Where's the diversity?

Is it coincidence, fate, or maybe poor planning on my part that I am spending 3 evenings in a row at the Pima County Democratic Headquarters this week?

The Pima Dems Executive Committee met last night; tonight Legislative District 28 (where my precinct is) met; and tomorrow I am making phone calls for Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and MoveOn. (That's me and Gabby on election day 2008, when I was also making calls for her. Wasn't that a great day!)

What really struck me about last night's meeting-- besides the vote-- was the lack of diversity in the Pima County Democratic Party's upper echelon. When I made phone calls for Barack Obama in 2008, I was in the minority on most nights. Didn't the local Dems recruit any of those 2008 black and Hispanic phone bank volunteers or walkers to be precinct committee people?

I had planned to raise the lack-of-diversity issue at tonight's LD28 meeting, but with only 1 black campaign worker for Rodney Glassman (Hi, Zeke!) and 1 Polish Mexican, tonight's meeting was older and whiter than last night's meeting. (Not that there's anything inherently wrong with old white folks; these people are hard workers. And, besides, I plan to be an old white person someday.)

Yes, I know there is an African American Democratic Caucus. Great group of folks, but I don't see many of them in leadership positions. Actually, I only saw 1 last night.

This is a problem-- and a missed opportunity. Nationwide and statewide, the Republicans are alienating many groups and particularly people of color. The "energized" Republican base-- primarily Tea Partiers-- ranges from old white folks to white supremacists on the diversity scale. Obviously, that leaves a lot of people left out.

Come on, Democrats. Let's show everyone that we really do have a big tent that all of us can fit under. We need to bring these diverse populations into the fold-- not just for their vote but for their ideas, their energy, and their leadership.

I challenge the Arizona Democratic Party to make a concerted effort to recruit more diversity to the ranks of its precinct committee members between now and 2012. This will only make the progressive movement stronger. We can do this.

If Obama isn't a US citizen, then neither is McCain

One of the more bizarre political rumors in recent years is the ongoing questioning of President Barack Hussein Obama's citizenship.

Although he was born in Hawaii-- after it became a state-- and although his birth certificate is on the Internet, birthers still believe that he is not a citizen.

Yesterday, when I was researching John Sidney McCain III's voting record, I came across this information from the Washington Post on McCain's place of birth. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone!

July 1, 2010: The first day of the rest of your life

Today, a major wave of healthcare reforms begins.

Today, most importantly, the pre-existing condition dies. You can no longer be denied health insurance because you have a pre-existing condition.

If you are among the one in five Americans with a pre-existing condition and you have been denied healthcare insurance, you can sign up for a high-risk healthcare pool today.

Of course, since this system was designed by Congress, it's a bit complicated to apply. And, since state's like to hold some power, there will be some variability across states. For example, according to the LA Times, the rates for high-risk pools could vary from $140 to 900 per month. BUT, the main point is that you will not be denied coverage.

Ironically, some states that beat the states' rights drum most often-- like Arizona!-- have asked the feds to run their high-risk pools. Twenty-one states want the federal government to run their programs, while 29 others will be running their own high-risk pools.

What does all of this mean to you and your family? Check out the government's newly designed Healthcare.gov. The site includes an easy-to-use interactive tool to help you find plans in your state.

For more background, the Los Angeles Times has an extensive series of articles related to reform.

SB1070 becomes law in 3 months-- maybe

As thousands of protesters chanted outside the state capitol in Phoenix yesterday, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB1070. The controversial legislation would require law enforcement officers to stop people whom they believe are in the US illegally and ask for identification such as a birth certificate or passport. Moreover, it gives citizens the right to sue local law enforcement if they believe they are not implementing this law.

With stories in the New York Times and on CNN, MSNBC, the Colbert Report, and local television and radio, Arizona has been under the media microscope since this bill passed both houses of the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Now that it has passed, Arizona is under the legal microscope, according to National Public Radio (NPR). President Obama has asked his legal advisors to review the civil rights implications of the legislation. Multiple civil rights groups are planning legal challenges.

If SB1070 survives these legal challenges, it will go into effect in 3 months, according to NPR.

Economic implications aside, I personally don't see how this legislation can be fairly implemented. Thirty percent of Arizona residents are Hispanic, and many more are mixed race. By far, most are legal, but under this law they will be treated differently because of the color of their skin. Not all illegal aliens are Hispanic. There are undocumented Filipinos, Chinese, Vietnamese, Indians-- you name it-- in the US. Will the police be stopping them also? Where will it end?

It is my hope that passage of wrong-headed legislation like SB1070 will push the US Congress into finally passing comprehensive immigration reform.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click on the link to see the Colbert video.

Governor expected to sign SB1070, as statewide rallies and walkouts continue

Arizona residents are literally up in arms over the Arizona Legislature's passage of SB1070. Protest rallies have continued throughout the week, and more are planned for today and this weekend in Tucson and Phoenix.

The New York Times, The Arizona Republic (not exactly the bastion of liberal thinking), Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva, Stephen Colbert, and now President Obama have all come out against this legislation which would require Arizona law enforcement officers to ask people for proof of citizenship during legal contacts. If they don't have proof of citizenship on their person, they are presumed to be illegal.

Saturday, April 24, is Governor Jan Brewer's deadline. If she doesn't sign by then, it will become law without her signature. The Derechos Humanos website announced that she will sign the bill Friday morning-- while they protest outside.

Will this legislation have the dire economic and social consequences predicted by The Arizona Republic and others? Only time will tell.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column. Click on the link and see the video of students chained to the state capitol building.

Passage of healthcare reform brings threats and jubiliation

The passage of historic healthcare reform legislation on Sunday by the US House of Representatives brought a flood of threats from Republicans; racial/ethnic slurs and acts of terrorism against Democratic supporters; and shouts of joy from supporters. With passage in the Senate, President Obama was ready with his signing pen.

After a year of wrangling, the debate will likely continue for a while. Some states also want to opt out of the reform, using the states' rights argument. Governor Jan Brewer is among those governors opposing expanded healthcare coverage because she says it will cost too much. Of course, Brewer and her Republican cronies in the Legislature just knocked thousands of adults and children off of the state's healthcare rolls. As a result, the state will lose billions of dollars in matching funds. (Personally, I'm beginning to think they are all bad at math-- besides being uncaring. Why eliminate worthwhile programs that bring in revenue and help thousands of Arizona residents?)

Republicans like Arizona Senator John McCain have publicly vowed to fight against reform and other legislation brought forth by President Obama and the Congressional Democrats. To which most progressives said, "What else is new?"

On yesterday's John C. Scott radio show, McCain spun his tale with only softball questions (more like set-ups) from Scott.

McCain was trying hard to revive his Maverick image and deny the moderate flip-flop image his opponent J.D. Hayworth is spinning about him. McCain said the healthcare legislation was "a sham" and vowed to "fight in the Senate, fight in Tucson, fight in Phoenix, fight in Flagstaff, and fight across Arizona." I think by "fight" he means "campaign". How will his obstructionist stance play out in the fall election? Why would anyone vote for someone who's primary strategy is to say, "no"?

McCain also railed against the use of reconciliation to "ram it through" the Congress. Of course, neglecting the fact that Republicans have used this strategy 17 out of 23 times, since it was created a few decades ago.

So, healthcare politics continues. Although right-wingers will continue to try to stop or reverse reform, progressive will be pushing for more. As Ed Schultz said this morning, we are in the midst of a culture war that goes far beyond this legislation. After verbal and physical attacks against Democrats who supported this legislation, I totally agree with him.

Above, pro-reform protesters outside Senator John McCain's Tucson office.

This article originally appeared as a piece in my Progressive Examiner column.

Healthcare reform anyone?

Today is "the day" in a year of landmark votes on healthcare reform. As I write this on Sunday morning, National Public Radio is predicting the vote on reform in the US House of Representatives will come within hours.

This has been a week of arm-twisting, media hype, dueling polls, rallies, e-mail blasts, and facebook posts from both pro- and anti-reform camps. My personal survival strategy was to not watch television and limit my talk radio listening. Ed Schultz spent much of the week pushing for passage of the reform legislation but vowing to fight for more reform until a single payer system is achieved. Amy Goodman of Democracy Now aired several stories throughout the week, including an nterviewed Congressman Dennis Kucinich after he agreed to vote for reform. Kucinich also vowed to keep pushing for a single payer system, saying this bill is just the first step.

I was impressed with President Obama's use of social media to get the pro-reform word out to supporters. Move On and Organizing for America sent thousands of e-mails urging reform advocates to call their representatives and senators and to rally for reform.

On Friday, March 19, several of us from the local Drinking Liberally club joined other progressives for a Move On rally in front of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords' Tucson office. Approximately 150 reform advocates waved signs, cheered, and chanted. (They were joined by 3 anti-reform protesters.) Earlier in the week the Arizona Daily Star reported that Giffords and Congressman Raul Grijalva would both vote for reform today.

Hundreds of lunch-hour motorists cheered and honked as they passed the marchers. If honks were votes, I'd say that there is strong support for reform in Tucson. What will happen today? Who knows, but since Barack is one of my friends on facebook, I'm sure he'll post the news on his wall.

This article was originally published in my Progressive Examiner column. To see a slide show from the Tucson rally, click on the Examiner link.

Birthing a Big Baby-- the Final Push

Congress has been in labor for more than a year over healthcare reform.

Sweaty, red-faced, exhausted, strong-willed but nervous, the Democratic Mother is pushing hard and looking forward to the birth of her big reform Baby. She can't predict the future of her offspring. Will this reform Baby be the light of their lives, bringing the Parents and millions of Family members health, joy, and happiness, or will the Parents look back in regret for ever conceiving this Baby?

Nervous Nellies in the Delivery Room, Republican relatives predict a dire future if this Baby lives. Abort this Baby, and let's try again, they urge. Convinced the baby will have a 666 on it's forehead, they favor killing it. To most of the Family, it is obvious that these naysayers are more worried about their inheritance and their own future than the future of the Baby and the Family as a whole. They spin lies about the Baby's Father and the reform Baby itself and worry distant relatives.

"No one likes this Baby. It's too big!"

"No one wants this Baby."

"No one likes this Baby's Father."

While the Mother's relatives have different opinions.

"The Father is well-liked and trusted."

"We want that Baby to be born already. This Baby will help the Family."

Only 4% of the Family favors aborting this Baby.

Most of the Family just wants everyone to work together-- as a Family.

In the meantime, while Family members argue and the Mother pushes, the Father is visiting with relatives around the country saying, "Hey, I know this may not be the prettiest, most well-like Baby in the world, but it's time. At home in Washington, we shouldn't be worrying about our survival. We should do what's best for the Family."

The Father knows there are backward wilderness clans in the Family-- like the one in Phoenix-- that would allow Family members to die, rather than pay for their care, so he keeps fighting for the reform Baby.

As the contractions get harder, the Mother is only marginally reassured when the Father whispers, "It will be OK, Honey. No one ever said parenthood would be easy. Think of the good of the Family." Although she's nervous about what motherhood will bring, she realizes she's gone too far to stop now. The Baby's head is in view. The birth is eminent.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Healthcare Summit: The Party of No keeps saying 'no'

I am such a political nerd. I watched the healthcare summit yesterday and loved every minute of it. I generally listen to talk radio while working; instead, yesterday, I used my auxiliary computer screen to live stream the healthcare summit on C-Span. If you weren't able to watch it, here is the C-Span link where you can watch the recorded broadcast. Yesterday evening National Public Radio also aired an hour-long analysis of the summit, but it really paled in comparison to the real thing.

President Obama set the tone at the beginning by reminding the attendees that the purpose of the summit was to find bipartisan consensus on healthcare-- not to talk about process, not to campaign, not to dredge up differences, and not to spout hackneyed talking points. Throughout the day, he had to remind attendees why they were meeting.

Everyone had stories about constituents who gone bankrupt or lost loved ones because of poor insurance coverage or no coverage. Several-- including the President-- had stories about pre-existing conditions, and there was consensus that if they were not covered by the government's Cadillac health plan that they would have a hard time buying insurance on the open market today. I was impressed with their thorough knowledge of the problems. (Of course, they have been talking about healthcare reform for a year!)

The other consensus--besides recognition of the problems with the current non-system-- was the identification of the common enemy-- health insurance companies. The health insurance companies were vilified by Democrats and Republicans alike for raising rates, for dropping sick people, and for strict-- and sometimes absurd-- rules about pre-existing conditions. Although pre-existing conditions were discussed at length, the Republican's plan would expand coverage to only 3 million Americans-- compared to 30 million under the President's plan-- and would not get rid of pre-existing conditions, according to NPR.

Over and over again-- ad nauseam-- the Party of No said the Congress should start over, which in an election year means: "Let's just forget about this for a while." Despite repeated Republican calls for a "clean sheet of paper," President Obama and the Democrats pushed for comprehensive reform and expanding coverage throughout the day.

The other Republican suggestion was to address a piece of the problem-- rather than tackle comprehensive reform. Which piece was not clear. (This way, they could go back to their constituents and say they did something.) The Republicans also were clearly more worried about tort reform, the cost of healthcare to the government, and deficit spending than expanding coverage for uninsured Americans. (Ironically, the cost of Medicare skyrocketed under the Bush Administration with the prescription drug bill that does not allow the US government to negotiate drug prices with pharmaceutical companies-- so Republicans created this problem. Also, the Republicans under President Bush didn't worry about deficit spending. )

The Republicans-- including Arizona's Jon Kyl-- railed against "mandated coverage" because it would be too expensive and because people want choice. Basically, what they are calling "mandated coverage" the President calls a "minimum benefits package." He used the example of the fictitious Acme Car Insurance that he purchased as a college student, but when he was rear-ended, it didn't cover the repairs to his car. He said we have to eliminate insurance coverage that doesn't really cover anything and eliminate lifetime caps on coverage. Now people have the "choice" to buy really cheap insurance that in the end may or may not be adequate. Kyl said that these mandates would raise rates for some Arizonans; the President's point was that it may raise rates for people who have the really cheap policies that leave them underinsured.

One high point of the day was when Arizona Senator John McCain began grandstanding, and President Obama reminded him they were no longer on the campaign trail. Of course, McCain is on the campaign trail, since he is up for re-election, and conservatives, independents, and progressives in Arizona are not happy with his performance.

One of the day's best statements originally came from Senator Harry Reid but was repeated a few times by others. Reid reminded Republicans that they were entitled to their own opinions but not their own set of facts.

If you want to learn more about the different healthcare reform ideas and see your government at work, turn off the pundits and watch the C-Span live videos of this summit.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Disgusted? It's Time to Organize

No, I'm not joining the Tea Baggers... er...Tea Partiers. On the contrary, I believe that it's time for the left to get organized.

After weeks of discouraging news from Phoenix about the Arizona legislature's plans to dismantle public education, close the parks, increase taxes for the middle class, deny healthcare for thousands of poor Arizonans-- AND offer even more tax breaks for the rich, I must say I'm pretty disgusted with our state government. Arizona Legislators are pandering to the corporatists, the gun lobby, and anti-immigrant extremists while ignoring the citizens of this state -- especially our children and the poor. At the same time, Arizona's US Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain-- brought to you by big banks, big insurance, big pharma, and big guns-- are marching in lock step with the Party of No and stonewalling all progressive legislation offered by the Obama Administration.

What's a lefty to do? With lingering recession, high unemployment, deep budget cuts, and failed government (particularly at the state level), these are dark times for our country. The grass roots populists who elected America's first black president are no match for the corporatists' multi-million-dollar war chests. But as The Doors sang, "They got the guns. We got the numbers."

Three recent Tucson events have given me hope-- the Martin Luther King Jr. Day events sponsored by the local Black Chamber of Commerce and Pima County African American Democratic Caucus, the Corozon de Justicia Awards Dinner sponsored by Derechos Humanos, and the Charlie King concert sponsored by No More Deaths.

These events gave me hope because it brought me face-to-face with hundreds of local activists of all colors who are working quietly and organizing on multiple progressive issues.

Particularly inspiring was the Corozon de Justicia keynote speaker Roberto Lovato, a writer and Latino activist, who addressed a highly diverse activist audience on Friday night. In 2009, Lovato launched the successful Basta Dobbs campaign which led to the resignation of right wing commentator Lou Dobbs from CNN. This campaign is a shining example of how the masses can take on corporate America-- and win. On Sunday, KXCI's Amanda Shauger aired a very insightful interview with Lovato, whose latest projects can be found at Presente.org.

Lovato said that national boundaries are irrelevant to corporations and that there should be no national boundaries in the human rights struggle against corporatism and fascism. Ironically, Iranians protesting against their repressive government are using The Doors' anthem from the 1960s anti-war protests as a rallying cry against fascism and sexism in their country. Is it time for us to dust off the vinyl and take to the streets? The Tea Partiers are not the only ones who are disgusted.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

I.O.U.S.A.: a case for fiscally responsible government

Pontificating about the national debt and fiscal responsibility is popular campaign rhetoric, but politicians haven't done anything significant to reduce the national debt since President Bill Clinton was in office.

In fact, under President George W. Bush, Clinton's $127 billion surplus was transformed into a record $455 billion deficit-- through repeated tax cuts for the wealthy, military imperialism, and adherence to the failed theory of trickle down economics. Now the debt is in the trillions of dollars--and increasing every minute.
As we approach a new year with cautious hope, many Americans are glad to see 2009 end. With skyrocketing unemployment and home foreclosures, failing local businesses, and bankrupt state and local governments, it has been a rough year and a half since the economic crash of 2008.

Watching I.O.U.S.A. One Nation. Under Stress. In Debt on New Year's Day was a chilling experience. The movie offers a learned but understandable look at the current national debt, how we are dealing with it (or not), and what the country has done in the past to pay off debt. For a thorough recap and independent review of the movie, check out this link.

In a nutshell, the premise of the movie is that the US actually has four deficits:

1- The federal budget deficit-- The national debt is $12 trillion and counting;

2- The savings deficit-- we are a country of consumers, not savers;

3- The trade deficit-- we buy more from other countries than they buy from us; and

4- The leadership deficit-- our politicians are more interested in getting re-elected, than making tough choices. The leadership deficit is glaringly apparent in Arizona, where the Republican governor and Republican-controlled legislature nip away at the multi-billion-dollar budget while avoiding tough choices and refusing to listen to ideas put forth by the legislative Democrats.

I would two more deficits to this list:

5- The education deficit-- It was shocking how many people in the movie could not define the word "deficit". This is a symptom of our failed educational system, which is only going to get worse in bankrupt states like Arizona. Public education in the US is in a downward spiral, and no one is acting upon this. After all an uneducated populace will not question those in power. If you can't even define "deficit," you're not likely to ask for accountability from the leaders who are running it up. We are shortchanging future generations by allowing this to continue.

6- The media deficit-- With the demise of local newspapers and the rise of television entertainment news, the media in the US is in a shambles. Our best hope for real news-- not controlled by corporate press releases-- is citizen journalism.

When the continuation of the war in Iraq, escalation of the war in Afghanistan, multiple stimulus packages and corporate give-aways, and potential healthcare reform are added to our current fiscal obligations and the impending financial doom with the government starts paying Social Security benefits to millions of retiring Baby Boomers, the scenario is mind-boggling. For years, US taxpayers have been paying more into Social Security than is being paid out to retirees. Within the next 10 years, as more Baby Boomers retire, Social Security will be obligated to pay out more than it takes in. This in itself is a problem, but the US government has been borrowing against the Social Security surplus for years. No more surplus = no more borrowing = an even higher budget deficit.

Where do we go from here?

- Americans have to be willing to make tough economic choices. Thanks to Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich, George W. Bush, and the ideologues at FOX News, many Americans believe we can have everything we want and not pay for it. Our credit card mentality has to change. The bill is coming due, and we have to figure out how to pay it.

- We absolutely have to hold our elected officials accountable. In many elections, there is a "throw-the-bums-out" sentiment. This can be good or bad. Yes, throwing the bums out can clean house, but it is not blanketly a good idea to vote for the challenger "just because". We should reward politicians who have the guts to make the tough choices for the collective good. (Except for President Barack Obama and some in his administration, I can't name too many politicians who are putting the public good in front of personal ambition.)

- It is unconscionable for us to spend, spend, spend and leave crippling debt, a crumbling infrastructure, and a devastated educational system to our children and grandchildren.

- What can you do personally? Get involved in your local community and local government. Register and vote. Educate yourself about candidates and issues. Talk with friends and family. An educated and informed electorate is the key to change. Check out the I.O.U.S.A. trailer as a first step.

- Release yourself from debt. Pay off your credit cards, cut them up, and close the accounts. Don't buy things you can't afford. Save money. Make a plan to become financially independent.

This article originally appeared in my Progressive Examiner column.

Is the public option dead? Say it ain't so...

It seems as if the US Congress has been debating healthcare reform for an eternity. Remember last summer when President Obama was hopeful that Congress would get 'er done before the August break? Ha! We'll be lucky if they finish before the Christmas break.

The latest wrangling in the Senate sounds like a good idea, but in the long run, it's probably not. The latest Congressional shell game to avoid a "robust" public option and still make it look as if they are reforming the healthcare non-system is to lower the Medicare eligibility age to 55 and all younger folks who are not covered by insurance to buy into the federal system.

A little disclosure here, I am over 55 and buying into Medicare is attractive to me, but in the long term, this move benefits insurance companies more than anyone else. People use more health insurance as they age. By pushing the Baby Boomers-- who are getting older and fatter everyday-- off on the government, insurance companies are left with the "cream of the crop"-- younger, healthier Americans who are less likely to make a claim.

Shifting the cost to care for the people most likely to make a claim to the government will surely break the Medicare bank-- already scheduled to go bankrupt in 2012 (or 2017 depending upon how you crunch the numbers but in any case that's not too far away).

In a recent blog post, former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich says that this latest development will give insurance companies even more control over the current non-system, will do nothing to curb obscene profits, and will do nothing to control costs. It also guarantees that healthcare reform will be revisited in the coming years.

Again, this debate proves that we have the best Congress money can buy.