Sunday, April 11, 2010

How to Fix the New York State Budget


The following is a letter that appeared in the Albany Times Union newspaper with the exception of the last paragraph on war spending; this they cut. All solutions that are being project by the media and the politicians to fix the state budget are solutions that fall on the backs of working people and the poor such as tuition increases at the State Universities, layoffs of state workers or asking them for give backs or decreasing the amount of school aid. This letter takes a different approach

In the April 1 article “Paterson warns of ‘massive’ state layoffs,” the governor is reported as proposing delaying the 4 percent raise due to state workers. Once again working people are asked to assume the entire burden of a financial crisis that we had no hand in creating. In reality, there is no budget crisis; we are the richest country in the world and can afford a bigger share of the pie for the working people and the poor.

Why not ask the rich to assume a fairer share of the burden? Over the past years, tax rates have been significantly flattened in favor of the rich so they pay a New York State tax rate not that much different than the poorest New Yorkers. Let’s tax the rich.


While an Albany resident pays 8% tax when they buy a shirt, the less than 1% tax on a stock trade is completely rebated to the payer. Let’s tax stock trades.
According to a Government Accountability Office study, 2/3 of corporate taxes are not paid as Corporations seek tax shelters and other gimmicks to avoid paying taxes. Let’s tax the greedy corporations.

While our state claims a budget deficit of 13 to 18 billion dollars, our state’s share for the illegal and immoral wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is over $87 billion. Let’s end the wars.

Anyone of these alternatives can save our schools, save our jobs and save our state, but it seems that all options that don’t put the entire burden on working people and the poor are off the table


References:
2/3 of corporations pay no taxes: http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/12/news/economy/corporate_taxes/

States cost for war spending: http://www.costofwar.com/

Tax on stock trades is rebated to the payer: http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/stocktransfertax.pdf

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Left/Right dialogue on War




In Albany, the left and the Tea Party folks have been having a dialogue. So far there have been 3 forums, the first on health care the second on climate change and the third on war. Below is my 5 minute opening remarks as part of the panel for the left side of the discussion on war.

Years ago, when I worked against the Vietnam War, the political and economic context of our struggle was very different than it is today. During Vietnam, for example, we had a growth economy; people were able to get jobs; factories were booming. Today, few factories exist in the US. There are few options for young people other than the military. Today, we have an economic draft instead of a real draft as during Vietnam.

Also the cost of today’s wars fall more on the backs of working people and the poor than during Vietnam. Back then, taxes on corporate profits accounted for over 30% of the total tax revenue; today they accounts for less than 8%. Today, nearly 2/3 of all Corporations-- because of tax havens and other tax trickery -- pay no taxes. The tax structure was also much more progressive in the 1960s and 70s with the highest earners paying more of a fair share of the taxes. Today the tax rates have been significantly flattened putting more of a burden on working people and the poor. The disparity between the rich and the poor has increased in the US to the point where today the top 1% is wealthier than the bottom 95%. As the burden of paying for these illegal and immoral wars falls more and more on working people and the poor we see failing state budgets, cuts to social services and deterioration to our country’s infrastructure.

Military expenditures in the US are more than those of all the rest of the countries in the world combined. They account for more than 50% of our present federal budget. Yet, in these hard economic times as people are losing their homes, their healthcare and their jobs, Obama tells us in the state of the Union address that everything will be frozen or cut, except for the military. I think he has his priorities backwards.

The flight of US industry from US shores to find cheaper resources and labor, with no unions, and no environmental or health and safety regulations -- a process known as globalization -- has required new military thinking. To protect US corporate interests abroad we now have our military in over 135 countries with over 800 permanent, foreign military bases. Our now globalized economy will mean permanent war as the US corporate controlled government seeks to protect US corporate interests abroad. As native populations in these countries seek to reclaim their national resources and wealth for the people or their own counties, they will be accused of terrorism and so, as Bush told us, we will have a permanent war on terror. War will be a permanent part of the politics in this country from now on and so the anti-war movement must become a permanent part of politics in opposition to these policies of exploitation and violence.

The war on terror is a fiction. No country can stand against the military might of the US in a battle field as in WWI and WWII. So the wars will be more guerilla warfare with small irregular bands of people seeking to protect their families and communities from US invasions and occupations and foreign corporate exploitation. As the US violently suppresses those who fight back, more anger and resistance will be engendered causing an ever increasing spiral of violence. We will not end terrorism with war we will only end it with peace and collaboration for the good of all. But peace and collaboration stand in stark contrast to the US corporate grab for foreign resources, markets and cheap labor.

The fake war on terror has also justified attacks on our civil liberties at home and abroad. We have seen the continuation of the policies of the Bush administration of warrantless wiretaps, secrecy, arrests without charges and trials with secret evidence. We have seen the scrapping of Geneva Accords, a continuation of black sites, extraordinary renditions and torture. All of this does not end terror; it is terror and gives justification to those who seek violent opposition to the US and its policies.

So, the anti-war movement must continue to connect the dots between the wars, the economic crisis, the attacks on civil liberties and other policies that are affected by these wars. In building the anti-war movement we must insure that our strategy and tactics flow from the idea that while these wars may be in the interest of the multi-national corporations and the few at the top, they are not in the interest of the vast majority of the people of this country or around the world. Therefore, our movement must seek international ties and employ tactics that involve the masses of people for whom war is not in their interest. These tactics must put at their center mass mobilizations that seek to bring these people into political motion instead of having them sit on the sidelines waiting for their political leaders or others to end the wars.

To this end, there will be a mass demonstration in Washington March 20, the 7th anniversary of the war on Iraq. Please see people at the Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace table to get a seat on the bus

Additionally, this summer on July 23 – 25, there will be an historic unity conference in Albany of the national anti-war movement more details will follow soon.

Joe Lombardo

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Haiti

It must be a tremendous insult to the Haitian people that president Obama appointed George W. Bush along with Bill Clinton to head up relief efforts for Haiti. Although Clinton has a dubious history with Haiti too, Bush is seen as the enemy of Haiti by a great number of people in that country. It was under the Bush administration that the US military was sent to Haiti in the middle of the night to kidnap their elected president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2004. Aristide was put on a US military plane and dropped in the Central African Republic and left there. Aristide had been a very popular president but one the US government didn’t like because of his anti-globalization stand and his insistence that Haiti’s resources and production to be used to better the Haitian people not the multi-national corporations.

Bush also had less than a good record for his administrations response in New Orleans after hurricane Katrina. There, mercenaries from the Blackwater corporation along with National Guard were sent in to keep order as a priority over meeting the needs of the people. The same seems to be happening in Haiti today.

As many are calling for the return of Aristide as a way of unifying the country, the US has sent in the military, supposedly in a humanitarian mission. Other countries did not send their militaries; they sent doctors and disaster recovery experts. The first move the US military did was to take over the airport. As stated in an AP article on January 18, 2010, “Some aid groups and foreign officials have blamed the U.S. military for slowing down aid deliveries, saying the American units that took charge of the small Port-au-Prince airport last week gave priority to U.S. military flights.” In a country where possibly 200,000 have died, where the people are in great need of aid the US is emphasizing security. Is the US afraid that the Haitian government has collapsed and the people might rise up and overthrow the US supported government and perhaps bring back Aristide?

Maybe, with his record in Iraq, Afghanistan and New Orleans, Obama sees Bush as just the right man for the job.

Sunday, January 17, 2010

AVATAR

Yes, the 3D in the movie AVATAR was incredible as was the world created as the backdrop for the story. But mostly, I liked the politics.

Here is the story where the natives win. It is a story where the invasion and occupation of a foreign land for mineral rights and profit is defeated and the destruction of the environment for profit does not succeed as the entire planet rises up to defeat the invaders and destroyers.

We have all heard of the effort of a true genius, James Cameron, who spent year envisioning this movie and waiting for the technology to catch-up with his ideas. But politically, this movie could not have been produced at any other time. It came out just as the Copenhagen talks on climate change were concluding with an agreement by the rich countries to continue to destroy the planet for profit. It came out as the US is escalating the war in Afghanistan with powerful technologies that the native people of Afghanistan can not match. The themes in AVATAR are exactly parallel.

These themes of US aggression and environmental destruction were not coincidental. This was shown by one of the characters referring to the invasion of the planet as “Shock and Awe,” the term used by the Bush administration to describe the US invasion of Iraq.

Part of the genius of Cameron was how he got the viewer on the side of the indigenous people and against the greed and violence of the corporation and the American mercenaries. Though it was not stated, these were clearly Americans, the shots are called by the representative of the corporation that is trying to exploit the minerals on the planet and the soldiers are clearly mercenaries similar to the Blackwater mercenary bands that have been running lawlessly through Iraq and Afghanistan.

So, the movie is a must see for every science fiction fan and everyone trying to save our environment and bring about a peaceful world.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

What is Democracy?

I, along with a number of activists in the Albany area, have formed a socialist discussion group in which we read material and hold a discussion on the reading and issues of the day. One new member of our group e-mailed me and asked my opinion on democracy. He asked if there are any examples of democratic functioning states. He also suggested that it might be good to have a 4th branch of government comprised of scientist and other experts who might be better able to respond to climate change and similar issues. Below is my response to his e-mail.

Your e-mail brings up many questions. First of all, I don’t think that we need a panel of experts, such as scientists, as a 4th branch of government. I think that if people were given the facts, we can make decisions that are in our own interest and the interest of all. This is why there is secrecy in our country, they don’t want people to know the truth, it would expose too much. They don’t want people to see the pictures of torture or hear the facts about global warming, etc. Too often we are told that we are too stupid to make decisions for ourselves. This is one way they take democracy away from us; they tell us to leave it in the hands of the experts or the politicians.

I think there have been very few examples of a true democracy in the modern world. In fact, maybe you can’t have a true democracy in a class society because the ruling class, if it is a minority, as in this country, would not want to see its power taken away. On the other hand, if the working class truly took power, the only way we could rule would be democratically because we are the vast majority. There is actually a lot more to talk about here like what happened in the Soviet Union, etc., but that would better be discussed at another time because there is a long history about this.

Although there have been no real models of democracy in the modern world, there have been many attempts that give us a glimpse of what a true democracy might look like. The Paris Commune, where workers took over Paris and parts of France before being crushed by invading armies was one example. Some attempts in Cuba, Nicaragua and other places helped give us a glimpse of what democracy could look like. Basically, Marxist don’t typically equate voting and democracy, like we do in the US. Voting is part of democracy. But in most other industrial countries they have a better system of voting such as proportional representation, requirements for equal access to the media and less involvement of money. In the US, you have to be rich or supported by the rich to run for national office. This is a filter that insures the interests of the rich will be those represented by the government.

In some of the places mentioned above, they tried to organize people on a block by block level. In Cuba, these block committees were called Committees for the Defense of the Revolution. They discuss everything from health care and education in their communities to international politics. They then elect representatives to committees organized on a regional level who elect people to the national level. These are in addition to direct national elections. Additionally, they helped organize women’s organization, labor, farmers, youth and other constituency groups. These groups discuss issues related to their constituencies and also elect people to the regional and national governing bodies.

Additionally, Cuba included the right to have a union as a democratic right. The right to a job is also seen as a democratic right. There are many other areas, besides elections where equality needs to be seen as a democratic right.

I have a friend at work who comes from China. He and many others at our work had a big problem with one of our managers. But nothing could be done about it. Work in the US is a dictatorship. He told me in China, if the workers did not like a manager they would have a meeting and decide that the manager was not good and would be able to get rid of him. In the US, he says, you can criticize the president, which you can’t do in China, but you can not criticize your manager, which you can do in China. Perhaps, if we did not have a capitalist society where work means making a profit for the boss, we would be able to criticize our manager too.

So, I think that in a socialist society, democracy would mean something very different. Since we grew up in a capitalist society we think of it as being the same as voting. In the original US constitution, only white men who owned property could vote. Later, through amendments we allowed all adults citizens to vote. After an uprising the first amendment was added to the constitution which included other rights like the right to free speech and assembly, which we now call democratic rights, but were not there in the beginning. But in a socialist society, we may add the right to housing, healthcare, a job, the right for women to control their own bodies, the right for gays to marry, etc.

Also, in a non-hierarchical society the entire idea of democracy would be different and less adversarial.

So, that’s a longer answer to your e-mail than I intended, but much shorter than needed. Perhaps it would be a good topic to discuss at one of our meetings.

Joe Lombardo

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Meeting of the National Assembly

For the last 4 days, I was in San Francisco for a meeting of the coordinating committee of the National Assembly to End the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and Occupations. Of the 45 members of the coordinating committee, about 30 people from across the country were present (we also hold meetings once per month by phone conference). One member of the coordinating committee who was not present was Lynne Stewart. As you know, Lynne, a now-disbarred attorney, is in jail, having been convicted of aiding terrorism for defending her client, who was accused of being involved with the plot to bomb the World Trade Center in 1993. (For more information on that case and Lynne’s situation, please go to www.lynnestewart.com.) The group gathered at the meeting sent Lynne a note of support, and each of us who know her also wrote a personal note. Mine was also from the Muslim Solidarity Committee, a group that she always thought was doing exemplary work. Lynne let us know that she would like protests at federal buildings on her behalf. People who want to send her a message can write to: Lynne Stewart, 53504-054, MCC-NY, 150 Park Row, New York, NY 10007.

There were two important points that came out of the meeting. The first is that we decided to endorse the call from the ANSWER coalition to have demonstrations on March 20 to commemorate the 7th anniversary of the Iraq War. The National Assembly would have preferred that the ANSWER coalition not put out this call unilaterally but rather to work in conjunction with other national anti-war groups, including the National Assembly, before deciding what to do on the 7th anniversary of the Iraq war. But in the interest of promoting unity in the anti-war movement—a principle that the National Assembly was founded on--we agreed to support and build this action and to try to get other forces to join us.

The second point of importance that came out of the meeting was that we agreed to hold our 3rd national conference in Albany, New York on July 23rd-25th, 2010. This means that national leaders along with hundreds of peace activists from around the country will be coming to meet in Albany. Also present will be members of the peace and progressive movements from other countries. The main function of the National Assembly conference is to assess the state of the movement and to decide on a program of actions during the upcoming period. This will occur during plenary sessions where everyone present will have voice and vote. Additionally, there will be workshops and a large public meeting on Saturday night, along with a panel discussion on Friday. Besides having a fairly strong peace movement in the Capital District, we have done some very good defense work with Muslims who have been attacked in our area and have done some important work with Iraqi refugees. It would be important to showcase this work for the rest of the country and international guests.

The San Francisco meeting also heard reports and discussed situations in Iraq, Afghanistan/Pakistan, Palestine, and Honduras. In addition, we had a discussion on the current state of the anti-war movement. As we all know, the anti-war movement is at a low point. Some of the national groups are not functioning well, if at all. Despite polls that continue to show that the majority are against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and occupations, anti-war demonstrations and rallies have been much smaller recently than in the past. On October 17, demonstrations took place in 54 cities around the country, but all of them were small. However, discontent with U.S. policies is growing, especially given the present economic environment. We can expect to see a surge in Afghanistan soon, and cities all across the country are preparing a response. The National Assembly believes that this is a very important moment when we must continue to build anti-war organizations and activities in preparation for what we believe will be an inevitable explosion of anti-war sentiment and activity as the wars continue and the honeymoon with the Obama administration ends.

You have probably heard about the explosion of protests on the California campuses after the California a 33% tuition increase was announced. While in California, I was able to take two trips to the Berkley campus, where students have been demonstrating and occupying buildings. These activities are going on throughout the state. The students tie their protest in to the issue of the war using slogans like “Money for schools not for war.” They are also chanting, “This is what democracy looks like,” and “The people united will never be defeated.” Some can argue that the birth of the student movement of the 60s and 70s began with the Berkley Free Speech movement. The students are also aware of the connection of their movement to the plight of union workers who are being laid off; the biggest cheers at their rally came when some fired janitors spoke. Teachers and other workers throughout California are suffering from the cutbacks and protesting too. California reflects the future of all states across the country, as our nation's corporate elite try to shift more and more wealth from the working people and the poor to the corporations and the already obscenely rich. People working on all issues, from war to healthcare to tuition hikes, need to come together and join in one fight against a common enemy. With this understanding in mind, the National Assembly sent a message of support to the striking students.

There are many union activists on the coordinating committee of the national assembly, included the presidents of two state-wide labor federations. The group took note of the resolution that came from our own Troy Area Labor Council calling for the AFL-CIO leadership to organize a mass action around the issues of jobs, the war, and health care. A similar call was passed by the Wisconsin state AFL-CIO federation, the San Francisco Labor Council and a number of other labor groups. We see such calls as extremely hopeful signs and as a way forward for the movement as a whole. They point toward our developing a real fight-back against the attacks being directed at the American people today. The Albany conference in 2010 will be a very important step in that direction, as well. I hope all activists in our area will join me in building this conference.

Peace,
Joe Lombardo

Monday, October 12, 2009

Health Care Costs

The following is a letter of mine that was in the Albany Times Union today. The letter is on healthcare costs and advocates for a single payer solution. The only piece that the editors took out of my letter was a sentence where I supported my statement that the insurance executives get "over-the-top salaries and bonuses" by using the example of Stephen Hemsley, CEO of United Healthcare who makes $102,742.00 per hour


Health plan may benefit wealthy
First published: Monday, October 12, 2009

In "Health costs hit home" (Oct. 3), the Times Union reports that
health care costs will rise steeply again this year. This is at the
same moment when health care reform bills are making their way through Congress without serious consideration being given to single-payer health care or even the nebulous public option.

With the way things are headed, it looks like people who can barely
afford the co-pay for a visit to their doctor will be mandated to buy
a defective and exorbitant health insurance policy or else face a
fine. This is a huge giveaway to the health insurance industry and,
like the recent corporate bailouts, is essentially another transfer of
wealth from working people and the poor to the rich.

A recent study comparing the U.S. health care system to that of five
other industrial countries, reported by the New York Daily News,
concludes that ours is twice as costly per capita as any of the others
and has worse outcomes, to boot. The other five countries all have
some form of single-payer system.

The high cost of health care in the U.S. is the direct result of
greedy insurance companies, with their high overhead and over-the-top salaries and bonuses for their executives.

Health care costs more in this country than any place else on the
planet because we put the profits of the corporations above the needs of the people. The only way to remove the insurance companies -- the Number One enemy of meaningful health care reform in this country -- from the equation is to adopt a single payer system.

Joe Lombardo