Wished I Learned in High School,” in response to policies in Arizona restricting ethnic studies programs. Cabral is graduate of Moses Brown School in Providence, RI.

(PROVIDENCE, RI; PHILADELPHIA, PA; TUCSON, AZ) – When does learning about non-Europeans/non-Whites in the US constitute promoting resentment toward a race or class?

When does learning about the development of the US and manifest destiny and those who opposed such policies cross the line to become promoting the overthrow of the US government?

When did a class providing awareness about the societal and civic contributions of one of this country’s minority/ethnic groups become illegal?

These are some of the questions being asked by activists, students, and journalists all over the country, though the answer to number three might be more clear: it’s been over a year since the governor of Arizona signed into law House Bill 2281, “which prohibits a school district or charter school (in Arizona) from including in its program of instruction any courses or classes that promote the overthrow of the United States government, promote resentment toward a race or class of people, are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group, or advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

Yet it is recent events that have re-stirred up the questions, concerns, and heated debates on the topic: the final termination of the Mexican American Studies program in Tucson, Arizona – and the removal of corresponding books from Tucson schools that are now part of a list of banned literature.

Critics of the legislation say that the policies curtail teacher creativity, and call the law an attempt to further silence and marginalize people of color in a state becoming infamous for what many view as one anti-immigrant or anti-Brown policy after another.  Supporters of the state law – and the recent move by Tucson officials – cite the Mexican American Studies program as an example of a program that promotes one racial/ethnic group over all others, and say that programs like these promote a victimization mentality.

But critics aren’t buying it, and they’re not standing by quietly.  Two such activists are Nuala Cabral and Denice Frohman of FAAN Mail (Fostering Activism and Alternatives Now!), www.faanmail.wordpress.com. FAAN Mail is a media literacy/media activism project formed by women of color to promote pro-active audiences and creative alternatives.

Cabral and Frohman are based in Philadelphia, MA, but they’re not letting geography stop their actions.  On the contrary, Cabral, Frohman and the FAAN Mail community have launched a social media campaign (on Twitter, primarily, #WishiLearnedinHS), “Wished I Learned in High School,” to collect and share stories from people who can speak to the benefits they’ve gained from Ethnic Studies programs and to the regrets they feel about not getting enough exposure to the stories of people of color, women, LGBT writers, and other voices in their K-12 years.

Cabral and Frohoman say they are outraged that racist/conservative ideology has prevailed over data on programs that have been proven to be effective for students of color (who are at more risk for dropping out), and bothered that what hasn’t been acknowledged is the idea that there are already preferential treatments built into the educational system – those that favor the stories, ideas, history and perspectives of wealthy, western, white men.

Click here to check out my audio podcast/interview with Cabral and Frohman, which was recorded and originally aired on Sonic Watermelons on bsrlive.com on Wednesday, February 1.  Click here to see a short video about some of the on-the-ground student and community organizing.

Or check out the links below to learn more about the FAAN Mail campaign and the Arizona saga.

  • http://faanmail.wordpress.com/wishilearnedinhs-effort/
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_studies
  • http://www.thenation.com/blog/165989/challenging-arizonas-ban-ethnic-studies
  • http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-moshman/did-arizona-ban-ethnic-st_b_816713.html
  • http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/ethnic-studies-banned-arizona
  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_SB_1070

Fighting for Rhode Island


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The last few years have been tough for our great Ocean State. Across Rhode Island, I’ve organized community dinners, main street tours, and coffee hours where I’ve heard firsthand from so many people struggling to find work, seniors worried about their Social Security and Medicare, families being crushed by unfair credit card rates, and students scared they are going to have to leave college because they can’t afford tuition. People are hurting and they are frustrated, but they aren’t giving up, and neither am I. I’ve listened and I’ve brought these stories with me to Washington, and it is my promise to you as your U.S. Senator that I will keep fighting to create jobs, protect essential benefits like Social Security and Medicare, and provide our kids with a brighter future.

OUR VOICE IN WASHINGTON                                        

Rhode Islanders sent Sheldon to the Senate to fight for us and against the big special interests – and that’s just what he has done. We know that we can count on Sheldon to support our priorities – creating jobs, protecting families, and ending special deals for billionaires and big corporations. Sheldon has led the fight against moves to severely cut Social Security, Medicare benefits, and Pell Grants because he knows how much we in Rhode Island count on these programs.  And he has opposed giving more tax breaks to billionaires and multinational corporations while middle class families continue to suffer.

SHELDON’S PLAN

Putting Rhode Islanders Back to WorkSheldon has fought hard for legislation to create jobs, support small businesses, and revitalize our manufacturing sector.

  • Sheldon introduced legislation that would meet President Obama’s call in his State of the Union speech to eliminate the tax loopholes that reward companies who ship US jobs overseas.
  • Sheldon helped pass a Senate bill to crack down on China’s currency manipulation that costs American jobs by making it more expensive for us to sell goods to China, and cheaper for China to sell things here.
  • Sheldon is supporting legislation that could fund significant transportation improvements, such as repairing the I-95 viaduct in Providence, and provide new construction jobs in Rhode Island.
  • Sheldon has proposed a measure to provide tax credits to small businesses who hire unemployed workers to make it easier for a business to add new jobs.

Protecting Medicare and Social Security for Rhode Island Seniors. Sheldon will always be committed to preserving Social Security and Medicare benefits, and will continue fighting to reduce the cost of prescription drugs for seniors.

  • When Republicans in the House passed dangerous legislation to end Medicare as we know it, Sheldon helped lead the fight against that bill in the Senate.
  • Sheldon helped ensure that the health care reform bill closed the “doughnut hole” for prescription drugs covered under Medicare. More than 10,000 Rhode Island seniors benefited from this discount in 2011, saving $5.5 million dollars.
  • When budget negotiators threatened to pass new cuts to Social Security to reduce the deficit, Sheldon stepped up to protect that vital program and helped form the Senate’s Defend Social Security Caucus.

Getting a Straight Deal for Middle Class FamiliesSheldon has heard from so many Rhode Islanders who are frustrated with the special deals enjoyed by big corporations and billionaires.  He shares that frustration and is working to restore the “straight deal” that middle class Americans expect and deserve – ending tax giveaways to Big Oil, combating unfair credit card interest rates, making sure millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share in taxes, and putting a stop to unlimited and anonymous spending by big corporations in our elections.

Supporting Education Providing our children with a good education is the most important thing we can do to give them the opportunity to get the best jobs in the future.

  • Sheldon is fighting to protect Pell Grants to make it easier for students to afford college. In 2009-2010, 19,937 Rhode Islanders received $69,567,944 in Pell Grants for an average of $3,489 per student.
  • Sheldon has been working to extend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to improve our nation’s middle schools by establishing a grant program to help fund reforms in struggling school systems.

Protecting our Environment and Coastal Economy.  In Rhode Island, the strength of our economy is strongly tied to the health of our environment.  Sheldon recognizes this, and is leading several bipartisan efforts to better protect our oceans and coasts – and the jobs they support.  He’s working with Senator Snowe (R-ME) to establish a National Endowment for the Oceans, collaborating with Senator Vitter (R-LA) to re-authorize the National Estuary Program, and is co-chairing the Senate Oceans Caucus with Senator Murkowski (R-AK).  Sheldon will continue fighting to advance these priorities in 2012.

Stay in Touch: whitehouse.senate.gov, facebook.com/SenatorWhitehouse, twitter.com/SenWhitehouse

Imagination, Collective Struggle, and the Inclusion of Artists and Ordinary People: Angela Davis Speaks at RISD in Providence

PROVIDENCE, RI – Click on the image above to hear a short podcast with Dr. Angela Davis.  It is from a brief interview I conducted with her after a keynote address she gave on Monday, June 23, 2012 at Rhode Island School of Design.  More information about her talk is below; in the podcast/interview, I ask Davis more about the history of race relations within the labor movement.  She replied with an abbreviated timeline of when and why Blacks were excluded, but went on to discuss the benefits of integration in the Labor movement, citing one group in particular – the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (the ILWU).  A labor union that primarily represents workers on the West Coast, the ILWU accepted Black workers as members as early as the 1930′s.

Later in the century, explained Davis, Black workers within the ILWU helped introduce new “radical” ideas into the labor union movement, including during the global campaign to dismantle Apartheid South Africa.

The podcast is produced by me Reza Clifton (Reza Rites / Venus Sings / DJ Reza Wreckage).  Music by (and played with permission from) The Blest Energy Band ft. Tem Blessed & The Empress. The song, “The Struggle,” comes from their album ”Re-Energized,” which was released January 20, 2012. The podcast and article written below are also available on www.IsisStorm.com.

***

(PROVIDENCE, RI) – Imagination, collective struggle, and the inclusion of ordinary and disenfranchised people.  These were among the themes and lessons shared on Monday, January 23, 2012, when famed scholar, activist, and former prisoner (acquitted of charges including murder, kidnapping, and conspiracy), Dr. Angela Davis, spoke at RI School of Design. Part of a week of service dedicated to Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Davis’ keynote address covered the topic of “Building Communities of Activism.”

Her talk included a discussion of King’s belief in collective action despite the memorializing of him as the face of the Civil Rights Movement; an examination of the New Deal from the perspective of the protests and direct actions that prompted the policies that emerged after the 1930′s era Depression; and an analysis of the “prison abolition movement” as an important part of the worldwide struggle for social justice, workers rights, and economic equality.

Davis also talked about and periodically referenced the Occupy (Wall Street) Movement throughout her talk, including the site here in Providence.  At times, she was thoughtfully critical about what many have documented as the movement’s absence or sparsity of space for discussions about race, class, and the “intersectionality” of these and other issues in the Occupy encampments, as well as concerns associating the US occupy movements with traditional American occupation narratives of Native lands, Puerto Rico, Iraq, and other sites associated with the rise (and ills) of “global capitalism.”  Davis displayed this same kind of caring admonition in reference to the exclusion of prison labor union issues in spaces created by the “free union movement,” expressing pride in the advancements but honesty in the historical tendency to leave certain groups out (ie. women, people of color, and prisoners).

Overall, though, Davis expressed an unbridled show of support and enthusiasm for Occupy activities (and the labor movement), citing Occupy as the main reason why a climate exists again in this country for discussions on economic inequalities and the failures of capitalism.  Notably, she also inserted occupy in her speech, reframing the syntax and lexicons usually used in historical texts about Civil Rights and Worker movements, where terms and phrases like “sit-ins” and “street demonstrations” became sites or examples of people who “occupied” spaces.

Conscious of her audience and the origins of the invitation – RISD, an art school – and in response to a question from a student, Davis encouraged artists to continue making their art.  Harkening back to the ordinary people who joined because of their collective abilities to imagine a world without segregation, racism, jails, etc. Davis says that artists are in the practice of imagining the impossible, and that alone is a gift to the world – and contribution to the movement.

Apple: The Company No American Should Be Proud Of


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

When most Americans think of Apple, they think of the hip commercials, the latest must have gadgets, and the industry leading innovation. What most do not realize is the untold story of how Apple has perfected stealing the seeds of American ingenuity and harvesting them under a complex system of third world slave labor. Throughout this article, keep in mind that Apple made a profit of $400,000 dollars per employee last year.

Apple made headlines this week when a New York Times article detailed Apples explanation for the companies lack of US manufacturing. Apple said that the issue goes much deeper than cheap labor and that American manufactures lacked the, “flexibility, diligence and industrial skills of foreign workers.”

The true meaning of Apples statement only became evident when they cited a specific example clarifying what they meant. Last year, Apple ran into a last minute problem with the screen on one of its devices that caused the company to make a last minute adjustment in the manufacturing procedure.

Apple proudly admitted that 8000 employees at a Chinese manufacturing plant were quickly roused from their on-site plant dormitories, given a biscuit and cup of tea, and forced to go right into a 12 hours shift retrofitting the new screens.

If Apple wants to define “flexibility” as keeping workers in military like dormitories in which they are forced awake in the middle of the night to work a 12 hour shift on minimal food rations, than perhaps America cannot compete with that.

If one wishes to measure how Chinese workers truly feel about the working conditions they should look no further than the Foxconn plants in China. Apple uses the Chinese company Foxconn to manufacture a large portion of the Apple items bought in the US. In 2010, there were 14 successful suicide attempts at Foxconn when workers began jumping off the manufacturing building.

These suicides led 20 Chinese universities to launch an investigation and compile a report on the working conditions at Foxconn. The universities findings classified the conditions at the plants as comparable to a “labor camp.”

The idea of suicide being preferable to work became so widespread throughout the company that special netting was put around the roof of the building to keep workers from jumping to their deaths. In addition, workers were asked to take a anti-suicide pledge. Unfortunately Apple is not alone here. A few weeks ago, 300 employees that manufacture the Microsoft Xbox 360 threatened to commit mass suicide over working conditions.

Although Apple’s manufacturing practices are closer to the norm, rather than the exception when it comes to tech corporations, they deserve special scrutiny. Apple is quickly monopolizing the market of tablet and phone accessories. Most third party magazines, catalogues, and retailers that sell electronic accessories seem to be marketing accessories almost solely for Apple products today. Consequently, Apples business practices will likely be the practices emulated by the industry for market competitiveness.

Most disturbing though may be the uniquely deceptive way in which Apple products are marketed. Apple has successfully marketed its products as the must have items for generation Y. Sadly, when the young American unpacks his or her new I-Pad, they are unaware of the story behind how it actually was made.

Eleven Shocking Facts About Campaign Finance (or Why We Need Publicly Funded Elections)


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Over at The Nation, they have a list of Eleven Shocking Facts About Campaign Finance (and they’re not pretty):

The amount of independent expenditure and electioneering communication spending by outside groups has quadrupled since 2006. [Center for Responsive Politics]

The percentage of spending coming from groups that do not disclose their donors has risen from 1 percent to 47 percent since the 2006 mid-term elections. [Center for Responsive Politics]

Campaign receipts for members of the House of Representatives totaled $1.9 billion in 2010—up from $781 million in 1998. [Committee for Economic Development]

Outside groups spent more on political advertising in 2010 than party committees—for the first time in at least two decades. [Center for Responsive Politics]

A shocking 72 percent of political advertising by outside groups in 2010 came from sources that were prohibited from spending money in 2006. [Committee for Economic Development]

In 2004, 97.9 percent of outside groups disclosed their donors. In 2010, 34.0 percent did. [Committee for Economic Development]

In 2010, the US Chamber of Commerce spent $31,207,114 in electioneering communications. The contributions for which it disclosed the donors: $0. [Committee for Economic Development]

Only 26,783 Americans donated more than $10,000 to federal campaigns in 2010—or, about one in 10,000 Americans. Their donations accounted for 24.3 percent of total campaign donations. [Sunlight Foundation]

Average donation from that elite group was $28,913. (The median individual income in America is $26,364) [Sunlight Foundation]

Amount the Karl Rove–led Crossroads GPS says it will spend on the 2012 elections: $240 million. []

Amount that President Obama has raised from the financial sector already for his 2012 re-election:$15.6 million [Washington Post]

Join Obama for America – Rhode Island at a State of the Union Watch Party in Your Neighborhood


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Scores of Rhode Islanders are getting together next Tuesday night in homes, restaurants and college campuses across the state to watch President Obama’s State of the Union address. And it’s not too late for you to join them!

“This is an important speech—one you, your friends and your family can’t miss,” says Devin Driscoll, Rhode Island state director with Obama for America. “President Obama will be talking about the issues and values that are central to his vision of an America that will out-innovate, out-educate and out-build the world.”

Rhode Island’s watch parties will be taking place in homes in Warwick, Cranston, Providence, Pawtucket, Newport and East Greenwich. Students will gather at Brown University’s Wilson Hall and state and city Democrats will head for McFadden’s Restaurant in downtown Providence.

Folks will be renewing neighborhood connections, making new friends and talking together about the next important event on the Rhode Island campaign calendar: forming teams to collect signatures to get President Obama on the ballot for November. For more information and to find the watch party nearest you, go to www.barackobama.com/state/ri and click the “Find an Event” tab.

For more information about State of the Union watch parties and to volunteer with the campaign, please contact Devin Driscoll at ddriscoll@barackobama.com.

Around the U.S. in 50 Days: New Mexico

Just as Democrats see an opportunity in Arizona, especially in a vacant Senate seat, Republicans should see a greater chance in neighboring New Mexico. Most of the news revolves around the retirement of and replacement for Democratic Senator Jeff Bingaman.

For President, the state has been becoming increasingly blue with each successive election and 2012 should not be any different. This state will go for Obama and probably by the same margin as in 2008. Most of the growth in population occurred in the Albuquerque area and like most western states, it has a growing Hispanic population- two demographics that generally favor Democrats.

For the Democratic nomination to succeed Bingaman, Martin Heinrich will vacate the Albuquerque-based 1st District. With former Lt. Governor Diane Denish and Rep. Ben Lujan pulling out early, the race becomes Heinrich’s to lose. He will have to go through a primary that features state auditor Hector Balderas and social activist Andres Valdez. Originally, ex-Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez declared his candidacy, but pulled out to run not against Heinrich, but for his House seat. On the Republican side are businessman Bill English, Lt. Governor John Sanchez and ex-Representative Heather Wilson. Wilson formerly represented the Democratic-leaning 1st District and won her races in 2000 and 2004 by comfortable margins despite it also voting for Gore and Kerry. Hence, one would have to surmise that this race will pit two fairly well-known and liked candidates in Heinrich versus Wilson. The fact Wilson can win in a Democratic leaning district and by comfortable margins (her closest call came in 2006) gives her a leg up here. Given the stakes (like the balance of the Senate), this could be an expensive race with lots of outside money. While many Republicans are drooling over Nebraska, North Dakota and possibly Florida for Senatorial pick ups, they would be remiss in their duties if they overlook New Mexico.

New Mexico has three House seats currently 2-1 for the Democrats. There is no drama in the 2nd where Republican Steve Pearce should win nor in the 3rd where Democrat Ben Lujan should win. That leaves the vacant 1st District. This is an interesting, compact district where one would expect Democrats to actually perform better. However, Heinrich is the first Democrat to win the district in 2008 after Wilson left to run for Senate against Tom Udall. In 2008, he won by 12 points only to see that support dissipate to 4 points two years later. The first Democrat to enter the race was state senator Eric Griego who came out blasting Washington Republicans. Because certain “blue dog Democrats” were considering a run, progressive groups early jumped behind Griego with money and vocal support. However, he will have stiff competition against an old rival in the ex-Mayor of Albuquerque, Martin Chavez. In fact, Griego ran to the left of Chavez for Mayor in 2005 and lost by over 20 points after being outspent by Chavez 4-1. Chavez eventually lost the mayor’s job over incumbent fatigue and a small scandal over favoring city contracts, an issue which should resurface in the course of a primary or general election campaign.

They have already had spats. Chavez has been described by New Mexico Democratic operatives as the perfect fit for this moderate district. Hence, he is a moderate. One of his first mailings was to blast Republicans for insisting on the possibility of Social Security and Medicare cuts as part of the debt ceiling deal. This leftist rhetoric, including the “Republicans are for the rich and I am for the middle class and poor” stump lines, caught the attention of Griego who released a bitter and sarcastic response to Chavez’s suddenly more liberal stances. He insinuated that Chavez was trying to repaint himself as more liberal than what he really has shown in the past. Compounding matters is the fact that Bernalillo County commissioner Michele Lujan Grisham has entered the race. This will be a bruising primary battle that can only help the Republicans.

For Republicans, they believe they have a 50/50 shot at the seat, although the odds are more like 35-45%. One time Albuquerque City Councilman Dan Lewis entered the race and raised over $100,000 in the first quarter of his run. And former state representative Janice Arnold-Jones has also entered the race. One should not count out the possibility that Jon Barela, who lost by 4 points to Heinrich in 2010, may enter this race. He currently is secretary of the state’s Economic Development Department and an endorsement from Hispanic Republican and fairly popular New Mexico Governor Sue Martinez would go a long way here. Although it should be an interesting and close race, I believe the Democrats will eventually prevail in a very close race and keep the delegation 2-1 in their favor.

In conclusion, Obama takes their five electoral votes while Heather Wilson wins a hard-fought, somewhat expensive and eventually close race against Martin Heinrich while a Democrat will hold the 1st District for another two years thus leaving no pick ups for the GOP in this state.

Running totals thus far:

  • Obama with 83 electoral votes to 36 for the GOP nominee;
  • Net gain of two Governors;
  • Net gain of one Senate seat, and;
  • Net loss of 4 Republican House seats

Congress Needs to Start Working to Put the American People Back to Work


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

When I decided to run for Congress in 2010, I began my campaign with the conviction that no issue was more important than putting men and women across Rhode Island back to work.

For too long, national policies had left behind far too many working families in our state. In cities such as Woonsocket, factory employees who worked hard their whole lives were left to fend for themselves because of tax incentives for corporations to ship jobs overseas. Students at schools such as Rhode Island College were anxious that they wouldn’t be able to find work even after they earned their degrees. And small-business owners from Smithfield to Newport were still unable to get access to the capital they needed to support their companies.

Of course, Rhode Islanders certainly weren’t alone in their frustration — the same sentiments were held by men and women across our country. But as I begin the second year of my first term in Congress, I am struck by how little progress has been made to put our country back on the right track.

Since assuming the majority last year, the House Republican leadership has repeatedly missed opportunities to get things done and instead  has focused on extreme legislation with little or no chance of passing in the Senate. Making an ideological point has trumped getting things done. Several times during the past year, Republican leaders pushed our country to the brink — bowing to tea party pressure to resist any compromise even as unemployment remained high and Congressional approval plunged to record lows.

But following public rejection of their most recent effort to end a middle-class tax cut and unemployment benefits, I hope that my Republican colleagues will recognize that the time has come to get back to work and take real steps to strengthen our economy and get Americans back to work.

There are several bills pending before House committees that would immediately benefit our economy, and the underlying goals of these bills enjoy bipartisan support.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro’s (D-Conn.) National Infrastructure Development Bank Act would help leverage public and private funding for infrastructure projects — creating jobs and enabling us to rebuild crumbling bridges and roads across our country. Rep. Dan Lipinski’s (D-Ill.) National Manufacturing Strategy Act would direct the president to establish a manufacturing strategy for our country. Rep.Heath Shuler’s (D-N.C.) tax legislation would make the research and development tax credit permanent, encouraging small-business owners to propose and commercialize innovative ideas.

Earlier this year, I introduced the Make It in America Block Grant Program Act, a bill that has garnered 37 House co-sponsors, and a companion bill was introduced by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). This legislation would make investments, administered through the Commerce Department, to help small and medium-sized manufacturers retool their factories, retrain workers and acquire the capital they need to compete. American manufacturing helped push our country ahead in the 20th century, and making it a national priority again is key to revitalizing our economy.

I return to Washington, D.C., even more mindful of the urgency of taking action to improve our nation’s economy and the lives of those I have the honor of representing and more aware of the obstacles that continue to impede progress for everyday Americans.

A willingness to cross party lines and put pragmatism ahead of partisanship has been missing for far too long in Washington. But with millions of our friends, family members and neighbors still out of work, it has never been more important for Congress to get to work so that Americans can get back to work. We can’t wait.

Rep. David Cicilline is a member of the Small Business and the Foreign Affairs committees.

Originally published in Roll Call.

Republican Presidential Candidates’ Tax Policy Would Destroy the Economy (Even More)

There’s nothing quite like a political campaign to demonstrate just how extreme the national Republican Party and its primary voters are. The Center for Tax Justice has an analysis of the GOP Presidential Candidates’ Tax Plans which shows just how much they favor the wealthiest 1% of Americans. Some high(low)lights:

  • Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s $18.1 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $391,330.
  • Texas Governor Rick Perry’s $10.5 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $272,730.
  • Former Senator Rick Santorum’s $9.4 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $217,500.
  • Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s $6.6 trillion tax plan would give the richest one percent of Americans an average tax cut of $126,450.

To put these numbers into better perspective, let’s compare them to the 2010 median wgae of $26,363, as reported by the Social Security Administration (note: median wage means that 50% of workers earned less and 50% or workers earned more. This is a much better calculation to use since “average” income skews higher because of the outrageous sums of wealth that some people generate).

  • Under Newt Gingrich’s plan, the median worker would need to work almost 15 years to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.
  • Under Rick Perry’s plan, the median worker would need to work about 10 years and 4 months to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.
  • Under Rick Santorum’s plan, the median worker would need to work about 8 years and 3 months to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.
  • Under Rick Perry’s plan, the median worker would need to work about 4 years and 8 months to earn as much as the average tax cut received by the richest 1%.

And these calculations don’t include the millions of people who are either “officially” unemployed, or have stopped looking for work, just those that are fortunate enough to find jobs. Why these proposals are even being seriously considered is beyond me.

It’s important to remember that not all taxes (or tax cuts) are equal. For instance, a payroll tax is more regressive than an income tax, a sales tax is more regressive than a payroll tax, and a capital gains tax is the most progressive of all since the wealthy benefit the most from capital gains (hence why capital gains taxes were sharply cut under George W. Bush). It’s also important to remember that the US tax burden is at its lowest level since 1958 and also federal income taxes are at historically low levels. The LAST thing this country needs right now are additional transfers of wealth to the already rich.

Each of the GOP candidates’ tax plans would further starve the federal government of much needed revenue, increase borrowing to provide for all the important things the federal government does for us, further increase the national debt and the interest we pay on that debt, and exacerbate the growth of income inequality, albeit in varying degrees. What they wouldn’t do is deal with the real economic problem facing the country: not enough money is going into the hands of people who will spend it.

Since the 1970s, U.S. wages have largely remained stagnant. At the same time, the vast majority of all the wealth created in the country over the last 30 years has been flowing upward.

Because the super wealthy don’t actually work to generate their income, wages as a share of national income has been declining for just as long. What that means is less and less money is being earned by workers, and that’s bad for the economy because workers spending money is what fuels economic growth. Consumers earning more money means that they can buy more goods and services, increasing the effective demand in an economy. Seems pretty simple, right? Well, yes, it is.

Right to Work (for Less)


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Waging war on public sector unionized employees last year, with Governors Walker, Kasich and LePage leading the charge, lawmakers are now gearing up to take on private sector employees in this year’s sessions in legislatures in states across this country. Indiana is in the forefront of the war against workers’ rights with its governor, Daniels, set to introduce legislation into a Republican-led legislature that will make Indiana a “right to work” state. Right to work states have enacted laws that do not require union membership of employees working in union shops, therefore allowing free-riders to enjoy all the benefits of being a member without having to pay dues.

However, with this year’s Super Bowl being played in Indianapolis, a high-profile union in the form of the NFL Players’ Association has issued a statement weighing in on subject.

“Right-to-work is a political ploy designed to destroy basic workers’ rights. It’s not about jobs or rights, and it’s the wrong priority for Indiana.”

The statement also notes that as union members, players aren’t alone; they are joined by employees working the concession stands and everyone else that brings the games to their fans. Making note of teamwork, how right to work laws will decrease the average income of working families in Indiana by approximately $1,500 and urging Indiana legislators to reject the  measure.

Right to work states were predominantly in the South and West but as Republicans have gained control of legislatures and governors’ mansions in traditional “Rust Belt” states, there has been a steady eastward and northward drive to circumvent what was once protected under the National Labor Relations Act. The Wagner Act, as it was first known when passed in 1935, ensured protections for union organizing with union security being one of its main tenets once employees had chosen to organize.

In 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act was passed by Congress, over the veto of President Harry Truman with the president calling it a “slave labor” act. A year later, Truman campaigned against a “do nothing congress” and won re-election in a landslide. However, the act gave states the right to impose a right to work status on workers and many did just that.

Just this week, the Republican-controlled house in Indiana passed a work to right to work bill through its Employment, Labor and Pensions Committee by a vote of 8-5 in what was called a “charade” vote by state Rep. David Bartlett after a five minute hearing where no amendments were allowed and no discussion heard. Fellow Democratic state Rep. Clyde Kersey stated, “I think the light of democracy just went out in the Indiana House,” after the vote was taken. A vote to pass the measure in full can be taken as quickly as later this week.

A few things known about right to work states is that on average, workers make $5,333 less a year than in non-right to work states. Workers are still protected from paying union dues if they conflict with their beliefs and workers are better protected in states where there are protections in place for workers. The only ones benefitting from a right to work statute are employers, not workers. Employers will save money from this law, not the other way around. In states where a right to work law was enacted, such as Oklahoma, where job creation was touted, no such job creation took place and manufacturing jobs have actually been lost.

This cynical and broad-based attack on workers’ rights from Republicans and chambers’ of commerce benefits no one and in the long run will hurt the economy of Indiana as workers have less and less to spend with lower wages. Now is not the time to be decreasing the earning and spending power of the local workforces.

Getting Kicked Out and Arrested at a Romney Event


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

My friend Matt from the Harvard Kennedy School has a blog post up about a disturbing situation at a Mitt Romney campaign event he was attending, which, in my opinion, is emblematic of a larger trend of slowly taking away the rights and freedoms of people to speak out in dissent.  We see this occurring more and more at public and campaign events: private police details, people being denied entry, cordoned off “free speech” zones, etc.  It is as if political candidates and public officials are moving towards the “Minority Report” model to prevent outbursts at events such as politically motivated signs, public mic checks, or monopolizing limited question and answer time with particular questions by preventing those who may (but likely won’t) be engaging in such activity from the opportunity to attend.  I suppose it is a symptom of the 24/7 news cycle, the democratization of information, and the ease with which even the most mundane political “controversies” can be blown out of proportion and manipulated for partisan ends.

Here are some snippets of his article.

I’d been in New Hampshire for the past several days to follow the campaign and see some of the candidates in-person. Yesterday morning, I was chatting up a Romney campaign staffer before an event at the Gilchrist Manufacturing Company in Hudson, NH, when a police officer approached. Sir, we have to ask you to leave the premises.

I asked another question or two, and the cop had had enough: “You’re under arrest.” He took my things, handcuffed me behind my back, searched me, and tucked me into a nearby cruiser. A few minutes later, an officer removed me from the cruiser and had me lean up against another police car and spread my legs for a second search. Two or three TV crews had their cameras trained on us; I felt ashamed in a wholly unfamiliar way. I wanted to look directly at the cameras and explain what had happened, but I feared the police officers’ reaction.

It was clear to me that the two officers had no interest in discussing what the law actually said, or what my rights actually entailed. I was paperwork, and they wanted to get it over with. I kept asking questions, and at one point, one of them opened up the New Hampshire legal code and read me the definition of disorderly conduct. He read the words dully, as if they were just syllables, with no interest at all in what they meant.

Read the whole post here.

Creating Boss Culture: These are Dangerous Days

Update from Sunday Morning.  Seems even the epitome of mainstream media, The Washington Post, is asking the very same question about why American’s aren’t protesting.

Join David S. Meyer as he chats about his latest Outlook piece, “Americans are angry. Why aren’t they protesting?” Monday, Aug. 15 at 1 p.m. ET. In his piece, Meyer writes, “There’s something exciting, sometimes terrifying, about people taking to the streets to get what they want. In Cairo’s Tahrir Square, they gathered to demand the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak. […] Most recently, in London and across England, young people have assembled at night, looting stores and burning cars to demand – well, that’s not clear yet.

Original Post.

A conversation on Twitter concerning the riots in London brought to my attention this great article from Alternet about how we are creating (have created?) an overly compliant culture. Following the story is a video that seems to sum it up with the line from O’Connor’s song: “These are dangerous days – to say what you feel is to dig your own grave.”

8 Reasons Young Americans Don’t Fight Back: How the US Crushed Youth Resistance

Traditionally, young people have energized democratic movements. So it is a major coup for the ruling elite to have created societal institutions that have subdued young Americans and broken their spirit of resistance to domination.

Young Americans—even more so than older Americans—appear to have acquiesced to the idea that the corporatocracy can completely screw them and that they are helpless to do anything about it. A 2010 Gallup poll asked Americans “Do you think the Social Security system will be able to pay you a benefit when you retire?” Among 18- to 34-years-olds, 76 percent of them said no. Yet despite their lack of confidence in the availability of Social Security for them, few have demanded it be shored up by more fairly payroll-taxing the wealthy; most appear resigned to having more money deducted from their paychecks for Social Security, even though they don’t believe it will be around to benefit them.

How exactly has American society subdued young Americans?

1. Student-Loan Debt. Large debt—and the fear it creates—is a pacifying force. There was no tuition at the City University of New York when I attended one of its colleges in the 1970s, a time when tuition at many U.S. public universities was so affordable that it was easy to get a B.A. and even a graduate degree without accruing any student-loan debt. While those days are gone in the United States, public universities continue to be free in the Arab world and are either free or with very low fees in many countries throughout the world. The millions of young Iranians who risked getting shot to protest their disputed 2009 presidential election, the millions of young Egyptians who risked their lives earlier this year to eliminate Mubarak, and the millions of young Americans who demonstrated against the Vietnam War all had in common the absence of pacifying huge student-loan debt.

Today in the United States, two-thirds of graduating seniors at four-year colleges have student-loan debt, including over 62 percent of public university graduates. While average undergraduate debt is close to $25,000, I increasingly talk to college graduates with closer to $100,000 in student-loan debt. During the time in one’s life when it should be easiest to resist authority because one does not yet have family responsibilities, many young people worry about the cost of bucking authority, losing their job, and being unable to pay an ever-increasing debt. In a vicious cycle, student debt has a subduing effect on activism, and political passivity makes it more likely that students will accept such debt as a natural part of life.

2. Psychopathologizing and Medicating Noncompliance. In 1955, Erich Fromm, the then widely respected anti-authoritarian leftist psychoanalyst, wrote, “Today the function of psychiatry, psychology and psychoanalysis threatens to become the tool in the manipulation of man.” Fromm died in 1980, the same year that an increasingly authoritarian America elected Ronald Reagan president, and an increasingly authoritarian American Psychiatric Association added to their diagnostic bible (then the DSM-III) disruptive mental disorders for children and teenagers such as the increasingly popular “oppositional defiant disorder” (ODD). The official symptoms of ODD include “often actively defies or refuses to comply with adult requests or rules,” “often argues with adults,” and “often deliberately does things to annoy other people.”

Many of America’s greatest activists including Saul Alinsky (1909–1972), the legendary organizer and author of Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals, would today certainly be diagnosed with ODD and other disruptive disorders. Recalling his childhood, Alinsky said, “I never thought of walking on the grass until I saw a sign saying ‘Keep off the grass.’ Then I would stomp all over it.” Heavily tranquilizing antipsychotic drugs (e.g. Zyprexa and Risperdal) are now the highest grossing class of medication in the United States ($16 billion in 2010); a major reason for this, according to theJournal of the American Medical Association in 2010, is that many children receiving antipsychotic drugs have nonpsychotic diagnoses such as ODD or some other disruptive disorder (this especially true of Medicaid-covered pediatric patients).

3. Schools That Educate for Compliance and Not for Democracy. Upon accepting the New York City Teacher of the Year Award on January 31, 1990, John Taylor Gatto upset many in attendance by stating: “The truth is that schools don’t really teach anything except how to obey orders. This is a great mystery to me because thousands of humane, caring people work in schools as teachers and aides and administrators, but the abstract logic of the institution overwhelms their individual contributions.” A generation ago, the problem of compulsory schooling as a vehicle for an authoritarian society was widely discussed, but as this problem has gotten worse, it is seldom discussed.

The nature of most classrooms, regardless of the subject matter, socializes students to be passive and directed by others, to follow orders, to take seriously the rewards and punishments of authorities, to pretend to care about things they don’t care about, and that they are impotent to affect their situation. A teacher can lecture about democracy, but schools are essentially undemocratic places, and so democracy is not what is instilled in students. Jonathan Kozol in The Night Is Dark and I Am Far from Home focused on how school breaks us from courageous actions. Kozol explains how our schools teach us a kind of “inert concern” in which “caring”—in and of itself and without risking the consequences of actual action—is considered “ethical.” School teaches us that we are “moral and mature” if we politely assert our concerns, but the essence of school—its demand for compliance—teaches us not to act in a friction-causing manner.

4. “No Child Left Behind” and “Race to the Top.” The corporatocracy has figured out a way to make our already authoritarian schools even more authoritarian. Democrat-Republican bipartisanship has resulted in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, NAFTA, the PATRIOT Act, the War on Drugs, the Wall Street bailout, and educational policies such as “No Child Left Behind” and “Race to the Top.” These policies are essentially standardized-testing tyranny that creates fear, which is antithetical to education for a democratic society. Fear forces students and teachers to constantly focus on the demands of test creators; it crushes curiosity, critical thinking, questioning authority, and challenging and resisting illegitimate authority. In a more democratic and less authoritarian society, one would evaluate the effectiveness of a teacher not by corporatocracy-sanctioned standardized tests but by asking students, parents, and a community if a teacher is inspiring students to be more curious, to read more, to learn independently, to enjoy thinking critically, to question authorities, and to challenge illegitimate authorities.

5. Shaming Young People Who Take Education—But Not Their Schooling—Seriously. In a 2006 survey in the United States, it was found that 40 percent of children between first and third grade read every day, but by fourth grade, that rate declined to 29 percent. Despite the anti-educational impact of standard schools, children and their parents are increasingly propagandized to believe that disliking school means disliking learning. That was not always the case in the United States. Mark Twain famously said, “I never let my schooling get in the way of my education.” Toward the end of Twain’s life in 1900, only 6 percent of Americans graduated high school. Today, approximately 85 percent of Americans graduate high school, but this is good enough for Barack Obama who told us in 2009, “And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It’s not just quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country.”
The more schooling Americans get, however, the more politically ignorant they are of America’s ongoing class war, and the more incapable they are of challenging the ruling class. In the 1880s and 1890s, American farmers with little or no schooling created a Populist movement that organized America’s largest-scale working people’s cooperative, formed a People’s Party that received 8 percent of the vote in 1892 presidential election, designed a “subtreasury” plan (that had it been implemented would have allowed easier credit for farmers and broke the power of large banks) and sent 40,000 lecturers across America to articulate it, and evidenced all kinds of sophisticated political ideas, strategies and tactics absent today from America’s well-schooled population. Today, Americans who lack college degrees are increasingly shamed as “losers”; however, Gore Vidal and George Carlin, two of America’s most astute and articulate critics of the corporatocracy, never went to college, and Carlin dropped out of school in the ninth grade.

6. The Normalization of Surveillance. The fear of being surveilled makes a population easier to control. While the National Security Agency (NSA) has received publicity for monitoring American citizen’s email and phone conversations, and while employer surveillance has become increasingly common in the United States, young Americans have become increasingly acquiescent to corporatocracy surveillance because, beginning at a young age, surveillance is routine in their lives. Parents routinely check Web sites for their kid’s latest test grades and completed assignments, and just like employers, are monitoring their children’s computers and Facebook pages. Some parents use the GPS in their children’s cell phones to track their whereabouts, and other parents have video cameras in their homes. Increasingly, I talk with young people who lack the confidence that they can even pull off a party when their parents are out of town, and so how much confidence are they going to have about pulling off a democratic movement below the radar of authorities?

7. Television. In 2009, the Nielsen Company reported that TV viewing in the United States is at an all-time high if one includes the following “three screens”: a television set, a laptop/personal computer, and a cell phone. American children average eight hours a day on TV, video games, movies, the Internet, cell phones, iPods, and other technologies (not including school-related use). Many progressives are concerned about the concentrated control of content by the corporate media, but the mere act of watching TV—regardless of the programming—is the primary pacifying agent (private-enterprise prisons have recognized that providing inmates with cable television can be a more economical method to keep them quiet and subdued than it would be to hire more guards).

Television is a dream come true for an authoritarian society: those with the most money own most of what people see; fear-based television programming makes people more afraid and distrustful of one another, which is good for the ruling elite who depend on a “divide and conquer” strategy; TV isolates people so they are not joining together to create resistance to authorities; and regardless of the programming, TV viewers’ brainwaves slow down, transforming them closer to a hypnotic state that makes it difficult to think critically. While playing a video games is not as zombifying as passively viewing TV, such games have become for many boys and young men their only experience of potency, and this “virtual potency” is certainly no threat to the ruling elite.

8. Fundamentalist Religion and Fundamentalist Consumerism. American culture offers young Americans the “choices” of fundamentalist religion and fundamentalist consumerism. All varieties of fundamentalism narrow one’s focus and inhibit critical thinking. While some progressives are fond of calling fundamentalist religion the “opiate of the masses,” they too often neglect the pacifying nature of America’s other major fundamentalism. Fundamentalist consumerism pacifies young Americans in a variety of ways. Fundamentalist consumerism destroys self-reliance, creating people who feel completely dependent on others and who are thus more likely to turn over decision-making power to authorities, the precise mind-set that the ruling elite loves to see. A fundamentalist consumer culture legitimizes advertising, propaganda, and all kinds of manipulations, including lies; and when a society gives legitimacy to lies and manipulativeness, it destroys the capacity of people to trust one another and form democratic movements. Fundamentalist consumerism also promotes self-absorption, which makes it difficult for the solidarity necessary for democratic movements.

These are not the only aspects of our culture that are subduing young Americans and crushing their resistance to domination. The food-industrial complex has helped create an epidemic of childhood obesity, depression, and passivity. The prison-industrial complex keeps young anti-authoritarians “in line” (now by the fear that they may come before judges such as the two Pennsylvania ones who took $2.6 million from private-industry prisons to ensure that juveniles were incarcerated). As Ralph Waldo Emerson observed: “All our things are right and wrong together. The wave of evil washes all our institutions alike.”

Bruce E. Levine is a clinical psychologist and author of Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite (Chelsea Green, 2011). His Web site is www.brucelevine.net

View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/151850/

 


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387