Majority Rules Blog

Promoting Citizen Awareness and Active Participation for a Sustainable Democratic Future

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Washington State Minimum Wage Increases January 1, 2011

Washington State's minimum wage continues to lead the nation. On January 1, 2011 it will increase 12 cents per hour to $8.67 per hour. As reported by Rachael La Corte in today's Seattle Times, an attempt by business interests in Washington State to challenge the 12 cent increase was rejected by a Kittitas County Judge after a motion for summary judgement to prevent it going into effect on Saturday. The lawsuit still remains active according to the article.

Groups challenging the minimum wage increase included the Washington Restaurant Association, the Washington Farm Bureau and the Washington Retail Association.

According to the article:
A Seattle-based lawyer for Justice for Immigrant Workers said the increase is "a big deal for a lot of people."
"That 12-cent raise goes further than you think," Rebecca Smith said. "It's going to make a difference of a few dollars a week — but a few dollars a week buys an extra loaf of bread, another gallon of milk or a gallon of gas."
The agency's decision in October to raise the rate came after conflicting legal opinions from the state attorney general and the authors of the 1998 voter initiative that tied the minimum wage to the Consumer Price Index.
The current Federal minimum wage is only $7.25 and has no consumer inflation index adjustment which means that each time inflation goes up nationally, jobs tied to the federal minimum wage see decreased purchasing power for the hours worked.  Republicans have consistently opposed Federal minimum wage increases while Democrats have supported them.

Ten states have minimum wages that adjust to index them to inflation.  Washington State was the first state to enact legislation to automatically raise the minimum wage based on increases in the consumer price index.  The voters enacted the current law by passing Initiative 688 in 1998.

As noted on the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries website:
Initiative 688, approved by Washington voters in 1998, requires L&I to make a cost-of-living adjustment to its minimum wage each year based on the federal Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). This measures the average change in prices on a fixed group of goods and services such as food, shelter, medical care, transportation and other goods and services people purchase for day-to-day living. L&I recalculates the state's minimum wage in September, and it takes effect the following year on January 1.
The minimum wage in Washington State was $8.55 in 2009 and stayed the same in 2010 because of a decrease in inflation.  The minimum wage will increase to $8.67 on Jan 1, 2011.  It will be the highest in the nation.

In this year's Senate election in Washington State, Republican Dino Rossi, supported lowering the minimum wage. Other Republicans this year publicly supported lowering the minimum wage. Amanda Getchel notes that:
Republican candidates Joe Miller of Alaska, John Raese of West Virginia, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Linda McMahon of Connecticut have all called for reducing the minimum wage with Raese flat out saying it should be eliminated.
Only Rand Paul was elected by the voters.

The current Federal minimum wage law was passed in 2007. Washington State Republicans Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Doc Hastings joined with  other Republicans nationally to oppose the bill. All 233 Democrats in the House at the time joined with 82 Republicans to support the legislation. 116 Republicans in the House voted no. They include 9 of the incoming 12 members of the House leadership.

Of the members of the incoming House leadership,

Speaker of the House: Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)- VOTED NO

Majority Leader: Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) - VOTED NO

Majority Whip: Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) - VOTED NO

Conference Chairman: Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) - VOTED NO

NRCC Chairman: Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) - VOTED NO

Policy Committee Chairman: Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) - VOTED NO

Conference Vice-Chair: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) - VOTED NO

Conference Secretary: Rep. John Carter (R-TX) - VOTED NO

Freshman Representative: Rep.-elect Kristi Noem (R-SD) - NOT IN CONGRESS AT TIME

Freshman Representative: Rep.-elect Tim Scott (R-SC) - NOT IN CONGRESS AT TIME

Rules Committee Representative: Rep. David Dreier (R-CA) - VOTED NO

Chairman of the Leadership: Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) - VOTED YES

Nine of the 12 House Leadership members voted no to raise the minimum wage. Two other members of the incoming House leadership were not in Congress at the time. Only Greg Walden voted NO - Oregon voters previously passed an initiative to index their minimum wage to inflation. Oregon's minimum wage is near the top in the country.

Prospects for any Federal increase in the minimum wage in the near future looks difficult as long as Republicans control the House.

As noted in a separate article in the Seattle Times seven states will see an increase in their minimum wage in 2011.
Poverty advocates say the rising minimum wages shouldn't be seen as raises, just adjustments to keep the working poor at the same level as prices of goods rise.
The National Employment Law Project, a New York-based advocate for workers, estimates that about 647,000 people will see their paychecks go up in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.
Three other states with their minimum wage indexed to inflation did not see enough of an increase to see a rise in their minimum wage - Florida, Nevada and Missouri.

In the near term any increase in the minimum wage will probably have to take place at the state level. In previous initiative efforts to raise the minimum wage in Washington State voters have strongly supported raising the minimum wage. Initiative 688 in 1998 was approved by Washington voters by a 66% yes vote. A previous vote to raise the minimum wage in 1988, Initiative 518, passed with a 77% yes vote. It was not indexed to inflation.

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Washington State House of Representatives Reorganizes Committees for 2011-2012 Session

For the 2011-2012 Legislative Session, the Olympia House of Representatives will have 21 Standing Committees:


Agriculture & Natural Resources (AGNR)

Business & Financial Services (BFS)

Capital Budget (CB)

Community Development & Housing (CDH)

Early Learning & Human Services (ELHS)

Education (ED)

Education Appropriations & Oversight (APPE)

Environment (ENVI)

General Government Appropriations & Oversight (APPG)

Health & Human Services Appropriations & Oversight (APPH)

Health Care & Wellness (HCW)

Higher Education (HE)

Judiciary (JUDI)

Labor & Workforce Development (LWD)

Local Government (LG)

Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness (PSEP)

Rules (RUL)

State Government & Tribal Affairs (SGTA)

Technology, Energy & Communications (TEC)

Transportation (TR)

Ways & Means (WAYS)

2011-12 House Standing Committees/Issue Areas

Please note: This is a general description of issue areas considered by committees; not a definitive or exhaustive listing. It is provided solely to assist members in requesting committee assignments.

Agriculture & Natural Resources

The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee considers issues relating to agricultural production, marketing, and sales; animal and plant disease control; fisheries and wildlife; forest practices and forest fire protection; water; and mining. The committee also considers the management of certain state-owned lands.

Business & Financial Services

The House Business & Financial Services Committee considers the licensing and regulation of businesses and professions (except for health care professions). The committee also considers issues relating to insurance, including the activities of the Office of the Insurance Commissioner and the Pollution Liability Insurance Agency, the solvency of insurance companies, and the rates and practices of insurance companies. Financial services issues include the safety and soundness of state banks and credit unions, the regulation of consumer credit and lending, and the regulation of securities and investments. The committee also considers consumer protection issues relating to motor vehicles, financial services, and insurance.

Capital Budget

The House Capital Budget Committee considers the state capital budget which approves money for the construction and repair of public buildings and for other long-term investments, such as land acquisitions and transfers. In addition, the committee considers state money that is either given or lent to local governments or nonprofit organizations for infrastructure, housing, and cultural and heritage facilities. The committee also considers legislation that authorizes state debt and legislation that affects state buildings and land.

Community Development and Housing


The House Community Development and Housing Committee considers issues relating to the economic and social vitality of communities, including the establishment and operation of special districts that provide community services, community development funding, strategies to build self-sufficiency for low income communities, small business, business assistance and financing, tourism, and trade. Housing issues considered by the committee include the accessibility and affordability of housing, state assistance to low-income housing, housing authorities and the Housing Finance Commission.

Early Learning & Human Services

The House Early Learning and Human Services Committee considers issues relating to early learning from birth to kindergarten, as well as a broad array of issues affecting children and families, including parent education, foster care, dependency, child protective services, child welfare services, children's mental health and family reconciliation services. The committee also considers family support programs, including TANF and Disability Lifeline, issues relating to persons with developmental disabilities, adults in need of drug and alcohol treatment, vocational rehabilitation, and at risk-youth, youth violence prevention and juvenile offenders.

Education

The House Education Committee considers kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) educational policy and finance issues.

Education Appropriations & Oversight

The House Education Appropriations & Oversight Committee considers issues relating to funding and oversight of early learning, K-12, and higher education programs and agencies and makes funding recommendations to the Ways and Means Committee. In addition, the committee considers bills relating to early learning, K-12 and higher education with limited fiscal impact.

Environment

The House Environment Committee considers issues relating to climate change, renewable energy standards, recycling and solid waste, hazardous waste, toxics, air quality, aquatic lands, oil spill prevention, the State Environmental Policy Act, and parks and recreation. The committee also oversees the Puget Sound Partnership's activities in Puget Sound and Hood Canal.

General Government Appropriations & Oversight

The House General Government Appropriations & Oversight Committee considers issues relating to funding and oversight of general government, natural resources and corrections programs and agencies and makes funding recommendations to the Ways and Means Committee. In addition, the committee considers bills relating to general government, natural resources and corrections with limited fiscal impact.

Health & Human Services Appropriations & Oversight

The House Health and Human Services Appropriations & Oversight Committee considers issues relating to funding and oversight of health and human services programs and agencies and makes funding recommendations to the Ways and Means Committee. In addition, the committee considers bills relating to health and human services with limited fiscal impact.

Health Care & Wellness

The House Health Care and Wellness Committee considers a broad range of issues relating to the provision of physical and mental health care services, long-term care, and strategies to promote better health. Health care service issues include the licensing and regulation of health care facilities and the credentialing of health care providers. The committee also regulates pharmacies and pharmaceutical drugs, and has oversight and regulatory responsibility for state and local public health programs. The committee also considers issues relating to the accessibility and affordability of health care in both the private health insurance market and public health programs such as Medicaid and the basic health plan.

Higher Education

The House Higher Education Committee considers issues relating to the state's public and independent baccalaureate colleges and universities, public community and technical colleges, and private career schools. Issues include governance and coordination of higher education, financial aid, tuition, distance learning, and the licensing of private colleges and career schools.

Judiciary

The House Judiciary Committee considers a wide variety of subjects relating to civil and criminal law, including issues involving commercial law, torts, probate, guardianships, civil commitment, drunk driving, courts and judicial administration, landlord/tenant law, and Consumer Protection Act remedies and processes; and family law issues such as marriage, marriage dissolution, child support and adoption.

Labor & Workforce Development

The House Labor and Workforce Development Committee considers issues relating to industrial insurance, unemployment compensation, collective bargaining, family leave, safety and health standards, and employment standards, such as wage laws and employment discrimination. The committee also considers issues relating to the building and construction trades, and workforce development issues, including apprenticeships, job skills and working retraining, and implementation of the Workforce Investment Act.

Local Government

The House Local Government Committee considers issues relating to the operations and financing of counties, cities, and some special districts. The committee also considers issues relating to the Growth Management Act and related land use issues, such as local permitting and the subdivision of property.

Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness

The House Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Committee considers issues relating to law enforcement agencies, crime prevention, criminal penalties and sentencing, registration and civil commitment of sex offenders, adult correctional programs and institutions, mentally ill offenders, and state and local government preparedness to respond to public emergencies, including the interoperability of emergency communications systems.

Rules

The House Rules Committee considers all bills reported from policy and fiscal committees and determines whether, and in what order, to schedule their consideration on the floor of the House. The Rules Committee also reviews, adopts and schedules consideration of floor resolutions.

State Government & Tribal Affairs

The House State Government and Tribal Affairs Committee considers issues relating to the processes of government, including state agency rule-making, state government reorganization, elections and campaign finance, public disclosure, ethics in government, procurement standards, and public employment. The committee also oversees various state agencies and officials, and considers the regulation and oversight of liquor, tobacco and gambling, and issues relating to veterans and the government-to-government relationship of the state and Indian tribes.

Technology, Energy & Communications

The House Technology, Energy & Communications Committee considers deployment, regulation, and access to technology and electronic communications; energy availability, production, and conservation; and related infrastructure issues.

Transportation

The House Transportation Committee considers the transportation budget, revenue sources for transportation funding, and issues relating to transportation policy and transportation agencies, including the Department of Transportation and the Washington State Patrol.

Ways & Means

The House Ways and Means Committee considers the operating budget bill, global fiscal issues such as pension policy and compensation, and bills with larger fiscal impacts. The committee also coordinates the work of the Education Appropriations & Oversight, General Government Appropriations & Oversight, and Health and Human Services Appropriations & Oversight Committees in developing the operating budget. The committee also considers issues relating to state and local revenues, such as increases or decreases in taxes, exemptions from taxes, and changes in the administration of taxes. (Note: Issues involving revenue for transportation purposes, such as gasoline taxes, are usually considered by the House Transportation Committee.)
 
The above information is courtesy of Seth Dawson.
 
For more information and to track legislative bills go to www.leg.wa.gov.

Labels: , , ,

Friday, December 10, 2010

King County Democrats Elect New Officers

This last weekend the King County Democrats met and elected new officers for 2011 and 2012. Here is a list of who was elected.

Chair: Steve Zemke

1st Vice Chair: Megan Gustafson

2nd Vice Chair: Andrew Villeneuve

3rd Vice Chair: Chad Lupkes

4th Vice Chair: Omaha Sternberg

Secretary: Chris Maryatt

Treasurer: Jeff Upthegrove


State Committeeman: Javier Valdez


State Committewoman: Ann Martin

And here is a little more about each of the officers in statements they wrote for the election:

Chair: Steve Zemke

King County represents a third of the voters in this state. I am running to be the next Chair of the King County Democrats because I believe we must work hard to organize and turn out Democratic voters in King County, not just to win local races but to keep our state blue and re-elect Barack Obama and other Democrats in 2012.

I have been active in Democratic politics for over 30 years, helping to elect Democratic candidates and pass progressive initiatives supported by the Democratic Party. For the last 2 years I have the Co-Chair of the King County Democrats Legislative Action Committee and served on the KCDCC Board.

My involvement in Democratic politics, grassroots organizing, fundraising, legislative action, initiative campaigns, candidate campaigns, media outreach, managing campaigns, serving on and chairing Boards of organizations and much more has given me the skills and insight needed to help us more aggressively forward over the next 2 years to counter the Republican onslaught that has emerged over the last two years. Working together we can get much done and help Democrats prevail and triumph in 2011 and 2012.

First Vice Chair - Megan Gustafson

My name is Megan Gustafson and I've been very active with the young democrats and politics. I'm running for 1st Vice Chair for KCDCC. I work as an IT & Sales Admin for a small business in Kirkland, WA and I earned my BA from University of Iowa and MPA from University of Nebraska. I actively volunteered for Governor Gregoire's campaigns doing research and helping process contributions. As the KCYD Chair, I attended KCDCC meetings regularly. I was proud to be a part of the KCDCC at that time which taught me about the party and supporting our candidates. In 2009, I was the Young Democrats of Washington State President after multiple years as the YDWA Vice President of Finance where I wrote the budget, kept track of the finances, and wrote some fundraising letters. I was named Washington State Democratic Party Female Rising Star of the Year at the 16th Annual Warren G. Magnuson (Maggies) Awards Ceremony and I completed the Institute for Democratic Future program. I am the Women's Political Caucus State Secretary and want to help more women get elected. Currently, I am PCO in the 45th Legislative District and serve as their alternate for KCDCC. I am excited to serve as the 1st Vice-Chair and I hope you will support me on Saturday. Thanks! Megan Gustafson.,

Second Vice Chair: Andrew Villeneuve

Andrew Villeneuve is the founder and executive director of the Northwest Progressive Institute and a columnist for Sound Publishing's Reporter Newspapers. He has helped organize opposition to every Tim Eyman initiative since 2002, principally through NPI's Permanent Defense project, and has served on the King County Democrats' Endorsements Committee in addition to chairing the 45th District Democrats' Endorsements Committee. He is running for 2nd Vice Chair to put his expertise - especially in strategy, communications, and technology - to work for the King County Democrats during what promises to be a challenging 2011-2012 election cycle.
Andrew Villeneuve
NPI :: revolutionizing grassroots politics @ nwprogressive.org

Third Vice Chair: Chad Lupkes

Chad Lupkes became active in the Democratic Party in 2003 after beating Cancer. He was active in Democracy for Washington, the Progressive Democratic Caucuses of Washington, and the Washington State Progressive Caucus. Chad is the chair of the 46th District Democrats and 1st Vice Chair of the King County Democrats from 2009-2010. He is running for 3rd Vice Chair in order to take on the challenge of building the membership and PCO recruitment efforts of the county organization as we head into the 2012 Election Season. The mission is to organize the membership information of the King County Democrats to make engaging, educating and empowering Democrats and Progressives in King County as easy as possible.
Chad Lupkes - http://chadlupkes.blogspot.com
Chair, 46th District Democrats - http://46dems.com/
1st Vice Chair, King County Democrats - http://kcdems.org/
Webmaster, Washington State Democratic Chairs Organization - http://wa-demchairs.org/

Fourth Vice Chair - Omaha Sternberg

My name is Omaha Sternberg, and I am asking for your vote for 4th Vice Chair. I am a lifelong Democrat. I started as a teenager helping my best friend's parents in their election campaigns, and was heavily involved with the Equal Rights Amendment work in Florida. With the advent of Bush politics, I felt the need to become more active than ever, joining the 33rd legislative district and eventually becoming the chair.

With the current economic crisis still overshadowing our efforts locally as well as nationally, and with the Republican party having so effectively manipulated the public political voice, now is the time to take aggressive measures to make sure that our rights and values are upheld. There is no room for complaining about what hasn't happened. There is only room for looking at what needs to happen, planning how it will happen, and taking the steps to ensuring that it will.

Recruitment, especially of younger democrats, and proper communication of our message is crucial to that plan. Building the party with enthusiastic members with fresh ideas using cutting edge tools will bring our message to new and larger audiences. Communicating our messages in new ways...clear and concise...will help our message be heard and transmitted farther.

I hope that you will join me in this endeavor and elect me as your vice-chair. Together, we will be heard!

Secretary - Chris Maryatt

Chris has been working on campaigns since he was sixteen. He was then active in the Young Democrats at Vassar College, and before going to law school, spent three years as a Canvasser, Field Manager, and Citizen Outreach Assistant Director for various progressive issue campaigns. He served as Vice President and President of the Young Democrats at Seattle University Law School, and has been active with the 43rd Legislative District Democrats, serving two terms as Treasurer and one concurrent term as First Vice Chair. He is currently the Secretary for the King County Democrats, and looks forward to working to make sure President Obama, Senator Cantwell, and many other Democrats up and down our ballot are elected in 2012.

Treasurer - Jeff Upthegrove:

Jeff has been involved with Democratic politics as an organizer, campaign worker, fundraiser and volunteer for 20 years. He currently serves on the Executive Board and as Membership Chair of the 34th District Democrats, where he has led an effort in recent years to upgrade systems for management and reporting of financial and membership information. Jeff has extensive experience in finance and bookkeeping in the business world, having worked as Business Manager, Chief Operating Officer and CEO of a series of small and medium sized businesses. Jeff currently works as a political consultant doing professional campaign Treasury and other services for progressive candidates, office-holders and organizations.

State Committeeman: Javier Valdez

As a member of the KCDCC Executive Board for over seventeen years, I've had the honor serving you as your State Committeeman for the past ten years. I ask for your support for another term. As a member of the State Party Executive Board., I'm proud to have helped lead the effort for King County/Seattle being chosen to host the 2012 State Party Convention. My commitment to the Party and its causes runs deep, including Chair of the 43rd LD (1997-2002), 46th LD (2007-2009), and I was recently elected as President of AFSCME Council 2, Local 21-C. Thank you. Javier Valdez

State Committewoman: Ann Martin

Ann and her husband moved to West Seattle in 1976 where they raised a son and daughter, Seattle-Public -School educated Democrats, who are working on bachelor and doctorate degrees, respectively. Ann has been active in Democratic politics as a PCO and in many leadership positions at the district and county levels. She has also served on rules, credentials, and platform committees at all levels of the Party. She has served as a campaign manager, campaign treasurer and other volunteer positions for Democratic candidates and issues. She is active in her community, serving on the board of the Southwest Youth and Family Services and involved in many groups like the West Seattle Democratic Women. For the past two years, she has been proud to serve the KCDCC as state committee woman, participating in statewide meetings and in the Agriculture and Rural Caucus and the Elections Committee. She chaired the KCDCC Multicultural Networking Team and was a member of the Bylaws, Platform, and Resolutions Committee. She hopes to continue to represent you on the state committee for the next two years.

Labels: ,

City of Seattle and Seattle School District to End Lives of 29 Trees at Ingraham High School that have Served the City for over 70 Years

It is with sadness that we (Save the Trees - Seattle) announce that we have reached the end of our efforts to save some 29 mature Douglas fir, western red cedar and madrone trees at Ingraham High School. We recently lost our appeal before King County Superior Court Judge Teresa Doyle and are unable to continue with an appeal to the Appellate Court because of the cost and potential liability if we lose on continued appeal.

Save the Trees - Seattle has succeeded in reducing the trees to be cut in the NW Grove from an initial 70 to less than 30. The 29 trees to be cut down represent about one quarter of the trees in the NW Grove. We also succeed in saving a mixed conifer madrone grove of the trees on the east side of the school that had been protected for 50 years in an agreement with the Parks Department but which the Seattle School District had targeted for a parking lot.

Our efforts to save the NW Tree Grove helped to get the City to pass a stronger interim tree protection law which currently protects tree groves from future development. We also originated the idea and worked to pass legislation to create the current Urban Forestry Commission. And we are working now to fight the proposal by the Mayor and his Department of Planning and Development to deregulate tree protection in the city that would send us back to the roar of chainsaws clearcutting what trees remain in Seattle's reduced tree canopy which has been reduced by half since the 1970's.

The time to appeal expires as of Dec 9th so we expect the Seattle School District to rev up their chainsaws and cut the trees down as early as this weekend. We urge you to stop by and say good-by to the 29 trees condemned to die because of the City's and the Seattle School District's blindness to environmental and ecological values.

If the trees are gone when you come by, we urge you to pay homage to the 70 plus years of service they provided the city by reducing stormwater runoff, cleaning our city's air, producing oxygen for us to breathe, providing a park area for the school and the neighborhood, providing habitat for birds and squirrels and insects and other animals and plant life, for being part of the last 50 plus acres of an uncommon plant habitat in Seattle (a conifer madrone forest), and for just being there for their beauty and serenity.

This Sunday (Dec 12, 2010) at 10 AM we will hold a Citizen's Memorial Service on the North side of the tree grove to honor the trees for their 70 years of service to our neighborhood and city and to say good -by.


The street is N 135th between Ashworth Ave N and Meridian Ave N. Please come by and bring something in writing or a sign or flowers or something to post on the wire fence circling the grove. Bring a poem or words or a picture to share with others as we grieve for this unnecessary loss of part of our city and our neighborhood and our green urban forest infrastructure.

And vow to write to the Mayor and the Seattle City Council, urging them to reject efforts to eliminate all protections for existing trees as the Mayor proposes. Urge that they strengthen our tree laws to protect trees like those being cut down at Ingraham High School.


And if you are able to - please donate to Save the Trees to help pay off our legal bills and support our efforts needed over the next year to get a much stronger tree protection law passed. Contributions can be sent to Save the Trees-Seattle, c/o Steve Zemke, 2131 N 132nd St, Seattle, WA 98133. If you have questions or would like to help in our fight, you can contact us at stevezemke@msn.com or call 206-366-0811.

We want to thank everyone who has helped over the last three years. Your support has keep us going. While we have not saved all of the NW Grove, we have reduced the impact and loss overall. We as a group are dedicating ourselves to strengthening our City's tree laws so that other trees in our city can avoid the fate facing those trees being cut down at Ingraham High School with taxpayer dollars. On Sunday we will pay homage to those trees that are dying an unnatural death despite their long service of 70 years to our city. We hope you will join us in saying thanks on Sunday.

Steve Zemke
Chair - Save the Trees-Seattle

PS - Come by and see the trees and post something on the fence or leave something when you can. As I noted, there is no guarantee that the trees won't be cut down before Sunday. The 29 trees to be cut down are those closest to the west side of the Ingraham High School Building.

E-mails for the Seattle City Council are:
tim.burgess@seattle.gov

sally.clark@seattle.gov

richard.conlin@seattle.gov

sally.bagshaw@seattle.gov

jean.godden@seattle.gov

mike.obrien@seattle.gov

nick.licata@seattle.gov

bruce.harrell@seattle.gov

tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov

Also send a letter to: Mayor McGinn, Seattle City Hall 7th floor, 600 Fourth Avenue, P.O. Box 94749, Seattle, WA 98124-4749

PPS: Please forward this to others as time is short. Let neighbors and others know and come on Sunday.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, December 08, 2010

Overturn Citizens United -- Demand Fair Elections and a Fair Economy

by Craig Salins
We need a broad movement to overturn the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling (January, 2010). Without that, nearly everything we do to stop or rein in the corporate takeover of our country is unlikely to make headway - because of the two-sides-of-a-coin relationship between spending on elections and lobbying, and public policy lawmaking.
We need to talk candidly with friends and concerned citizens about our economy and our elections. And it's necessary, if we're to save either from further meltdown and ruin.
They're deeply related of course - in biology its called a symbiotic relationship. Considering the economy, and election politics, each is "fixed" or kept in place by the other. It's mutual back-scratching: campaign cash flows in, and political (and economic) favors flow out. This "pay-to-play" politics keeps wealthy special interests on top of the economic haystack, and from that perch they have the wealth to influence election outcomes and lawmaking to their liking.
Of course, this self-interest and short-term profiteering hurts the country. It's brought our economy into serious recession, and may bring us to further ruin without fundamental change.
The predicament in suggesting a road map for change is knowing or deciding where to start.
I believe a fight to reverse the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United is a place to start - and a necessary game-changer. Unless we stop Wall Street banks and corporate chieftains from buying elections through massive spending on issue ads and hidden or laundered campaign contributions, there's little hope to enact needed reforms elsewhere, including reclaiming the airwaves from corporate takeover, and adopting policies that can reduce poverty and save our middle class, and return America to a balanced economy offering opportunity and a fair shake for everyone.
We need a broadly-based movement to restore the right of self-government to Main Street, not the bankers and speculators on Wall Street - a movement to put us on the road to true economic fairness and a robust economy in America.
Economics: The prime influence:
Also - we need to talk openly about wealth and poverty, and greed - and the economic class nature of politics in America. It's the elephant in the living room (no pun intended) with a mighty influence over elections, campaigns and lobbying - nearly everything we observe, and the challenges we face.
You know the story: Within a year of TARP and the bailouts, the "too-big-to-fail" banks on Wall Street are rolling in profits and bonuses, while millions of Americans are still dealing with home foreclosures, job loss and spiraling health care premiums that seem never to stop or level off.
Off-shore hedge funds speculate in worldwide currency manipulations that bankrupt whole countries (Ireland, anyone? Is Spain next?). Yet Congress can't - or won't - regulate their activities, or even tax the multi-million dollar profits of their owners and investors at more than the 15% capital-gains rate - which is less, by the way, than the income-tax rate paid by most Americans who earn barely a living wage and survive only through credit card debt and perhaps a shrinking home-equity loan.
Economic posturing: what a spectacle: The U.S. Congress and it's "Debt Commission" on the one hand, trying to figure out how to reduce a national debt in the trillions of $$ -- while the GOP (spinning the November election results as a "mandate of the people") threatens a Congressional filibuster in order to win tax breaks for millionaires.
It's an outrage! Think economics 101: Any eighth-grader who's run a lemonade stand knows you sell more lemonade only when there are more customers with dimes in their pockets - and not because you've invested in a larger ice chest and stocked your inventory with more cups and frozen lemonade. In fact, don't "invest" if you don't see customers coming.
Henry Ford got it, capitalist though he was - and he put spending power in the pockets of Model T Ford workers. Is there something about this lesson that is missed in the thinking of the new GOP leaders (and some of the Democrats) in Congress?
These "conservatives" in Congress want to trick us into believing that a permanent tax cut for millionaires is essential to economic recovery, and will somehow restore full-employment in America.
What a misunderstanding of lemonade-stand economics! Really, how much lemonade can a millionaire drink? Is that millionaire gonna grow your lemonade stand business, if you don't have other paying customers? Not likely. And what's true for the lemonade stand is true for all of America.
We must NOT use the federal budget deficit - and the economic recession - as an excuse to weaken the nation's social safety net, to cut public spending and services for Main Street. Such policy moves serve only to further shift wealth to the top and to weaken chances of an economic recovery. Yet this is a ploy that's being popularized, with the catch-phrase: "Don't burden future generations with debt..." The truth is, we have budget deficits primarily because our tax system is so unfair - where the wealthy are not paying their share - not because we spend too much on public investment or on services we all need.
David Stockman - Reagan's budget director - is now speaking out, even as a true conservative. He favors increasing taxes for the wealthy, to begin lowering the nation's debt. Note that for decades during the Great Prosperity (end of WW-II through the 1960's) top tier income tax rates of 70 to 90 percent were in effect. And because tax revenues were sufficient to pay the costs of economic investment and needed public services, the nation's debt was under control even as we built the interstate highway system, expanded rural electrification, developed new products and services, expanded educational opportunity, launched the internet, and brought new technology to households across the land.
But then came tax cuts and financial deregulation, and financial "innovations" providing high-rollers with new opportunities to invest wealth to make more money. Even while the national debt was spiraling out of control, the net wealth of the top 5% in America increased five-fold - from $8 trillion to $40 trillion - in just twenty-two years (1985 to 2007).
How did this happen - this great and growing concentration of wealth? Off-the-chart CEO compensation and bonuses. Capital gains and profit on Wall Street and off-shore, through largely-unregulated 'innovative' financial products - derivatives, hedge funds, engaging in currency trades and market manipulations. Corporate mergers, consolidations, and profit-taking. All in all, an immense transfer of wealth to the already-wealthy - while the average earnings of Main Street households stayed virtually level. Without the means to keep pace with rising costs of health care, education and housing, many working families went further into debt.
All that "wealth" in the top tier will not create jobs - except perhaps higher pay and bonuses for Wall Street traders, CEOs and executives of the largest banks. Investors will put their wealth "to work" in places of highest return: capital gains speculation - placing and manipulating bets - on Wall Street and through giant hedge funds (many off-shore). Why risk investing in a stateside lemonade stand, if there are few or no customers? - and if instead you can earn a higher return investing in an overseas call center, sweatshop, or simply through speculating in fluctuating currency exchange?
Profits in the financial services sector have accounted for 40 percent of all corporate profit in recent decades - while manufacturing (home-building, autos, etc.) has lagged. The business of America has become making money rather than making things - and the jobs and high incomes go to Wall Street traders and bankers who produce no real wealth, rather than to carpenters, farmers and machinists who make and grow things, and nurses and teachers who provide necessary services. It's outrageous. Even worse, this misappropriation of work and wealth stands in the way of developing a truly-sustainable economy with a solid middle class.
Political leaders have fed this monstrous situation with bailouts and tax preferences -- all the while cheating ordinary Americans out of the fruits of their labor by limiting worker pay, raising the costs of housing, health care and education, and forcing millions of Americans into debt just to keep up with an ordinary standard of living. Too-big-to-fail banks got billions in bailouts (and this taxpayer money allowed bonuses to keep rolling!); but when the economy crashed and jobs were lost, there was no bailout in sight to stop home foreclosures, to avoid state budget cuts, school and library closures, or to maintain health care benefits for laid off workers.
And now, states and localities - including our own - face budget deficits that will require deep slashes to the social safety net and services to many residents - with cutbacks that will trigger more rounds of job loss, lower spending and tax revenue, and perhaps more cuts and unemployment.
This downward spiral is totally man-made and not due to government excess. Instead, it's a natural result of tremendous inequality in the distribution of wealth and spending power - and a failure of public policy to look after the common good. The recent Great Recession is the result of decades of profiteering and inadequate oversight and regulation of the financial services industry, unbridled Ponzi schemes on Wall Street (not to mention speculative bubbles and two unfunded wars) - followed by bank bailouts and economic policies at the national level that left corporate profits largely intact while leaving ordinary wage-earners and households to sink on their own. And as they sink, so do state and local budgets and services. The fault lies not with hard-working Americans - and not with states or localities, who seek properly to look after their citizens.
Make no mistake: these policies are bought and paid for - the result we get when the wealthiest one-percent of Americans and their corporate playgrounds pay for and control our election outcomes and lawmaking in the highest circles of government.
Relief Now!
While Main Street is desperate for a permanent turn-around - (shall we put down the pitchforks if we get some relief?) - let's push for immediate relief from lawmakers and Congress.
For starters:
(1) An extension of unemployment benefits. In fact, convert this to 'Worker Retraining Benefits' - because our old jobs are gone; corporate chieftains shipped 'em off-shore.
(2) A moratorium on home foreclosures. In fact, require the banks who got the bailouts - the ones now profitable, handing out millions in bonuses to top executives, banks who now are profiting from near-zero federal funds rates! - to engage in immediate and serious revision of mortgages (and lending practices) to keep working class folks in their homes. That is a bailout and stimulus that would reduce Main Street debt and make a difference. If this is costly to bankers who created the housing bubble and gambled on derivatives, it's reaping the crop they sowed and it's the capitalist way -- and it's the only way to really relieve the 'troubled assets'.
(3) Full funding of the social "safety net" - including bailouts of state budgets, so that states aren't bearing the burden of Wall Street gambling and unfunded wars - to save state-level programs like Basic Health, Disability Lifeline, prescription meds, affordable tuitions, and roads, bridges, schools and parks that are fully-funded and available to all.
Indeed we deserve to ask: Where's the Main Street bailout? Why aren't the banks forced to renegotiate mortgages, to keep folks in their homes? Why are states and local governments forced to slash spending and services with furloughs and layoffs - while the Congress dithers over a $multi-trillion tax break for currency speculators and hedge fund owners and investors?
Why is there such reluctance to talk (in "polite" society) about economic class in America? As stated, it influences everything - and explains much of what we observe in lawmaking and public policy.
In 1992, Clinton's campaign maxim was, "It's the economy, stupid."
That's still true. But we should now shout from the rooftops: "Hey, it's Main Street - deserving a bailout!" It's Main Street households and workers - who, with earnings in their pockets and purchasing power, will restore our economy. Not wealthy speculators with off-shore accounts; no, it's Main Street, U.S.A. that has earned and deserves the spending power - and will turn it around, buying lemonade and much more.
Citizens United: corporations unleashed to buy election results:
Let's not forget the folks behind the curtain - those who spend hundreds of millions to influence election results, and then spend more to lobby the Congress they've "bought". It's the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Wall Street banks, and wealthy special-interests who funded campaigns and issue ads for the last election, and who foot the bills of expensive lobbying. They assume they bought the right to dictate policy in Congress. Why else spend billions in the recent campaigns? And to avoid popular outrage, they (in effect) laundered the funds - through non-disclosure of who the real donors were, and through "issue" ads designed by campaign experts to be as targeted toward selected voters as a cruise missile.
First, Citizens United unleashed the funds ("Spend what you will" says the Supreme Court. "Thanks" - says Wall Street). And then the lavish spending worked wonders. Corporate-owned media and the persuasive power of Madison Avenue joined forces to influence ordinary voters - who may have been duped. In many ways it wasn't really "the people" who spoke in the November election; it was their fear of an economy on the skids, their worry over paying the rent, and anger toward anyone seeming to be in power who wasn't fixing it. And that fear - that anger - was cynically manipulated by an over-abundance of spin, half-truths and campaign ads, paid for by special-interests who want their Wall Street gravy train to keep rolling.
This corporate influence over election outcomes and our economy is what we have to change.
To benefit all Americans - to create an economy that is fair and sustainable, and a democracy truly "of, by, and for the people" - we have to stop the corporate takeover of government in America.
The nation cannot afford another Gilded Age. Great concentration of wealth impedes economic recovery - it's bad for everyone, and the superrich don't need (and can't possibly spend) the dollars.
Renowned jurist Louis Brandeis captured the point: We can have great concentration of wealth - or democracy. Not both.
Yet concentration of wealth seems to be winning lately - and dominating government. (Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois quipped recently, "The banks own the place" - meaning the Senate and Congress).
Change we need
To restore citizen government, to recapture our democracy, we must reverse "Citizens United". And then we need to finance campaigns publicly at every level - so that elected officials and lawmakers can truly represent the people, not the banks and Wall Street corporations.
It won't be easy - or quick. But we need a Constitutional amendment, that clarifies that "free speech" in the political realm is for people, the sovereign voters, not corporations. Further, that Congress and the states have the constitutional authority to regulate the spending on political speech by any corporate entity.
Only by so-doing can we put people - instead of corporate money - back in control of election outcomes. Only by ending the rule of money and wealth, can we hope for lawmaking that benefits Main Street instead of Wall Street. And then, perhaps, an economy that offers opportunity and full employment at a living wage, for all.
The struggle to win this will take a populist hurricane - a tremendous and steady political wind. Activists and concerned groups from all over the state and nation need to get involved. Nothing is more important, and what else can we do? Any "reforms" we undertake - and there are some that are worthwhile - will fall short of the mark if we don't also reverse the trend and the "pay-to-play" game that grants political power to Wall Street and corporate America.
What to do:
1. Become informed on the issue - so you are knowledgeable as an advocate.
For more information, visit FreeSpeechForPeople.org, and MoveToAmend.org.
2. Read the proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution by Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Maryland) and twenty-five co-sponsors, including Rep. John Conyers. (Appendix A, below)
3. Become an organizer. Talk with neighbors, co-workers and friends. Learn their views, their concerns, and encourage them to join a broad movement - as a solution to the woes that afflict us.
4. Create "political wind" in the sails of this movement, with grassroots awareness and support.
Use Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other means, to 'like' these proposals, and spread word.
Propose and encourage resolutions to be adopted by local organizations, city councils, county councils, and the state legislature. These resolutions should call on the Congress to approve and send to the states (for ratification) a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United ruling.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts is considering such a resolution. WA's legislature should do the same. (See the proposal in Massachusetts:
5. Lobby and push our local, state and federal officials to take action. Tell them:
"We want a bailout of America's Main Street households - not Wall Street.
"We want an economy that works for everyone, especially those on lower rungs who are most in need of a foothold. We're all in this together - just like during the Great Depression.
"We want fair elections, where issues and voters determine the result - not immense spending by shadowy groups.
"And, most basic: We want our democracy back in the hands of people, not corporations! The only way to achieve that, is to stop the Wall Street banks and corporate chieftains from using their vast wealth to steal our elections and dominate lawmaking for their own selfish interests.
"For that, we want an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, that restores fair elections to the people, and stops corporate entities from buying the elections through massive spending on issue ads and hidden campaign contributions. Money and free speech are not the same; free speech is a right of the people, to assure democratic self-government. Concentration of great wealth should not confer greater voting power or political speech.
"We want you to use your power and position as an elected official, to urge Congress to make this change - to propose a constitutional amendment for ratification by the states, that overturns the Citizens United ruling."
We must organize and build awareness - so that friends and neighbors realize there is a way to restore democracy in America. We can introduce and enact resolutions (as above) at every level. Doing so is a means to launch the conversation, to capture the outrage at the corporate takeover of our country, and to put grassroots wind in the sails of a nationwide movement to overturn Citizens United.
Many organizations - local and statewide - can assist in building this movement.
Long-term, it's our only hope.
~ Craig Salins
_______________________
Craig Salins is executive director of Washington Public Campaigns - a statewide grassroots group in Washington state, organizing for public campaign financing, fair elections - and a fair economy - in the state. More info: www.washclean.org / wpc@washclean.org

Addendum - recommended reading

Many recent books describe in detail what we're facing - what's wrong and how to fix it.
Here is some recommended reading:
About the economic meltdown --
"The Looting of America" - by Les Leopold
"Aftershock" - by Robert Reich
"Freefall" - by Joseph Stiglitz
"Thirteen Bankers: The Wall Street Takeover..." - by Simon Johnson and James Kwak
"The Return of Depression Economics" - by Paul Krugman
And, about politics, lobbying and hijacking of government --
"Winner-Take-All Politics" - by Paul Pierson and Jacob S. Hacker
"So Much Damn Money" - by Robert Kaiser
"Hostile Takeover" - by David Sirota
Some relevant history --
"Traitor to his Class: ... Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of FDR - by H.W.Brands
Appendix A:
Joint Resolution, proposing a constitutional amendment
( by Rep. Donna Edwards )
=======================
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States permitting Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech. (Introduced in House)
HJ 74 IH - 111th CONGRESS, 2d Session
H. J. RES. 74: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States permitting Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 2, 2010
Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland (for herself and Mr. CONYERS) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
JOINT RESOLUTION
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States permitting Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:
Article--
Section 1. The sovereign right of the people to govern being essential to a free democracy, Congress and the States may regulate the expenditure of funds for political speech by any corporation, limited liability company, or other corporate entity.
Section 2. Nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.'.

Appendix B:
Proposed resolution regarding First Amendment rights for people, not corporations
(by any group, organization, city, county or state legislature)
Whereas: the First Amendment is designed to protect free speech rights of people, not corporations; and
Whereas: for the past three decades, a divided United States Supreme Court has transformed the First Amendment into a powerful tool for corporations seeking to evade and invalidate democratically enacted reforms; and
Whereas: this corporate takeover of the First Amendment has reached its extreme conclusion in the US recent ruling Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission; and
Whereas: the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. F.E.C. overturned longstanding precedents prohibiting corporations from spending their general treasury funds in our elections; and
Whereas: the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. F.E.C. will now unleash a torrent of corporate money in our political process unmatched by any campaign expenditure totals in US history; and
Whereas: the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. F.E.C. presents a serious and direct threat to our democracy; and
Whereas: the people of the United States have previously used the constitutional amendment process to correct those egregiously wrong decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court that go to the heart of our democracy and self-government;
Now, therefore, be it resolved:
That [name of organization or jurisdiction] ___________________________________ hereby calls upon the U. S. Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, December 06, 2010

Ingraham Trees Again Face Chainsaws - End Draws Near for Trees

In a brief decision, King County Superior Court Judge Theresa Doyle recently ruled against the appeal of Save the Trees-Seattle to prevent clear cutting a quarter of a grove of 70 year old, 100 foot tall Douglas fir, western red cedar and western madrone tress in an uncommon plant habitat at Ingraham High School in North Seattle. This was despite the fact that only a few hundred feet away the Seattle School District had identified in a Master Plan a large open lawn area as a future building site.

The decision clearly says that in Seattle trees have no legal standing. Judge Doyle’s decision in essence says that development of any property in the city trumps tree protection and preservation. The Seattle Department of Planning and Development’s stated policy is that they are all for protecting trees unless it limits the development potential of a lot. In this instance Judge Doyle is saying it does not even matter if there are alternative locations close by on the site that the building could be moved to or even if habitat is uncommon.

Despite Seattle City law saying that priority should be given to protecting uncommon, unique, or rare habitat, the Judge's decision ignored a Seattle Hearing Examiner’s decision that the NW Grove is an uncommon plant habitat in the city of Seattle. It is a remnant of a conifer madrone forest in the City of which only 52 acres remain elsewhere. The species diversity present at the Ingraham site, some 14 different tree and shrub species, is comparable to that at the other major site where this plant community exists, namely at Seward Park in South Seattle.

What is disturbing about the decision is that it supports DPD’s tacit authority to ignore City tree protection laws and gives more impetus to DPD’s current proposal to actually remove from current city law, all protections for trees outside development. In any given year only 1% of city property is being developed. That means that 99% of the City’s trees in any given year would have no protection.

DPD’s proposal was reviewed by Mayor McGinn before it was released. It would remove all protection for exceptional trees and for tree groves. It is a death warrant for our city’s trees and will make it impossible to reach our goal of increasing the city’s tree canopy over the next 20 years or so.

The proposed clear cutting of the trees at Ingraham High School is just a continuation of the unofficial policy of the City of Seattle to prioritize development by any means over protection of our urban forest infrastructure. And now DPD wants to formally make it City law to prevent citizens from even questioning the misplaced priorities of the City.

Citizens need to speak out against this senseless slaughter of trees and our urban forest infrastructure without regard for the social, environmental and economic costs of this loss and the loss of what citizens value in living and enjoy in a city with trees and a vibrant urban forest.

Send an e-mail to Mayor McGinn and all 9 members of the Seattle City Council and urge they reject DPD's proposal and instead work to add additional protections to the interim ordinance passed last year by the City Council.

Councilmembers' e-mail adresses:

tim.burgess@seattle.gov
sally.clark@seattle.gov

richard.conlin@seattle.gov

sally.bagshaw@seattle.gov

jean.godden@seattle.gov

mike.obrien@seattle.gov

nick.licata@seattle.gov

bruce.harrell@seattle.gov

tom.rasmussen@seattle.gov

Send a letter: Mayor's Office, Seattle City Hall 7th floor, 600 Fourth Avenue, P.O. Box 94749, Seattle, WA 98124-4749

Labels: , , , , , ,

Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Supreme Court will hear challenge to Arizona's Clean Elections program

by Craig Salins

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments next spring on the constitutionality of "rescue" matching funds - a key component of Arizona's Clean Elections program that provides additional funds to Clean Elections candidates when they are outspent by privately-financed opponents or face opposition by independent ads . The court's decision to hear the case was announced Monday, Nov. 29th.

Additional info - links on the Supreme Court case, McComish v. Bennett ---

SCOTUS takes Arizona Clean Elections (rescue funds) case (Seattle Times)

SCOTUS to hear challenge to AZ's Clean Elections law (AZCentral.com)

Brennan Center will defend AZ Clean Elections program (Brennan Center)

End of Public Financing? (Brennan Center post, by Mimi Murray Digby Marziani)


Background:

This lawsuit (McComish v. Bennett) began two years ago, when some Republican candidates - assisted by attorney Bill Maurer of the libertarian-leaning law firm Institute for Justice - argued that their fundraising (and therefore their speech) was "chilled" because funds they raised would simply provide more matching dollars to publicly-financed candidates.

In January 2009, a U.S. district judge in Phoenix found the matching funds provision unconstitutional. In May, 2010, the Ninth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of the law, issuing a stay to overturn the Arizona District Court. But then Clean Elections opponents asked the Supreme Court to intervene and block distribution of Clean Elections Act matching funds - and the Court did so (in June), pending a decision whether to hear the case.

Nearly no one is surprised the Supreme Court has chosen to hear this case. Opinions and rulings from various districts and federal circuit courts have been divided on whether public financing of campaigns - and in particular, the matching "rescue" funds feature that is part of most state Clean Elections programs - is constitutional under First Amendment "free speech" provisions.

We certainly know of the Supreme Court's leanings, evidenced by the Citizens United ruling last January, and by the Court's tossing out the "Millionaire's Amendment" provision (Davis v. FEC) of the McCain-Feingold law, last year. Will the Court expand the lawsuit to rule against public financing of campaigns in general? - or will they confine a ruling to only the question of triggered matching funds? We don't know.

But it should be clearer than ever that democracy in America is imperiled - by growing concentration of wealth at the top and by the power of money to influence election outcomes and lawmaking itself. Main Street households are often busy trying to survive in a depressed economy. Voters can easily be swayed by clever issue ads, spin and half-truths - especially on complex public policy issues with no easy answers.

It's time for the Supreme Court to side with people (that is, flesh-and-blood natural persons) instead of money and wealth.

Since the court seems inclined otherwise - it's time for a broad national movement to clarify (by a constitutional amendment) that "free speech" is intended as a right of the people, not as a means for money or corporate interests to hijack self-government - and the promise of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" - in America.

For details, visit MoveToAmend.org.

Also, FreeSpeechForPeople.org

Also, see the back page of WPC's proposals to the 2011 legislative session


~ Craig Salins

__________________________________________________

WA Public Campaigns / washclean.org / wpc@washclean.org


Labels: , , , , , ,