Peoples Strengthen Resistance by Defending the Rights of All
•
Call to Action: Close Guantánamo Now!
• Actions Around the Globe to Close Guantánamo
• Struggle for the Right to Housing Goes Forward in the Face of Tasers, Pepper Spray, and Arrests
• Myths and Facts About Public Housing in New Orleans
Elections 2008
• Primaries Organized to Limit Choice and Block Voters from Decision Making
• Obama, Huckabee Make Gains in Iowa
• Anti-War Bus Tour to Precede NH Primary
•
Civil Disobedience at Presidential Campaign Offices
•
Parties Running Candidates for President
• Fighting for Ballot Access
January 11 International Day of Action
Call to Action: Close Guantánamo Now!
“Immediately close the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and either release its inmates or bring them before an impartial tribunal.” — United Nations Human Rights Commission
We declare January 11, 2008 — six years after the first prisoners arrived at Guantánamo — an International Day of Action to Shut Down Guantánamo. In Washington, DC, we will hold a permitted demonstration at the National Mall followed by an orange jumpsuit procession to the Supreme Court. There will also be solidarity demonstrations in Chicago, Miami, London and Paris, with more being added every day. We invite you to come to Washington and participate, or join or plan an action in your own community. We also encourage people around the world to wear orange t-shirts, armbands or other orange clothing on January 11 to mark the date.
Join Us in Washington, DC
Friday, January 11, 11:00am. (National Mall).
The day involves several elements:
Demonstration at the National Mall: Witness Against Torture has teamed up with Amnesty International and the National Religious Campaign Against Torture to hold a permitted demonstration on the National Mall at 11:00am. (Gather at 12th St. NW between Madison Dr NW & Jefferson Drive SW - near the Smithsonian Metro Stop.)
“Prisoners of Guantánamo March:” Hundreds of people marched in last year’s procession. The march involves a provocative street theater performance with people wearing orange jump suits and black hoods. We will march from the National Mall to the Supreme Court in an orderly silent procession hauntingly evoking the moral disgrace that is Guantánamo. With your help, we will form a prisoner contingent including as many protesters as there are prisoners.
Funeral Ceremony at the Supreme Court: Following the procession to the Supreme Court, we will hold a Funeral Ceremony to remember the four men who died in custody at Guantánamo and to mourn the death of Habeas Corpus. Like last year, some may choose to risk arrest. For up-to-date details as well as information about housing, food, rides and directions, legal support and much more, please visit our website at www.WitnessTorture.org.
Wear Orange on January 11!
Wherever you are on January 11, we encourage you to wear orange to raise public awareness and strengthen the movement to demand an end to torture and indefinite detention.
Attend or Organize an Action in Your Community
If you cannot join us in Washington D.C., consider attending or organizing a vigil, march or public forum in your community. Actions are currently planned in 30 cities, including New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Miami, London, Paris and elsewhere.
Who We Are
Two years ago Witness Against Torture drew international attention after it walked to Guantánamo to visit the prisoners. Upon its return, the group has organized vigils, marches, nonviolent direct actions and educational events to expose and decry the administration’s lawlessness, build awareness about torture and indefinite detention, and forge human ties with the prisoners at Guantánamo and their families.
A broad variety of organizations, including anti-war, civil and human rights, religious and political organizations are endorsing and organizing the January 11 Day of Action.
[TOP]
Actions Around the Globe to Close Guantánamo
A list of cities that are organizing events on January 11 International Day of Action.
Amherst, Boston, and Northampton, Massachusetts
Boise, Idaho
Budapest, Hungary
Chicago, Springfield, Illinois
Columbia, Missouri
Columbus, Ohio
Corvallis, Oregon
Dallas, Texas
Dublin, Ireland
Edinburgh, Scotland
Ft. Huachuca, Phoenix, Tucson, Arizona
London, England
Miami, Naples Florida
Montclair, New Jersey
New York City, Saratoga Springs, New York
Newcastle, Australia
Norwich, Connecticut
Paris, France
Philadelphia, West Chester, Pennsylvania
San Francisco, California
Shepherdstown, West Virginia
Sydney, Australia
Telluride, Colorado
Warsaw, Poland
Washington, DC
Worldwide, January 7 vigils at Al Jazeera offices in solidarity with Al Jazeera journalist Sami El Haj, held at Guantánamo since 2002, without charges or trial.[TOP]
Locked Outside of Public City Council Meeting
Struggle for the Right to Housing Goes Forward in the Face of Tasers, Pepper Spray, and Arrests
In a remarkable symbol of the injustices of post-Katrina reconstruction, hundreds of people were locked out of a public New Orleans City Council meeting addressing demolition of 4500 public housing apartments. Some were tasered, many pepper sprayed and a dozen arrested.
Outside the chambers, iron gates were chained and padlocked even before the scheduled start.
The scene looked like one of those countries on TV that is undergoing a people’s revolution — and the similarities were only beginning. (See video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMBWAXfGsc4)
Dozens of uniformed police secured the gates and other entrances. Only developers and those with special permission from council members were allowed in — the rest were kept locked outside the gates. Despite dozens of open seats in the council chambers, pleas to be allowed in were ignored.
Chants of “Housing is a human right!” and “Let us in!” thundered through the concrete breezeway.
Public housing residents came and spoke out despite an intense campaign of intimidation. Residents were warned by phone that if they publicly opposed the demolitions they would lose all housing assistance. Residents opposed to the demolition had simple demands: If the authorities insisted on spending hundreds of millions to tear down hundreds of structurally sound buildings containing 4,500 public housing subsidized apartments, there should be a guarantee that every resident could return to a similarly subsidized apartment. Alternatively, the government should use the hundreds of millions to repair the apartments so people could come home. Neither alternative was acceptable to HUD. A plan of residents to partner with the AFL- CIO Housing Trust to save their homes was also ignored.
Outside, SWAT team members and police in riot gear and on horses began to arrive as rain started falling. Those locked out included public housing residents, a professor from Southern University, graduate students, the Episcopal Bishop of Louisiana, ministers, lawyers, law students, homeless people who lived in tents across the street from city hall, affordable housing allies from across the country and dozens of others.
Inside the chambers, Revered Torin Sanders and others insisted that the locked out be allowed to come and stand inside along the walls — a common practice for over 30 years. No one could recall any City Council locking people out of a public meeting. The request to allow people to stand was denied. The council then demanded silence from those inside. Those who continued to demand that the others be let in were pointed out by police, physically taken down and arrested. Ironically, some young men were tasered right in front of the speaker’s podium.
This was a meeting the council had repeatedly tried to avoid. It was only held after residents (100 percent African American and nearly all mothers and grandmothers) got an emergency court order stopping demolitions until the council acted. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced long ago it was going to demolish 4500 public housing apartments — despite the Katrina crisis of affordable housing and no matter what anyone said. HUD had no plans to ask the council or anyone else for approval. The judge said otherwise, so the meeting was scheduled.
Leaders of the U.S. Congress, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, asked that the decision be delayed 60 days so they could try to move forward on Senate Bill 1668 which would resolve many of the demolition problems. This request was backed by New Orleans Congressman William Jefferson, Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu and presidential candidates John Edwards and Barack Obama.
Opponents cited the affordable housing crisis in New Orleans. Homeless people are camped across from City Hall and for blocks under the interstate. The number of homeless people has doubled since Katrina. Thousands of residents in FEMA trailers across the Gulf Coast are being evicted.
Solidarity demonstrations opposing demolition were held in Washington, DC, New York, Oakland, Minneapolis, Houston, North Carolina, Maine, Philadelphia, Cleveland, New Jersey, and Boston. Thousands of people across the country contacted city council members. Dozens of community, housing and human rights groups petitioned the council not to demolish until there was an enforceable requirement of one for one replacement of housing.
But hours before the meeting began, a majority of the council publicly announced on the front page of the local paper that they were going to approve demolition no matter what people said at the meeting. The paper, the developers and others were delighted. Residents and affordable housing allies were not.
Inside, the council started the meeting surrounded by armed police, National Guard and undercover authorities from many law enforcement agencies.
Outside, those locked out could see the people who had been arrested on the inside being dragged away to police wagons. A few of the protestors then pulled open one of the gates. The police started shooting arcs of pepper spray into the crowd. A woman’s scream pierced the chaos as police fired tasers into the crowd. Medics wiped pepper spray from fallen people’s eyes. A young woman who was tasered in the back went into a seizure and was taken to the hospital.
Inside and out, a dozen people were arrested — most for “disturbing the peace.” They joined another dozen who had been arrested over the past week in protest actions against the demolitions.
The City Council meeting continued. Supporters of demolition were given careful, courteous attention and softball questions by council members. Opponents less so.
Despite pleas from displaced residents, dozens of community organizations and federal elected officials, the New Orleans City Council voted unanimously to allow demolition to proceed. In their approval the council did promise to urge HUD to listen to residents and to work for one for one replacement of affordable housing. Several city council members read from typed statements about their reasons to support demolition: the deplorable state of public housing; the lack of available money for repair; the oral promises of all, the federal government and developers, to do something better for the community.
After the meeting, residents vowed to continue their struggle for affordable housing for everyone and to resist demolitions — putting their bodies before bulldozers if necessary.
The struggle for affordable housing continues as does the campaign to stop demolition until there is a real right to return and one for one replacement of housing. Residents and local advocates applaud and appreciate the support of allies from across the nation. Critics label national supporters as “outside agitators” — exactly the same charge leveled at civil rights activists historically. But people understand that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Public housing residents and local affordable housing advocates welcome the humble participation of social justice advocates of whatever age, of whatever race, from whatever place, who join and act in solidarity.
Residents vow to make sure that the promises made by the council and the mayor are enforced. For example, the mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, announced that he would not allow HUD to demolish two of the four housing developments until HUD gave documentation of funded plans including one for one replacement of the housing demolished and details of the developments and their plans.
The Senate will continue to be lobbied to pass SB 1668 — which would really guarantee one for one replacement of housing. It is currently stalled in the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee because of opposition by Louisiana Republican Senator David Vitter.
Litigation is still pending in state and federal courts to enforce Louisiana and U.S. laws that should protect residents from illegal demolitions. Investigations into the legality of locking people out of a public meeting, the legality of a law passed at such a meeting, the indiscriminate use of tasers and pepper spray, are all ongoing.
Padlocked and chained gates will only amplify the voices of the locked out calling for justice. Pepper spray and tasers illustrate the problems but will not deter people from protesting for just causes. Bulldozers may start up, but people will resist and create a reality where housing is a real human right.
Stephanie Mingo, a working grandmother who is one of the leaders of the residents, promised to continue the resistance after the meeting: “We did not come this far to turn back now. This fight is far from over. We are not resting until everyone has the right to return home.” Those wanting additional information should look to: http://www.justiceforneworleans.org or http://www.defendneworleanspublichousing.org
Bill Quigley is a human rights lawyer and law professor at Loyola University New Orleans. Bill is part of the team of lawyers representing displaced residents of public housing. You can reach him at Quigley@loyno.edu[TOP]
Myths and Facts About Public Housing in New Orleans
The New Orleans Times-Picayune recently repeated many of the untruths propagated by the federal government’s Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) and the local Housing Authority of New Orleans (HANO). Here is a list of Myths and Facts to help people know the reality.
MYTH #1: “Federal officials, in partnership with developers, are pushing a plan that will demolish 4500 units of traditional public housing, replacing them with 3343 units of public housing and 900 market rate rental units.” Statement in Times-Picayune, 12/16/2007.
FACT: HUD is aggressively working to demolish 4500 units of traditional public housing. HUD and HANO’s own numbers state that less than 800 units of traditional public housing will be built by the developers who demolish those 4500 apartments. In order to get to the 3343 number they trumpet, HUD is actually re-counting over 2000 old public housing apartments (in Iberville, Guste, etc) which they have not yet scheduled to demolish. Thus, they are not telling the truth – they are not replacing the 4500 with 3343 at all, they are replacing the 4500 with less than 800 – an 82 percent reduction in public housing apartments.
MYTH #2: HUD is not trying to reduce the amount of public and subsidized housing in New Orleans – it is just working to try to make affordable housing available for all.
FACT: When Katrina hit, New Orleans had more than 9000 families in Section 8 subsidized apartments and 7700 public housing apartments — 5146 were occupied and the others were waiting for modernization — in all serving over 14,000 families.
Now, New Orleans has 1700 families in public housing and 4000 families on DVP vouchers — 2000 of which are being transferred into Section 8 — for a total of 5700 families, or around a third of pre-Katrina.
MYTH #3: If HANO and HUD do not start demolition right away, they will lose their tax credits.
FACT: The Louisiana Housing Finance Agency (LHFA) is the agency giving tax credits. The following is an exact quote from the LHFA to Tracie Washington: “The LHFA never required demolition by HANO by any specific date. The LHFA did not set the timeline for demolition or construction. As a matter of fact, the only deadline that LHFA mandated was the deadline for HANO to “meet carryover,” a deadline required for all tax credit properties, which was accomplished by the execution of the ground lease.
The date slated for demolition was chosen by HUD/HANO. HANO set up its own schedule/timeline, which was approved by the LHFA Board so that the state’s tax credits would not be at risk. The LHFA Board is requiring that HANO meet its own deadlines since if the housing units that are due to come online do not do so in a timely manner, the tax credits will be lost to the detriment of other housing developers who could have gotten their developments up and running and Louisiana’s citizens waiting to return to safe, affordable homes.”
Tracie also asked the following questions in writing to which the LHFA made the following responses in writing.
Q: If HANO does not commence demolition by December 18th and the LHFA takes back the tax credits, can HANO reapply for the credits next year?
Response of LHFA: “The allocation of the credits to the HANO projects has already occurred. No recapture would occur unless there is a material change in the Project Schedule that would authorize the Board to recapture the credits.”
Q: Has the LHFA granted tax credit extensions since Katrina? If so, how many? Have any of these extensions been premised on a firm deadline for the commencement of demolition?
Response of LHFA: “Yes, the LHFA has granted tax-credit extensions since the hurricanes. I’ll have to check on the number. Other than HANO, no extensions have been premised on a firm deadline for the commencement of demolition.”
Q: Currently, HANO is being sued by its clients, the residents of New Orleans public housing. Is this external lawsuit ground for an extension that is not contingent upon demolition?
Response of LHFA: “There is no statutory requirement under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code to preclude flexibility here.”
MYTH #4: Surveys of residents show they want demolition.
FACT: The survey asked residents whether they wanted brand new homes or to move back into their old apartments — a false choice. HUD and HANO have consistently refused to guarantee residents one for one replacement of public housing apartments so everyone can move back in. Of the 4500 being demolished, less than 800 will be public housing subsidized apartments — a reduction of 82 percent. The survey did not ask the real question — “Are you in favor of returning to your apartment or do you want to wait until they are torn down and new houses are built and take a chance that you will be one of the lucky 18 percent who gets to move back? It does not take an expert pollster to figure out the results of that question.
MYTH #5: There really is no housing problem, it is just outside agitators who are making it seem like New Orleans has a housing problem.
FACT: In December 2007, the national research group Policylink issued a report “Fewer Homes For Katrina’s Poorest Victims — An analysis of subsidized homes in post-Katrina New Orleans.” The report concluded that HUD and HANO have only approved resources to restore a third of the pre-Katrina stock of subsidized homes in New Orleans. The full report is available online at: http://www.policylink.org/documents/nola_fewerhomes.pdf
Laura Tuggle points out that it there are some statistics regarding additional affordable housing needs in our community. Currently, there about 6,300 families transitioning from the old FEMA/CLC rental assistance program to the new DHAP (Disaster Housing Assistance Program) in Orleans Parish. Over the next 6 months, about another 6,400 families will be forced to transition out of FEMA trailers according to a recent Times Picayune article. All those folks have to have affordable housing. Of course, Unity estimates we have about double the number of homeless people now than pre-Katrina, up from 6,000 to 12,000. If we do not have housing ready by the time the temporary Disaster Program and the temporary Rapid Rehousing Program end, we are going to have a homeless crisis out of this world come March 1, 2009.
Those supporting demolition also fail to acknowledge opposition among the faith community to demolition: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/81803_92874_ENG_HTM.htm
Public housing residents have received threatening phone calls promising that if they show up at protests, their housing assistance will be revoked. Many others are still in Houston, Atlanta and other places and cannot join the protests.
MYTH #6: People do not want to come back to New Orleans. There are hundreds of vacant empty subsidized apartments just waiting for people to move in — no one wants to take them.
FACT: At various times over the past 2 years, HUD and HANO have proclaimed that they had hundreds of vacant traditional public housing units ready to be occupied but people just did not want to come home.
Each time, these numbers were revealed to be false numbers and gross overstatements. For apartments that actually are made available, delays in filling this much smaller number of apartments were because of bureaucratic guidelines and dysfunction at HANO. HANO first offers the available apartment to its previous occupant (who is also told that they can wait for the mythical promised new apartments) — a process that usually takes 60 days; then the apartments are offered for a period of time to a select list held by HANO; only after that entire process are they offered to the displaced people from other developments.
Example #1:
HANO is recognized as perhaps the most dysfunctional public housing program in the U.S. — and HUD has been running it for years. Most of the already overworked and underpaid pre-Katrina HANO staff were let go and the few current employees are terribly overworked.
The phones do not get answered, messages are not returned, mail goes nowhere. Public housing residents, particularly those displaced outside of New Orleans, have an extremely difficult time communicating with HANO. It is very difficult to get in touch with HANO and to cut through the bureaucratic mazes to get back — but people continue to try.
Do not just take the residents’ word about these problems — consider the statement by a private landlord in a December 9, 2007 letter to the editor of the Times-Picayune:
“Dealing with the Housing Authority of New Orleans’ Section 8 Department is an unprofitable prospect. They rarely answer the telephone, return messages, answer emails or even read their postal mail. When you do speak to someone, the staff and case workers are rude and obviously overworked.
“HANO’s accounting department is a mess. Staffers deposit funds to the wrong accounts, in incorrect amounts and fail to provide a basic level of documentation and accountability.
“The HANO inspection process is a joke. The standards vary from inspector to inspector, and many criteria for immediate failure are petty and unsupported by national building codes…”
Example #2:
On December 11, 2007, HUD released a fact sheet stating that there were 300 public housing units that remain unoccupied (available at: http://www.hud.gov/news/neworleansfact.cfm). Four days later, in the Times-Picayune, December 16, 2007, HUD stated they had 162 move-in ready apartments.
Example #3:
In December 2006, HANO announced that it had a list of hundreds of “key-ready” apartments for people to move into but no one wanted to come back. In January 2007, HUD investigators determined that there was no such list and that the key ready apartments did not exist.
MYTH #7: HUD and HANO have given full and fair consideration to all points of view and have consistently told the truth.
FACT: Example #1:
On the one year anniversary of Katrina, HUD promised in writing “After the Hurricane, HANO reoccupied approximately 1,000 units at Iberville, Guste, Fischer, and River Garden (formerly St. Thomas) where damage was limited. HANO and HUD have identified another 1,000 units that were not materially affected by the hurricane and are working to temporarily reoccupy the vast majority of these units by the end of September 2006.” See http://www.hud.gov/news/katrina05response.cfm
As of today, it appears that HUD and HANO have brought about 1700 units online — 16 months past their September 2006 promise.
Example #2:
HUD promised that once HANO submitted its application for demolition, HUD would take 100 work days to carefully consider the application and make an independent determination of whether demolition of 4500 HANO apartments was legal. HANO submitted their completed application for demolition on September 20, 2007. HUD approved it September 21, 2007.
MYTH #8: It would cost much more to repair these apartments than tear them down and start over.
FACT: HANO’s own insurance company documents prove that, right after Katrina, cleaning and repairing CJ Peete apartments could be done for less than $5000 per apartment. HANO’s own documents right after Katrina also documented that the cost for repairing and modernizing apartments would be far less costly than demolishing and rebuilding. Only after HUD announced that the buildings were coming down (a decision by HUD that HANO did not participate in nor even know was coming) did well-paid consultants go back and re-work the numbers.
MYTH #9: This is all just about progress.
FACT: Nationally recognized investigative journalists have written three major articles documenting FBI investigation into corruption between HUD and HANO. Local media have given these corruption investigations little coverage at all. Contrast how much coverage is given to corruption charges against local politicians and ask why corruption at this higher level that directly impacts New Orleans is getting such soft treatment.
See the latest article at: http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/071214nj1.htm
MYTH #10: Residents of public housing just want to go back to the bad old days of failed housing.
FACT: Residents of public housing know the problems of public housing better than any drive-by critic. They also know the lack of alternatives better than any critic. There would be no $750 million for this project without the suffering of thousands of families who lived in public housing.
Many non-residents want public housing down, just so they can say something is happening in New Orleans. Lots and lots of consultants, developers, friends of public officials and others are set to get an awful lot of money. If a couple of thousand poor families are worse off — well that is regrettable but that is the price of “progress.”
Residents ask only that they not be worse off after everyone else gets their part of the $750 million. Either guarantee them one for one replacement of public housing in the new construction — or use the money to fix the apartments back up and let them come home.[TOP]
Primaries Organized to Limit Choice and
Block Voters from Decision Making
This year, for the first time, twenty-nine states will hold their primaries by February 5. On that date 23 states will vote, in primaries or caucuses, with the other six voting before that date. These 29 states include most of the larger states, like California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Florida and most of the other southern states. Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania vote after that date. Given that most candidates will be eliminated even before February 5 and that a majority of delegates will be decided by then for both parties, it is expected that a single candidate for Democrats and Republicans will emerge at that time. Thus all the votes after that point, involving almost half of all the delegates, will play little or no role.
Many of the states moved their dates earlier as they vie to keep a significant place for their state party in the selection process. As the Democrats and Republicans operate more and more as cartels, with decisions made by a gang at the top, the place of the state parties and their machines is being eliminated. In part to counter this, states are demanding an earlier date. In Florida and Michigan, for example, the state parties went against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) by moving their primaries to January. Their parties sanctioned them, with the Democrats saying the Florida and Michigan delegates would not be seated at the convention and securing agreements from the candidates not to campaign there. The Republicans cut the delegations by half.
In this manner, the RNC and DNC are arbitrarily eliminating the votes of the people of these states. They are also deciding who can and cannot participate in the voting and in what order. In a set up already designed to force candidates out after even just Iowa and New Hampshire, it can be seen that these measures further marginalize the people from any say in terms of selecting the candidates. These issues have significance as the people increasingly demand a greater say in choosing candidates and platforms, while the Democrats and Republicans increasingly block any say, including from their own state parties.
The marginalization of the people can be further seen in the reality that in general, only about 10 percent of the population votes in the primaries and caucuses held nationwide. And even this 10 percent are blocked from voting for third party candidates, as these candidates cannot get on the ballot.
In 2000, the last year that both parties held caucuses, 59,000 Democrats and 87,000 Republicans voted in Iowa, a state with 2.9 million people and about 94 percent white. In 2004, when the Republicans did not caucus, 124,000 people turned out for the Democratic caucuses. On January 3, 2008, the turn out was almost twice as large, 230,000 for Democrats. Of these, about half were participating for the first time and about one fifth were independents — additional indications that people want a say. Republican turnout was also larger than 2000, estimated at about 110,000.
While the rules vary for each state, in general, for the primaries, registered Democrats vote in the Democratic primary and registered Republicans in the Republican primary. Independents can vote in one or the other in some states, including both Iowa and New Hampshire. The primaries involve voters going to the polls and voting, like they would in a general election. The caucuses involve people meeting in their local voting precincts, discussing the various candidates, trying to influence others to vote for their preferred candidate, and then an election of delegates for that candidate for the county and then state party convention. For both caucuses and primaries, each state elects delegates to the national convention, pledged to the various candidates.
For each party, the total number of delegates given to each state is determined at the top, by the RNC and DNC. Existing elected officials, for example, are automatically delegates, states with larger numbers of elected officials may get bonus delegates, etc. These appointed delegates usually comprise about 15 percent of the total. A candidate must secure a simple majority of all delegates to secure the nomination. For Democrats that is 2,184 delegates and for Republicans it is 1,259.
In some states the delegates are distributed proportional to the vote, in others a “winner-take-all” method is used. For example, with Iowa, Barak Obama secured 38 percent of the delegates, John Edwards 30 and Hillary Clinton 29 percent. This translates into 16 delegates for Obama, 15 for Edwards and 14 for Clinton. Governor Bill Richardson secured about 2 percent of the vote but no delegates. It is not known what the rest of the Democratic candidates secured, as they did not meet the initial 15 percent threshold, their voters joined other candidates. For the Republicans, Mike Huckabee secured 34 percent, with 25 percent for Mitt Romney, 13 percent each for Fred Thompson and John McCain, 10 percent for Ron Paul and 3 percent for Rudy Giuliani. Huckabee secured 30 delegates and Romney got 7, the rest none.
This year, for both parties, a majority of delegates will have been decided with the completion of the February 5 primaries. All delegate counts are supposed to be based on the votes taken in the caucuses and primaries. However, with a few exceptions, the delegates are not required by law to do so. And it is common practice for candidates that drop out to call on their delegates to support another candidate. This shows, again, it is the candidate at the top deciding, not the voters.
For both parties, the caucus and primary process acts to eliminate choices, not provide them. Already, most third party candidates are not included. In addition, with just a few losses based on a tiny percentage of the vote, candidates drop out. For Democrats, for example, Senators Joe Biden and Christopher Dodd dropped out after just the Iowa caucus.
In addition, for Democrats, the caucus process itself acts as a mechanism to eliminate candidates. It requires that at least 15 percent of the people present at a given meeting support each candidate. If the 15 percent threshold is not reached, that group of people must select another candidate or be “undecided,” meaning they are not counted. In this manner, the candidates receiving fewer votes appear to receive none at all, giving the impression that voters reject them entirely, when in fact they may have garnered close to 15 percent of the vote. Prior to the Iowa caucus vote, both candidates Dennis Kucinich and Bill Richardson called on their voters to support Barak Obama, if they did not secure the required 15 percent. In this manner, the candidates are forced to oppose their own candidacies even before a single vote is cast and no one actually knows what level of support they did achieve.
All of these various mechanisms to exclude the people from actually selecting their own candidates are among the factors showing that the existing primary set up as an institution must be changed if people are to have a deciding vote.
Democratic primary and caucus schedule
January 2008
3 - Iowa caucus
8 - New Hampshire Primary (changed on 11/21/07 so it could move back up to first primary status; they waited to make sure Michigan would not schedule their primary even earlier than Jan 15)
15 - Michigan (on 12/01/07 the Democratic National Committee (DNC) sanctioned the state for having an earlier primary and took away their delegates)
19 - Nevada caucus (approved by DNC)
26 - South Carolina Primary (approved by DNC)
29 - Florida Primary (penalized by DNC for breaking party rules, resulted in losing their delegates and all Democratic Party candidates agreeing with the DNC to not campaign in the state)
February 2008
Super Tuesday - February 5th
Alabama, Alaska caucus, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado caucus, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho caucus, Illinois, Kansas caucus, Massachusetts, Minnesota caucus, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico caucus, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah
February 2008, continued
9 - Louisiana, Nebraska caucus, Washington caucus
10 - Maine caucus
12 - D.C., Maryland, Virginia
19 - Hawaii, Wisconsin
March 2008
4 - Ohio, Vermont, Texas
8 - Wyoming
11 - Mississippi
April-June 2008
April 22 - Pennsylvania
May 6 - Indiana, North Carolina
May 13 - West Virginia
May 20 - Kentucky, Oregon
June 1 - Puerto Rico
June 3 - Montana, South Dakota
Republican primary and caucus schedule
January 2008
3 - Iowa
5 - Wyoming Republican Convention
8 - New Hampshire Primary
15 - Michigan
19 - Nevada, South Carolina
29 - Florida
February 2008
2 - Maine
Super Tuesday - February 5th
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah
February 2008, continued
9 - Louisiana, Kansas, Washington (18 of 40)
12 - D.C., Maryland, Virginia
19 - Wisconsin, Washington (19 of 40)
The rest of 2008
March 4 - Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Texas
March 11 - Mississippi
April 22 - Pennsylvania
May 6 - Indiana, North Carolina
May 13 - West Virginia, Nebraska
May 17 - Maine
May 20 - Kentucky, Oregon
May 27 - Idaho
June 3 - South Dakota, Montana, New Mexico
June 6 - Hawaii
June 28 - Nebraska
Later events
• August 25 to August 28, 2008 - 2008 Democratic National Convention, in Denver.
• September 1 to September 4, 2008 - 2008 Republican National Convention, held in Saint Paul, Minnesota.
• November 6, 2008 - Election Day.
• December 15, 2008 - Members of the U.S. Electoral College meet in each state to cast their votes for President.
• January 6, 2009 - Electoral votes officially tallied before both Houses of Congress.
• January 20, 2009 - Inauguration Day.
[TOP]
Obama, Huckabee Make Gains in Iowa
Barak Obama for the Democrats and Mike Huckabee for the Republicans emerged as the candidates with more votes in the Iowa caucuses January 3. According to news reports, Obama secured about 38 percent of the vote, John Edwards 30 percent, Hillary Clinton 29 percent and Bill Richardson 2 percent. For Republicans Huckabee secured 34 percent, with 25 percent for Mitt Romney, 13 percent each for Fred Thompson and John McCain, 10 percent for Ron Paul and 3 percent for Rudy Giuliani. It can be seen that no candidate secured a majority. This is further emphasized by the fact that only about 10-15 percent of voters participate in the caucuses and in the entire primary season.
The vote for Democrats is also complicated by their method of requiring that each candidate secure 15 percent of all voters present at each meeting. Failing that, these voters have to go with another candidate. As a result, it appears that a candidate like Dennis Kucinich received no votes, while what is more likely is that the votes he did get went to other candidates. Kucinich and Bill Richardson both took stands against their own candidacies, by calling on voters, before a single vote was cast, to give support to Obama if they did not secure the 15 percent threshold. Neither condemned the process as exclusionary and one blocking voters from having their say.
The gains by both Obama and Huckabee are seen as a message from voters that are rejecting the establishment candidates of the two parties, notably Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, and expressing their demand for change. The Democrats, in particular are attempting to occupy the space for change that exists — a space stemming from the necessity of present conditions to advance progress. This requires a system of elections and rule that empowers the people themselves to govern and decide. Democrats, as a party, have the task of maintaining the existing set up, while appearing to be for change. A battle is on, between this old set-up and its parties, the Democrats and Republicans, and the new quality emerging, for a system and institutions that empower the people.
It is no accident then that the slogan of the Democrats this year is “Democrats Leading the Way for Change.” Senator Obama has as his slogan “Change We Can Believe In.” Senator Hillary Clinton’s is “Ready for Change, Ready to Lead.” As the elections unfold, a critical question is, what will be the quality of that change and what will the role of the people be in deciding it? Will the change represent progress for the people, or retrogression?
Obama, having advanced in Iowa, with a population that is largely white, is now positioned as someone supported by both whites and African Americans. He is presenting as the person who is bringing about unity. He said “In small towns and big cities, you came together as Democrats, Republicans and independents, to stand up and say we are one nation. We are one people. And our time for change has come. You said the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that is consumed in Washington. To end the political strategy that has been about division, and instead make it about addition. To build a coalition that stretches through red states and blue states. Because that is how we will win in November and that is how we will finally meet the challenges we face as a nation. We are choosing hope over fear. We are choosing unity over division, and sending a powerful message that change is coming to America.” The content of unity being given here is that among the ruling circles, between Democrats and Republicans — red and blue states. People come together as “Democrats, Republicans and independents.” And the role of the people is to support that unity, and that continued rule. The we is not, “we the people,” but we the Democrats and Republicans, we the rulers. But necessarily, Obama, like Clinton, must also address the anger of the people toward government and the peoples’ rejection of their exclusion from government. Obama continues, “You said the time has come to tell the lobbyists who think their money and their influence speak louder than our voices that they do not own this government — we do. And we are here to take it back.” He concludes by again emphasizing, “We are not a collection of red states and blue states. We are the United States of America.”
The people are not divided into red and blue states. That is a concoction of the ruling circles and their Democratic and Republican parties to divert from the fundamental division: that between the ruling circles, driving society backward and down the path of fascism and war, and that of the working class and people, fighting for progress, to advance society and secure a government that favors them. The emphasis that the division is between Republicans and Democrats is given as a mechanism to draw people into the agenda of the ruling circles. It serves to re-establish their credibility and that of their system at a time when both are broadly recognized, here and worldwide, as illegitimate.
The broad struggles of the peoples also make clear that their unity is built by standing together to defend the rights of all. Making a break with the chauvinism of the ruling circles, their power and dictate and claims that the U.S. is the best and only model, is a big part of this fight. When it comes to the Iraq war, the people are standing together with the Iraqis and rejecting the notion that we are to defend the U.S. and its aggression. The same is the case with torture, with aggression against Iran or any other country, with the rights of immigrants, with the crimes against Katrina survivors. The people are rejecting a government that has shown itself to be racist and aggressive to the core. Their fight, their agenda for change, is not to go back but to advance forward to a new government and new arrangements that empower the people to decide. This is the struggle for change being engaged in the elections.[TOP]
Anti-War Bus Tour to Precede NH Primary
New Hampshire Peace Action and the American Friends Service Committee will dramatize their anti-war agendas in the last four days of the New Hampshire Primary campaign with the help of the Yellow Rose of Texas Peace Bus, a slogan-bedecked, full-sized coach.
During the four days between the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire Primary, the bus will travel around the state to campaign events with anti-war activists, Iraq war veterans, military family members, and religious leaders.
“Peace must be a presidential priority,” said Anne Miller, Director of NH Peace Action.
Miller said the Peace Bus participants will challenge all the candidates to:
• Withdraw all U.S. troops and bases from Iraq within one year of taking office;
• Commit to resolve conflicts with Iran through diplomacy, not war;
• Transfer money being spent on warfare to meet human needs, including housing, health, education, Iraqi reconstruction, and care for returning veterans.
They are already planning to show up at events including: The Democrats’ fundraiser on January 4 in Milford; The ABC-sponsored debates on January 5 at St. Anselm College in Goffstown; and The Republican brunch on January 6 in Milford.
Arnie Alpert, New Hampshire Program Coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee said the project is non-partisan, and will not support or oppose any of the candidates. “Our emphasis is not on how people should vote, but on our message to the candidates. We want to move the entire political debate toward a path to peace and justice,” he said.
The bus is driven and owned by Jim Goodnow, a Vietnam veteran from Texas. The Peace Bus Project has been endorsed by the New Hampshire and Vermont chapters of Iraq Veterans Against the War, the Episcopal Peace Fellowship-NH, Vietnam Veterans Against War, and Veterans for Peace-AJ Muste Chapter.
New Hampshire Peace Action is a statewide, membership organization working to end the war in Iraq, prevent war with Iran, and support the abolition of nuclear weapons.
The American Friends Service Committee is a Quaker organization supported by people of many faiths who believe in peace, social justice, and humanitarian service.
Additional information about the Peace Bus can be found at: www.nhpeaceaction.org, and the AFSC’s website, at www.afsc.org/nhprimary2008
[TOP]
Civil Disobedience at Presidential Campaign Offices
On December 31, in Des Moines, Iowa, social justice and antiwar advocates will continue their campaign of nonviolent direct action, Seasons Of Discontent: a Presidential Occupation Project (SODaPOP) that began on November 8 with the “occupations” of campaign offices of Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani. Nonviolent occupations will occur at the offices of presidential candidates — both Democrats and Republicans — who do not publicly commit to a complete withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq; a cessation of all U.S. military action against Iraq (including air and land warfare); and to oppose any form of military action against Iran.
While the majority of Americans favor a quick withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, each of the leading candidates of both parties endorse plans that would keep thousands of troops there for the foreseeable future. “We’re very respectful of the [Iowa] Caucus process and the long history behind it,” said Voices for Creative Nonviolence (VCNV) coordinator Kathy Kelly at a rally at Nollen Plaza in Des Moines on November 8, “but we feel quite strongly that the issues of this war must be inserted into the process of narrowing down who the candidates for the presidential elections will be.”
Eighteen activists from around the Midwest were arrested for criminal trespass in the campaign offices of Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton on November 8. Activists from around the nation will be joining local people in occupying more offices in the lead up to the Iowa Caucuses on January 3. The SODaPOP campaign will continue with occupations of pro- war candidates in other states
The SODaPOP campaign is organized by the Iowa Occupation Project and Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Since February 5, 2007, over 400 arrests have occurred in the offices of over 40 Representatives and Senators throughout the United States. The Occupation Project campaign seeks a public commitment to vote against additional funding for the Iraq war. Nonviolent civil resistance has occurred several times at the offices of Iowa Senators Harkin and Grassley. SODaPOP aims to bring the Occupation Project into the presidential campaign.[TOP]
Parties Running Candidates for President
A number of different parties will nominate candidates for president in 2008 and numerous independents have also declared their candidacy. These same parties will likely run candidates for Congress as well. Most of these parties will not determine their candidate until later in the year.
The U.S. electoral system is designed to have only the candidates of the Republicans and Democrats on the ballot. This is accomplished in part with one of the most restrictive ballot access systems in the world. For other parties to get on the ballot requires large numbers of signatures of registered voters — commonly tens of thousands, secured within a brief period of time. Each state has different requirements and different filing deadlines that must be learned and met. As well, even when signatures are gathered, the Democrats commonly dispute them, forcing either costly court battles or loss of ballot status. Given these obstacles, many of the parties running candidates cannot secure ballot access. This means the only way to vote for their candidates is as a write-in candidate, a possibility made much more difficult with the new computerized voting machines.
The Green Party, for example, one of the parties with the most ballot access, is organizing to secure ballot access in about 30 states. The primaries are even more exclusive, requiring special ballot access as well. Among those parties with announced candidates are:
Constitution Party
Green Party
Libertarian Party
Prohibition Party
Socialist Party USA.
Other parties who have run candidates in the past and are likely to do so for 2008 are:
America First Party
American Heritage
Independent American Party
Minnesota Independence
New American Independence Party
Peace & Freedom Party
Reform Party
Socialist Equality Party
Socialist Labor Party
Socialist Party USA
The Populist Party
The Prohibition Party
Veteran’s Party
Vermont Progressive Party
Workers World Party
Working Families Party
In addition various individuals have also declared their candidacy for president. Visiting their webpages and webpages of those promoting them, are often the only means to even find out about them, as the existing set up does not acknowledge their existence (see thirdpartywatch.org for links to these parties and individuals).
[TOP]
This week in Annapolis, Maryland the United States government will host a conference between Palestinian and Israeli leaders to launch peace talks on a permanent agreement. A vital component of the peace proposals to be discussed involves exchanges of territory that would allow Israel to keep its West Bank “settlement blocs” while compensating Palestinians with land inside Israel.
But my community of Qira, like many others, cannot survive in a Palestinian state divided by Israel’s settlement blocs. The settlement blocs are built on Palestinian agricultural land and water resources, and carve the West Bank into disconnected Palestinian bantustans.
Every morning I see through my window the settlement of Ariel, lying atop the hill adjacent to my village. I’ve never visited Ariel’s beautiful homes and green gardens, so different from our poor, parched community, because as a Palestinian I am forbidden to enter Ariel, even though it sits on Palestinian land in the West Bank. In 1978, when construction of Ariel began, I was a child. Yet I recall my frustration and sorrow for the many Palestinian farmers who lost their lands to the Israeli colony. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Ariel is one of the four fastest growing Israeli settlements. It expanded from 179 acres and 5,300 residents in 1985 to 1732 acres and 16,414 inhabitants in 2005. 1 In contrast, my village, which is hundreds of years old, has not grown because the Israeli government restricts the area and growth of Palestinian communities.
Ariel is located in the center of the Salfit District in the northern West Bank, 13 miles east from the Green Line, Israel’s pre-1967 border. Ariel is part of the larger “Ariel settlement bloc” which consists of 26 other West Bank settlements with nearly 40,000 settlers. 2
Cutting deep into the heart of the West Bank, the Ariel settlement bloc separates the northern West Bank from the rest of the West Bank. U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher warned against the construction of Israel’s wall around Ariel in June 2004, saying that it would make Palestinian life more difficult and confiscate Palestinian property. 3 Nonetheless, hundreds of acres of Palestinian land were confiscated for that wall.
If the Ariel settlement bloc becomes part of Israel through the territorial exchanges proposed by Israel and supported by the U.S., it would be disastrous for the Salfit district’s 70,000 residents. Ariel forms a physical barrier. We must travel around the entire settlement and through Israeli checkpoints to reach the town of Salfit, our district’s “urban center.” It typically took me 90 minutes to drive from my village to Salfit when I worked there, even though it is only four miles away.
Ariel’s settlers prevent Palestinians from harvesting their olive groves near the colony. They attack Palestinians, sometimes under the Israeli army’s protection. They have even entered mosques and desecrated the Quran inside.
Although the Salfit district is located in the West Bank’s most water-rich region, our water supplies have been redirected to Israel and Ariel. According to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem, Israeli settlers consume five times more water than local Palestinians. 4 The nearby villages of Kifr al-Dik and Bruqin are constantly without enough water for these reasons.
Sewage from the hilltop settlements and wastewater from Ariel’s industrial zone pollute our region. According to the Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem, 80 factories from Ariel’s Barkan industrial zone discharge 0.81 million cubic meters of wastewater per year into nearby valleys. 5 All this wastewater and the sewage have formed a river through the agricultural lands of the villages of Kifr al-Dik and Bruqin. These poisonous streams have led to the death and ruin of trees and crops located in their immediate vicinity. Restrictions on our movement, settler attacks, the diversion of our water and the pollution of our land, all caused by the Ariel settlement bloc, are destroying Salfit’s economy, and dramatically restricting our rights. Ariel is like a bone in our throat that is choking us.
Palestinians hope to reach a peace agreement with Israel, and we are cautiously optimistic about the upcoming Annapolis, Maryland conference. But Palestinians are most concerned with getting back their stolen lands. Incorporating settlement blocs like Ariel into Israel is not a viable solution. Ordinary Palestinians will not be able to cope unless their rights are restored.
[1] http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/TheHumanitarianImpactOfIsraeliInfrast ructureTheWestBank_ch1.pdf
[2] http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/view.php?recordID=664
[3] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2004/06/mil-0 40615-31 9dee83.htm
[4] http://www.btselem.org/english/Water/Consumption_Gap.asp
[5] http://www.arij.org/pdf/chapter9.pdf
Fareed Taamallah is a peace activist and journalist who lives in the West Bank village of Qira in the Salfit district.
[TOP]
Fighting for Ballot Access
Below is an example of the common effort being made by independent candidates to get on the ballot, for the primaries and the election. This is a statement by Cynthia McKinney, of the Greens, on the effort to get on the ballot for the Illinois primary February 5. She is one of the people striving to be selected as the Green Party candidate for president.
Greetings,
We are going to have to do things we have never done before if we are to have things we have never had before.
Democracy, authentic representation, human needs prioritized, universal access to health care, bringing our troops home, making peace with the world’s nations, making peace with our home planet, making peace in our own communities, funding schools over jails.
Each of these alone is something we have never known before. Anyone of them alone would be worth doing things we have never done before. And all of them can be achieved when we get engaged and make democracy our own.
I want to thank those Greens from throughout Illinois and beyond who made it possible for me to offer myself to the voters of Illinois in the upcoming February 5, Presidential Preference Primary. I especially want to thank Walter Esler, Charlie Howe, Patricia Hill, J. Michael Carr, Rich Whitney, Phil Huckleberry, and in addition those dozens of activists, Green Party and otherwise, I have not yet met who saw the possibility and made it real.
I also want to thank those supporters of Jared Ball, Howie Hawkins and Kent Mesplay, whose help carrying our petitions, as our supporters helped carry theirs, made possible our collective success. Together we offered the people of Illinois meaningful choices in the upcoming Illinois Primary. Just as we will continue to offer them in the General Election as well.
As late as the final weekend we did not know if we would make it. But then voters, ready for things we have never enjoyed before, through the simple if sometimes arduous process of collecting their neighbors signatures put me and three other candidates on Illinois’ Presidential Preference Primary ballot. While they were at it, they also put a peace slate of nine candidates for Congress, multiple candidates for state assembly, county office and internal party seats on the ballot as well.
With yesterday’s victory, Greens and other supporters have now placed me on the Primary ballots in California and Illinois. We still have the Primary ballots of Arkansas, District of Columbia, Maine and Massachusetts to go. And we still have thirty states left where with your help on our ballot access work, I can appear on the general election ballot as well. […]
Yours,
Cynthia McKinney
November 6, 2007
[TOP]