Articles » peoplesworld

March Madness comes with insane price

Pepe Lozano — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:04:00 -0400

Nationwide excitement among college basketball fans builds as the 2010 March Madness tournament is scheduled to begin Thursday, March 18. Sixty-four of the best National Collegiate Athletic Association men's and women's basketball teams will compete to make it to the Final Four next month.

Even President Obama has joined the "madness" predicting Kansas, Kansas State, Kentucky and Villanova in the finals. He's predicting Connecticut, Notre Dame, Stanford and Tennessee in the women's tournament.

There's nothing more entertaining than healthy basketball rivalry and cheering for the nation's best collegiate teams.

However Derrick Z. Jackson, writing for the Boston Globe, says it's disturbing when the graduation success rates of players belonging to the best teams are worsening.

For example, top-power Kentucky made the Division 1 tournament with a graduation success rate of only 18 percent for its black athletes and 31 percent overall.

"This program single-handedly betrays the NCAA as toothless on the exploitation of athletes," Jackson says. Kentucky's graduation rate scorecard for its black players for the last six years is: 18, 17, 9, 17, 17, and zero. Over the last ten years, its black player graduation rate has never risen above 29 percent and its overall graduation rate passed 50 percent only once, in 2001.

"Yet, who do we see hawking March Madness on Direct TV? Why none other than Kentucky's $32 million coach, John Calipari."

Jackson says the NCAA should ban the likes of Maryland, Texas, Nevada Las Vegas, and Kentucky because the concept of "student-athlete" is beyond repair. "At these schools, the athletes are semi-pros who should be paid."

Maryland is in the tournament with a zero graduation rate for its black athletes, and 8 percent overall. Texas and Nevada Las Vegas are also in the tournament with both colleges not reaching over 22 percent when it comes to graduation rates among blacks. The University of California at Berkeley has a campus graduation rate of 85 percent, including 62 percent for black students. But the graduation success rate for both black and white players is zero, notes Jackson.

"Until the NCAA demands studies of another sort and starts banning programs that do not heed the demand, March Madness will remain a national indictment of how we let college sports drive us stark riving mad," writes Jackson.

Meanwhile an annual report by The Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at the University of Central Florida finds the disparity between graduation rates for white and black players on NCAA tournament-bound men's basketball teams grew this year. The report shows 45 teams graduated 70 percent or more of their white players, and only 20 teams graduated at least 70 percent of their black players.

Players on teams headed to the NCAA women's tournament however are graduating at a higher rate than the men. The graduation gap between white and black players is smaller for women than it is for men. There were 19 women's teams that had a 100 percent graduation rate compared to six men's teams. And 51 women's teams graduated at least 70 percent of their players compared to 29 men's teams.

The NCAA says 56 percent of black basketball players now graduate from Division 1 teams. White players have an 81 percent graduation rate.

Critics contend the NCAA is a multi-million dollar industry that can care less about the players or their academic success and instead cares more about the industry's increasing monster profits. Others argue the college players need an association similar to the professional leagues so that their rights are protected on and off the courts, especially when it comes to health care and compensation.

Kentucky guard Eric Bledsoe (24) scores against Mississippi State in the championship game at the NCAA college basketball Southeastern Conference tournament on March 14. Wade Payne/AP

Obama school plan has pluses but big minuses, teachers and others warn

Susan Webb — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 15:39:00 -0400

The Obama administration has sent Congress a "blueprint" for a new public education bill to replace the expiring 2002 No Child Left Behind law. It discards some of NCLB's much-criticized features, while retaining or adding others that teachers, their unions and other public school advocates oppose.

It projects federal support for educational equity, improving teaching and learning and making every student "college-ready." The devil, many say, is in the details.

Congressional hearings on the proposals opened yesterday with testimony by Education Secretary Arne Duncan. Leaders of the nation's two teachers unions will also testify.

The 41-page blueprint emphasizes eliminating disparities between schools in poorer and wealthier communities, and within schools.

Moving away from the NCLB focus on reading and math to the exclusion of other subjects, it calls for a "more complete" curriculum including science, history, the arts and other subjects. Addressing complaints that NCLB's standardized test focus has led states to "dumb down" their standards, the blueprint requires states to develop "college- and career-ready standards" for English language arts and math, with additional funding possible for groups of states to develop assessments in areas like science, history and foreign languages, and for English learners and students with disabilities.

Testing and other forms of assessment, Duncan insisted in a conference call with reporters on Monday, will focus "not just on absolute test scores but on growth and gain," measuring improvement over a period of time. The blueprint discards NCLB's widely criticized "adequate yearly progress" test-score standard, which led to labeling a third of the nation's 98,000 schools as "failing."

It talks of a new program to "support ambitious efforts to recruit, place, reward, retain, and promote effective teachers and principals and enhance the profession of teaching."

It requires states, "in collaboration with teachers, principals, and other stakeholders," to develop evaluation systems that identify "effective" and "highly effective" teachers and principals "based in significant part on student growth" along with other measures such as classroom observation.

Speaking of "fostering a race to the top," it uses what Duncan called a "carrots and sticks" approach that offers "rewards" for achieving "dramatic gains" in student achievement, and requires controversial "turnaround models" for lowest-performing schools. Three of the four "turnaround" models require closing the schools or mass firing the teachers and principal as happened recently in Central Falls, R.I. One of these involves turning the schools over to charter or other private operators.

Many public school reform advocates are up in arms over the green-lighting of privatization and mass teacher firings. In New York, the parent-community Alliance for Quality Education notes in its March newsletter that "there is little evidence that such practices work" and "charters do not have a track record of turning around low performing schools and have no transparency." The organization describes itself as "one of the lone and loudest voices for a long time advocating that the lowest performing schools need dramatic action to become successful," but says remedies must be based on "proven educational strategies."

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, in a March 13 statement, said an initial review of the blueprint suggested that it "places 100 percent of the responsibility on teachers and gives them zero percent authority. "

Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, said, "We were expecting to see a much broader effort to truly transform public education for kids. Instead, this blueprint's accountability system still relies on standardized tests to identify winners and losers. We were expecting more funding stability to enable states to meet higher expectations. Instead, this blueprint requires states to compete for critical resources, setting up another winners-and-losers scenario. We were expecting school turnaround efforts to be research-based and fully collaborative. Instead, we see too much top-down scapegoating of teachers and not enough collaboration."

Seeking to counter that criticism, Education Secretary Arne Duncan told reporters Monday that unlike past practices, "there will be shared responsibility. Not just with teachers, but principals, school systems, and even states. Everyone's going to be accountable for driving better results."

In a CBS interview Monday, Van Roekel said, "We want to make sure the policy matches the rhetoric."

Although the blueprint speaks of measuring student "growth," he warned, it still appears to rely on high-stakes testing.

Reiterating his criticism of the winners and losers approach, Van Roekel raised concern that the blueprint is "moving more and more funds" away from formulas that provide equitable federal funding across states. "We need to make sure all schools get adequate funds, not just a few winners," he said.

He expressed "total support" for Obama's and Duncan's reform intentions, saying they are "absolutely motivated by the right thing," and the union's access to education officials has been "wonderful." But he emphasized that involving teachers in reform is "absolutely essential."

A longtime activist with New York's United Federation of Teachers said it is urgent for progressive teacher unionists and supporters to come forward with dialogue and solutions to the complex problems facing schools. Otherwise, he said, "blame the parents" or "blame the teachers" frames the debate, and public schools and unions will be the losers.

The administration's education blueprint and transcript of Duncan's Monday conference call can be found here.

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wwworks/ / CC BY 2.0

With health care street heat, progressives blunt teabaggers

Bruce Bostick — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:57:00 -0400

COLUMBUS -- Hundreds showed up at what was supposed to be a right wing attack on Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy's office yesterday in Columbus. The event, however, proved to be much different from what the "teabaggers" announced and had planned.

Dueling demonstrations, each with around 200-300 folks, lined Olentangy River Rd., the "teabaggers" attacking Kilroy for her strong support of health care reform, and an equal or greater force of people there supporting her stand.

"We just had to come out and stand with Mary Jo," said Tim Ely, a business agent for the Pipefitter's Union. "She's stood up for us in the legislature, and I'm just sick and tired of these right wing thugs lying about health care and going around intimidating people. That crap's going to stop, now!"

Chants of "Pass it Now," "People's Needs, not Corporate Greed," & Health Care, not Warfare" echoed against the building that housing Rep. Kilroy's office, and cars honked, answering signs stating; "Honk to support Health Care Reform!" Many of the signs were hand-printed, many carried by people that have had to fight insurance companies as well as diseases.

On the "teabagger" side, the mood was much different. Chants and signs called on Kilroy to "Kill the Bill," but the undercurrent was extreme levels of anger, paranoia and frustration.

Dave Hysell, who described himself as "a proud American," stated that he was there "because the government lies." "They made the Swine Flu virus," he said, "but didn't make enough vaccine for the seniors. They're trying to kill off the seniors."

Nearby, a woman named Mary, volunteered that "they have secret committees in place to decide who they can kill off." Asked how she'd know about them if they're secret, she stated that, "Oh, we have ways, we can find out."

Chris Grant, with the right wing group, said that he opposed the proposed reform for two reasons; ""First, he said," it's going raise taxes, and I'm against all taxes, and, second, the bill eliminates choice."

On the pro-reform side, there was more of a festive atmosphere. People seemed happy, and especially encouraged, at the big turnout to support Rep. Kilroy and oppose the "teabaggers."

Faith Van Horne, a local artist, spoke about her concerns. "I'm really happy to see all the people here," she said. "I'm just so sick of the lies they're telling about health care reform. I'd had a lump on my breast," she explained, "but I waited 6 months until my regular checkup to get it checked. The insurance wouldn't cover it and it would've cost me $1,500 that I didn't have, just to get it checked. We need to get rid of these insurance companies and get real health care coverage."

We were glad to hear that the exam had proved negative and she was here in good health.

While a police line separated the demonstrations, "teabaggers" yelled "Whore" and "Bitch" at women demonstrators and seemed anxious to create confrontations. A group of three "teabaggers" came across to the progressive side, standing behind folks, attempting to confront them. When Diane Smith approached the men, stating that she had M.S. and could not get insurance, one of the right wingers just laughed at her, stating "You've got health care, just go to the Emergency Room!"

"They are just disgusting," said Jeff St. Clair, who was there "because my wife has five incurable diseases and cannot get insurance coverage." He explained that his family was able to get some help from the MS Society, "But," he stated strongly, "we have a rich county. We should have health care coverage for everyone, with dignity! If every other nation can do it, we certainly can, as well!"

Norm Wernet, Ohio Director for the Alliance of Retired Americans, was struck by how many "teabaggers" held signs about keeping Medicare free of "government control."

"It's such a shame that people aren't getting the facts, that these right wingers put out so many lies. This Health Care reform bill will SAVE Medicare! Bush put private companies into Medicare and we are paying them 17% MORE than the norm," he said. "This bill will cut those funds and put Medicare on much stronger footing. We need this bill to save Medicare," (which, he stated with a grin, is, of course, a single-payer government run program that runs pretty darn well)!

Leaving the rally, we heard that Rep. Kilroy stated that she would proudly continue to support health care reform.

Today, we learned that Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who'd previously stated his opposition to the present reform bill, announced he'd also vote YES!

"I have doubts about this bill. This is not the bill I wanted to support," the congressman said. "However, after careful discussions with President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, my wife Elisabeth and close friends I have decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation. If my
vote is to be counted, let it count now."

To see a video of the Columbus demonstration, including tea party people yelling at a man who said he had Parkinsons. One man yelled, "If you're looking for a handout you're in the wrong end of town," one man yelled at him. "Nothing for free over here, you have to work for everything you get." Another threw dollar bills at him. Check out Raw Story.

Photos:Top, page shot from Raw Story; bottom is courtesy of Norm Wernet/ARA

Rich get richer; Working families feeling the pinch

Joel Wendland — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:34:00 -0400

The rich are getting richer, and they are paying fewer taxes. Despite constant whining from the richest Americans about high taxes and how the best solution to the economic crisis is lower taxes for themselves, the evidence, according to a recent paper by the Economic Policy Institute, shows that the very richest Americans saw their after tax incomes rise astronomically leading up to the Great Recession in 2007.

Analysis of federal tax data showed that the 400 richest Americans took in $344.8 million in 2007, up 31 percent over 2006. Between 1992 and 2007, that income grew by 409 percent. After tax income for this group grew by 476 percent.

Meanwhile, pre-tax median income for all Americans grew by just 13.2 percent in the same period. During the past ten years, however, federal data shows median incomes for working families have actually fallen.

In 2007, the richest Americans earned 6900 times more than the average household, while in 1992 they earned just 1124 times as much. That means the gap between the richest Americans and the average family is 6 times higher today than it was in 1992.

Such growing disparities in wealth have hit the working class hard in recent years. For example, a new study by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation revealed this week that 2.4 million middle-income earners were added to the number of Americans who go without health insurance between 2000-2008.

A recent finding by the White House Middle Class Task Force also showed that "while incomes have risen, the prices for three large components of middle class expenses have increased faster than income: the cost of college, the cost of health care and the cost of a house. Thus, we conclude that it is harder to attain a middle class lifestyle now than it was in the recent past."

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ken_mayer/ / CC BY 2.0

Useless war: Afghanistan needs peace to develop

John Bachtell — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:13:00 -0400

In a potentially important development, exiled members of the former People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan are returning to the country to re-found the organization. They plan to hold a Congress in Kabul later this year and rename the organization the Democratic Party of Afghanistan.

The PDPA was the ruling party that led the country on a path of socialism before being ousted from power in 1992 by the U.S. government-backed Taliban. Thousands of PDPA members were slaughtered or driven into exile where they have functioned over the years as scattered groups.

Exiled members met recently in Germany to unite their ranks and agree on an approach to reestablishing a legal political party on Afghanistan soil.

"The main goal is to return to Afghanistan and bring a situation of peace and stability in the region," said Dr. Zalmay Gulzad, professor of Social Sciences at Harold Washington Community College in Chicago. Gulzad was born in Afghanistan and came to the U.S. as a student in 1971 and stayed. "Once peace is achieved the movement will evolve into different stages."

In an interview with the People's World, Gulzad said the new DPA would join the growing democratic movement in Afghanistan that includes a strong women's movement, intellectuals, students and even some members of the Parliament.

Media reports have noted nostalgia for the PDPA governing years. Many people say times were better then; there was more stability and security. The government built a lot of schools, provided education and health care, according to Gulzad. Many feel "that period was better than during the repression of the Mujahideen and today's American bombs."

"It's a different situation," he continued. "The conditions are good for unity to bring peace to Afghanistan. Even before Sept. 11, 2001, members of the PDPA returned and became members of Parliament and they've been working within the function of government."

Gulzad termed the Karzai government a corrupt "puppet regime" and said U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry is really running the country.

Gulzad said the main threat to the stability of the Afghan government comes from a resurgent Taliban. While the people don't want U.S. troops in the country, they fear a return of the Taliban to power, he said.

"The people will not accept a puppet regime. They will work with the Karzai government because of the situation with the Taliban. Once peace comes, people will bring a genuine people's government," he said.

The Taliban have their roots in the U.S. drive to destabilize the Soviet Union during the Carter administration. Known then as "freedom fighters" (Mujahideen) they were religious extremists assembled by the CIA to overthrow the government and kill Communists, democrats and Soviet "infidels." They were recruited from predominantly Muslim countries when they couldn't be found in Afghanistan.

Because they were trained in Pakistan, they were renamed Taliban, which means "religious students." These same elements, trained by the CIA, were responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center in September 11, 2001, including Osama Bin Laden.

After the attacks, said Gulzad, they were suddenly renamed "terrorists." Instead of going into Saudi Arabia where most were from, or Pakistan where they were trained, the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan. Gulzad says the reason is the strategic geopolitical importance of Afghanistan, its proximity to energy resources and Iran, Russian, China and the Persian Gulf.

"If the Taliban retook power they would be a very regressive force. The Afghan people wouldn't accept it. Remember there was a civil war - north versus south and within the south they were fighting the Taliban. And the region's countries would get involved in arming various factions - Pakistan, Iran, Russia and China."

The main source of support for the Taliban is still the military in Pakistan. Gulzad said this is related to Pakistan's desire for additional territory in its fight against India and for gaining hold of Kashmir. They want a weak government in Afghanistan and to rid it of Indian influence, which has invested heavily in Afghani infrastructure, education and hospitals.

Gulzad said during the arming of the "freedom fighters" against the Soviet Union everyone denied Pakistan was helping. And today everyone knows the Pakistani military and Inter-Service Intelligence are supporting and arming the Taliban, but it's still denied.

Today, there are now two separate Taliban, one in Afghanistan and one in Pakistan. The Pakistan Taliban is threatening to overthrow the Pakistani secular state. Gulzad said most of the recent terrorist attacks in other parts of the world have emanated from Pakistan including the deadly attack on Mumbai.

All the Obama administration needs to do is put pressure on Pakistan to stop arming the Afghani Taliban and protecting their sanctuaries from which they are launching attacks into Afghanistan, and the problem would be solved, said Gulzad.

"We are losing many Afghan and U.S. troops right now for no reason," he said. "Pakistan could arrest Osama Bin Laden and other al-Qaeda and terrorist leaders if it wanted to. Many believe the U.S. and Pakistan want to keep it going for their own purposes."

"The problem reflects the split in (U.S.) ruling circles, in the U.S. military and the Obama administration. Sections of the military and intelligence community see the importance of a long-term presence in Afghanistan for access to energy resources and geo-political purposes," he said.

Recently, Defense Secretary Gates, Secretary of State Clinton and General McCrytsal let it be known they oppose President Obama's suggestion of negotiation with the Taliban, who have suffered military defeats recently.

"The institutions of U.S. imperialism are highly developed. Pres. Obama can't change it alone. He has very good intentions but the people around him - e.g. the Pentagon, CIA, they are not really allowing him to move from that policy," said Gulzad

The American people have to demand a change in foreign policy to end U.S. involvement and close down the foreign military bases. he said.

"So long as the imperialist mentality exists - hostility to Iran, China, etc. the U.S. is in a good spot," he said. Which helps explain why they are rejecting offers from Russia and China to help, he said.

"Russia wanted to help Afghanistan, but were denied by the US. Russia has a long history with Afghanistan. Most of the highways and infrastructure were built by the Soviets. They have all the blueprints."

Gulzad said international help could come by training and educating personal to rebuild the country. They could be sent to Tajikistan and Iran, which both speak the same language and have the same culture as many Afghanis.

"It would require the U.S. to step back and allow the Afghan government to have its own sovereign relations. The American people have a big responsibility. Look, our government is broke and people are suffering. Yet the US has military bases all over the world and it costs a lot to maintain this. The mentality of imperialism is finished. People around the world don't accept it any longer," said Gulzad.

Photo: Dr. Zalmay Gulzad John Bachtell/PW

Mexican government on full-blast offensive against workers

Emile Schepers — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:34:00 -0400

Last week, Mexico's Secretary of Labor and Social Welfare Javier Lozano Alarcon announced a series of legislative proposals which, if approved, would constitute a major blow against Mexican workers and especially embattled independent unions.

The measures presented to a meeting of the Business Coordinating Council will be included in a major legislative vehicle shortly. The government proposes to:

• Give employers the right to government arbitration in strike situations, which only unions have at present. Lozano claims that this will put an end to "eternal strikes".

• Allow more leeway for employers to hire people part time, for short term periods and in other irregular ways. Lozano says this is merely recognizing the fact that Mexican workers are already being employed in these ways.

• Other measures intended to increase "labor flexibility" and worker productivity, and thus reassure both Mexico's business elite and foreign investors that the country's efforts to recover from the heavy blow it received from the world financial meltdown will be carried out at the expense of workers and the poor, and not the rich or foreign corporations.

The announcement comes after one of the worst years in recent Mexican economic history. During 2009, Mexico lost about 7 percent of its Gross Domestic Product. Both prices of food staples and the unemployment rate have been rising, 28 percent of the working population is in the informal sector, and the amount of money sent to Mexico by its citizens working in the United States has dropped drastically due to the recession here. A vicious drug war is frightening both tourists and business away, while oil production has been dropping due to the failure of the state owned petroleum company, PEMEX, to modernize its infrastructure.

Oil, tourism and remittances are Mexico's major sources of foreign exchange.

This disastrous situation is in part caused by the degree to which the Mexican and U.S. economies are intertwined. For example, the crisis in the U.S. auto industry hit workers in "big three" plants in Mexico especially hard. The integration of the two economies has been greatly intensified by the North American Free Trade Agreement and the right wing, free trade policies of the current government of President Felipe Calderon of the National Action Party (PAN). The attack on workers needs to be seen in this context.

The connection between the Mexican government's attack on workers and the drug-related violence is strong though indirect. NAFTA and the overall neo-liberal environment is widely seen as having stimulated the drug trade. For example, farmers who can't sell their crops anymore because of NAFTA are tempted to grow cannabis or poppies, or to allow their empty lands to be used by drug gangs. Unemployment for urban people increases crime. Calderon's plan to try to fight the drug trade with the army is also related to his and his officials' quasi-fascist mindset; to a man whose only tool is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail. Drugs, human trafficking and forced migration are closely related too. When all the SME workers were fired in October, among the retraining classes the government provided to those electrical workers willing to renounce their union were English classes. Many saw this more than a gentle hint.

After the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1920, much of organized labor was incorporated into an arrangement comparable to the "corporate state" model of Mussolini's fascist Italy. Unions, employers, farmers and professionals were grouped into national federations whose interests were to be mediated by the government and the governing Revolutionary Institutional Party (PRI). Union demands were tamped down in the name of stability and balanced growth: Theoretically, neither union members' wages nor employers' profits could so outstrip each other as to destabilize development.

But the corporativist unions soon expelled the left and degenerated into partners with employers and the government in suppressing the workers. Both rank and file dissidence and attempts to form unions outside the corporativist setup were countered by harsh government repression and sometimes gangster violence. In 1959 a strike by the militant railway workers union was crushed by troops and police, and a number of top left wing leaders of the union and of the Mexican Communist Party were given long jail sentences. More recently, attempts to form independent unions in the "maquiladora" operations have been met with violence from goons brought in by the corporativist labor leadership and the employers. First the PRI and now the PAN governments have abetted these practices, which violate the labor clause of the constitution.

Under the Calderon administration, intensified repression has been directed against a number of independent unions:

• The National Mine and Metal Workers Union (SNTMMRM) has been on strike against the operations the multinational corporation Grupo Mexico in Cananea, Sonora since July 2007. The government, which has strong ties to the Grupo Mexico management, has thrown everything it can at the union, and on February 11 the courts ruled that the union contract no longer exists and that Grupo Mexico can fire all 1,200 remaining union members. The SNTMMRM says it will not evacuate the Cananea mine, and a military confrontation may loom.

• Last October, the government seized by force power stations which belonged to the publicly owned Luz y Fuerza del Centro (Central Light and Power), ousting 44,000 members of the renowned independent Mexican Electrical Workers' Union (SME). The SME is one of the oldest unions in Mexico, having worked with the forces of Emiliano Zapata when that insurgent leader took over Mexico City briefly during the 1910-1920 Revolution. But the government has declared the union as well as Luz y Fuerza to be dissolved, in spite of continuing mass protests by the electrical workers and their allies.

• The latest is an attempt to crush the independent National Union of Petroleum Technicians and Profesionals (UNyTPP). This union was formed for employees of the national oil company, PEMEX, who were not included in the bargaining unit of the regular petroleum workers' union, under tight government control since the 1980s. No sooner did the 3,000 member UNyTPP get official recognition, than the PEMEX management began to call its members in one by one to force them to sign letters resigning from, and calling for the cancellation of the union's recognition. Those who will not sign are fired and removed by force.

Corporativist union leaders, instead of joining a united front against the PAN government's anti-worker policies, have hastened to attach themselves to it in the same way they were formerly attached to the PRI. This is why Secretary Lozano Alarcon calls them "serious, responsible and sensitive workers' organizations which have maintained labor peace" ("Acabar con huelgas eternas" La Jornada, March 15 2010; my translation).

Independent unions represent a danger because they make demands that threaten to destabilize the pacts on which the neo-liberal government is maintained. They are also organizing centers of political opposition to the right wing government, and to imperialism. The SME is central to coalitions which are fighting for changes in agricultural and trade policies that have led to the impoverishment of millions of Mexican grain farmers and others. One of their major demands is for a renegotiation of NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement). The future of the Mexican left is linked to the survival and growth of the independent unions and their allies. Surviving independent unions, many grouped in progressive federations like the National Workers Union (UNT) and the Authentic Workers Front (FAT), assume that they are on the short list for extermination, and are girding for battle.

Secretary Lozano Alarcon's new proposals show that the attacks against the miners, electrical workers, oil workers and others are not just a reaction, as he claims, to "irregularities" within those individual unions, but part of a concerted plan to force all Mexican workers back into corporativist unions, whose leaders will continue to work hand in glove with the big business and that of international monopoly capital.

U.S. labor has been expressing strong solidarity with the Mexican independent unions. The U.S. Steelworkers, United Electrical and Machine Workers (UE) and others have organized solidarity campaigns. UE updates the situation on its International Solidarity website.

Fortunately, much as Calderon and Lozano may wish, the class struggle can't be abolished with the stroke of a pen.

Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cmanuelrodriguez/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

World Notes: India, France, Paraguay, Palestine

W. T. Whitney Jr. — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:13:00 -0400

India: Unprecedented women's bill passes hurdle

After two days of intense debate, India's upper house overwhelmingly approved legislation on March 9 requiring women occupy one third of national assembly and state legislative seats. With that vote, the measure passed a significant hurdle on it way to becoming law, the first of its kind in the world. The Women's Reservation Bill had been stalled until the recent upper house action.

However, two regional parties threatened to derail future ruling-Congress Party legislation if the lower house follows suit. Detractors saw the reform as benefitting privileged women at the expense of Islamic and lower caste voters.

Women make up only 8 to 13 percent of all elected officials in India.

In 1991, the Communist-led government of Kerala introduced a 30 percent quota for women serving in the district legislature. In 1996, Geeta Mukherjee, a member of the Communist Party of India-Marxist, chaired a joint parliamentary committee which submitted a report to the two houses recommending the "reservation" of one third of seats for women. Both CPI-M and the Communist Party of India are supporters of the measure.

France: Sarkozy loses in regional elections

In regional elections, March 14, President Nicolas Sarkozy's center right party secured 26 percent of the votes. The Socialist Party took almost 30 percent, and run-off elections March 21 will decide between the two. The Green Europe Ecologie party took third place with 13 percent of the votes followed by the right wing National Front Party at 12 percent. A record high 52 percent of voters abstained. The left coalition that included the French Communists won 6.2 percent of the votes. Regional election results made unaccustomed news this year as a forecast of possible presidential election results in 2012. Sarkozy's unpopular labor and pension reform proposals plus 10 percent unemployment and significant deficit spending worked against him, reported EUobserver.com.

Paraguay: President honors Communist leader

"Forgive us, Ananías, for so much death, so much injustice," asked President Fernando Lugo, who in ceremonies on March 10 awarded Paraguay's highest civilian award, the National Order of Merit, to Ananías Maidana. With government officials and left activists looking on, Lugo honored the former secretary general of Paraguay's Communist Party: "Comrade Maidana dedicated his entire life to Paraguayan democracy and for that he suffered persecution, torture, and jails during the Alfredo Stroessner dictatorship." The President, quoted by pcv-venezuela.org, noted that "his party and its circumstances reflected limitless belief, unparalleled in our history, that struggle against oppression and for human dignity must be considered in terms of one's own existence and its price."

Palestine: Iron fist accompanies Israel's land grab

On March 12, Israeli security forces sealed off the Al-Aqsa mosque, Islam's third holiest shrine, to all but women and older men. Soldiers blocked thousands of Palestinians from entering East Jerusalem. Clashes with protesters left 20 wounded. The West Bank remained closed as of March 15, except for humanitarian workers and commerce. The turmoil coincided with announcements that 1,600 new Israeli housing units were going up soon in East Jerusalem and 50,000 more within a few years. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to the visiting U.S. Vice President Joe Biden for the timing of the announcement, which is widely seen as an affront to the Obama administration who opposes new settlements. South of Bethlehem, Palestinians received land confiscation notices, reported Ma'an news. Meanwhile, settlers burned a six acre Palestinian-owned olive grove north of Hebron. The Palestinian Authority called off peace talks.

Photo: CPI member holds a poster in favor of a mandatory one-third women's representation in parliament and state bodies, Hyderabad, India, March 2008. Teresa Albano/PW

Tax the rich and create jobs now!

Tim Wheeler — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:59:00 -0400

SEATTLE-Union members picketed the downtown Chase Bank March 15 to demand that the Wall Street giant pay its share of state taxes and stop lobbying for extension of a $67 million tax giveaway while the people face drastic cutbacks in education and health care to balance the state budget.

Al Link, president of the Washington State Labor Council told the crowd, "The Wall Street banks turned their backs on us after they took $700 billion of our money in taxpayer bailouts. Now, here in Washington State, these big banks want even more of our money."

The protest came on the same day that Washington's state legislature went into a special session to try to come up with extra revenues or more deep cuts to eliminate a $2.7 billion deficit. This after already inflicting $6 billion or more in cutbacks to vital human needs programs. Yet the big out-of-state state banks are spending millions in the state capital, Olympia, lobbying to win extension of the $67 million tax giveaway.

On St. Patricks Day, the labor movement here is staging a "Jobs NOW" rally at Westlake Park in downtown Seattle to protest 35 percent unemployment in the building trades and to demand that the legislature approve a pending jobs bill that includes funds to replace the crumbling Alaskan Way Viaduct and the Highway 520 floating bridge.

Will Parry, a veteran union leader and past president of the Puget Sound Alliance of Retired Americans debunked the argument that there is no money to fund these lifeline programs. "There is literally billions of dollars available in special state tax exemptions granted to banks and corporations if the legislature has the courage to go after them," Parry told the World in a phone interview. "In the last couple of years, the legislature enacted another batch of these tax giveaways costing the state another $2 billion in lost revenues. There are over 300 special tax exemptions and privileges for banks and corporations in the Washington tax code."

Parry added, "The overall economic situation is increasingly desperate for workers. This is the worst possible time to slash the safety net." He greeted a bill introduced by Spokane's state Sen. Lisa Brown, a Democrat and Majority Leader of the Senate, to put on the November ballot a referendum to establish a 4.5 percent income tax on those earning $200,000 or more annual income. Her measure would also reduce by one cent the 6.5 percent sales tax. Washington has no state income tax and relies on a "soak the poor" sales tax and property taxes that have dwindled as the economic crisis worsens. The state legislature enacted a graduated income in 1933 but the State Supreme Court overturned it as unconstitutional.

"For decades, tax fairness advocates have advocated a progressive income tax in Washington State," Parry continued. "Our tax system is the most regressive in the nation. The enactment of a fair, progressive income tax, properly structured, would relieve low-income taxpayers of a tremendous tax burden," Parry continued. "The sales tax hits low income people hardest and does not generate the revenues needed especially during an economic recession like this one."

His views were echoed by veteran community activist, John Borah, who served as a city planner in Port Angeles and other cities across the nation. In a widely circulated email, he urged an outpouring of messages to State Rep. Lynn Kessler, majority leader of the Washington legislature, urging her to drop her opposition to a vote on Sen. Brown's income tax measure. "This progressive change in taxation is desperately needed to help counteract suffering and inadequate funding for education," Borah wrote.

Facebook to open office in Hyderabad, India

Pepe Lozano — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:48:00 -0400

Facebook, with more than 400 million users these days, is the largest and most popular social networking site in the world. The U.S.-born company, founded in 2004 mainly for university students, announced Monday plans to set up shop in Hyderabad in southern India.

The new Hyderabad office is expected to help manage the rapid growth of users throughout Asia and will occupy online sales and operations teams. The move is part of a strategy to create Facebook support centers around the globe, covering all time zones, and provide assistance in several languages.

According to Don Faul, Facebook director of global online operations, 70 percent of users are now outside the U.S. and use the site in over 70 languages. "In India alone, we've seen rapid growth and now have more than 8 million people there actively connecting on Facebook," wrote Faul in a recent blog. By having support centers in a variety of time zones, Facebook can provide better around-the-clock, multilingual support, he added.

Facebook has emerged as one of the Internet's most popular destinations and recently surpassed the Web's powerhouse competitor, Google.

The Hyderabad office will supplement the company's support teams at its headquarters in Palo Alto, Calif., and in Dublin, Ireland. Last week the company also announced it plans to open a new office in Austin, Texas.

Hyderabad is one of India's technology hubs and a base for major U.S. companies including Google, Microsoft and IBM, among others.

However union officials and workers rights advocates argue many major U.S. corporations open up shops in developing countries like India mainly to tap a skilled workforce at relatively cheap wages. Facebook and other U.S. major companies should aim to pay their overseas workforce at livable wages with decent health benefits and worker protections, including the right to organize and join unions, they say.

While golfers play, locked out workers picket

Marilyn Bechtel — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:05:00 -0400

PLEASANTON, Calif. - Bright spring grass, gentle breezes, a tree-lined country road. It should have been an idyllic setting for the golfers fanning out across the fairways at Castlewood Country Club on a sunny Sunday morning. But in the foreground of this suburban idyll was a startling sight - a picket line!

Actually, the pickets were marching for a 17th day on March 14, as workers at the club, represented by Unite Here! Local 2850, protested club management's decision to lock out 59 cooks, dishwashers, housekeepers and maintenance workers in the midst of a bitter contract struggle. At its heart: health coverage.

As the golfers played on, accompanied by choruses of "Castlewood, Castlewood, you're no good! End the lockout like you should!" and a stirring beat laid down by members of the Brass Liberation Orchestra, Maria Munoz, for seven years a housekeeper at the club, told how a decades-long good union-management relationship turned sour when new owners and management took over last year.

The bottom line, she said, is that the new owners don't seem to want the union. Some workers have been laid off, the club's laundry, where Munoz used to work, has been closed, and more layoffs are possible.

Munoz' own daughters are grown, she said, "but I think of the families with kids. What will they do? And my co-workers - they're like family for the eight hours we're together." She herself faces big problems paying her bills and keeping her home.

Janitor Maria Ramirez said her husband is sick and depends on ongoing medical care. "If I don't have health coverage through my job, there's no way we can get insurance," she said.

The workers and their union have been negotiating for a new contract since September 2009, and have proposed a contract the union says would actually cut labor costs by 8 percent in the first year, an extremely modest wage increase in the second year, and higher workers' monthly insurance premiums for a cheaper plan with fewer benefits. The club is insisting instead that workers must pay $739 a month for family health care - more than three times the national average. Workers, whose pay averages about $12.50 an hour, now contribute nothing for their health care.

Ramirez and others said community support is growing, with Alameda County firefighters and other unionists having joined picket lines, and some country club members saying they want the lockout to end. As we talked, passing cars honked their support.

On March 7, California state Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico joined workers and their children on the picket line. Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, who represents the Pleasanton area, offered to mediate but the club would not agree. And last month, Pleasanton Mayor Jennifer Hosterman told the Pleasanton Weekly that on their current average wages, the workers would find it impossible to pay the company's proposed health care premium.

Local 2850 president Wei Ling Huber said in a statement that the union's proposed agreement would cost no more than the company's latest offer. "But rather than being open to the union's suggestion of redirecting the same amount of money towards family health care instead of wages, the company has chosen to lock the works out in an effort to starve them into submitting to management's own view," she said.

Photo: Marilyn Bechtel/PW

Criminal justice reform takes step forward

Joe Sims — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:24:00 -0400

Blacks, Latinos and immigrants receive longer prisons terms than others committing the same crimes, according to a new report issued last week by the United States Sentencing Commission. The commission is headed by former FBI chief William K Sessions III.

The sentencing differential apparently arose after a recent loosening of federal sentencing guidelines in the wake of a Supreme Court ruling, the United States v. Booker that allows judges greater flexibility in imposing prison terms.

The study indicates that Black and Latino men receive sentences that are 10 and 7 percent longer than whites respectively. Immigrants receive longer sentences than citizens, while college graduates serve less time those with high school diplomas or less.

The new trend apparently reverses progress in eliminating differentials. The report's authors say the "difference in sentence length declined steadily in fiscal years 2000 and 2001. By fiscal year 2002, no statistically significant difference was observed in the sentences imposed on black offenders compared to white offenders. No statistically significant difference between the sentences imposed on these two groups was observed again until after the Booker decision in January 2005."

The cause of the problem remains unclear and the results should be treated with caution. Conservatives have long favored mandatory sentencing. "People who commit similar crimes should receive similar sentences," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, reports the Kansas City Star.

The study comes as important steps are being made to eliminate differences in crack and powder cocaine sentencing. In a rare bipartisan move, the Senate Judiciary Committee recently voted unanimously for significant reforms.

The Washington Post writes, "The compromise would reduce the sentencing disparity to 18 to 1 for people caught with crack cocaine vs. those who carry the drug in powdered form. The current ratio has rested since 1986 at 100 to 1, disproportionately hurting African Americans, who are convicted of crack possession at far greater numbers."

Most important, the possession of crack cocaine would no longer carry a mandatory minimum, a first for the House and Senate to take such steps.

This represents an important victory for the Obama administration which promised to work to eliminate such disparities in sentencing which have contributed to the U.S. having the world largest prison population.

Today "2.3 million people are in jail or prison, and another 5 million are on parole, probation or other community sanctions. This means that about 1 in every 31 American adults is under some form of correctional supervision--by far the highest rate in the world," Louisiana-based criminal attorneys Damico and Stockstill said in a recent press release applauding the Senate Judiciary Committee and its chair, Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia, for passing a bill that would create a "blue-ribbon commission to study the justice system from top to bottom and propose much-needed reforms."

This blue ribbon panel, headed by Webb, is the first time a review and major overhaul of the criminal justice system is being considered since draconian measures imposed by Republicans in the late 1980s and 1990s.

During that period, mandatory sentencing of juveniles as adults became a major legal fad. Currently 1,175 prisoners are servicing life sentences without parole after being sentenced as teenagers. The Supreme Court is currently considering the legality of the GOP legislation.

Leticia Miranda of Colorlines writes, "This June, the Supreme Court will decide whether young people can be sentenced to life without parole for crimes that didn't result in a death. Separately, several states are also considering abolishing life without parole for youth."

Women leaders call for urgent action on Illinois budget crisis

John Bachtell — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 12:57:00 -0400

CHICAGO - "Illinois is broke. Failure to act will cause obscene and immoral cuts in aid to education and human services. Shame on every elected official who refuses to lead us through this terrible crisis," warned Maria Whelan, director of Illinois Action for Children.

Whelan joined 245 other women leaders representing civic, political, trade union, religious and advocacy organizations March 15 who jointly issued a call for urgent budget and tax reform to avoid catastrophic cuts to human services and massive layoffs across the state.

Illinois faces a $13.8 billion deficit brought on by the economic crisis and one of the most regressive tax systems in the nation.

The leaders were marking Women's History Month by sending a letter to Gov. Quinn and the state legislative demanding action. They were specifically responding to Gov. Pat Quinn's budget proposal, which includes $2 billion in spending cuts, including $1.2 billion in cuts to primary and secondary education.

Quinn called for an across the board tax rate hike of 1% to cover the education cuts, which he said would result in the layoff of 17,000 teachers. Quinn also proposed nearly $5 billion in borrowing to cover the budget gap, which he termed a crisis of "epic proportions."

"We can no longer wait," said Kathy Ryg of Voices for Illinois Children. "We have come to agree on the size of the problem - the state has a $7.5 billion revenue shortfall and over $6 billion in unpaid bills - and a framework for dealing with it."

The women leaders reiterated the cuts would devastate the most vulnerable populations especially seniors, the disabled, the poor and single parent families. These service cuts and the thousands of workers who labor long hours at often times low pay will disproportionately impact women.

Nancy Shier of the Ounce of Prevention Fund noted the ongoing budget crisis and non-payment of bills is already having a huge impact. Early education programs across the state have received no funding since October and many have shut down mid-year. Layoff notices are already being sent for next year's programs. The budget will cut 40% from mental health programs.

The women and their organizations belong to the Responsible Budget Coalition, a statewide alliance of labor, human service, religious and community organizations who are supporting budget and tax reform and have united around passage of HB 174 that would raise the personal and corporate tax rate while raising the earned income tax credit to protect low income workers.

Since 2010 is an election year, Democratic legislative leaders are fearful of enacting a tax increase without Republican support.

The Republican candidate for governor, Bill Brady, has called for a 10% across the board budget cut and cuts in taxes. This proposal has been widely criticized, including by many in his own party.

Rich Whitney, Green Party candidate for governor, has proposed progressive tax reform he says will bring in $16 billion a year. Whitney's plan would increase tax rates but would also provide greater protections to workers and low-income families through the creation of a Family Tax credit and by tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit. It also includes a "financial transaction tax" on speculative trading.

"The human costs will be tremendous if we fail to act," said Anne Ladky, executive director of Women Employed, one of the signers of the call. "We are talking about destroying an infrastructure of human services, early education, and higher education that will put this state at an economic disadvantage for decades to come."

"This gathering is the tip of a mighty iceberg moving toward Springfield. We will not be silent, we will be heard," said Whelan.

Photo: Anne Ladky of Women Employed joins with other women to issue a call for urgent action on the state budget crisis. John Bachtell/PW

March For America

PW Editorial Board — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 12:31:00 -0400

This coming Sunday, March 21, thousands of immigrants and their allies from unions, community and faith based organizations will converge on the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. to call for the passage of comprehensive immigration reform.

A progressive immigration reform that protects the rights of both immigrant and U.S. born workers is an essential step towards the resolution of the economic crisis. There are estimated to be between 10 and 11 million undocumented immigrants, at least 8 million of whom are in the labor force. These immigrants want to join labor unions so that they can struggle alongside U.S.-born workers for justice on the job and in the community, yet they can not because their undocumented status gives them no rights. Thus they have to accept lower pay and worse working conditions than would be the case if they had legal status. This undercuts the position of all workers in the country, reduces the consumption power of the working class, and, even though undocumented immigrants do pay taxes, deprives federal, state and local governments of increased revenues that would come from higher earnings. The lack of political rights of these immigrant workers also weakens the whole working class. In addition, there are believed to be about 4 million U.S. citizen children with one or both parents undocumented, who, on a daily basis face the cruel possibility of the arrest and deportation of a mother and father.

The anti-immigrant lobby, rooted in the fascist far right, tells U.S. born workers that the undocumented are "stealing their jobs" and claims that their mass deportation would "open up" jobs for U.S. born workers. They have convinced many, but this is fallacious reasoning. Workers of every kind, immigrant and U.S. born, documented and undocumented, occupy jobs in the economy, but also create wealth by their toil and engage in other activities (as consumers and taxpayers) that create jobs for others. Were that not the case, we could say that every worker in the country is potentially "taking a job" from some other potential worker. The problem is not "taking jobs" but lack of rights, which weakens working-class solidarity.

A recent study by the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Institute, "Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," concludes that the legalization of the undocumented would add $1.5 trillion to our country's Gross Domestic Product over a 10 year period, and generate billions in new tax revenues each year. This translates into many thousands of desperately needed jobs. Legalizing the undocumented will create jobs, not take them away.

This, and basic justice, is more than enough reason to fight for comprehensive immigration reform now.

Photo: Students march for immigrant rights May 2009 in Chicago. Pepe Lozano/PW

Monserrate runs on anti-gay platform

Dan Margolis — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:51:00 -0400

NEW YORK — "If you hate gay people, vote for me."

This disturbing message seems that it could very well be the campaign message of Hiram Monseratte, the former state senator who was booted from his post after he was found guilty of domestic violence charges and who is now running in a March 16 special election to win back his former position.

Monserrate is challenging Jose Peralta, currently a State Assembly member, for the seat in New York's 13th senatorial district, which includes Jackson Heights, East Elmhurst and Corona, all in Queens.

An unsigned non-union flier, distributed by supporters of Monserrate, referred to the ousted senator's election rival, State Assembly member Jose Peralta, as "the gay caballero." Further, the "community alert" said that Peralta is a "spokesperson for the gay community's [sic] in NYC," who are "dedicated to destroying our way of life."

On March 4, Monseratte held an anti-GLBT rally outside Peralta's office in Jackson Heights, Queens. Monseratte was the main speaker, along with Catholic and other clergy members.

Ricardo Reyes, a pastor of the El Elyon Christian Church in Corona, said, "I have seen a generation sunk down by the gay community ... If we vote for a gay marriage situation, then we are sending our children to practice something against the Bible."

The rally was in part to target Fight Back NY, which Monserrate and his cohorts called a group of outsiders trying to infiltrate the neighborhood. But City Council member Daniel Dromm of Jackson Heights, took issue with the characterization of FBNY as well as Elyon's statements. He noted that "Jackson Heights holds the second largest gay pride parade outside the borough of Manhattan. We are a multicultural and multi-ethnic community and we do not support hate."

Aside from anti-gay bigots, Monserrate isn't getting much support. Peralta, his opponent has received endorsements from a diverse crowd: the AFL-CIO, Rev. Al Sharpton, New York Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, virtually all of the City Council members in the 13th district, NARAL and Planned Parenthood, the Si Se Puede Democratic Club of Corona and numerous others.

According to Dennis Hughes, president of the New York State AFL-CIO, his organization "will coordinate a comprehensive get-out-the-vote effort, including mailings, phone banks and door-to-door visits to union members. I am confident that with labor's support, José Peralta will be elected." Hughes noted that Peralta has a 100 percent pro-labor voting record.

Hughes represents 2.5 million unionists overall, and more than 13,000 in the 13th district.

Also targeting Monserrate is President Obama's grassroots group, Organizing for America. Monserrate has angered them by using Obama's "Yes we can" campaign slogan and featuring Obama and OFA logos on campaign literature. According to OFA, Monserrate did not seek, and would not get, permission to use the logos.

A list of Monserrate supporters was not available as of this writing.

Photo: Last year protestors rallied against Hiram Monseratte, who promised he would vote "Yes" for the marriage equality bill, then ended up voting "No." http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmeng34/ / CC BY-NC 2.0

Czech young communists meet after four-year ban

Morning Star — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:41:00 -0400

LONDON (Morning Star) -- Young Czech communists met in Prague on Saturday for their first congress since the government banned their organisation nearly four years ago.

The interior ministry dissolved the Czech Communist Youth Association (KSM) in October 2006 on the basis that its programme violated the former socialist country's constitution by advocating the revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist order and the social ownership of the means of production.

The KSM appealed against the decision and, under pressure from progressive opinion at home and abroad, Prague City Court annulled it in January.

KSM member Jakub Holas described the association's first congress in over four years as a "great victory, not only for the communist movement, but for all democratic and progressive forces in the Czech Republic."

The group issued a statement calling on citizens to resist ongoing efforts to ban the KSM and the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia.

Florida Senate bill is attack on teachers

Robert Scott — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 11:18:00 -0400

According to a proposed bill in the Florida state Senate, teachers will no longer have tenure in the upcoming school year, and it would introduce so-called merit pay.

According to the bill, SB 6, "Classroom teachers hired in a Florida school district on or after July 1, 2010, would be employed under the revised probationary and annual contracts. In effect, professional service contracts would not be given to any classroom teacher hired on or after July 1, 2010. This gives school districts greater flexibility in meeting student instructional needs by retaining effective teachers and removing poor performing teachers more quickly and cost-effectively."

What does that mean? Well, beginning July 1, 2010, each new classroom teacher would be hired under a probationary contract that may not extend for over 1 year. The teacher may be dismissed without cause or can resign without violating the contract, leaving the teacher with no legal recourse. After the probationary period, the teacher would then be offered a one year contract under which dismissal or renewal can be with OR without cause.

The bill goes on to state "An annual contract may only be granted for the sixth year of teaching and thereafter to a state-certified classroom teacher who was approved by the school board for a contract and whose performance is rated effective or highly effective in at least two of the preceding three years by the performance appraisal, based on objective student learning gains and Florida's Educator Accomplished Practices. In effect, the school district would make the determination whether to renew an annual contract in its discretion, rather than the contract automatically renewing."

The bill may sound hunky-dory, but the effect of this bill will be devastating to teacher morale and hiring. What makes the matter critical is that pay will be constituted by greater than 50% on student learning gains. In other words, the teacher will be paid based upon how each individual student in that teacher's class performs, instead of at a school wide gain or performance.

As the bill itself states "Districts may not use time-served or degrees-held in setting pay schedules. Instead, student outcomes would have a potentially significant effect on compensation. Effective teachers would be paid more, while those that are unsatisfactory or in need of improvement would be paid less. The State Board of Education would define student learning gains in rule."

In practice this will set teacher against teacher, classroom against classroom and will have the possibility of minorities and lower income classes given to poorer performing teachers.

According to this bill, beginning in 2014-2015, more than 50 percent of a classroom teacher's performance would be based on learning gains of students assigned to the teacher. For other instructional personnel and school-based administrators, more than 50 percent of their performance must be based on the learning gains of students assigned to the school. "Student learning gain thresholds would be set in State Board of Education rule. Personnel may not be rated as effective or highly effective if students fail to demonstrate learning gains."

This bill should be seen for what it is; a union busting bill. A teacher would not get an annual renewing contract until the sixth year, but the school districts make the determination whether to renew at its discretion.

The implications of this bill are clear. Tenure will no longer be an accepted part of the Florida school system and pay practices. Any collective bargaining agreement could be denied. Florida public employee statutes don't seem to help public workers. It "authorizes the public employer to unilaterally control" under collective bargaining: wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment, because of "managerial" consideration.

We must gather together and stand with the Florida teachers and demand withdrawal of this language from the bill and insert positive and affirmative collective bargaining guidelines that can lift up both teachers and students.

Photo: Florida teachers discuss changes that need to be made to improve education during 2008 presidential campaign. http://www.flickr.com/photos/barackobamadotcom/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Huge demo calls for new Thai elections

Morning Star — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:51:00 -0400

LONDON (Morning Star) -- Thailand's PM and his military backers have rejected an ultimatum to dissolve parliament as over 100,000 protesters in Bangkok vowed to continue their push to oust the right-wing government.

Speaking from the capital's heavily defended 11th Infantry Regiment headquarters, where he had been staying for the past few days, Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said that he would not give in to the protesters' demand to dissolve parliament by midday.

After the deadline passed, red-shirted United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship demonstrators who had surrounded the military HQ began a march back to their main encampment.

In the first reported violence of the protests, two soldiers were wounded when four grenades exploded inside the army headquarters.

The UFDD had called on protesters not to resort to violence and said it suspected it was the work of agents provocateurs.

The front has been flexible in its tactics and deadlines, but it is adamant that Mr Vejjajiva's Democrat Party must dissolve parliament and call new elections.

The UFDD maintains that Mr Vejjajiva took office illegitimately with the connivance of the military and other parts of the traditional ruling class who were alarmed by former PM Thaksin Shinawatra's popularity, particularly among working people in the countryside.

Mr Thaksin, who became prime minister in 2001 and whose Thai Rak Thai (Thais love Thais) party won two sweeping election victories, was ousted by a 2006 military coup.

He spoke to the rally by video link on Sunday night, urging the crowd to continue their struggle peacefully, and emphasising that he considered the so-called "ammart," or elite, the enemy.

Mr Thaksin is a billionaire businessman, dogged by corruption allegations, who fled Thailand in 2008 before being convicted for a conflict of interest violation and sentenced to two years in jail.

"The people who cause the problems in the country these days are the ruling elites," said Mr Thaksin.

"To solve problems related to democracy, equality and justice - the ruling elites won't be able to do that because they don't have the conscience. The people will have to do it."

He claimed that, if returned to power, he would redistribute wealth and boost economic development in rural areas.

The Red Shirts' last major protest in Bangkok last April deteriorated into rioting that left two people dead, more than 120 people injured and buses burned on major thoroughfares before the army quashed the unrest.

Thailand has been in political turmoil since early 2006, when the People's Alliance for Democracy - which wants to limit popular elections - kicked off anti-Thaksin demonstrations.

Photo: Members of the United Front For Democracy Against Dictatorship demonstrate in Bangkok, April 8, 2009. http://www.flickr.com/photos/11401580@N03/ / CC BY-NC 2.0

Obama in Strongsville: It takes courage

Rick Nagin — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:58:00 -0400

STRONGSVILLE, Ohio -- Speaking to a boisterous crowd of 800 in suburban Cleveland here, President Barack Obama made an impassioned appeal for health care reform.

Even before he entered the gym at the Ehrnfelt Recreation Center in Strongsville, the audience was chanting repeatedly "What do we want? - Health Care! When do we want it? - Now!" and "Yes, we can!"

The crowd erupted enthusiastically when Obama was announced and continuously interrupted his 30 minute speech with applause and supportive comments.

The speech had a special significance since Strongsville is in the district of Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who has threatened to vote against Obama's plan on grounds that it does not go far enough to reduce costs to consumers. Kucinich and Obama sat next to each other on Air Force One from Washington and the two reportedly spent the entire trip discussing health care reform.

The speech also had special meaning because of a letter Obama had received from Natoma Canfield of nearby Medina which he had read to a recent meeting he had with insurance company executives.

Obama had hoped Canfield, a self-employed cleaning woman, would be at his side but two weeks ago she collapsed and had to be hospitalized where she received two blood transfusions and was diagnosed with leukemia.

Canfield lost her insurance in January after paying premiums for 16 years. Her insurance company kept hiking the premiums because she had been diagnosed with a treatable form of cancer. Last year she paid $6,000 in premiums plus $4,000 out of pocket for co-pays and prescriptions. Since she didn't reach her deductible, her policy only paid $900.

Then the company hiked her premium 40% and she would not have been able to make the mortgage payment on her home, so she cancelled her insurance and wrote the President.

"Natoma is in the hospital and that's why I'm here," Obama said.

With anger rising in his voice and the crowd continually cheering, Obama went on:

"I'm here because I remember my own mother, in the last six months of her life, on the phone in her hospital room arguing with insurance companies when she should have been spending time with her family.

"I'm here because of the millions denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions - or dropped from coverage when they get sick.

"I'm here because of the small businesses forced to choose between health care and hiring.

"I'm here because of the seniors unable to afford the prescriptions they need.

"I'm here because of the folks seeing premiums going up by thirty, forty, fifty percent in a year.

"I am here because this is not the America I believe in - and it's not the America you believe in.

"And so when you hear people say 'start over' - I want you to think of Natoma. When you hear people saying that this isn't the 'right time' - think of what she's going through. When you hear people talk about who's up and who's down in the polls - instead of what's right or what's wrong for the country - think of her and the millions of responsible people - working people - being hurt by today's system of health insurance. And I want you to remember: There but for the grace of God go I."

The status quo is unsustainable, Obama said. "We can't have a system that works better for insurance companies than it does for the American people."

As the audience shouted, "No, No, No," Obama blasted "those who believe the answer is to simply unleash the insurance industry, by providing less oversight and fewer rules. I call this the 'putting the foxes in charge of the hen house' approach. It would only give insurance companies more leeway to raise premiums and deny care."

Obama said his plan would "end the worst practices of insurance companies" would guarantee everyone coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions or length of illness. It would provide free preventive care and let young adults stay on the parents plans until they are 26. It would provide tax credits for middle income people and pay for it by cutting the subsidies to insurance companies which are draining Medicare. The plan would also close the "donut hole" in prescription drug coverage for seniors.

Obama blasted his Republican opponents who claim his plan is "a government takeover of health care," that it sets up "death panels" deciding if someone lives or dies and harms Medicare. The plan in fact "adds almost a decade of solvency to Medicare," he said.

"I believe Congress owes the American people a final up or down vote," he said and someone in the crowd shouted, "we need courage."

"Yes," Obama said, "we need courage," as the crowd erupted in cheers.

"Because in the end, this debate is about far more than the politics. It's about what kind of country we want to be. It's about the millions of lives that would be touched and, in some cases, saved by making private health insurance more secure and more affordable. It's about a woman, lying in a hospital bed, who wants nothing more than to be able to pay for the care she needs.

"And the truth is, what is at stake in this debate is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don't know about the politics. But I know what's right. So I am calling on Congress to pass these reforms - and I look forward to signing them into law."

Bipartisan Senate immigration bill looks like a bitter pill

Emile Schepers — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:32:00 -0400

Indications are that a new immigration reform bill with some bipartisan support will be introduced very soon in the Senate. But there are going to be some severe problems with the bill, which will be tilted well to the right of the House bill, HR 4321, recently introduced by U.S. Reps. Solomon Ortiz, D-Texas, and Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill..

This week, President Obama met with three different groups of people interested in the immigration reform legislation. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus talked to him about their frustration with health care legislation that, when finished, may stop undocumented immigrants from even buying private insurance from proposed pools with their own money. It would also restrict help with health care financing to legal immigrants who have been in the country for five years or less. The Hispanic Caucus wants a guarantee that there will be an immigration reform which includes the legalization of an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants.

Secondly, Obama invited representatives of a number of immigration reform organizations to meet with him in the White House on Thursday, March 11. Press reports indicate that in this meeting, he said immigration reform could not proceed without "substantial" Republican support. The Democrats with independent allies have 59 votes in the Senate, but not all the Democratic senators are in favor of legalization, and there is the issue of breaking a potential filibuster, which requires 60 votes.

Coming out of the meeting, some of the union and community leaders said that they were somewhat encouraged that Obama did commit to try to get a Senate bill before the major immigrants' rights demonstration to be held in Washington D.C. on March 21. However, they also said that Obama stressed to them the political difficulty of doing this. The activists also asked Obama to immediately suspend the deportation of ordinary, non-criminal undocumented people.

The third group with which Obama met consisted of U.S. Senators Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. They have undertaken the task of crafting a Senate bill. So far they have neither introduced it nor given details of what it might contain. There are signs, however, that it is likely to be much more conservative and oriented toward big business than the Ortiz-Gutierrez bill. They plan to include a mandatory national ID card containing biometric data for all workers. Also, they want to re-insert the idea of a large-scale new guest worker program into the legislation, which most of organized labor opposes. Finally, they want to sharply cut back permanent resident visas based on family unity, and replace them with visas based on job skills, stressing people who have higher education and advanced technical skills.

To top it off, Graham threatened that if the Democrats try to use "reconciliation" to pass health care reform, the Republicans will kill any attempt at immigration reform.

All of these things place the projected Schumer-Graham bill well to the right of the Ortiz-Gutierrez bill, and some of them would probably worsen the situation for both immigrant and U.S. citizen or legal resident workers. For example, most undocumented immigrants emigrate because the impact of corporate controlled globalization has eliminated their livelihoods and closed off all other options for family survival. They come illegally because their poverty and lack of advanced education means they can't get a visa. The United States gives out only about 5,000 visas a year to people in that skills category. But a few more can come in legally by being sponsored by relatives legally in the U.S. The Schumer-Graham proposal would seem to cut off even that escape route. Their choice will be: Stay home in an untenable situation, come here as a guest worker with few rights, or come here undocumented with absolutely no enforceable rights at all.

Some on the left are organizing against the Ortiz-Gutierrez bill, because it does not give the undocumented immediate, almost unconditional amnesty, and that it contains trade offs of various kinds involving enforcement. They wish to push the legislation to the left, and ready to mount resistance to the passage of both bills if this can not be achieved.

Looking at the balance of power in Congress and the country, this seems to be a way of ensuring that no legislation is passed at all. If that happens, the 11 or so million undocumented immigrants, about 8 and a half million or so of who are workers, will see their situation degenerate even more, harming the whole working class. The real fight in the coming weeks is going to be over what mix of good and bad elements will be in the legislation, and how this impacts on its possibilities for passage.

Photo: Clarissa Martinez de Castro, with the National Council of La Raza, center, talks to reporters outside the White House, March 11, after meeting with President Barack Obama to discuss comprehensive immigration reform. Alex Brandon/AP

Israel faces moment of truth over East Jerusalem

Susan Webb — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:01:00 -0400

Last Tuesday's announcement by the Israeli government that it will build 1,600 new housing units for Israelis in Palestinian East Jerusalem has unleashed an unparalleled furor. It was announced while Vice President Joe Biden was visiting Israel and the West Bank to promote the start of new indirect peace talks, which had just been announced a day earlier.

Some are calling it a slap in the face to Biden and the Obama administration. Others term it a wake-up call on the need for stronger U.S. action for peace. Still others say it is a moment of truth for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition.

Many commentators are noting Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's sharp 43-minute phone call to Netanyahu on Friday, in which she said the announcement of the construction plan had sent a "deeply negative signal" that had damaged Israeli-American relations. Clinton told Netanyahu that the U.S. expected Israeli officials to take "specific actions" to show "they are committed to this relationship and to the peace process," according to State Department spokesperson Philip Crowley, quoted in The New York Times.

"Such blunt language toward Israel is very rare from an American administration," the Times article said.

Crowley declined to say what actions the U.S. was calling for, but other administration officials said the United States "hoped Israel would do something drastic enough to send a signal to the already reluctant Palestinian Authority that it was committed to the peace process," according to the Times.

This morning, the "pro-Israel pro-peace" Jewish American group JStreet said it was delivering to the White House nearly 18,000 signatures in support of stronger U.S. leadership for a two-state resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The organization said the Israeli housing construction announcement for East Jerusalem was "a wake-up call" that "business-as-usual peace processing" is not working.

"An urgency of purpose suited to the danger of the moment is missing - here in the U.S., in Israel and in the American Jewish community," JStreet said. "The time has come for strong action, not more talk."

JStreet Executive Director Jeremy Ben-Ami said the crisis presented an opportunity for the White House to press for resolving the core issues, in particular the need to define a border between Israel and the future Palestinian state.

"Bold American leadership is needed now to turn this crisis into a real opportunity to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is a fundamental American national security interest," Ben-Ami said in a March 15 statement. Such efforts, he said, are also in Israel's interests, and would find "vast support among American Jews."

East Jerusalem is on the Palestinian side of the pre-1967 Green Line dividing Israel and Palestinian territory. One of the Palestinians' central demands is that East Jerusalem will be the capital of the Palestinian state.

Israeli housing construction in East Jerusalem, along with evictions of Palestinian residents, has been an ongoing issue. Before the latest crisis, on March 6, several thousand Israelis and Palestinians demonstrated in East Jerusalem against the eviction of Palestinians from their homes to accommodate Jewish settlers.

The Israeli government unilaterally "annexed" East Jerusalem following the 1967 war, and it insists that all of Jerusalem is part of Israel, therefore not covered by any settlement freeze.

But the uproar unleashed by last week's move may force Netanyahu to back off from that position.

"I think that Netanyahu is at a moment of truth," Gideon Doron, a political science professor at Tel Aviv University, told the Christian Science Monitor. "He has to choose whether or not he wants to ignite the forces for peace, or whether he'll go against the U.S. and play for time. He can't do that. It's suicide."

This morning, the Israeli news site YNet News reported that Israel would implement a "de-facto" construction freeze in Jerusalem.

YNet quoted a senior Israeli government source as saying, "The price for the American insult will be a de-facto construction freeze across greater Jerusalem. There will be no other choice, due to the government's stupidity."

According to this report, sources in the Israeli cabinet say the U.S. is demanding cancellation of the construction plan.

"The necessary gestures will halt construction work in all settlements," the YNet article said. "Tenders that were in the works will be put on hold, even if those were part of previously approved projects. In addition, ... Netanyahu will have to extend building restrictions in settlement blocks once the cabinet decision expires in September."

The Israeli prime minister is not expected to make a statement officially calling off the construction, but, the government source said, "the tense reality will force him to quietly enforce the construction freeze. Furthermore, this freeze will include all construction in the West Bank today," and probably into the future.

Other possible Israeli "gestures" include agreeing to talk about "final status" issues during the indirect talks, prisoner releases and easing restrictions in the occupied territories.

Photo: Palestinian workers on a construction site in the East Jerusalem neighborhood that Israel calls Ramat Shlomo, where the Israeli plan would add 1,600 housing units for Israelis. (AP /Dan Balilty)