CDC

We ARE The People

This is the text of a speech given by Anne Pawli at the WATP event held on Saturday, Oct. 29.

 We are a diverse coalition of organizations, the old, the young, the retired, the unemployed, students and workers, who understand evil is afoot in Michigan.  We were promised the American Dream but woke up in a nightmare, where elders' pensions are taxed, the poor are left hungry and homeless, teachers and other public employees are scapegoated as parasites on the system and working class women and men are told to downsize their plans for a secure retirement.  We are here because we know if we don't unite and face our foe together, we will be picked off and trampled underfoot one by one by one.  It has already begun.   

We are nonviolent.  We treat each other, and those who do not understand the urgency of our cause, with dignity and respect.  As MLK said, “Don't bring your opponent to their knees, bring them to their senses” and that is exactly what we intend to do.  But let's be clear: nonviolence does not mean we acquiesce to the outrageous policies coming out of Lansing.  We will stand together, arm in arm, back to back in support of each other, and we will stand toe to toe against the 1-percent and politicians who do not believe the shared burden of sacrifice pertains to them.  We will not go quietly into that good night.

We are a voice for those being forced to bear more of the burden of Lansing's misguided policies than they can possibly shoulder.  We are demanding our voices be heard by those elected to represent us.  WATP invited Sen. Goeff Hansen, Rep. Holly Hughes and Rep. Marcia Hovey-Wright to attend today's rally.  We expected our representatives would have the moral courage to face their constituents and defend or justify their votes on legislation which will hurt the most vulnerable among us.  We hoped they had solutions for the terrible problems their new policies will create.  All three legislators said they had prior commitments.  Only Rep. Hovey-Wright felt compelled to change her plans so she could join us today.   

We are angry, but we will not let our anger control us.  We cannot afford to be paralyzed by our rage.  And so we are here today to harness our outrage into action.  The powers in Lansing think we are distracted, asleep, hopeless and helpless.  They couldn't be more mistaken.  The sleeping giant has awakened.  We are going to organize, educate, motivate and irritate if we have to, our neighbors, friends, relatives and coworkers.  We are going to make sure what happened last November doesn't happen in 2012.  We are the people.  We have the power.  We are watching.  We are listening. And we will vote for our best interests Nov 6, 2012.

LETTER TO THE 53%

Below is a letter written to one of the 53%ers.  Norm Kittleson got it from Daily Kos, by Max Udargo  It is not hostile and is exactly the kind of thing we need to be saying to those who disagree with us.

Hello,

I briefly visited the “We are the 53%” website, but I first saw your face on a liberal blog.  Your picture is quite popular on liberal blogs.  I think it’s because of the expression on your face.  I don’t know if you meant to look pugnacious or if we’re just projecting that on you, but I think that’s what gets our attention.

In the picture, you’re holding up a sheet of paper that says:

I am a former Marine.
I work two jobs.
I don’t have health insurance.
I worked 60-70 hours a week for 8 years to pay my way through college.
I haven’t had 4 consecutive days off in over 4 years.
But I don’t blame Wall Street.
Suck it up you whiners.
I am the 53%.
God bless the USA!

I wanted to respond to you as a liberal.  Because, although I think you’ve made yourself clear and I think I understand you, you don’t seem to understand me at all.  I hope you will read this and understand me better, and maybe understand the Occupy Wall Street movement better.

First, let me say that I think it’s great that you have such a strong work ethic and I agree with you that you have much to be proud of.  You seem like a good, hard-working, strong kid.  I admire your dedication and determination.  I worked my way through college too, mostly working graveyard shifts at hotels as a “night auditor.”  For a time I worked at two hotels at once, but I don’t think I ever worked 60 hours in a week, and certainly not 70.  I think I maxed out at 56.  And that wasn’t something I could sustain for long, not while going to school.  The problem was that I never got much sleep, and sleep deprivation would take its toll.  I can’t imagine putting in 70 hours in a week while going to college at the same time.  That’s impressive.

I have a nephew in the Marine Corps, so I have some idea of how tough that can be.  He almost didn’t make it through basic training, but he stuck it out and insisted on staying even when questions were raised about his medical fitness.  He eventually served in Iraq and Afghanistan and has decided to pursue a career in the Marines.  We’re all very proud of him.  Your picture reminds me of him.

So, if you think being a liberal means that I don’t value hard work or a strong work ethic, you’re wrong.  I think everyone appreciates the industry and dedication a person like you displays.  I’m sure you’re a great employee, and if you have entrepreneurial ambitions, I’m sure these qualities will serve you there too.  I’ll wish you the best of luck, even though a guy like you will probably need luck less than most.

I understand your pride in what you’ve accomplished, but I want to ask you something.

Do you really want the bar set this high?  Do you really want to live in a society where just getting by requires a person to hold down two jobs and work 60 to 70 hours a week?  Is that your idea of the American Dream?

 Do you really want to spend the rest of your life working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week?  Do you think you can?  Because, let me tell you, kid, that’s not going to be as easy when you’re 50 as it was when you were 20.

And what happens if you get sick?  You say you don’t have health insurance, but since you’re a veteran I assume you have some government-provided health care through the VA system.  I know my father, a Vietnam-era veteran of the Air Force, still gets most of his medical needs met through the VA, but I don’t know what your situation is.  But even if you have access to health care, it doesn’t mean disease or injury might not interfere with your ability to put in those 60- to 70-hour work weeks.

Do you plan to get married, have kids?  Do you think your wife is going to be happy with you working those long hours year after year without a vacation?  Is it going to be fair to her?  Is it going to be fair to your kids?  Is it going to be fair to you?

Look, you’re a tough kid.  And you have a right to be proud of that.  But not everybody is as tough as you, or as strong, or as young.  Does pride in what you’ve accomplish mean that you have contempt for anybody who can’t keep up with you?  Does it mean that the single mother who can’t work on her feet longer than 50 hours a week doesn’t deserve a good life?  Does it mean the older man who struggles with modern technology and can’t seem to keep up with the pace set by younger workers should just go throw himself off a cliff?

And, believe it or not, there are people out there even tougher than you.  Why don’t we let them set the bar, instead of you?  Are you ready to work 80 hours a week?  100 hours?  Can you hold down four jobs?  Can you do it when you’re 40?  When you’re 50?  When you’re 60?  Can you do it with arthritis?  Can you do it with one arm?  Can you do it when you’re being treated for prostate cancer?

And is this really your idea of what life should be like in the greatest country on Earth?

Here’s how a liberal looks at it:  a long time ago workers in this country realized that industrialization wasn’t making their lives better, but worse.  The captains of industry were making a ton of money and living a merry life far away from the dirty, dangerous factories they owned, and far away from the even dirtier and more dangerous mines that fed raw materials to those factories.

The workers quickly decided that this arrangement didn’t work for them.  If they were going to work as cogs in machines designed to build wealth for the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts and Carnegies, they wanted a cut.  They wanted a share of the wealth that they were helping create.  And that didn’t mean just more money; it meant a better quality of life.  It meant reasonable hours and better working conditions.

Eventually, somebody came up with the slogan, “8 hours of work, 8 hours of leisure, 8 hours of sleep” to divide the 24-hour day into what was considered a fair allocation of a human’s time.  It wasn’t a slogan that was immediately accepted.  People had to fight to put this standard in place.  People demonstrated, and fought with police, and were killed.  They were called communists (in fairness, some of them were), and traitors, and many of them got a lot worse than pepper spray at the hands of police and private security.

But by the time we got through the Great Depression and WWII, we’d all learned some valuable lessons about working together and sharing the prosperity, and the 8-hour workday became the norm.

The 8-hour workday and the 40-hour workweek became a standard by which we judged our economic success, and a reality check against which we could verify the American Dream.

If a family could live a good life with one wage-earner working a 40-hour job, then the American Dream was realized.  If the income from that job could pay the bills, buy a car, pay for the kids’ braces, allow the family to save enough money for a down payment on a house and still leave some money for retirement and maybe for a college fund for the kids, then we were living the American Dream.  The workers were sharing in the prosperity they helped create, and they still had time to take their kids to a ball game, take their spouses to a movie, and play a little golf on the weekends.

Ah, the halcyon days of the 1950s!  Yeah, ok, it wasn’t quite that perfect.  The prosperity wasn’t spread as evenly and ubiquitously as we might want to pretend, but if you were a middle-class white man, things were probably pretty good from an economic perspective.  The American middle class was reaching its zenith.

And the top marginal federal income tax rate was more than 90%.  Throughout the whole of the 1950s and into the early 60s.

Just thought I’d throw that in there.

Anyway, do you understand what I’m trying to say?  We can have a reasonable standard for what level of work qualifies you for the American Dream, and work to build a society that realizes that dream, or we can chew each other to the bone in a nightmare of merciless competition and mutual contempt.

I’m a liberal, so I probably dream bigger than you.  For instance, I want everybody to have healthcare.  I want lazy people to have healthcare.  I want stupid people to have healthcare.  I want drug addicts to have healthcare.  I want bums who refuse to work even when given the opportunity to have healthcare.  I’m willing to pay for that with my taxes, because I want to live in a society where it doesn’t matter how much of a loser you are, if you need medical care you can get it.  And not just by crowding up an emergency room that should be dedicated exclusively to helping people in emergencies.

You probably don’t agree with that, and that’s fine.  That’s an expansion of the American Dream, and would involve new commitments we haven’t made before.   But the commitment we’ve made to the working class since the 1940s is something that we should both support and be willing to fight for, whether we are liberal or conservative.  We should both be willing to fight for the American Dream.  And we should agree that anybody trying to steal that dream from us is to be resisted, not defended.

And while we’re defending that dream, you know what else we’ll be defending, kid?  We’ll be defending you and your awesome work ethic.  Because when we defend the American Dream we’re not just defending the idea of modest prosperity for people who put in an honest day’s work, we’re also defending the idea that those who go the extra mile should be rewarded accordingly.

Look kid, I don’t want you to “get by” working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week.  If you’re willing to put in that kind of effort, I want you to get rich.  I want you to have a comprehensive healthcare plan.  I want you vacationing in the Bahamas every couple of years, with your beautiful wife and healthy, happy kids.  I want you rewarded for your hard work, and I want your exceptional effort to reap exceptional rewards.  I want you to accumulate wealth and invest it in Wall Street.  And I want you to make more money from those investments.

I understand that a prosperous America needs people with money to invest, and I’ve got no problem with that.  All other things being equal, I want all the rich people to keep being rich.  And clever financiers who find ways to get more money into the hands of promising entrepreneurs should be rewarded for their contributions as well.

I think Wall Street has an important job to do, I just don’t think they’ve been doing it.  And I resent their sense of entitlement – their sense that they are special and deserve to be rewarded extravagantly even when they screw everything up.

Come on, it was only three years ago, kid.  Remember?  Those assholes almost destroyed our economy.  Do you remember the feeling of panic?  John McCain wanted to suspend the presidential campaign so that everybody could focus on the crisis.  Hallowed financial institutions like Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch went belly up.  The government started intervening with bailouts, not because anybody thought “private profits and socialized losses” was fair, but because we were afraid not to intervene -  we were afraid our whole economy might come crashing down around us if we didn’t prop up companies that were “too big to fail.”

So, even though you and I had nothing to do with the bad decisions, blind greed and incompetence of those guys on Wall Street, we were sure as hell along for the ride, weren’t we?  And we’ve all paid a price.

All the” 99%” wants is for you to remember the role that Wall Street played in creating this mess, and for you to join us in demanding that Wall Street share the pain.  They don’t want to share the pain, and they’re spending a lot of money and twisting a lot of arms to foist their share of the pain on the rest of us instead.  And they’ve been given unprecedented powers to spend and twist, and they’re not even trying to hide what they’re doing.

All we want is for everybody to remember what happened, and to see what is happening still.  And we want you to see that the only way they can get away without paying their share is to undermine the American Dream for the rest of us.

And I want you and I to understand each other, and to stand together to prevent them from doing that.  You seem like the kind of guy who would be a strong ally, and I’d be proud to stand with you.

By Max Udargo

A SOLUTION TO MEN BEHAVING BADLY; ELECT MORE WOMEN

Published: Sunday, June 19, 2011, 7:26 AM

By The Muskegon Chronicle The Muskegon Chronicle
Follow

Share close

Google Buzz Digg Stumble Upon Fark

Share Email Print

Cokie and Steve Roberts

Men who cannot keep their pants up or their ears open are causing two of Washington's larger problems. And the remedy is the same: Elect more women to higher office.
Sex scandals and budget deficits might not seem like similar issues but in an important sense they are. In both cases, male arrogance and ego come into play. And in both cases, that leads to risky behavior -- emailing salacious images to women or jeopardizing the credit rating of the country.
Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, got it right when she told the New York Times: "Women run for office to do something, and men run for office to be somebody." Dee Dee Myers, former White House press secretary in the Clinton administration, added: "There are certain men that the more visible they get, the more bulletproof they feel. You just don't see women doing that; they don't get reckless when they're empowered."
Start with sex. After Rep. Anthony Weiner was revealed as a serial sender of phallic photos, folks tried really hard to compile a list of licentious women. The sinners included Helen Chenoweth, the late congresswoman from Idaho who carried on a long affair with a married man, and Katherine Bryson, a state legislator from Utah who got caught with her lover on a surveillance camera. To fill out the meager roster, historians had to dredge up Catherine the Great, who took many young lovers but died in 1796.
There are many reasons for this disparity starting with time. Men apparently have it, and women don't. One of the great unanswered questions is how Weiner squeezed in so many online flirtations. His colleague from New York, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (the mother of two small boys), once said of cheating: "While I'm at home changing diapers, I just couldn't conceive of it."
Then there's the "reckless" factor mentioned by Myers. Men might feel "bulletproof" but women know life doesn't work that way. They know there's always a price to be paid. Rep. Candice Miller, a Michigan Republican, told the Times: "Every time one of these sex scandals goes, we just look at each other, like, 'What is it with these guys? Don't they think they're going to get caught?'"
Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist, said the same self-confidence that enables a man to run for office could also fuel his sense of entitlement: "It's the Icarus phenomenon. You think you have wings and you can fly up to the sun and down to the water. Sometimes you burn and then you sink."
But sex scandals don't ruin the country's credit rating. The current struggle to raise the debt ceiling is far more serious, but males in both parties are exhibiting the same chest-thumping (or chest-baring) behavior that sank Weiner. Let's be clear, women can be highly partisan warriors (see Sarah Palin and Nancy Pelosi), but as Walsh noted, if their goal is to "do something," rather than "be somebody," women are more likely to submerge their egos, listen to their rivals, and seek pragmatic compromises.
In today's Senate, female members represent one of the few islands of civility. They meet regularly for private dinners, co-sponsor legislation, and have even written a book together. In a recent interview with Christiane Amanpour of ABC News, Christine Lagarde, the French finance minister, argued that women "inject less libido, less testosterone" into the decision-making process. "We don't necessarily project our egos into cutting a deal," she explained.
On ABC's "This Week," author Claire Shipman agreed that an overdose of male hormones makes harmony much more difficult. "There's something about a group of men and testosterone, you know, making risky decisions, that's very real," she said.
Torie Clarke, who learned something about male behavior during her years as the Pentagon's chief spokesperson, added: "You can see guys within a company competing with one another all the time, often to see who can get to the top of the food chain, versus women who more often will say, 'I'm going to get in there, and let's get this done.'"
All men are not jerks, and all women are not gems. But females still hold less than 17 percent of all seats in Congress. And if you don't think Washington would be better off with more women in positions of power, answer this question honestly. Can you imagine a female legislator taking a picture of her private parts and sending it to a youthful male admirer? We rest our case.
Steve and Cokie's new book, "Our Haggadah" (HarperCollins), was published this spring. Steve and Cokie Roberts can be contacted by email at stevecokie@gmail.com.

MICHIGAN'S FUTURE

On March 16, just 75 days into his administration, Gov. Rick Snyder signed into law PA4, legislation that can deprive local governments of all authority.  Yes, you read that correctly.  This bill can take away the rights of your legally elected representatives -- and your rights as well.

Michigan has had  Emergency Financial Managers (EFMs) for many years.  They could go into a city struggling with financial challenges and work with all parties involved to find solutions.  The bill signed into law on March 16 changed all that. The person representing the state is now an Emergency Manager and is essentially a dictator.

Once a financial emergency is declared, not one local person has any say  in what will happen to that village, city, township, county or school district.  State officials have the authority to make all decisions, via the Emergency Manager.   Yes.   Democracy can be legally  ripped out of our hands. When you wade through all the verbiage, this can essentially be done at the whim of the State Treasurer -- or the State Superintendent for a school district.

What can an Emergency Manager do?  Lots.  He or she can strip local elected officials of all authority (Section 15 (4) ),  reject, modify or terminate one or more terms and conditions of an existing contract (Section19, (j) ), lock elected or appointed officials out of their offices (Section 17 (2)), terminate one or more terms and conditions of an existing collective bargaining agreement (Section 19 (k), apply for a loan, (Section 19 (s) )order mileage elections (Section 19 (t), borrow money (Section 19 (u) consolidate or eliminate departments (Section 19 (n) ), sell off assets (Section 19 r ).  He/she can even go so far as to dissolve the municipal government.   (Section 19 (cc).  He/she can do all this  -- plus much more -- without input from any local official.  Should this happen in your community, your voice will be silenced.

“Who pays this EM?” you might ask.  The local unit of government.  How much do they cost?  There is no limit.  Detroit’s EM costs Detroit $400,000.  a year.  Benton Harbor must pay their EM $11,000 a month.  Oh, and by the way, the average income of the residents of Benton Harbor is $10,000 -- a year!

This is a 34-page Public Act.  I simply cannot cover it in this limited space.  Be assured, though, that this law has the potential to strip local control from every unit of government in this state.  Read it for yourself.

Our elected officials who supported this bill gave a wide variety of excuses.  “Oh, this will only be used in the direst of circumstances.”

 “Oh, and why then have they trained 400 of these managers?” I asked.  No answer.

“Don’t worry,” some legislators say, “there are 18 check points.”  They forget to mention that only one of those 18 points is needed.  And the last check point?  “The existence of other facts or circumstances that in the sole discretion of the state treasurer (or state superintendent in the case of a school system) indicate financial stress.”

“Oh, this is just to help our communities,”  said another legislator.  Really??  Extortion now helps our communities?  You do what we want, or we deprive you of your Democracy?  Un-american.

This bill could easily lead to selling off communities’ assets.  Will an EM come in to Muskegon Heights and sell off Mona Lake Park to the highest bidder? Will an EM come in and sell off their state of the art high school to a charter school?  There is nothing in law to prevent them from doing that.  Will they want to sell off Pere Marquette a few years from now?  There would be nothing we could do to stop them.

The city council in Benton Harbor, Michigan, has already had its power stripped by its Emergency Manager,  Joe Harris.  Here is what Mr. Harris had to say:

“The fact is that the city manager is now gone.  I am now the city manager.  I replaced the financial manager.  I am now the city manager and the financial manager.  I am the city manager, the financial manager, the mayor, and the city commissioners and I don’t need them.”

There you have it.  Michigan’s new future.


(We simply cannot sit by idly and allow this to happen.  In my next post, I will talk about actions we can take.)

To read this law for yourself:
Go to Michigan.gov
Click on Michigan Government tab
Click on Michigan Compiled Laws (on the right side)
Click on Public Acts (left side of screen)
Put Public Act 4 in the appropriate place
Click on the square next to Public Act

TIME TRAVEL?

I just saw something I thought I would never see in my country.  Students who loved their school and wanted to stay there were dragged  out by uniformed police officers.  Yes, you read that right.  The students do not want to leave their school.  They love it there.  They are learning there.  And uniformed officers dragged them out, while the students screamed in terror.  It should probably come as no surprise to anyone that these students were young, female and black.  This would never happen to white middle class kids.

I feel like I have time-traveled back to the fifties, when black students simply wanted to go to a good school, and whole towns fell completely apart.  I hope there are people out there who care and will stand up for those young people.  Apparently, it is not going to  be their elected officials.

Most people know by now that in Michigan our Republican legislature and governor gave unbelievably broad powers to Emergency Financial Managers (EFM).   These EFMs can not only nullify contracts, they can fire local elected officials and sell off assets.  In other words, EFMs do not have to listen to the people in the communities they take over.  They become dictators.  Local citizens’ hands are tied; they can only resort to begging -- and civil disobedience.

The EFM in Benton Harbor this week stripped all power from the Benton Harbor City Council.  Oh, excuse me, not all their power.  They can still call meetings, accept the minutes, and adjourn meetings.  That’s it.  All other decisions will be made by the EFM.

And in Detroit, the EFM decided to close schools, including the Catherine Ferguson School, a place for young women who are pregnant or have young children and still want to pursue their education.  These young women and their children will grow into adults.  The best case scenario is that they are educated.  I guess that will not be happening now.  An effective place of learning is being closed down by the EFM.  The young women decided to turn to a technique that broke down the walls of Jim Crow in the fifties and sixties.  They had the courage and will to turn to to civil disobedience.  They  held a sit-in at their school.  Their thanks for trying to get an education?  They got dragged out of their own school and hauled off to jail.

I am sick about it.  I hope you are too.

We simply cannot sit by and do nothing when dedicated students are dragged out of their own school by uniformed police officers.

I talked to my state representative about the Emergency Financial Manager bill today.  She seemed to think that because the mayor of Benton Harbor did something wrong, it was okay to take over cities, sell off assets, end contracts.  I was disheartened to think she was returning to the same “blame the victims” mentality that has been used since the beginning of time to oppress people.

There are actions we can take.  There is a rally at Benton Harbor at noon on Wednesday.  The more people that come, the stronger statement we make.

Soon there will be petitions to circulate.  If we can get signatures to equal 5% of the people who voted for the governor in the last election, the law is stopped in its tracks until it is put to a vote of the people.  We simply must stop this travesty.

This week it’s Benton Harbor and Detroit.  Who is next?