A Word about Unions

As the conflict in Wisconsin over Gov. Walker's proposal to strip unions of their right to collective bargaining continues, I find that many still do not understand what the debate is all about and why Walker's actions are terribly wrong and even deeply immoral.

First, let us dispel a few red herrings. This debate is not about whether unions have their flaws and foibles. Unions, like any other organization, have weak points, make mistakes, and are imperfect. So what? The criticisms of unions are no different than any other type organization. Second, the debate in Wisconsin has nothing to do with "balancing a budget" or "reducing the state deficit." To begin with, taking away the right of unions to bargain collectively does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reduce a deficit. Even worse, since Walker created the so-called deficit by giving tax breaks to his rich donors and even refusing stimulus money and the jobs that would be created by high speed rail, he can hardly say that we "must" strip unions of anything, let alone their right to bargain collectively!

Second, there are those who think this is about union members' greed. The unions have agreed - I would not have - to the cuts in their pensions and to pay more for health care. They insist only on holding onto to collective bargaining. Furthermore, many of the same people who insists that teachers are greedy for having a good health care plan also claim (out of the other side of their face I guess) that we have no right to raise any taxes on millionaires! If I hear from someone that millionaires should be given a break from their estate tax, but that teachers getting a solid pension is what we should really cut, I will simply laugh off this kind of stupidity and address it no further.

Third, I hear, all too often I am afraid, that public employees should not be given "fat benefits" that private employees lack. This is just absurd! If you think that public employees enjoy better jobs than their private sector counterparts, then you should fight to bring back union membership to private workers, to get them those "fat benefits," rather than want to remove them from public employees! Again, however, this misses the point. Unionized public employees and their allies are not fighting for better benefits, but for their right to bargain collectively! Let's please stay on track here.

These red herrings dispelled, we can now look at the justification for the existence of unions. In the employee/employer relationship the employer has all the power. The employer pays the wages, hires and fires, decides who takes breaks, when, and for how long, and so forth. If each employee must face their employer alone, they simply lack the power to fight for better wages, more time off, better working conditions, etc. The only way for employees to have anything like the power of their employer in this relationship is to come together and bargain collectively. This is what a union is, this is why unions are needed, and this is why their right to collectively bargain must be preserved.

The heart of the Battle in Wisconsin, and other states, is the battle to allow working people some power, some equality, some voice in determining their working conditions. As the collapse of unions in the private sector has already made clear, when unions go, working conditions for people fall dramatically. Without the existence of unions the power is solely in the hands of the employer, and we should all have long since understood that history clearly reveals that in any and all relationships where the power is all one side, the powerless never find themselves treated justly.

The Battle for Wisconsin: What's happening and why

The working people of Wisconsin are under attack. The hand-picked corporate stooge that is now Governor of the state has decided to risk his entire political career and the well-being of the people of Wisconsin (admittedly the latter mean little, if anything, to him) to destroy unions, to hurt the opposing political party, and to strip away one of the very few protections left to working people. I intended to blog about what is happening in Wisconsin and what it means, but Mother Jones has already written exactly what I wanted to say! Here is what MJ says (I will add my own thoughts at the end):

What's Happening in Wisconsin: Explained

— By Andy Kroll

| Fri Feb. 18, 2011 3:30 PM PST

Activists protesting new GOP Gov. Scott Walker's anti-union proposals have occupied the rotunda of the Wisconsin capitol building in Madison for the past week, but Walker is pressing ahead anyway.Flickr/Peter Gorman.

If you need to know the basics of what's going on in Wisconsin, read on. If you're already up to speed, you can follow the action on Twitter or jump straight to today's updates from our reporter on the ground in Madison.

—With additional reporting by Nick Baumannand Siddhartha Mahanta

The basics:

For days, demonstrators have been pouring into the streets of Madison, Wisconsin—and the halls of the state's Capitol building—to protest rookie Republican Governor Scott Walker's anti-union proposals. Big national unions, both major political parties, the Tea Party, and Andrew Breitbart are already involved. Democratic state senators have fled the state to prevent the legislature from voting on Walker's proposals. And the protests could soon spread to other states, including Ohio [....]

What's actually being proposed?

Walker says his legislation, which would strip most state employees of any meaningful collective bargaining rights, is necessary to close the state's $137 million budget gap. There are a number of problems with that argument, though. The unions are not to blame for the deficit, and stripping unionized workers of their collective bargaining rights won't in and of itself save any money. Walker says he needs to strip the unions of their rights to close the gap. But public safety officers' unions, which have members who are more likely to support Republicans and who also tend to have the highest salaries and benefits, are exempted from the new rules. Meanwhile, a series of tax breaks and other goodies that Walker and the Republican legislature passed just after his inauguration dramatically increased the deficit that Walker now says he's trying to close. And Wisconsin has closed a much larger budget gap in the past without scrapping worker organizing rights.

What's really going on, as Kevin Drum has explained, is pure partisan warfare: Walker is trying to de-fund the unions that form the backbone of the Democratic party. The unions and the Democrats are, of course, fighting back. The Washington Post's Ezra Klein drops some knowledge [emphasis added]:

The best way to understand Walker's proposal is as a multi-part attack on the state's labor unions. In part one, their ability to bargain benefits for their members is reduced. In part two, their ability to collect dues, and thus spend money organizing members or lobbying the legislature, is undercut. And in part three, workers have to vote the union back into existence every single year. Put it all together and it looks like this: Wisconsin's unions can't deliver value to their members, they're deprived of the resources to change the rules so they can start delivering value to their members again, and because of that, their members eventually give in to employer pressure and shut the union down in one of the annual certification elections.

You may think Walker's proposal is a good idea or a bad idea. But that's what it does. And it's telling that he's exempting the unions that supported him and is trying to obscure his plan's specifics behind misleading language about what unions can still bargain for and misleading rhetoric about the state's budget.

Walker's proposals do have important fiscal elements: they roughly double health care premiums for many state employees. But the heart of the proposals, and the controversy, are the provisions that will effectively destroy public-sector unions in the Badger State. As Matt Yglesias notes, this won't destroy the Democratic party. But it will force the party to seek funding from sources other than unions, and that usually means the same rich businessmen who are the main financial backers for the Republican party. Speaking of which....

Who is Scott Walker?

Walker was elected governor in the GOP landslide of 2010, when Republicans also gained control of the Wisconsin state senate and house of representatives. His political career has been bankrolled by Charles and David Koch, the very rich, very conservative, and very anti-union oil-and-gas magnates. Koch-backed groups like Americans for Prosperity, the Cato Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and the Reason Foundation have long taken a very antagonistic view toward public-sector unions. They've used their vast fortunes to fight key Obama initiatives on health care and the environment, while writing fat checks to Republican candidates across the country. Walker's take for the 2010 election: $43,000 from the Koch Industries PAC, his second highest intake from any one donor. But that's not all!:

The Koch's PAC also helped Walker via a familiar and much-used political maneuver designed to allow donors to skirt campaign finance limits. The PAC gave $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, which in turn spent $65,000 on independent expenditures to support Walker. The RGA also spent a whopping $3.4 million on TV ads and mailers attacking Walker's opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett. Walker ended up beating Barrett by 5 points. The Koch money, no doubt, helped greatly.

What are the Democrats and the unions doing to respond?

Well, they're protesting, obviously—filling the halls of the Capitol and the streets of Madison with bodies and signs. They're calling their representatives and talking about recalling Walker (who cannot be recalled until next January) or any of eight GOP state senators who are eligible for recall right now. Meanwhile, all of the Democratic state senators have left the state in an attempt to deny Republicans the quorum they need to vote on Walker's proposals, but if just one of them returns (or is hauled back by state troopers), the GOP will have the quorum they need. (Interestingly, the head of the state patrol in the father of the Republican heads of the state senate and house of representatives, who are brothers.) Finally, Wisconsin public school teachers have been calling in sick, forcing schools to close while teachers in over a dozen other school districts picket the capitol, plan vigils, and set up phone banks to try to block Walker's effort.

How could this spread?

Other Republican-governed states are trying to mimic Walker's assault on public employee unions. The GOP won a resounding series of state-level victories in high-union-density states in November. Now they can use their newly-won power to crack down on one of the Democrats' biggest sources of funds, volunteers, and political power. Plans are already under consideration in places like Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan.

Speaking of Ohio:

As Suzy Khimm outlined on Friday, an estimated 3,800-5,000 protestors came out in full fury in Columbus, Ohio, to vent their anger over a similar anti-union bill that would limit workers' rights to bargain for health insurance, end automatic pay increases, and infringe upon teachers' rights to pick their classes and schools. As in Wisconsin, both the Ohio state house and governor's mansion flipped from blue to red last year. "This has little to do with balancing this year's budget," former Governor Ted Strickland told the AP. "I think it's a power grab. It's an attempt to diminish the rights of working people. I think it's an assault of the middle class of this state and it's so unfair and out of balance."

How are conservatives working to support Walker?:

It was only a matter of time till the Tea Party got in on the action. Stephanie Mencimerreports that activists are bussing into Madison, and are "promising a massive counter-demonstration." The push is being led by American Majority, a conservative activist group that trains impressionable young foot soldiers to become state-level candidates (check out their ""I Stand With Scott Walker Rally" Facebook page). Founded by Republican operatives, the well-funded group (which, according to tax fillings, had a budget of nearly $2 million in 2009) gets much of its money from a group with ties to those adorable Koch brothers. Conservative media baron Andrew Breitbart will be leading the rally, and will be joined by presidential candidate Herman Cain and maybe—if we're lucky—Joe "The Plumber" Wurtzelbacher. Expect fireworks.

I wish to add to Mother Jone's analysis only this: The rights of workers in this country are under serious assault. This is an absolutely historical moment. If we fail, if Walker successfully destroys the unions in Wisconsin, we are headed back to the age of robber barons and unaccountable corporate power. We have already taken too many steps in that harmful and unjust direction. Not only must we stop walking toward such an abyss, it is time - NO LONG PAST TIME! - that we turned around and walked the other direction.

Remembering Mr. Gandhi

Today marks the anniversary of the birth of Mohandas Gandhi. I paste the following video of Gandhi's words to remember what he stood for.



I find that, unlike Gandhi, I cannot fully embrace total non-violence. For instance, Gandhi opposed the use of force even against Hitler! Even in self-defense! I don't say he was wrong, just that I cannot take the doctrine that far myself.

Non-violence, however, is more than just not using force. It is a commitment to a way of life, a way of life that rejects the normal injustice, discrimination, and brute use of power by governments, in relationships, and between people in every day encounters.

For Gandhi, we must stop responding to each other in hostile terms, stop thinking of each other as separate and opposed. Non-violence is really about our connections with each other, the unity of the human family, and the rejection of hostility and power struggles as part of our relationships to one another.

It is this rejection of hostility and distrust and its replacement by cooperation, love, and peace that we remember when we remember Mr. Gandhi. In the current political climate, where extremists shout out fears of government take overs and communism, where tea-baggers bring automatic weapons to political rallies, and where disagreements on policy are primarily expressed by ranting and raving and bullying your opponents ... we would do well to reflect on the example of Gandhi

What Democracy means

At a time when we are losing our democracy to the interests of the rich and powerful, we should be reminded what Democracy is, how we got it, and what we must do to keep it.

With that in mind, I offer this video, from a few years back, narrated by former MP Tony Benn:



I think Benn is correct. We have never really had much democracy, we have had to fight hard for what little we do have, and we better keep fighting hard to stop losing it and to get more of it.

Death, Fear, and Division in the Holy Land

PBS presents us with a story about the murder of a Palestinian child and the story of how his organs went to six other children. The father of the murdered boy meets with each of the kids who received his son's organs.

This video is hard to watch. It is painful, it is tragic, is shows how much hatred and fear can divide us.

Watch the full episode. See more Need To Know.

I am particularly disturbed by the fellow who says that he "hopes the organs come from a Jew, not an Arab," and later says that the Palestinian father should "immigrate to the US or Turkey, since there is nothing for him here." Even in the face of an outstanding act of Generosity, that gentlemen holds on to his hatred and fear.

The whole situation is just plain heartbreaking.

Never again

Today is Holocaust remembrance day. A day we remember, with great sorrow, the horrors of the Holocaust. The Holocaust was the end result of centuries of persecution and hatred directed toward the Jewish people and others. As one of the worst atrocities of history it is good to look to it and try to learn from it, learn how to stop it.

Sadly it does happen again. Often. The world is still full of hate, persecution and violence. We have, apparently, not yet learned our lesson. Perhaps we never will.

But there is hope.

On this Holocaust Remembrance day, let us commit ourselves to non-violence, inclusion, equality, forgiveness, healing and peace.

Maybe if we truly make that commitment it will really never happen again.

Corporate Freedom of Speech

The Supreme court has decided that corporations should be permitted to pour unlimited funds into any and all United States election campaigns.

In practice corporations have owned our politicians for as long as there have been corporations. but make no mistake, this ruling is very bad news. This is not merely a case of making the corporate control of our country more explicit; that control has now been extended.

There were limits on corporate spending and corporate endorsement of candidates. A number of states had rather tight limits on spending and endorsement. Those limits have been destroyed.

The supreme court has declared that corporations may govern us. Our politicians will be merely corporate employees - our laws passed to maximize profit. Yes, I know that we are already far down this road, be we have now opened the door to go all the way down it.

This nation never was truly democratic. But the kernel of democracy has always survived despite the evils and failures of our country. At last the special interests have won. They have smothered the small and dying ember of democracy, they have extinguished the lone spark of freedom.

We are all slaves now. Slaves to our corporate masters.

In the years to come we will see the dismantling of social services, the total exploitation of the poor and working class, the tearing of the veil which for some time has hidden from us the true gap between the haves and the have nots.

I do not know if we are without hope. But I do know that unless we undergo an immediate and dramatic social revolution - I am not advocating a literal call to arms. The revolution we need must be a non-violent one - unless the people rise up from the grassroots and at last demand genuine democracy, then we are in for a long era of doom and darkness.

The moment is at hand. The time has come. We must stand up and be counted now. We must fight with all of our might for our freedoms, for justice, for the people. If we do not battle full force, we will not prevail.

The choice is now crystal clear: we must side with human beings or corporations. We cannot choose both.

Which will it be?

Water World: The Future is NOW

Bangladesh is on of the first countries suffering the worsts of Global Warming; it won't be the last.

I have not forgotten Health care reform

My readers may have noted that I have not posted on Health care reform for a while now. In part this is because I am attempting to finish the initial draft of my dissertation and also because I have started the process of applying for Tenure-Track jobs. Also, I've needed a break from the political battles of our world in order to restore a little sanity to my life.

I will return to the topic of health care reform very soon. For now I want to wait and see what the final bill ends up looking like. That Olympia Snowe voted for the Baucus bill does not encourage me. That bill does not encourage me. There is nothing in it to control costs or ensure that claims submitted to insurers are actually covered. A health care bill is not reform simply because a member of the other party casts a vote for it. Health reform in reality, and not merely in name, would actually lower costs and expand coverage; it would actually help the people.

Let us wait, however, and see what happens. The Senate HELP bill is far promising, as are the bills in the House. For now, let us call, email, write, sign petitions, and protest. Let our Senators know that we demand a strong public option, an employer mandate (with small businesses exempt), and real change for a broken system and an ailing populace.

More on this to come as the bills reach their final form.

Saint Francis of Assisi: Make me an Instrument of Your Peace

I am officially late with this post. Sunday ended a couple minutes before I got to my blog. But this Sunday was the Feast of Saint Francis of Assisi. I've always honored the man.

People are fond of St. Francis for a number of reasons. For some it is Francis' "humble faith" in his God, for others it is his love of nature and animals. For still others it was the great Saint's commitment to love and peace. All of this is true to the man, and all of it meaningful.

But I want to focus on something else about Saint Francis: his vision of unity. Francis believed in a world where all things were united. All things, for him, were part of the same eternal reality to which they were forever linked. This "unity" is what inspired Francis' empathy and compassion for the sufferings others: for the lepers whom he strove to nurture, the poor whom he tried to comfort and even the wealthy and powerful from whose ranks he departed with joy.

One simply cannot live and love as deeply as Francis of Assisi unless one grasps the underlying unity of all creation. Too often we see divisions, separations, conflicts. Saint Francis saw past all of this, past the absurd and often tragic ways we break ourselves apart from each other. He was a man who saw all things as one, and who saw in everything the stamp of its Divine Creator.

Let us remember Saint Francis of Assisi; let us try to see something of the unity that he devoted himself to.

Corporations are people too

We live in a country dominated by corporate power and corporate interests. Our corporate masters buy and sell our politicians (look no further than corporate prostitute Max Baucus), bombard us with advertisements that endlessly impact our behavior, and slowly but surely solidify and expand their power at our expense.

A sad reminder of how beaten down we are by corporate power is the legal fiction that corporations are persons. The Law allows corporations to be given all of the privileges of persons. They have the same legal protections; Corporations are legal persons.

This is, of course, absurd. And no less a right-wing hero than Milton Friedman has argued that corporations are not "folks." How could they be? I cannot arrest, kill, or harm a corporation, nor can a corporation vote .... or can it?!

A new case before the Supreme Court would radically change the way corporations operate. Corporations already own most our politicians. Current laws, however, forbid corporations from publicly opposing or supporting candidates. This means that corporate money cannot directly fund attacks on or praises for a particular candidate. Any person in the corporation can do, but the corporation itself cannot. This is a very necessary, and all too rare, check on corporate power.

The Average candidate and average voter cannot compete against the vast monetary power of corporations. If Corporations can directly endorse or oppose candidates, then democracy does not stand a chance.

Bill Moyers explains:

The Supreme Court is returning early from its summer recess to consider a potential watermark case that could overturn a century of campaign finance restrictions and clear the way for unregulated spending by corporations on political campaigns. The case, Citizens United v. The Federal Election Commission, has grown from a limited question about a political documentary to a broad challenge to the government's right to restrict corporations from spending money to support or oppose political candidates.

Encompassing questions on First Amendment rights, the power of corporations and the influence of money on political elections, it's no wonder the case has created an assortment of strange bedfellows. Conservatives and liberals appear on both sides, either to defend the government's right to restrict corporate political advocacy or, on the other side, to argue that such regulations are a violation of the First Amendment.

A good description of the issue at hand. Moyers' continues:

At the center of this case is a 2008 political documentary, HILLARY: THE MOVIE, which sought to portray then presidential contender Hillary Clinton as a dangerous threat to the United States. The Federal Election Commission considered it an electioneering communication, funded by a corporation, and therefore subject to McCain-Feingold restrictions.

When the case appeared before the Supreme Court last session, in early 2009, the question was only whether HILLARY: THE MOVIE was an electioneering communication, but the case has grown in the re-argument. According to the NEW YORK TIMES' Adam Liptik, "some of the broader issues implicated by the case were only glancingly discussed in the first round of briefs, and some justices may have felt reluctant to take a major step without fuller consideration." The court asked for a re-argument, specifically as to whether the court should overrule two previous decisions that upheld the government's right to limit certain types of corporate political advocacy — the 1990 decision in Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce, which upheld a Michigan state law, and the 2003 decision in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, which upheld McCain-Feingold.

Let us step back for a moment. People have rights. We have the right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. I would argue that we also have rights to a basic standard of living, including: food, water, shelter, and health care. Buildings, on the other hand, do not have rights; they cannot exercise them. Rocks, bricks, and cars have no rights for the same reason. But the Lawyer for the Corporations argues that Corporations - which are no more "persons" than rocks or bricks - are being denied their right to free speech under the current law!

I must say this loudly and clearly A CORPORATION IS NOT A PERSON. A corporation is a legally protected contract arrangement in which a group of individuals have come together and formed a charter which gives them limited liability and tremendous financial resources. The people forming the charter have rights, but a corporation exist only in the realm of legal entities and has no rights whatsoever.

But the absurdity factor is the least of our problems. Corporations have resources beyond even the imaginations of most real people. If Corporations are allowed to directly promote and support or oppose and attack particular candidates, then the real people cannot have a chance to compete. Democracy will have been utterly undermined and perhaps even destroyed.

At some point, we have to say enough is enough. We have to refuse to give up another one of our rights to make corporate profits larger and corporate investors and CEO even more absurdly wealthy. It is time to put our foot down. It is time to end the long process of Corporations growing full, vampire-like, on our weakened and violated bodies.

But why stop with campaign finance? Let's send a firm message to all the corporate stooges in government.

Begin with the most foul, the most vile, the most blatantly servile of corporate owned puppets; Max Baucus. This guy wrote a bill so generous to the health insurance industry that they could not have in their wildest dreams have hoped for it! Let the voters in Montana know, this guy is a whore for corporate cash. He has no shame and must be voted out of office. The man disgust me. He should disgust us all.

So there we are. After Baucus we know for certain that elected officials are nothing more than servants to their corporate masters; we shall see whether the Supreme Court is equally ready to sell out real people for imaginary ones.

Either way, the time has come to turn the tables on this "den of thieves."

The Healing of America: Book Review

The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care by T.R. Reid

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This is the best book on Health insurance coverage that I have ever read. Anyone who wants to understand what is wrong with the current system of health insurance in the United States and what the genuine options for reform are must read this book.

The well-known facts of the troubles with our health care coverage are here: Millions uninsured, millions more under-insured, homes lost and personal bankruptcies endured even by the fully insured, premiums rising three to four times as fast as wages, more and more claims partially or wholly denied by health insurance companies, and our GDP being eaten up by the huge costs of our private health care system.

Unless one is ideologically blind or simply radically uniformed, these facts are well known, well documented (Kaiser family foundation, various Harvard studies, Commonwealth, WHO, CBO) and all too real to millions of suffering Americans. What is less well known is how other countries provide better insurance companies.

No other country spends anything like what we do on health care. Despite this, nearly every other industrialized country has better outcomes; longer life-spans, more healthy years after 60, less infant mortality, and better treatment for chronic ailments and they do all this while providing basic health care coverage to every man woman and child in their country.

This is where Reid's book makes its best contribution. In the United States both Liberals and Conservatives frame the debate as a contest between "socialized medicine" and our current "free-market" health care system. Liberals point to the abuses of a private-for-profit system and argue that we must have a single-payer system, a system in which the government pays all the bills (though doctors and hospitals are still private). Conservatives rage against this, fearing long waits, rationed care, and diminished quality.

Reid demonstrates that this debate between single-payer and free-market approaches creates a false dilemma. There are a number of ways in which other nations provide universal and affordable health care. Some of these countries use single-payer and some do not. The facts are clearly against the conservative claim that the free-market is best for health care coverage. But equally the evidence strongly suggests that a single-payer is not necessary for universal coverage and quite possibly not even the best way to provide it.

Reid travels to a number of countries: France, Switzerland, Japan, The United Kingdom, and Canada. Each of these countries has better health care outcomes than the United States, covers everyone, and pays far less than we do. But here is the twist: They do not all use "socialized medicine."

The UK is closest to a socialized system with their NHS. This system does have problems with funding and sometimes results in long wait times for elective surgery. But it reports higher satisfaction than the American system. likewise, Canada offers a single-payer model in which doctors and hospitals remain privately owned and operated but the government acts as the sole insurer. This system too has better outcomes than the United States. There are, however, real problems with limited resources, long waits for elective procedures, and underfunding.

A better model is found in France and Germany. Both countries use something called the "Bismark" model. This model relies on private doctors, private hospitals, and even private insurance. But the private insurance in France and Germany is nothing like its American counterpart. In these countries the government controls prices that doctors and hospitals charge, insurance companies are required by law to cover every claim sent to them, and are non-profit social businesses; they don't make money for CEOs and investors. Furthermore, Employers are required by law to cover their employees and everyone is legally required to buy insurance.

France and Germany have far better health outcomes than the United States (and even than England and Canada) for far less costs. Even better, France and Germany have shorter wait times than not only Canada and England, but also the United States. Everyone is covered and patient satisfaction is very high. This is what happens when the profit motive is removed from health care.

Reid concludes with a moral case for Universal and affordable health care. It is, he argues, simply a moral duty for a society to cover all its members. A civilization that allows only those who can afford it access to care is neither democratic or fair. If we wish to fulfill our moral duty we must recognize the right of all to affordable health care.

Reid did a documentary on the same theme as this book for Frontline. It is well worth seeing and can be found in its entirety here

Reclaiming Labor day

Labor day is nothing more than a day of grilling burgers, drinking beer, and - for may - not even getting the day off work. This is very sad. Labor day was originally a celebration of the labor movements. Organized labor greatly improved conditions for working people.

Not too long ago, workers worked 10-12 hour days, 7 days a week, year around. They had no workman's comp, no overtime, few holidays, no pensions, no benefits, no unions, no minimum wage and many worked as children before the labor movements abolished child labor.

Labor day was supposed to be a reminder of what workers achieved and a reminder of the importance of their rights. Sadly, no one thinks of these things any more when they celebrate labor day.

The following video from The History Channel on the origins and meaning of labor day is very informative. In it, we learn a little about the labor movement and how hard many working people fought for more humane working conditions.



If you look around you this labor day, you will find that the day has lost its meaning. Many Americans work on labor day (hardly fitting for a day in honor of workers' rights), and the dignity and rights of working people are not even thought about, let alone celebrated.

Labor day was meant to provide national recognition for working people: living wages, caps on hours, 2 days a week off, overtime, workman's comp, unions ... the great achievements of the labor movement are what we need to remember. Sadly, we live in a time where giant corporations and their tools in Washington have long been at work crushing unions, making sure wages don't go up too much, and undoing the rights of working people everywhere.

This Labor day, let us do more than light up the BBQ and drink cheap beer. Let's return power to the labor movement. Let us stand up together and demand that Washington listen to working people and not merely obey their corporate masters.

An Open Letter to "the gang of six"

I have long believed that even in the most corrupt among us an ember of real concern for what is right sill burns. I believe this also of each of you who are now in talks to write a bill for health care reform.

I do not intend to play dress up and disguise the truth: those of you who do not support a robust government option oppose it for one reason and one alone. Quite frankly you oppose the public option because you have been given large sums of money by the private health insurance industry and are beholden to your corporate masters.

You know the facts. You know very well how private insurance companies destroy people’s lives. They deny care to make their investors and CEOs and those like you who take their lobbying money very rich. Because of this, millions of people die and millions more go bankrupt or become buried in debt.

You also know very well that only a strong public option can stop the destruction and abuse heaped on people by private insurance. Cooperatives will do nothing. Of course you already know this, which is why you proposed them instead of a public option.

I am not writing to give you the facts. You know the facts. You know why the American People need a robust public option. I am writing to ask you to remember that you are not only politicians but human beings. Does the money you receive from your corporate masters really matter more to you than the lives and prosperity of millions of your fellow citizens?

Our lives upon this earth are very brief and in that brief span of time we all know pain, sorrow, grief, loss, and despair. It has long seemed to me that is the part of every man and woman to alleviate as much of the pain and loss and grief of others as we can. To actually do what is right for our fellow human beings, to help rather than hurt them ... this alone makes life truly rewarding and worthwhile.

As elected officials with the power of shaping a Health care bill you are each in a unique position to either help or harm your fellow human beings; your fellow Americans.

I urge you in the name of all that is decent, of all that is sacred; in the name of what is right and good and beneficial to your fellows ... PLEASE when forming this bill do what in your heart and soul you know is right. Do not do what will make you and your corporate masters even more wealthy.

Include a robust public option in your bill. You owe it to the people you were elected to serve, you owe to your own humanity.

Sincerely,

Matthew D. Wion

Note: here is a little video poscript for some factual background on the Public Option -

Conservative Pastor Versus Liberal Professor: A Video Debate Part 2

A while back my good friend Isaiah and I debated health care reform. He is a conservative pastor and I a liberal adjunct philosophy professor and grad student.

Isaiah just had his second son (congrats Isaiah!) and the debate went on hiatus, but has resumed. Here is the latest installment:

Love in Truth: The Gospel of Justice

Love in Truth: Caritas in Veritate by Pope Benedict XVI

It has always seemed to me that the gospel is chiefly concerned with love and justice. Simply read Matthew 5-7, and then Matthew 25 and you learn quite quickly that what the faith is about is treating our fellow human beings with dignity, repect, and - most importanly - justice.

The justice spoken of here is not retributive justice, but distributive justice - giving each their due and treaing no one unfairly. Fair distribution is the heart of the Pope's new encyclical. In essence, Popel Benedict's claim is that the current world econcomy is unjust.

Our current econcomy is built on multi-national corporations. Such coroporations can go anywhere in the world to escape paying taxes, lay off workers in one place in order to hire workers for scraps in another, destroy the environment, and bribe governments to pass legislation that favors their destructive ways. The result of this is a world system that abuses the working classes and the environment.

The Pope's solution is solidarity. We must encourage the values of cooperation, unity, trust, and fairness over the values of greed, gain, and the craving for profits at all costs. The very word "solidarity" is repeated frequently by Pope Benedict throughout the encyclical. Our current world econcomic system, the Pope argues, opposses solidarity by forcing us to relate to each other primarily as competitors. In other words, our current system is hostile to human nature and serves only to diminish it.

This is, however, more than just a call to each person to search their hearts and have more compassion for their fellows (though it is that too). Pope Benedict calls for a world authority with the power to regulate the global economy. The reason for this? Governments only have local jurisdiction, but the economy is world wide. A Local authority as no power over a world wide economy, so we must create an entity with global authority to regulate the world econcomy and restore rights to people and the earth.

I am not a Roman Catholic and my own theological beliefs are far removed from the Pope's, but I find his thoughts on globalization and the injustice of our current system well worth reading. His solution is debatable, but there is much insight into what is wrong with our system here. Of particular interest is the Pope's frequent assertion that we were made for cooperation and solidarity, not for competition and exploitation.

The Pope's new encyclical is a must read for those of us concerned with social justice and the unchecked power and danger of mutlinational corporations.


View all my reviews >>

Independence Day

I have never been a patriot. Every 4th of July I cringe when I hear that horrible nationalistic "Proud to be an American" song: no offense to Lee Greenwood. In fact, for several years now I have paid no attention to the fourth of July.

This winter, however, I spent a week in Philadelphia reacquainting myself with our founding fathers. Yes, I know all of their flaws. Though Benjamin Franklin and a few others were abolitionists, slavery was legal when this nation was founded. I know of the horrible crimes we committed against the Native Americans, the indignity and inhumanity of Jim Crow, the interment of the Japanese, and now the sad reality of American Imperialism throughout the world today.

Despite all the horror in and dark side of our legacy, I have come to think our founding fathers really did give us something remarkable. A Constitutional Democracy, a representative Republic, a system of checks and balances aimed at maximum freedom of the individual and protection of his or her rights.

When I read the Preamble of the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence I am deeply moved by the spirit of freedom. Once again, I am sadly aware of the limited application of freedom in our founders' day and our own. But it is not for nothing that nations the world over, and even oppressed groups here, have appealed to those founding ideals when fighting for their own freedom (just read King's speeches, they are filled with allusions to the founding fathers).

So, despite their many flaws and shortcomings, our founders sought to bring the spirit of freedom into their country, indeed they fought to do so. I have come to believe they were right about this, and that they were right to fight for it. But the battle for our freedom cannot be restricted to rebellion against the British long ago. The Battle for freedom, rights, and democracy is perennial; we must keep up that fight today.

Democracy is currently either dead or in critical condition in the United States. As Bill Moyers notes "Money is chocking Democracy to death." Basically Corporations sponsor - or better buy - our politicians and expect that their interests, not ours, are what the politicians work to protect. They are not let down, our politicians do not work for the people, but for the vested interest - those with the cash.

Corporations own our newspapers and TV news stations, they own our politicians, and our entertainment .. in short, they have bought our government at our expense.

The rallying cry of the Revolutionary War was "no taxation without representation." Once again we are not represented. Our Politicians do not represent us, they represent their corporate sponsors. We the people are a minimal factor in the minds of lawmakers. Laws are passed and enacted for the benefit of multi-national corporations, and we the people are forced to foot the bill for it.

If we would claim our liberty, enjoy our freedom, and have real democracy in our lives, then we must work to end this intolerable situation. We must, like our founders, demand our Independence - not through bloody rebellion this time, but through demanding we are heard. Fighting for Public Schools, Public Television, Public Radio, Public Health Care, and - perhaps most importantly - Public Campaign Financing. Let us reclaim our country from the moneyed interest and let freedom ring again.

In the all too often unread words of Jefferson's Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

Let us read these words very carefully, and, this July 4th instead of merely getting drunk and hearing that awful Lee Greenwood song, let's start to ask ourselves how we can win our country back.

Dear Mr. President, Practice what you Preach

Dear President Obama,

You ran on a platform of hope and change. You had the audacity to tell us that you were going to bring something fresh and new to Washington. We have heard such promises before. We know that they are usually lies to dupe the public. But we believed in you sir; we needed to believe in you. After eight years of a criminal administration, we craved a leadership who understood us and who really cared. To many of us you seemed to be that leader. On election night we cheered, and after long years of hanging our heads we were finally able to raise them. We were, at last, proud to be Americans.

Perhaps, sir, you still are that man. I hope so. But I confess I have yet to see any real change, and sadly I have not seen much audacity or hope either. Your stimulus bill was too small - you crafted it to win Republican votes - as if bipartisanship is somehow intrinsically good. Despite your repeated claim to be a "fierce advocate" of gay rights, you have done nothing for gay people. Your bank regulations are appallingly weak, your so-called "sweeping" environmental bill is so below what scientists are calling for that it is practically useless, your foreign policy does not differ in substance from your predecessor's, and you have maintained numerous Bush policies regarding secrecy and executive unaccountability. I fail to see the change here sir. Many of us do.

Nevertheless, Mr. President, we all told ourselves that you could only do so much. We knew that you inherited a bad situation and we accepted that compromises had to be made - even as we did not like it. Many of us told ourselves that you would still come through on the most important domestic issue yet: Health Care reform.

Your ideas about how to fix health care have not disappointed. You correctly and cogently defend the logic of a public health care plan. The goal of private health insurance is profits; huge profits. To make huge profits in health insurance one must constantly raise premiums, deductibles, and co-pays, while in turn avoiding actually covering people whenever and however possible. A public plan will offer full coverage and a better price and force private insurance to do the same or perish. This is the only way to fix our broken and cruel health care system.

And now Mr. President we come to the heart of the matter. Both you and your people have now repeated several times the claim that, though you want a public option as part of health care reform, you "will not insist on it" and will "draw no lines in the sand." You have expressed your desire to make the reform pleasing to big insurance companies and Republicans - the very people that oppose any real reform of the system!

Mr. President, why have you done this? Why are you so committed to compromise at all costs? You know there is no way to fix health care without a public option! What you have done is let the vested interests and their vassals in congress know that you will accept a bill with no public option. In other words sir, you are open to stopping real health care reform. Would Martin Luther king Jr have refused to "draw a line in the sand" about civil rights? Would Lincoln "not insist" on preserving the union?

Over fifty million Americans are now without insurance. Many millions more are denied coverage left and right by the insurance they have, nearly two thirds of bankruptcies, and many home foreclosures are the direct result of medical bills. Private insurance companies are taking people's homes, their health, their savings, their very lives. If you wish to compromise Mr. President, remember this ... YOU ARE COMPROMISING PEOPLE'S LIVES!!! You are refusing to "draw a line" for the well-being of people who elected you and believe in you. You are "not insisting" that people live and prosper.

Mr. President please stop being "open" about this. Please - at least this time, on this issue - don't compromise.

In the name of justice, compassion, and basic human dignity: PLEASE MR. PRESIDENT DRAW A LINE AND STAND FIRMLY IN FRONT OF IT!

Colbert hammers Obama for his failure to promote gay rights.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - Stonewalling
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Mark Sanford

If Jesus were a Health Insurance CEO

Just imagine if Jesus operated the same way the health Insurance industry does. The gospel story would read like this:

Once when they were passing through Capernaum, a blind man cried out to Jesus. And the blind man said to him, "Lord, help me!" And Jesus said unto him, "what would you have me do for you?" And the blind man said "Lord, help me to see again." And Jesus sat down and wrote with his finger on the ground and would not answer. But the crowd pressed Jesus for an answer. So Jesus got up and said unto the blind man; "I am sorry but I cannot heal you. I'm afraid that you have a pre-existing condition. Health care is not a human right and you have no right to expect the state to take care of you when you cannot afford to pay." And Jesus left the blind man for another village.

One need only read the gospels to realize that Jesus never did or would refuse to heal anyone. The health insurance industry, on the other hand, makes massive profits precisely in collecting premiums while denying care. Something is clearly wrong with this!