Liberté, égalité, fraternité

Contributed by Katie Foley

In another nod to the fact that GOP candidates for president don’t “get it,” Herman Cain explained to Bob Schieffer of CBS’ Face the Nation that he stood by his earlier comments that the Occupy Wall Street protesters and the tens of thousands around the nation participating in solidarity protests are simply “jealous” of those whom they are protesting.  He described the protests as “un-American” and an example of “class warfare.”

On the same program, Mr. Newt Gingrich, another GOP presidential nomination “contender” voiced his opinion “that a ‘bad education system’ that taught ‘really dumb ideas’ was to blame for the protests.”

First I’ll address the idea that these protests are un-American.  The Founding Fathers, you know, those men about whom the Tea Party and others of their ilk tend to wax poetic, created this country from the smoldering ashes of revolution. Protesting the government, in their case the English government, is at the very heart of our nation’s founding. Therefore I fail to see how exercising rights important enough to have been in the First Amendment could be construed as un-American.

As for the idea that the protesters are laboring under the mistaken assumptions imparted upon them by their crappy public school educations, how do you explain all of the well-educated participants? My exposure to a “bad education system” got me a 28 on my ACT and two higher education degrees by the time I was 25. How do you explain my participation?  Or was it the silly ideas of  “personal liberty,” “work hard, be rewarded,” or “you too can have your American dream” I was taught that have left me cheering for the occupations taking place around the nation?

Perhaps, for some people, the claims of Misters Gingrich and Cain are correct.  Maybe some people are jealous of bankers’ “golden parachutes.”  It’s possible that drastically reducing public school funding has left many of those protesting with less-than-adequate educations. But more than likely the people protesting Wall Street, claiming to be the 99%, would not include “jealousy” among the emotions they feel. 

For example, I’m not jealous of Herman Cain’s net worth of $18 million USD, I’m just exhausted from working three jobs to pay for my peanut-butter-and-jelly diet. I’m not jealous of Herman Cain’s wife and two grown children, I just regret that working three jobs leaves me no time to date. I’m not jealous of his M.A. from Purdue University, I just resent that, in this economy, my J.D. is worth less than the paper upon which the degree was printed. 

I’m not jealous that Herman Cain used to be CEO of Godfather’s Pizza, I’m just dismayed that my J.D. has gotten me to where I am able to deliver Chinese food for minimum wage. I’m not jealous that Herman Cain has a pulpit from which to preach his offensive brand of politics, I’m disillusioned by the fact that people are taking a man who has never been elected to public office seriously.

I’m not jealous that Wall Street stock brokers drive BMWs and Mercedes, I’m distraught that I barely make the car payment on my Chevy Cobalt each month.  I’m not jealous that the wealthiest 1% can afford haute couture or designer clothes, I’m just bitter that I have to budget a trip to the Goodwill. I’m not jealous of those who live in Beverly Hills mansions or estates in the Hamptons, I’m just perturbed that $300 rent credit to clean the building I live in has been a godsend this past six months. 

I’m not jealous that Wall Street banks were bailed out by the government, I’m just disgusted that conservatives still have the nerve to call ours a “free-market system.” I’m not jealous of people fortunate enough to have pulled up their bootstraps sufficiently to land them in a prestigious career, I’m just enraged by the idea that the rest of us just need to “work harder.” I’m not jealous of people who have such wonderful health insurance coverage that they fear a single-payer system, I’m just incredulous that Obamacare protestors want to keep government out of their Medicare. I’m not jealous of all of the press the Tea Party got by demanding “their America” back, I’m just incensed that it took so long for the so-called “liberal media” to even begin covering the Wall Street protests.

I’m also angry that I do not have the funds or credit to visit my mother in Florida.  I’m frustrated that I don’t have the funds to replace the clothes I bought ten years ago while I was in high school. I’m disturbed that I have been so hungry that I’ve eaten the food off of the plates of strangers while I’m clearing their table. I’m resigned to the fact that receiving an $80 grocery gift card from my step mom causes me to weep with gratitude. I’m stunned that the GOP insists that there is nothing wrong with the current economic system, when in actuality the whole global monetary system is at risk. I’m reluctant to exercise my Constitutional right to peaceably assemble because I’m not sure I can take the time off work to participate in Occupy Minnesota. I’m also fed up with the fact that the movement is being deliberately misunderstood by people like Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich. 

But most of all, I am determined to keep working my ass off so that I can make my life work on my own terms.  I am relieved to have friends and family that love and support me. I’m optimistic that this movement could lead to the type of change that Obama promised and then failed to deliver, and I’m invigorated that the 99% have finally rose up to strike fear into the hearts of their oppressors.

So you see, I’m a lot of things, jealous is just not one of them. So, Misters Cain and Gingrich, along with all of you other conservative talking heads who want to discount the movement as nothing more than lazy, unemployed hippies who want everything for nothing, I have only one thing to say to you and your need to deliberately misconstrue the growing desperation of the working/middle class: you had better be right, because I’ve read about something like this before, and I can tell you that it didn’t end well for those in the upper classes.   

Letter to the Red States

This is a classic (published here as early as 2005) but I've been thinking a lot about States' Rights.  This letter implies secession, but what I'm thinking is less an act of war and more an act of "be careful what you wish for."  I think we should roll back federal government, just in the way the Tea Party is suggesting.  If we allow states more authority, or delegate them more responsibility, under the Tenth Amendment, I have no doubt that the blue states would remain good places to live.  

I can't speak to the veracity of any claims contained herein, but it gets me thinking just the same. I hope you enjoy this "oldie but goodie."  

Dear Red States... 

We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. 

In case you aren't aware, that includes Hawaii, Oregon,Washington, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California. 

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get Elliot Spitzer. You get Ken Lay. 

We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families.  You get a bunch of single moms. 

Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire. 

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools, plus Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Cal Tech and MIT. 

With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia. 

We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you. 

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy b*****ds believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties. 

 

By the way, we're taking the good pot, too. You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico.

Peace out,

Blue States

You're Invited!

Contributed by Katie Foley

As a politically-active, hippie lawyer, one of the organizations I receive emails from is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).  I recently received this gem, inviting me to a free discussion:

St. Paul: Organized with our ally OutFront Minnesota, this next event will cover the significant progress that is being made within the LGBT community, from the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to the rapidly evolving legal struggle for marriage equality. Featuring Sharon McGowan, Attorney, Appellate Section of Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice and Anthony Winer, Professor of Constitutional Law at William Mitchell.

Advances in LGBT Equality in the Age of Obama
Wednesday, October 12, 7:00 p.m.
William Mitchell College of Law, Mitchell Auditorium, 578 Summit Ave.
This event is free and open to all.
Refreshments will be provided.

Since this is an event "open to all" I thought I would advertise it on the blog where like-minded and/or interested people could be made aware of it.  It's in my calendar, I hope to see some of you there!

Taxes: Society's Way of Paying it Forward

I'm Already Afraid - What Else D'ya Got?

Contributed by Katie Foley

As a political hack and diligent signer of on-line petitions, my inbox is daily flooded with political messages and alerts.  The AFL-CIO wants me to "Take a Stand."  Paul Thissen tells me what it'll take to "[Clean] Up Their Mess." The DFL advises me that there will be "Consequences." Barack and Michelle Obama have invited me to lunch. 

These are causes, organizations and candidates I support, yet these emails immediately get moved to the trash bin. Lately Liberals have been struggling to rally around a coherent message that really moves people to action.  "Hope" and "Change" rang in the hearts of so many in 2008 because we had only just begun to suffer what would take government economists months to admit was the "Worst Recession since the Great Depression" - a phrase I am so sick of hearing I could puke.  Let's call it what it is . . . painful. 

Though the official unemployment rate is 9.1% nationally,

"Combined, the 14 million officially unemployed; the "underemployed" part-timers who want full-time work; and "discouraged" people who have stopped looking make up 16.2 percent of working-age Americans."  

These are unfortunate numbers for any of us who fall into any of the above three categories. Life is a sea of uncertainty, with pride subservient to necessity. In a mere four years, 25% more young people between the ages of 25 to 34 have moved back in with their parents, 45% of whom would be living in poverty if they lived alone.  Recent numbers show that 1 in 6 Americans is living in poverty.

These are our people and I daresay that the last thing they need in their lives is more fear.  Yet the DFL has the audacity to tell me there will be "Consequences" for the actions of our political rivals, warning me of the political potholes in my future – that could possibly be avoided if I could spare $5.

We live during an era characterized by fear and uncertainty. I find it hard to believe that the DFL is attempting to employ more fear, more uncertainty to achieve its goal of regaining Democratic control of government.  If I am any more fearful or uncertain I may simply stop leaving the house. Unfortunately, it’s hard to cast a ballot from underneath my comforter.    

Aside from the cognitive dissidence of trying to motivate through fear a group of individuals who are fearful enough, studies have shown that it is conservative brains that have over-developed fear centers.  Liberal brains, on the other hand, can better process complexity.  I have also heard that Democrats are stronger proponents of GOTV efforts because if we can get people to show up then they will likely vote in our favor.

We are the party of science. We know that the issues we face are complex.  We understand that one must consider the source when it’s Exxon-Mobile assuring us that “fracking” is perfectly safe.  Though we may be willing to capitulate that evolution is a “theory,” we are more willing to accept that Genesis is a far-out story, not an accurate accounting of the Earth’s creation. If science tells us that we can better grasp complexity, and statistical analysis shows us that the biggest struggle for Democrats is getting their supporters to the polls, let us convince people to show up to the polls in 2012 by imparting upon them the viability of our solutions to the complex issues we face. 

We are also the party of inclusion.  When we can truly reach out to our friends and neighbors we have the ability to make them hopeful and optimistic about the future.  We need to use our ability to understand complexity, analyze the facts, evaluate scientific evidence and rearticulate what we’ve concluded to those around us to convince the populace that they have a stake in the next election, that all is not lost if we can form a cohesive plan and then stick to it!   

I know that, more and more, winning elections has become about who can raise the most money and spend it in the most effective manner.  A candidate for the U.S. House has to raise $10,000 a week to be competitive in an election.  That's a lot of fundraising!  In the post-Citizen's United world, where a Super-PAC is not PAC Man on steriods, being the party of the down-and-out can be a difficult place to raise funds.  But so far GE, GM, and Apple do not get to cast a ballot come election time. 

Fundraising is important, but so is taking an honest approach to complex issues.  Liberal and Progressive candidates and causes need to start treating us like adults, or at least stop trying to motivate us with fear.  Fear works for conservatives because they are a more fearful lot. Liberals, however, need to be told why a particular approach or idea is the best.  Stop telling me about some vague “Consequences” and tell me “Why Our Job Plan Will Work.”  Instead of inviting me to lunch with the leader of the free world (if it sounds too good to be true....) tell me what Obama is going to do to live up to his own rhetoric during a second term. 

Let’s use our time and energy to develop a message that gets at an issue’s complexity and yet is easy enough to recall during that chance political discussion in the supermarket check-out. Let’s stop invoking fear and start invoking facts. Let’s get people invested in the election through appealing to their intellect, not their quaking centers of uncertainty. Let’s be clear and concise about why Democrats can fix things, not about why we’re better than those jerks over there. 

Barb Goodwin to Sleep with Fridley and Columbia Heights Mayors

Now that I have your attention, I should probably clarify what I mean by the headline.

Senator Barb Goodwin plans to raise awareness for the Lee Carlson Center for Mental Health and Well-Being by participating in the Center's "RoofRaiser."

Tonight (Friday, September 16) Barb and Fridley Mayor Scott Lund will be kicking off the RoofRaiser event at Bob's Produce in Fridley.  If you can't make it to Bob's Produce, join Barb and Columbia Heights Mayor Gary Anderson at Top Valu Liquors in Columbia Heights. All monies raised during the event will benefit children, adolescents and families struggling with emotional health issues.

Come out to Bob's Produce between 4-5 for "kick-off music, finger foods, Dunn Brothers Coffee, and DQ Blizzard samples."  Or, come out to Top Valu Liquors from 4 - 8 for "Brats, Polish and and Hot Dogs sold by the CH Booster Club" along with an appearance by the Vikings Cheerleaders.  Participants will be ascending to the roofs at 6 p.m., where it is my understanding they will spend the night.

This is a great cause and a great opportunity to support Barb, who was our District's fierce defender in the Senate, bringing sense, reason and sometimes levity to the craziness that was our last legislative session.

For more information, or to donate to the cause, check out these websites:

http://tinyurl.com/3bytvjt
http://www.leecarlsoncenter.org/news_roofraiser.html

You're Goddamned Right I'm a Liberal.

Contributed by Katie Foley

It is a relatively well known fact that the so-called “grassroots” Tea Party movement is actually a front for corporations and their boards to rally the masses using their own prejudices, insecurities and uncertainties to vote against their interests in the name of some vague promise of a return to “liberty.” 

People who could not place where they’ve heard the name "Mussolini" decry liberal leaders, including their own president, as alternately fascist and socialist, Nazi and communist.  They hold signs depicting the leader of the free world in “white face,” either unaware or uncaring of the gross racism implied by the image.

And yet wealthy men have paired up with opportunistic politicians to rally a base of people who are too caught up with the frenzied atmosphere of uncertainty surrounding them to realize that they are being manipulated into speaking out against the very things from which they benefit.  Mothers with children on Medicaid showed up to rallies opposing “Obamacare,” claiming they weren’t going to allow the government to interfere with their health insurance.  Poor people who have seen their property taxes spike and energy prices soar, while not getting an adequate pay raise for years, speak out against increasing the tax rate on the richest 1%, claiming that doing so is “un-American.”

During last night’s GOP debate, Mitt Romney proposed that to help the middle class, he would eliminate the taxes on interest, dividends and capital gains.  This would not help the 7.7% of Americans that do not have a savings or checking account, which includes 20% of the population earning less than $30,000/year. As for a cut in taxes on dividends and capital gains, this will benefit the people who are already in the upper echelons of American society.  At least 75% of the income of the top 400 earners in America is derived from dividends and capital gains. Meanwhile, minimum wage earners and people living pay check to pay check have very little to invest, therefore deriving no benefit from Romney's proposed tax cuts to help the middle class.

But “tax” has become a dirty word and the idea of cutting taxes, by which I mean any tax aside from the cigarette tax, has become the de facto “will of the American people" even though polls consistently show that more than 60% of us would be willing to see taxes raised on the wealthiest Americans.  Yet, the GOP's big plan to jump-start our economy is simply more of the same - tax breaks to the rich who, rather than reinvest in their business or community, fund political campaigns designed to ensure their money will not go anywhere besides where they want it to, whether that be to their furrier, jeweler, or directly to their off-shore account in some tax haven somewhere. 

The beliefs of the Tea Party are consistently decried as lies, or are at least acknowledged as less than the truth.  Leaders of the homophobia movement regularly get caught in an intimate but homosexual embrace. So-called grassroots movements are revealed time and time again to be nothing more than a well funded corporate battering ram, designed to increase the corporate bottom line while leaving in its wake the destruction of countless American dreams. And yet they still claim the moral high road.

Why do we allow this happen?  Why do we allow them to take the moral high road time and time again when they are actually engaging in appalling behavior that is damaging our country? Why do we keep letting them dictate to us the content of our American dream, instead of standing up to correct the record?  We let them use our willingness to allow women to be in charge of their own reproduction distract the populace from the lying, cheating and stealing that is going on right in front of them.  We allow complicity in the conservative destruction of the American dream because we keep thinking that people elected to serve the general welfare could not possibly be so self-involved, or that the people who elect them will make an informed decision instead of a gut-reaction to hyperbole laced talking points the next time around.   

 

We need to stop letting Conservatives win by using vague words, asserting part-truths, and preying on our all too human emotion of fear. Let’s call out the Tim Pawlenty’s for their unlawful actions that they boldly brag about while campaigning.  Let’s call out the Mitt Romneys, who despite his lack of neckties will never be able to relate to the “average American.”  Let us not be intimidated when they screech about the liberal bias of today's "gotcha" media, when Rupert Murdoch is one of the main financiers of the Tea Party movement.

Liberal and liberty have the same root word, and yet we consistently let them paint us as the enemies of liberty.  Enough is enough! By being the friends of liberty we are the friends of the American people and therefore we are friends of the Republic that derives its sovereignty from the people.  We are for the people, and it’s time we were a little more assertive about that fact.

Let's give Conservatives precisely what they want

contributed by Katie Foley

It may surprise you to hear this, but I have a friend who is a conservative, Yankees fan. (It's the latter I find most upsetting.)  Recently he said to me, "Oh, yes, I forgot that it's all still Bush's fault..."

This got me thinking. I decided that, if anything, a good degree of fault lies at the feet of Liberals and Democrats. We keep thinking that Conservatives want to govern when all they really want to do is fear monger and assure the wealth and privilege of themselves and their friends. Like an abuse victim we keep coming back thinking, "This time it'll be different, it'll be better. [They] won't hurt [us] again."

The most dangerous time for the victim of abuse s/he leaves. At this point of our political discourse, I'm willing to assume the risk. The South wants less government intrusion? Then the North should stop sending them money. People want the Federal Government to adhere to the text of the Constitution? Fine, let's stop Social Security, Medicare, farm subsidies, and the Federal Criminal Code. People want states to have more authority under the 10th Amendment? Fine, no more DOMA, no more Federal scheduling for "controlled substances", and no more "Leave No Child Behind". 

At this point I'm all for giving Conservatives precisely what they wish for. Let's have this fight on the State and Local level and let's have the Fed leave us alone. You don't want to play nice? Well then it's on.

Habitat for Humanity in SD50!

From the desk of Todd Olin

Below is an email I got from Mr. Todd Olin.  If you are interested in becoming involved with this project, please let me know at katie.j.foley@gmail.com.  I will then let Todd know you're interested so he can add you to his list. All said we'll need between 10-15 volunteers, so clear your calendar and get ready to do some community service!

Hi Everyone,

If you’re receiving this email, that means that you signed up to find out more about the Habitat For Humanity volunteer event on November 5th. This is a fantastic opportunity for DFLers in SD50 to make a difference right here in our community. Political organizing is a vital part of our commitment to improve our society, but the ideal of service that we hold so dear is bigger than politics. Projects like these let us put our ideals directly to practice and improve peoples’ lives.

The event on November 5th is a rare opportunity to work with Habitat for Humanity on a Saturday—they rarely have weekend events. The project will run from 8:30 to 4:00 (with a break for lunch, of course). No construction or other experience is required—and there is plenty for everyone to do no matter what age or ability.

I will contact everyone again in the coming month to provide more details about the specific project we’ll be working on and to confirm the final list of volunteers. So for now, please just stay tuned.

People will definitely see us doing this work and remember that DFLers get out and practice what they preach!

Thanks,

Todd Olin

A Perfect Night for a Picnic

Contributed by Katie Foley

The annual SD50 picnic took place on Wednesday, August 10.  Mother Nature was more than accommodating - the temperature was in the upper sixties, a light breeze kept the mosquitoes at bay, and the clouds in the sky were more reminiscent of rabbit tails than rain. 

The result of perfect weather and well executed marketing meant that around 110 people showed up to Kordiak Park to enjoy some good food and great political engagement.  In attendance were Congresswoman Betty McCullum, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, Kathy Olson on behalf of State Senator Barb Goodwin, State Representatives Kate Knuth and Carolyn Laine, Congressional District 4 Chair J.P. Barone, Senate District Chair Bill Krueger, candidate for New Brighton City Council Graeme Allen, and representatives from the Minnesota Health Plan and Amy Klobaucher Re-election campaign.

I thought that though all of our civil servants gave fantastic speeches, Mark Ritchie’s was the one that really hit home.  He mentioned that in 2008, 2.92 million people voted in Minnesota (“I know, I counted…”).  Two years later, during the 2010 gubernatorial and midterm elections, there were 800,000 fewer ballots cast.  He argued that in order to ensure DFL/Democratic victories in 2012 we need to make sure those 800,000 voters show up to the polls.

According to Mr. Ritchie, somewhere between 30,000-40,000 Minnesotans turn 18 every year, so we need to make sure they are engaged in the political process. He also mentioned that new residents and new citizens might need us to help them understand the intricacies of Minnesota's political process, the caucus system in particular. I think he had a salient point. We need to identify those who could benefit from our experience and help them become engaged.  There should be campaign issues that reflect the concerns of today's youth, giving them a stake in the process and encouraging them to exercise their fundamental right to vote. History shows that if we can get 800,000 more people to the polls it is likely they'll vote Democratic.

Betty McCullum remains as fierce an advocate for liberal issues as ever. Carolyn Laine assured us that though she is not 100% recovered from her horrible reaction to a prescribed medication, she is “fine” and appeared ready to get back in the proverbial saddle on behalf of her constituents. Kate Knuth candidly stated that it was an incredibly difficult session, but that she was very encouraged by the energy that appeared in the form of Wisconsin Solidarity demonstrations and protests to the upcoming Amendment vote that could Constitutionalize discrimination in Minnesota by defining marriage as a fundamental right that only applies to some couples. 

J.P. Barone was as entertaining as we’ve come to expect.  He mentioned that the Special Redistricting Panel created by the Minnesota Supreme Court is required to have its final decision regarding the redistricting plan ready by noon on February 21, 2012.  To that end, Mr. Barone wanted to remind us that though we will soon be surrounded by new faces in our new districts, we are still part of the same family.  This is a cheesy metaphor, perhaps, but apropos nonetheless.  We need to remember that we have a lot to fight for in the upcoming elections.  We cannot let our insecurities and/or old habits interfere with the job that needs to be done. Or, as J.P. stated, we need to remember to use the best ideas from everyone, regardless of whether they reflect how we’ve “typically” done things. He also *finally* presented SD50 Chair Bill Krueger with the plaque commemorating his receipt of the Distinguished Party Service Award which was given to him at the  Bruce Vento dinner back in October of 2010.

Though Senator Barb Goodwin was unable to make it, she sent her regards through Kathy Olson.  Graeme Allen spoke about his upcoming bid for a seat on the New Brighton City Council.  One of the things he spoke of is the conservatives that have lately infiltrated the City Council.  He stated that though they speak out against state workers and have caused to be laid off many city employees, they voted to have the city provide them with health insurance.  As Mr. Allen pointed out, this is supposed to be a public service thing, “we don’t need to give ourselves health care.”   Though it is this blogger’s belief that Mr. Allen needs to embrace the political practice of kissing babies, I look forward to helping him on his campaign and would like to encourage others to do as well.

SD50 Central Committee member Todd Olin mentioned an upcoming Habitat for Humanity event taking place in our district on Saturday, November 5.  He will be providing more details in the future which I will happily pass on to anyone interested. And finally, thanks are due to Steve, Deb, Val, Rick, Kathy, Betty, Mildred, Jim and Kristen Hopwood, Graeme, Jered, and anybody I've accidentally omitted, whether you're a member of the planning committee or you helped set-up and/or tear-down. Without volunteers we are nothing but ideas without action, so thank you for showing up and giving yourselves to the cause!

GRAEME ALLEN FOR NEW BRIGHTON CITY COUNCIL! J

Women's Rights: There Are Still Battles to be Fought and WON

Contributed by Katie Foley

This weekend I met a stunning young woman from a primarily Buddhist, South Asian island nation.  She has been educated in the United States, earning both her Bachelor’s degree and Master’s degree from a state university.  She is now doing whatever she can to extend her stay in the U.S. because she knows that if she returns to her island home it is likely her parent’s will have picked a husband for her. 

It’s only natural for a flaming liberal and rabid feminist such as myself to contemplate at length the state of Women’s Rights, not only in this country but world-wide.  Women have come so far since we were finally given the franchise in 1920 [1], a *mere* 133 years after the Constitution was adopted by the Constitutional Convention. [2] Thanks to World War II, when women were needed to produce supplies for the men fighting the war, women learned the satisfaction to be gained from financial independence.  However, I know for a fact my grandma had to hide that she was married from her employer lest she be fired for being derelict in her house-wife duties.

But even though we have entered the second decade of a new millennium, there are still innumerable strides to be made in order for women to gain the full equity of U.S. citizenship.  It’s no secret that women earn substantially less than men for comparable work, 78 cents on the dollar according to the latest census data. [3] Even if women find themselves in a position of equality with men they are still expected to present themselves as feminine and desirable, perhaps even demure.  This is true of women in any professional capacity, from lawyers to doctors to politicians such as Michele Bachmann.  I may not agree with her politics, or even think her completely sane, but I resent that she has to strive to appear feminine amidst what must be an exhausting bid for the GOP nomination. 

The continued subordination of women is not limited to cultural or economic phenomena. In February of this year the GOP in Congress wanted to limit abortion funding by inserting the word “forcible” before the word “rape” in federal legislation. [4]  This implies that there may be some types of rape that are okay, as long as they are not “forcible.”  Then again, I cannot think of a way that rape could be anything but forcible, given that the common law definition of rape is “unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman…through force and against her will.”

Now, thanks to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act, women will have access to free birth control, including the “morning-after” pill, through their private insurers.  Those of us who have been perturbed for years by the fact that insurers were more interested in ensuring old men can still get erections than helping women with family planning [5] find the new mandate to be a step in the right direction for women’s rights and women’s health.  In fact, studies indicate that as many as 2/3 of women believe contraceptives should be covered by private insurance plans.  Yet the vociferous right-wing has indentified this as nothing more than a battle tactic by the culture warriors on the left. This is not about women’s health, it is just liberals looking to impose their immorality on the pocket books of private insurers. [6]

The last example I'll give of the stagnation of progress for Women’s Rights advocates was in the form of a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.  The Court failed to allow a sex discrimination case against Wal-Mart to be certified as a class action, splitting 5-4 over the issue of whether all of the women alleging employment discrimination on the basis of sex had a common claim, a requirement in class action law suits. [7] What this means is that each woman will have to individually litigate the issue, a daunting and expensive task when you’re fighting a global super power such as Wal-Mart.  The bottom line is that Wal-Mart will be able to continue its *alleged* practice of employment discrimination on the basis of sex because the likelihood of being sued successfully for having done dropped significantly with the Supreme Court’s decision. 

I don’t pretend to know the solution to the problem of the continued efforts of those in power to subordinate women.  I don’t know what we can do to liberate women in South Asian island nations and the Middle East from the religious and cultural chains that bind them.  What I do know is that what we have been doing has not been enough, and for a nation committed to “Equal Protection of the Law” we are sadly lacking in the area of Women’s Rights.  Just as all people should be allowed to marry who they want regardless of gender, women should not be told to be more feminine in the work place and should have insurance coverage for family planning. Women should not have to fear a forced marriage or wonder whether the rape they experienced was “forcible” or not.  As the old Cheris Kramarae quote says, "Feminism is the radical notion that women are people." Women are over half of the population, it’s time to make the less-than-half part of the population truly acknowledge and value our humanity. I will not let my uterus dictate where I go in life.  No other women should have to either.    

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Constitution

[3] http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/acsbr09-3.pdf

[4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/09/abortion-forcible-rape-language-hr-3_n_820846.html

[5] http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=51391

[6] http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-balan/2011/08/01/cbs-spins-new-obamacare-birth-control-mandate-good-news

[7] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/20/groups-blast-laud-high-court-for-decision-against-nations-largest/

It's Picnic Time!

With upcoming local elections and challenges posed by the "Tea Party", it will be an important time to join us for the 8th Annual SD-50 DFL Picnic taking place Wednesday, August 10th at Kordiak Park.

Wednesday, August 10

6:00 to 8:00 pm

Kordiak Park

1845 49th Avenue NE, Columbia Heights

Of course, taking center stage will be Senator Barb Goodwin, Representative Kate Knuth, and Representative Carolyn Laine! There is no charge, but a free will donation will be accepted.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU THERE! 

Drink That Kool-Aid, Follow Their Lead

Contributed by Katie Foley

Please forgive me my absence. Much of what I describe below was gleaned from this article: http://www.twincities.com/ci_18342883?nclick_check=1  

I have been listening to a lot of MPR lately and between talks of mummies and tapping into the Strategic Oil Reserve is a lot of talk about the impending government shut-down.

The shut-down will go into effect on July 1, 2011.  The parties involved went to court today and a judge stated that if the parties cannot agree, she will decide which provision in Minnesota's Constitution is more important: that the government cannot spend money unless the legislature has appropriated it?  Or that Minnesotans should not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law?

One friend asked me, "Doesn't this happen every few years?"  The answer is yes and no.  Past shutdowns have been partial shutdowns.  Many agency budgets had been passed and money that was appropriated for another purpose could be diverted somewhere else.  This appropriation shifting was directed at what have come to be known as "essential" services.

For example, the State Patrol and court system are among the services thought to be essential.  Towards the bottom is the Minnesota State Lottery and Canterbury Park.  Actually, people who plan to go to State Parks for the 4th of July will have to cancel their plans. It'd be a shame to drive all that way to see the Parks' entrances barricaded.

The problem this year is that even if everyone could agree on what should be deemed essential, the legislature hasn't appropriated any money.  For anyone. That means no appropriation shifting as there will have been no appropriations. Hence the judge's dilemma about the Constitutional issues "at the core of government." My lawyerly brain is intrigued by the prospect of new jurisprudence, but my Minnesotan brain is outraged at the complete inability to compromise when anybody who has accomplished anything can tell you that compromise is the name of life's game.

Back to MPR.  One afternoon this week a newscaster asked who should take the political heat for this, the Republican legislature or the Democratic governor. Since I'm a flaming liberal, my response was pretty typical.

"The Republicans, of course!" I yelled at my radio, "They were elected to solve a budget crisis and instead they focused on making sure gays can't have the same legal rights as straights!"

But a couple days later a thought has struck me.  My opinion has been based on the underlying assumption that these men and women were elected to balance the budget - to solve the budget crisis.  This has been a mistaken assumption.  The Republicans were elected to cut spending and make sure that (non-property) tax rates did not go up.

Maybe someday I'll have the money to be concerned about the capital gains tax, or taxes on estates over $5 million.  Maybe someday I'll be in a tax bracket that doesn't result in a full refund every year, like the government feels sorry for how broke I am. Maybe someday I'll appreciate that I can speak with money, not just watch it all go towards keeping a roof over my head, food in my stomach and the luxury of a cell phone with an unlimited data plan.  For now I'm too busy being concerned about how to pay for health insurance coverage on the off chance that Blue Cross overlooks my pre-existing conditions and actually decides to insure me.

So to MPR, when you ask who should take the political fall for the budget impasse, I'm going to have to change my answer.  Who should take the political fallout?  The Democrats.  Because we keep thinking that if we play nice, the Republicans won't kick us in the shins and steal our ball.  Maybe we need to resort to playground politics because the Republicans elected because some people believe we are "Taxed Enough Already" are doing exactly what they were elected to do - to steal the ball and run home. Unfortunately, this isn't a playground where the one with the ball decides who gets to play. This is life. This is liberty. This is people's livelihoods and property.  Aren't those the rights that these supposed Patriots have proclaimed they stand to uphold? Or was that just another flavor of Kool-Aid that too many people have decided to drink without realizing what is really in the cup?

New Idea for Hit Show "Survivor"

I got this as an email from my (not very political) sister and thought it was worth sharing.  Enjoy! -Katie Foley


Next Season on Survivor*

Have you heard about the next planned "Survivor" show?

Governor Scott  (Florida), Kathy Black (NYC Schools' Chancellor), Governor Walker (Wis) and Governor Christie (NJ) will be dropped in an elementary school classroom for 1 school year. Each of them will be provided with a copy of his/her school district's curriculum, and a class of 20-25 students.

Each class will have a minimum of five learning-disabled children, three with A.D.H.D., one gifted child, and two who speak limited English. Three students will be labeled with severe behavior problems.

Each of them must complete lesson plans at least 3 days in advance, with annotations for curriculum objectives and modify, organize, or create their materials accordingly. They will be required to teach students, handle misconduct, implement technology, document attendance, write referrals, correct homework, make bulletin boards, compute grades, complete report cards, document benchmarks, communicate with parents, and arrange parent conferences. They must also stand in their doorway between class changes to monitor the hallways.

In addition, they will complete fire drills, tornado drills, and [Code Red] drills for shooting attacks each month.

They must attend workshops, faculty meetings, and attend curriculum development meetings. They must also tutor students who are behind and strive to get their 2 non-English speaking children proficient enough to take the SOLS tests. If they are sick or having a bad day they must not let it show.

Each day they must incorporate reading, writing, math, science, and social studies into the program. They must maintain discipline and provide an educationally stimulating environment to motivate students at all times. If all students do not wish to cooperate, work, or learn, the teacher will be held responsible.

Contestants will only have access to the public golf course on the weekends, but with their new salary they will not be able to afford it. There will be no access to vendors who want to take them out to lunch, and lunch will be limited to thirty minutes, which is not counted as part of their work day. They will be permitted to use a student restroom, as long as another survival candidate can supervise their class.

If the copier is operable, they may make copies of necessary materials before, or after, school. However, they cannot surpass their monthly limit of copies. They must also continually advance their education, at their expense, and on their own time.

The winner of this Season of Survivor will be allowed to return to their job.


*Note: This is, of course, satirical.

Wachovia and Other Disasters - Where is the Outrage?

a Katie Foley rant

There's a lot of outrage lately. People are outraged that insurance companies may be forced to continue covering someone who gets sick. Others are outraged about the acceptance of things outside of the Biblical mainstream, thinking that the whole "Freedom of Religion" thing was clearly meant as "Freedom of Religion(s that do not threaten Christianity's dominance or freak us out)." Some are outraged that openly gay service members will now be tolerated because their sons may become the targets of sexual assault - never mind that the nation's daughters experience rape while serving in the military at twice the rate of their civilian counterparts. [1]

  

With so much outrage flying about I think one topic has seriously lacked the attention that it deserves, and that is the lack of penal accountability for the outright fraud committed by many banks over the past decade. Numerous investigations have revealed that that banks cut corners at the front end, misrepresenting information on up to 70% of the loan applications involved in the Early Payment Defaults - those that lost their homes when they could not afford their adjustable rate mortgage anymore. [2]

Then banks didn't agree to negotiate lower payments with mortgagees until Congress told them they had to by establishing the Making Homes Affordable program. [3] Next we find out that banks often could not find the proper legal paperwork for many of the transactions involving the sale of mortgage backed securities, causing  delays in countless foreclosure proceedings.  Then we find out that the documents, though once missing, have been found - except that they are themselves fraudulent.  The fraud spanned from erroneous dates and non-existent mortgage companies to forging the signatures of non-existent bank vice presidents.[4]

  

These are things that banks did to people's homes.  Now we find out that the actions of one, Wachovia Bank (purchased by Wells Fargo as a result of the 2008 mortgage meltdown) may have actually facilitated murder by laundering billions of dollars for Mexican cocaine cartels.  According to The Guardian, U.S. authorities from multiple agencies 

"uncovered billions of dollars in wire transfers, traveller's cheques and cash shipments through Mexican exchanges into Wachovia accounts.  Wachovia was put under immediate investigation for failing to maintain an effective anti-money laundering programme. Of special significance was that the period concerned began in 2004, which coincided with the first escalation of violence along the U.S.-Mexico border that ignited the current drug wars."

The criminal charges levied under the Bank Secrecy Act were settled out of court, with punishment being a deferred prosecution agreement (now expired) and "$110 million in forfeiture, for allowing transactions later proved to be connected to drug smuggling, and...a $50 million fine for failing to monitor cash used to ship 22 tons of cocaine." [5]

  

To put this into perspective, let's look at the consequences of cocaine possession.  Under Minnesota law, if you possess enough cocaine to equal the weight of two tablespoons of water (25 grams) you can be imprisoned for up to 30 years.  Wachovia laundered $378.4 billion which helped cover the cost of shipping 22 tons of cocaine and were fined less than 2% of Wells Fargo's 2009 profits [6] So, in review, 25 grams =  30 years in prison; providing the laundering service for $378.4 billion used to ship 22 tons of cocaine = a swat on the rear end (you can't even call it a spanking) and a "shame on you" fine. If we are to accept corporations as persons then I demand that they, too, be treated equally under the law - including laws related to criminal culpability and punishment.

  

There is evidence of one fraudulent action after another coming out of the banking crisis that lead to the Great Depression 2.0; one family after another watched their American dream shatter into a million pieces because of the greed sitting around bank boardroom tables. Now we find out that at least one bank may have flouted international and federal banking laws to the tune of $378 billion during a time when those benefiting from the bank's actions were engaged in one of the most violent drug-related street wars in recent history.  Not only that, but said bank had reason to know exactly what it was doing.  

  

No person, corporations included, should be above accountability for his/her/its complicity in a violent criminal enterprise. We give corporations tax breaks, they have the people creating the laws in their pockets and now even the courts have found corporations to be somehow less deserving of punishment for their engagement in conduct that is outright criminal.  Banks are a prime example of how we have allowed corporations to get out of control. 

  

Where is the outrage? People are shouting about distrusting the government - at least the government has some level of transparency and is accountable to the people.  Rather than blanket distrust of the government we should demand that our government "for the people" encompass only naturally born people, not corporate people.  At the very least we can hold corporations such as Wachovia as accountable as Mark Dayton would be if he helped launder billions of dollars for a Mexican cocaine cartel.  

[1] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1968110,00.html
[2] http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/mortgage-fraud-2006
[3] For more information on this communist plot, visit http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov
[4] http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110404/bs_yblog_thelookout/the-foreclosure-mess-isnt-going-away I recommended watching the clip from 60 Minutes
[5] Both quotes are from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs
[6] https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=152.021; http://www.asknumbers.com/tonnes-to-grams.aspx; http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs 

From the desk of Al Franken

The Effects the Proposed Federal Budget Could Have on Minnesotans


SD 50 Chair Bill Krueger wrote to Sen. Al Franken regarding the federal budget and the fiscal priorities being set by the President and Congress.  Al responded to Bill, who asked that the response be posted to this blog.  Al's response is below.  At the end Al refers to H.F. 1, which can be found here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c112:3:./temp/~c112f6veC1::


Dear Bill,

Thank you for contacting me about the federal budget.  I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this matter of critical importance to our nation.

As you may know, our country faces a tremendous challenge in getting our fiscal house in order.  Our debt has grown for decades under Congresses and Presidents of both parties.  And while it's easy to agree that we should cut government spending, it's much harder to agree on what we should cut.  We can't just say, "Let's cut $500 billion" or make vague promises about "increasing efficiency."  Cutting spending means choosing programs we currently spend money on, and deciding to stop spending money on them.  These decisions have real impacts on Minnesotans.

The President's budget does a good job of keeping our priorities in order while getting our deficits under control.  It would freeze non-security domestic spending across the board for five years, which would result in $400 billion in savings over the next decade.  I also believe the President's budget makes the right decision by continuing to invest in education, innovation, and infrastructure-areas key to creating jobs and growing our economy.

That being said, I worry that a few of the specific cuts proposed by the President will hurt Minnesotans disproportionately, particularly cuts to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).  These cuts would mean that nearly 50,000 households in Minnesota could lose assistance and have to choose between food or heat next winter.  Anyone who's lived through a Minnesota winter knows that you simply can't go without heat.  As the budget process moves forward, I will fight to keep full funding for LIHEAP.

But while the President's budget generally hits the right mark, the spending legislation recently passed in the House, H.R. 1, puts our entire economy at risk.  H.R. 1 would slash vital programs in an indiscriminate and ideological way.  Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Analytics and advisor to Senator John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, has estimated that H.R. 1 would cause the loss of 700,000 jobs by the end of 2012 if it were enacted.  Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs estimates that 2 percent of our nation's GDP would be wiped out by H.R. 1. During a fragile recovery, we can't be making indiscriminate or ideologically-driven cuts that will cost us jobs when we need them most.

Most troubling of all, H.R. 1 would take a meat cleaver to programs that disproportionately affect Minnesotans. I've heard from tens of thousands of Minnesotans who say these cuts would have a direct impact on their families and their livelihoods.  H.R. 1 would slash funding for job training programs at a time when 3,000 Minnesotans are on a waiting list to get trained and find new employment.  $1.1 billion in funding for Head Start would be cut, denying thousands of Minnesota children the chance to get their educations started right.  $1.6 billion in health research funding would be lost, delaying clinical trials and costing Minnesota good-paying medical research jobs.  All funding for high speed rail would be cut, and transportation grants that have funded projects like the Central Corridor Light Rail would be gutted.  These are cuts we simply cannot afford to make.

As you may know, Congress recently passed legislation that averted a government shutdown for three weeks.  That came after Congress passed a similar bill funding the government for two weeks.  Combined, these two measures made roughly $10 billion in spending cuts to federal programs.  However, making further cuts requires us to look at broader reforms, and I've proposed several that will significantly bring down our long-term deficits.

First, the government doesn't negotiate prices directly with drug companies under Medicare.  The Department of Veterans Affairs does, and for the ten most prescribed drugs, the VA pays about half as much.  Getting rid of the rule preventing Medicare from negotiating would save up to $240 billion over ten years.  Likewise, the oil industry already enjoys enormous profits, and yet still receives huge subsidies and tax breaks.  Many of these tax giveaways don't even help with domestic oil production.  Cutting these would save $64 billion over ten years.  And lastly, when the military says it doesn't need or want something, we should listen.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said the military doesn't need the F-35 alternate engine, the Marine Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, or the Non-Line of Sight Launch System.  Simply not buying these items will save us billions of dollars.

I hope we'll be able to put our differences aside and find a way forward in addressing our nation's long-term deficits.  Minnesotans' jobs-and our place in the global economy-depend on it.

Again, thank you for contacting me, and please don't hesitate to do so in the future regarding this or any other matter of concern to you.

Sincerely,

Al Franken
United States Senator