Activism Across America

Take away all the strong moral reasons to vote progressive, and there’s the relatively simple matter of practical benefit. Which political ideology brings more reliable economic prosperity - the right wing economic ideology, or the progressive vision for America?

Take a look at the state of Montana’s children, and the lesson is clear.

Montana’s political identity has leaned to the right for a long time. Recently, Montana’s political contribution to the national scene has included Electoral College votes to send George W. Bush to the White House both in the the 2000 and 2004 elections.

That political philosophy has served Montana’s children quite poorly. The rate of child poverty in Montana is 20.1 percent. That means that one in five children in Montana are living in poverty.

If you think that’s good enough, then I suppose you ought to vote for the right wing political agenda that has brought Montana’s children to such a vulnerable position. Otherwise, the choice is clear. Vote progressive in 2008.

A great deal of attention is being focused on Annapolis, Maryland right now, thanks to the meeting there which seeks to establish a long-delayed effort by President George W. Bush to broker a Mideast peace deal.

There are other current developments in Annapolis, however - perhaps too many of them. Out-of-control development in Annapolis is the concern in a City Council special election there. Both the Democratic candidate, Debbie McKerrow, and the Green Party candidate, Karen Jennings, say that the threat of unsustainable development of Annapolis is the biggest issue in the campaign. Jennings worries that Annapolis will become “run down by development and become another bedroom community to Washington, D.C.”

Voters will go to the polls on December 19. Read more about the election at Maryland Green Party News.

If a person had to locate a stronghold for right wing ideology, that stronghold would be Mississippi. If there has ever been a time when right wing ideology has not dominated Mississippi’s government, it certainly doesn’t come leaping to mind. Democrats and Republicans alike in Mississippi are beholden to right wing interest groups, ideologically and economically.

If the right wing agenda for society were at all productive, in comparison with the progressive agenda that Mississippi so strongly rejects, Mississippi would be prospering. However, the statistics show with as much clarity as anybody could ask for that prosperity is the last thing that Mississippi can claim as a product of its political system.

The overall poverty rate in Mississippi is 21.3 percent, and the child poverty rate in Mississippi is even greater, at 30.9 percent. Both are more than half again as large as the national average.

Mississippi is not just failing to prosper. It is drowning in poverty, thanks to its history of right wing politics. America as a nation must not continue to follow the example of Mississippi in national politics. In 2008, it’s time to return to a brighter, progressive vision that will provide a better life for all Americans, and help those states, like Mississippi, that are failing to live up to America’s standard of a decent way of life.

Progressives respect the law. That’s why we’re so outraged at the behavior of the Bush White House. Blatant disregard for the law disturbs us.Our regard for the law, however, does not come from a love of authority. Rather, it comes from a regard for the human beings it protects. For that reason, we are offended when the power of law enforcement is abused.Progressives watch carefully over law enforcement officials because of the authority they are given. We remember incidents like the one that took place in Utah this autumn, when a policeman attacked a nonviolent driver with a taser at a routine traffic stop. The soul of the law is the ability to check the power of authority, not the ability to wield power without restraint. (Source: Wasatch Watcher, November 25, 2007)

The problem Louisianans have is that, when it comes to politics, they don’t usually have more choice than to pick between a right wing Republican and a right wing Democrat. In Louisiana, both political parties hew to the right, and both political parties are plagued with corruption. That’s why, in Louisiana, it’s especially important for voters to pay attention to the policies promoted by a political candidate, and not just the party label that candidate carries.

A right wing candidate, for example, will promote the trickle down economics that provide subsidies to corporations and tax write-offs to the wealthy while failing to help the working families who are truly in need. Right wingers believe that welfare is only for the wealthy, and that the poor will only stop being poor when all government anti-poverty programs are destroyed.

Progressives, on the other hand, see quite clearly that the right wing economic approach is a path to disaster - just the sort of economic disaster that Louisiana is suffering from. Whereas states that had the wisdom to vote against George W. Bush are enjoying relative success in the effort to contain poverty, Louisiana has a poverty rate that is above the national average. About one in five residents of Louisiana are living in poverty.

Take a look at Louisiana’s children, and the news gets worse. More than one in four children in Louisiana are living in poverty.

Right wing economic policy has not worked in Louisiana. In fact, it’s kept huge numbers of people living in poverty. In 2008, Louisiana has the chance to live under a new kind of national leadership. If a progressive President is elected to the White House, Louisiana will finally have the chance to appeal to a leader who understands that fighting poverty requires investment, not neglect.

Sometimes, the value of a progressive organization is relatively abstract, such as in the protection of free speech.  Other times, it is starkly concrete, as in the case of current work of the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii, which is acting on behalf of the children of homeless families.  The ACLU of Hawaii is working to make sure that these children are given equal access to public education, as is required by the Constitution. 

As we meet with homeless families and social service providers across the state, the number of children who have been or are being denied access to basic public education continues to grow. The State’s blatant violations of federal law have harmed children statewide and must be immediately corrected,” said William Durham of LEJ. “Congress has given the State funds to fulfill an important national mandate. There is no excuse for the State’s negligence – every day that goes by results in more children being denied an education.”The latest round of legal actions includes requests to bar the State from carrying out specific practices that violate federal law such as denying homeless children entrance to school because they lack certain documentation, which has led to children missing school for days and weeks at a time. The State has also failed to provide transportation, which forces families of extremely limited means to fend for themselves and results in children being consistently tardy or absent from school.

Thanks to the ACLU in Hawaii.  When the rights of the least powerful are protected, the rights of the rest of us become stronger as a result. 

There’s the economy, and then there’s the economy. Some people try to understand the economy by looking at the value of stock in big oil companies. Others look at the items like the news summarized by the Food Research and Action Center: In Arizona, one in five children are living in poverty.

That rate of child poverty is above the national average, and far above the blue state average of just 15 percent. In recent presidential elections, Arizona has been voting as a red state - for the Republican candidate. However, it’s clear that Republican economic ideology, with its emphasis on reduced government assistance in the battle against poverty, just isn’t working for Arizona.

In 2008, voters in Arizona ought to vote for their own economic self-interest. For the sake of their economy, and brighter opportunities for their children, Arizona needs to help elect a progressive President in 2008.

Barack Obama is a United States Senator from Illinois, but is he running for President as an Illinois Democrat in particular?Barack Obama came to live in Chicago after law school. He wasn’t born there, and didn’t grow up there. Obama is not an Illinois native, any more than Hillary Clinton is a New York state native. Obama has as much heritage in Kansas or Hawaii, or Indonesia for that matter, as he does in Illinois. Since 2004, Obama has mostly lived in Washington, D.C.Barack Obama is really running as a national candidate with an overall appeal. He is not of one group over any other, ethnically or residentially.The following bumper stickers supporting the presidential campaign of Barack Obama in 2008 are available as singles, but at a better bulk discount rate in larger numbers:

Alabama has a long history of supporting right wing politicians. The economic condition of Alabama, however, indicates that the voters of Alabama ought to consider a change in course.

As indicated in the Food Research and Action Center’s 2007 State of the States Report, Alabama is being crushed under the weight of a high poverty rate. With a general poverty rate of 17 percent and a child poverty rate of 24.8 percent, Alabama’s burden of poverty is much higher than the national average.

With one in four children in Alabama living in poverty, the prospects for Alabama’s future are not bright either - unless Alabamans abandon their attachment to right wing economic ideology that clearly hasn’t worked for them. The 2008 presidential election is coming just in time for Alabama to support a progressive candidate for President who will replace right wing neglect with an effort to use the power of government to lift Alabamans out of poverty and into a state of genuine opportunity.

People of Arizona, celebrate: Arizona Indymedia is still going strong.

For years now, the people at Arizona Indymedia have been providing coverage of the stories that the mainstream media is too lazy or too indifferent or too biased to cover. On March 20, 2004, Arizona Indymedia gave a rich account of protests against the Iraq War at a time when the mainstream media was still under the thrall of George W. Bush’s claims that it would all, somehow, work out all right in the end.

On August 8, 2005, Arizona Indymedia covered the demonstration by hundreds of Arizonans in Tucson in support of Cindy Sheehan.

On October 17, 2006, Arizona Indymedia gave the thoughts of Phoenix Copwatch on the observation of National Day Against Police Brutality.

This last weekend, Arizona Indymedia provided information about an anti-torture protest at Fort Huachuca.

This is not the kind of news you’ll get a hold of by watching the national cable TV news networks, or by reading the Associated Press newswire. Thanks, Arizona Indymedia, for your years of work. Keep it up.