New Ground
109
November - December, 2006
Contents
New Ground
109.1 - 11.28.2006
0. DSA News
A Socialist in the Senate
Push for Peace
1. Politics
Big Box Living Wage Referenda and
Other Election News
West Suburban Hospital Community Benefits Agreement
2. Democratic Socialism
Michael Harrington on the Crisis
in Economic Theory
The Norman Thomas Barry Goldwater Debate
3. Upcoming Events of Interest
New Ground
109.2 - 12.06.2006
0. DSA News
YDS Statement on the Elections
1. Politics
America, Heal Thy Self
A Policy That Works
The March to Iraq
Witnesses Wanted
2. Democratic Socialism
Socialism and Sexuality
3. Upcoming Events of Interest
New Ground
109.3 - 12.29.2006
0. DSA News
Chicago DSA Membership Meeting
2007 DSA National Convention
YDS National Conference
1. Politics
3,000 and Counting
The Cost of War
There's a Dog Cage in Gitmo with Your Name. . .
AUD Audio
2. Democratic Socialism
Why We Need Socialism in America
3. Upcoming Events of Interest
New Ground
109.4 - 01.12.2007
0. DSA News
YDS National Conference
Winter Issue of "Democratic Left"
1. Politics
Martin Luther King Day March for
Justice
America Deserves a Raise
Health Care for All in Illinois?
March to End the War
2. Democratic Socialism
Death of a Jewish Socialist
3. Upcoming Events of Interest
Universal
Health Care How!
by Bob Roman
In New Ground 103,
"Everybody In! Nobody Out!",
I predicted the obvious: that as the Adequate Health Care Task
Force (mandated by the Health Care Justice Act of 2004, see New Ground
99, "The Health Care Justice
Act Unfurls") finished
its work on recommending legislation to reform health care in
Illinois, the Campaign for
Better Health Care (CBHC) decisions on what to support would
leave it "in trouble with some part of its constituency".
The moment is nigh. If not too many people are seriously pissed
off at CBHC (I hope), the coalition it cobbled together for the
Health Care Justice Act is fracturing nonetheless.
The Task Force had hoped to finish its
work prior to the November election; however, its approach to
the task, trying for a consensus among the stakeholders, has
delayed its report until the start of the next General Assembly
session in January. The recommendation (not surprisingly, see
New Ground 103.2)
is likely to resemble the plan passed early this year and presently
being implemented by Massachusetts. While the CBHC's 2005 meeting
was studiously uncommitted, by May of this year CBHC had submitted
a report to the Task Force that essentially asked the Task Force
to examine various features of the Massachusetts approach. On
the other hand, at the 2006 CBHC meeting this past October, Jim
Duffett, CBHC's Executive Director, made it clear that the CBHC
would not automatically support whatever the Task Force produced.
The Massachusetts approach is a good
example of the current fad in legislation: public policy as an
item to be marketed. In this case, the "hook" is individual
responsibility combined with community responsibility to
facilitate the fulfillment of that responsibility for those who
are poor. This is a powerful argument when expressed properly.
For health care policy, this means that
individuals would be "mandated" to obtain health insurance,
something like the way drivers are required to have automobile
insurance. Typically this would be done as it is today: through
employment. Employers would be "mandated" to provide
insurance or, if they do not, to pay the State additional taxes.
Individual policies would be subsidized for lower income levels,
and Medicaid would be available for the truly less well off.
The State would also set standards for insurance policies. Unlike
automobile insurance, failure to buy health insurance would not
be a criminal matter. In Massachusetts there are tax consequences.
It's pretty obvious that in such an approach the details are
vitally important.
Those with some familiarity with health
care policy will note that in preserving private insurance, the
Massachusetts approach preserves the administrative overhead
(and profits) that consumes an unfortunate portion of each of
today's health care dollar. Depending upon how the employer "mandate"
is implemented, there will be an incentive for employers to dump
employees into individual policies and for low-wage employers,
Medicaid. Unless you assume that "demand for health care
at zero price may be close to infinite" (There are economists
that delusional. The quote is from "Implementing Mandates"
by C. Eugene Steuerle of the Urban Institute, 1994.), a "single
payer" approach is guaranteed to be far less expensive.
Many Massachusetts health care activists
were not at all happy with being saddled with a health care plan
that is kinder to insurance companies than it is to the health
care recipient. In Illinois, an "Illinois
Single Payer Health Care Coalition" is being formed
to promote what will be a minority report from the Task Force
for a "single payer" solution. There is also no guarantee
that the insurance industry will be happy with what the Task
Force comes up with, even though the Massachusetts plan was largely
developed by Blue Cross Blue Shield.
Because enacting legislation on both
the state and federal levels in the United States requires some
degree of consensus, this split in the coalition probably does
not improve prospects for health care reform in Illinois. But
Massachusetts is going into its plan with a very large pot of
money to cover the initial costs while Illinois has persistently
failed to deal responsibly with its finances, including consistently
failing to fulfill its constitutionally mandated responsibilities
to fund education. Add to that a smaller Democratic majority
in the General Assembly and plurality in the electorate as compared
to Massachusetts and it becomes unclear that anything the Task
Force might propose has much of a chance. It may be that this
whole effort will become, at best, another exercise in public
education.
There is such an unmet need for health
care in Illinois that this ongoing disaster will be used to browbeat
dissidents to the Task Force consensus proposal. How could they
endanger passage of a reform that would make such a difference
in the lives of so many? "Impractical" and "utopian"
will be among the epithets deployed.
But an inadequate plan is not necessarily
any different than no plan; Massachusetts is an example of this,
too. This is not that state's first experience with a universal
health care plan. In 1988, Michael Dukakis got the state legislature
to pass a public / private universal plan. Because of a failure
of financing and political leadership, it was never implemented
and was mostly repealed in 1996. Yet another failure of liberalism,
in concept and politics. De ja vu all over again?
Accountability
and the War
by Tom Broderick
The United States of America went to
war against the people of Iraq because a venal and vicious Bush
administration had an agenda waiting for a catalyst. The catalyst
came in the form of an attack against the United States by Al
Qaeda on September 11, 2001. A war against Saddam Hussein was
justified as part of a war against international terrorism. Hussein
and Al Qaeda were linked through a barrage of lies, launched
by government officials. The evidence collected by the U.S. intelligence
services didn't support the agenda to liberate the oil fields
of Iraq through regime change. No matter, that.
The American
Friends Service Committee (AFSC) and co-sponsor National
Lawyers Guild brought several speakers to Chicago to present
the case that there must be accountability for this pre-emptive
American war against the people of Iraq. The Bush war council
is working hard to avoid culpability, but this inquest (the first
of many across the nation?) is providing the groundwork for accountability.
Inquest
Iraq: Accountability and the War
was held on Saturday, October
28th at Northwestern University's Thorne Auditorium in Chicago.
Given the popular distaste for our pre-emptive war, attendance
should have been better. Was advertisement at fault? Your Chicago
DSA sent out a post card promoting the program. We got our initial
information about the event through the Illinois
Coalition for Peace and Justice. Chicago AFSC and Chicago
DSA are founding members of this statewide organization. There
appears to be a failure to reach beyond our constituencies. How
do we remedy this?
It was an all day event (10 AM to 5
PM on a Saturday). Was this the problem? Given the depth of the
program, I'd say "no." There were three panel presentations:
Policy Witness Testimony, Veteran Witness Testimony,
and Iraqi Witness Testimony.
Former CIA analyst, Ray McGovern and
former U.S. Ambassador, Ann Wright, who quit her post after the
U.S. invasion of Iraq, were the witnesses at the Policy Witness
Testimony. They are both members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals
for Sanity (VIPS) and discussed the twisting of intelligence
to fit a pre-determined goal. They condemned the profligate abuse
of power by the Bush gang: Reckless and amoral behavior; Use
of illegal military practices and armaments; Imperial hubris.
They both felt that this administration has done great damage
to any good will held for our country by the international community.
They questioned the courage of the American
Congress, with Ms. Wright calling the Congress "yellow and
lily-livered on the issue of torture and the dismissal of habeas
corpus" in trials of suspected terrorists and their supporters.
A wide net can be spread with this gutting of the American legal
system. Mr. McGovern offered a parallel with Hitler and Germany
in 1933, when Hitler blamed communists with the burning of the
Parliament. Communists then, terrorists now. Intelligence? Not
required.
Next we heard from three American veterans,
who served in Iraq: John Flynn, Kayla Williams and Mike Nowacki.
Mr. Flynn joined the military because of 9/11. Ms. Williams had
enlisted in the military prior to 9/11 and was studying Arabic
when the 9/11 attack occurred. Mr. Nowacki served during Operation
Desert Storm and re-enlisted after 9/11. None now serve in the
U.S. Armed Forces.
While each of the three had different
perspectives on the war and their service, they were all emphatic
that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was poorly planned, with little
thought given to interaction between U.S. ground forces and the
Iraqi populace.
Ms. Williams, a former Military Intelligence
soldier, pointed to the two uses of U.S. interpreters when American
ground forces began their occupation: interrogation of prisoners
or listening to communications. There was no thought given to
dealing with the civilian population.
A former infantryman and now a member
of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Mr. Flynn confirmed that this
lack of forethought led to a tacit acceptance by American ground
troops that all Iraqis were targets because American lives came
first. He stated that "when discussing the war, we need
to focus on morals not on politics or on Democrats or Republicans."
All three panelists agreed.
Serving in the U.S. Army for over ten
years, Mr. Nowacki was a Counterintelligence Agent and Interrogation
Team Leader in Baghdad during the current war. He said that "military
service is noble, but soldiers are asked to do things that are
war crimes . . . the military culture does not keep the human
factor of Iraqis as a concern . . . what does it matter? They're
all the enemy."
When asked about military recruitment
practices, none felt they had been misled. Ms. Williams gave
the longest response and it struck a discordant tone. She joined
the military to escape poverty. She felt the military had lived
up to its end of the bargain, and went on to say "joining
the military involves a contract between you and the military.
It's your responsibility to read and understand that contract.
It's your fault if you don't." Neither of the other two
panelists gave any indication that they concurred with what seemed
such an extremely individualist response. Coming from a self-described
disadvantaged past, it's unfortunate that Ms. Williams didn't
regard contracts as documents favoring the writer over the signer.
Another question that drew some interesting
responses was: "What are your dealings with the Bureau of
Veterans Affairs now that you are out?"
Answering a somewhat different question,
Mr. Nowacki talked about the lack of support for the families
of the National Guard members sent to Iraq. Because these were
civilian soldiers, there was no overarching support mechanism
and many families had nowhere to turn for emotional or physical
support. Mr. Flynn simply answered "I'd rather not deal
with the bureaucracy." Ms. Williams said that her only dealings
were because of her husband. He also served in Iraq and suffered
injury to his brain. Because of this, she was brought into contact
with veterans who seemed to have no life and no future and she
worried that this could be her fate. There was a span of no sound
from the panel and the audience after this statement. The insanity
of war was made personal, resonant and painful.
The last panel gave us an Iraqi position.
We heard from: Raed Jarrar, an Iraqi-American who was in Iraq
during and after the 2003 invasion; Naba Hameed, an Iraqi citizen
and professor of biology at the University of Baghdad and survivor
of the invasion and occupation of Iraq; and Dr. Dahlia Wasfi,
an American medical doctor with relatives in Baghdad and Basra.
All three told us that the occupation
of Iraq by foreigners (particularly the Americans) is causing
more harm than good for the people of Iraq. There was a difference
on the best way to disengage. Ms. Hameed, who resides in Iraq,
felt that immediate withdrawal was not the best option. Dr. Wasfi
and Mr. Jarrar wanted American troops out right away but felt
we had an obligation to help (perhaps through the United Nations)
to stabilize and rebuild Iraq.
Questioned about the violence between
the Sunni, Shiite and Kurds, the three panelists responded with
an artful exclusion of the Kurds. The division, and therefore
the violence, between the Sunni and Shiite communities, was blamed
on the war and occupation. According to Mr. Jarrar, most Iraqi
families are a mix of Shiite and Sunni and would not turn on
each other. I hope this is not wishful thinking. Because questioning
during the forum was by written format only, the fact that the
Kurds were not included in responses by the panelists gives me
no comfort. The issue of an independent Kurdistan involves many
countries bordering Iraq.
There was an action component to the
Inquest Iraq program. Several laptop computers were available
with a pre-written letter to U.S. Representatives asking for
an inquiry into the war. I was staffing one of the tables and
during the break between sessions and it was a popular stop.
The recent elections hold out hope for
disengagement from this pre-emptive war. This war is a brutal
crime and those who fomented it need to be punished.
Picking
Tomatoes Is No Joke, Ronald!
by Tom Broderick
Ronald "the Clown" McDonald
and Hamburglar have been put on notice. The Coalition of Immokalee
Workers (CIW) is a farmworkers' coalition and they spent four
years struggling with Taco Bell (Yum Brands) to earn more money
and gain better working conditions. They succeeded and now they
have targeted the McDonald's Corporation, headquartered in Oak
Brook, Illinois.
Last April, they came to town for informational
picketing at the headquarters and at a flagship McDonald's operation
in the River North area of Chicago, making connections with local
religious and social action groups. They came back this past
October to again picket the headquarters and four additional
McDonald franchises and to deepen and broaden connections. Chicago
DSA has been among the groups supporting this work.
This month, some of the organizers are
in town to form a working coalition with local groups to establish
a local network and maintain momentum. They are meeting in Chicago
and the western suburbs and plan to come back in March or April,
2007, for another round of informational pickets. Currently they
are not calling for a boycott.
The CIW is based in Florida and is an
alliance between the farmworkers, the Alliance for Fair Food
and Interfaith Action. The CIW website is www.ciw-online.org.
The average migrant worker earns 40
to 45 cents per 32 pound bucket of tomatoes, a rate that has
remained constant since 1978. As farmworkers, they are excluded
from the 1935 National Labor Relations Act, denying them protection
when they organize. They are also excluded from the right to
overtime pay. For more information about the state of agricultural
labor in the U.S., see Oxfam America's report, "Like Machines
in the Fields", available at www.maketradefair.com.
Having successfully won an increase
from 40 to 45 cents per 32 pound bucket to 75 cents per bucket
from Taco Bell, the CIW is now looking to pressure McDonald's
to follow suit. Though this pay increase nearly doubled the income
of the tomato pickers, it only puts the farmworkers at the poverty
level.
In addition, the Taco Bell agreement
authorizes farmworkers, through the CIW, to participate fully
in the Taco Bell code of conduct. The agreement commits Taco
Bell to buy only from Florida growers who agree to the penny
per pound pass-through and to document and monitor the pass-through,
providing the CIW with complete weekly reports of Taco Bell's
Florida tomato purchase.
McDonald's wants none of this, preferring
to keep the migrant farmworkers destitute. You can help change
this. Chicago DSA will be publicizing CIW actions in Chicago.
However you might hear of it, please try to join the picket lines
or have an organizer speak to your group. We've also enclosed
a postcard with this issue of New Ground that you can
send to McDonald's or, better yet, write your own letter of support.
|