NYS Constitutional Convention Event October 30

GET EDUCATED ON THE UPCOMING NYS BALLOT ISSUE ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
Featuring
Erika Lorshbough, NYCLU, Legislative Counsel
And
Laura Bierman, League of Women Voters of NYS, Executive Director

MONDAY, OCTOBER 30 AT 6 PM
ALBANY PUBLIC LIBRARY
161 WASHINGTON AVENUE

We will hear the Pros (LWVNYS) and Cons (NYCLU) of voting on whether or not NYS should convene a Constitutional Convention in 2018.

Sponsored by
NYCLU, Citizen Action and LWVNYS

* The event is free and open to the public. *

Since Americans can’t be bothered to vote, don’t they deserve the government they get?

“We are their victims. We are weak and pathetic. But only by choice.”

conversationArthur asked the question above, and I’m compelled to respond to it.

My answer is “NO.”

Interestingly, I subsequently found, on Arthur’s Facebook, a link to this Inequality Tower, with his note, “Yep, this is pretty much New Zealand today—and most other Western democracies. Do you care? Do you vote as IF you care?”

A lot of people have been trained NOT to care, to believe “they” are all scoundrels, and it doesn’t make a difference. Gary Kroeger, former cast member of Saturday Night Live, and now running for Congress as a Democrat made an interesting observation:

“The disenfranchised non-intellectuals who now have a voice and are actually moving the needle. The uninformed now have a much bigger voice. They’re louder. By non-intellectuals I don’t mean stupid, I just mean those who just don’t want to engage in the minutia, pull up their sleeves, and do the math. They are from-the-hip voters.”

It’s not just many of the Republican candidates for President, it can even be CEOs of companies. So I could let THEM determine my fate, but I choose to at least try to fight back.

Voting matters. Why else would Ann Coulter and others suggest bringing back ‘literacy tests’ so voting is ‘a little more difficult’, even though it’s unconstitutional? You could be from Harvard and fail the 1964 Louisiana literacy test.

The state of Oregon has a new automatic voter registration. As someone said, in a comment about the new law: “Let’s start swinging the voting pendulum the OTHER way, instead of the recent years of ‘What? Brown people are actually VOTING? WE MUST STOP THIS!!!’ shenanigans like voter ID laws.”

Sometimes, it doesn’t take much to effect change. In Ferguson, MO, where they tripled the minority representation, “29% of eligible voters [were] casting more than 3,700 ballots. That’s more than double the 12% of eligible voters that came out for last April’s mayoral election.” Think about that for a minute: 29% was a GOOD turnout.

If people mobilize and actually vote in their self-interest, and arithmetically, there are far more on the bottom of the economic pyramid than the top, change CAN be made.

And if not, I’m becoming more convinced of a bad outcome for our country, and possibly other countries where contracts with zero hours of work guaranteed are not uncommon, and the vast number of poor are shamed. I came across As the Country Falls Apart, It’s Time for Our Revolution; a call to arms from Ted Rall’s “Anti-American Manifesto”:

Government exists to serve economic power. In the U.S. and globally, economic power is concentrated in business, namely the large corporations whose profits account for more than ten percent of the nation’s gross domestic product…. Corporations… ae parasites, vampires, hideous monsters that underpay and overcharge us and get fat on the spread. Who are we then?

We are their victims. We are weak and pathetic. But only by choice.

We can wait for the system to collapse of its own accord, for the rage of the downtrodden and dispossessed to build, for chaos of some sort to expose and destroy it. But implosion might take a long time. And when it happens, we may find ourselves even more powerless than we are now.

[It gets drearier.]

Not necessarily accepting the scenario fully, but Rall certainly has many valid points. So yes, I try to stay engaged in the political process, as exhausting and irritating as it is. And it’s because NONE of us deserve the government we have that gives more rights to corporations than people.

Washing your hands after using the toilet is not government overreach

TillisRiding the bus this week, one of the patrons was reading aloud a story about a US Senator complaining about onerous governmental regulations. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) suggested that businesses should be allowed to “opt out” of requiring employees to wash their hands after using the restroom. “The senator said he’d be fine with it, so long as businesses made this clear in ‘advertising’ and ’employment literature.'” See the video.

The jaw of one of the listeners dropped. Sure, most of us surmised that he was exaggerating to make a point, but it’s SUCH an unsavory image.

The right-wing website HotAir defended Tillis: “The idea is that, even in the most extreme or absurd situations, the common sense of Americans and the self-correcting nature of the free market take care of many woes. There are exceptions, of course, where the government can and should step in to ensure the general welfare, but that doesn’t mean that every single aspect of waking life for normal Americans requires Big Brother to rush in and hold their hands.”

Accepting that premise, one might want to come up with an example of real government overreach, rather than challenging a simple but effective rule to protect the public health.

Church and state: Francis I

If a Catholic priest were to echo Francis’ complaint about the rich-poor divide, that might be safe territory.

I found this graphic really interesting. The Socialist US Senator is embracing the Pope’s condemnation of “doctrinaire capitalism, ‘deified markets,” trickle-down economics, and the finance industry. He decried the growing gap between the rich and the poor, tax evasion by the wealthy, and characterized ruthless free-market economics as a killer that was inherently sinful.” I assume this will mean that the Pope will be painted as a socialist.

Francis, moreover, launched a broadside against former President Ronald Reagan’s signature economic theory, which continues to serve as conservative Republican dogma.

Of course, he’s in the Vatican, so he’s insulated from the US political issue. But I’m always re-examining what “separation of church and state” means. (And so is Dustbury.) I will make the case that being a good Christian – in my definition, obviously – could be, may be perceived as a political statement. If a Catholic priest were to echo Francis’ complaint about the rich-poor divide, perhaps by calling for raising the minimum wage, that might be safe territory. But if he were to name names, such as calling out the late 40th US President, that might well be crossing the line to partisan political talk that could theoretically get one’s tax-exempt status yanked.

Certainly promoting, or denouncing a political party or candidate can be a treacherous path, whereas, say, praying for the President and Congress and the federal courts to do good and just actions is OK. Calling for the closing of the wage-productivity gap is OK, but calling out the politicians who created the system, not so much.

It was weird watching Peggy Noonan on ABC News’ This Week with George Stephanopoulos this past Sunday. She was SO pleased by the new pope, who was bringing back some of the disaffected Catholics, even though he was directly dissing her former employer and mentor, Ronald Reagan, who she clearly adores (present tense). It’s enough to give other denominations a case of pope envy.

Francis still stubbornly traditional positions on women’s ordination and other issues notwithstanding, I’m liking this Pope; the fact that his position is considered radical by some tells how far from Christ’s teaching some of the church has become.
***
Bill O’Reilly speaks on behalf of Jesus about the scourge of Food Stamps

No, the US is NOT closing the Vatican embassy.

Veterans Day 2013

The better photo ops during the shutdown involved patriotic old men in their 80s and 90s unable to get to war memorials.

Reading this somewhat self-serving history of the Department of Labor during and after World War II: “When the war ended, attention shifted to the needs of those returning from war and their families. The Serviceman’s Readjustment Act of June 22, 1944—widely known as the G.I. Bill—provided a weekly unemployment allowance, as well as counseling, placement services, education and job training to nearly 10 million veterans between 1944 and 1949.” Taking care of that generation was important to the country.

At the end or near end, of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, we see that
most Americans now believe those conflicts were mistakes. I’m sure battle fatigue was a major factor in people’s opposition to an American incursion into Syria. Yet this is not a reflection of what people felt about soldiers’ bravery, from all reports.

The Veterans Affairs Department is drowning under mountains of paperwork representing services not rendered. During the government shutdown, the VA secretary said that “more than 5 million veterans, as well as some active-duty service members, would not have received “crucial benefits after Nov. 1 if the event had continued much longer. As it was, the shutdown slowed the process of paying those vets.

The better photo ops during the shutdown involved patriotic old men in their 80s and 90s unable to get to war memorials. Yet, one could argue that veterans were hurt far more by the loss of benefits during the shutdown than by the symbolic lack of access to some shrines. Open memorials may matter, but money for essentials matters, too.

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial