Mn-prog-events Mailing List: Progressive Calendar 12.05.05

[David Shove (shove001]

             P R O G R E S S I V E   C A L E N D A R    12.05.05

1. Cuba5/death/KFAI    12.06 11am
2. Child care law      12.06 11:30am
3. Catholic worker mvt 12.06 12noon
4. China/US$           12.06 4pm
5. Arab film           12.06 6pm
6. Human rights film   12.06 6pm
7. NGO pro party       12.06 6pm
8. Salon 64A rep       12.06 6:30pm
9. Uhcan-mn potluck    12.06 7pm
10. Open space         12.06 7pm
11. Save the parks     12.06 7pm
12. Housing/homeless   12.06

13. Patricia Bass - Jesse Mortensen to run for State House seat
14. Wyn Douglas   - Give Green for peace and non violence
15. Andre Damon   - Profit-driven Medicare drug plan sucks
16. www.wsws.org  - Scandal threatens Republican control of US Congress
17. Anon          - Bush presidential library destroyed by flood

--------1 of 17--------

From: Lydia Howell <lhowell [at] visi.com>
Subject: Cuba5/death/KFAI 12.06 11am

dear Supporters of the Cuban 5:
I just got a wonderful interview w/progressive attorney, Leonard
Weinglass, who's representing the Cuban 5 (and previously has done a great
deal of good human rights work - represented Pennsyvania Death Row
dissident journalist, Mumia Abu-Jamal). Weinglass does an excellent update
on & analysis about the case of the Cuban 5. The interview was recorded &
distributed by Prison radio.

Locally, peace groups are focusing on Intl Human Rights Day - and I
imagine nost of their focus will be the war/occupation in Iraq and
possibly the US use of torture. I want to include a DOMESTIC perspective -
that is, the human rights abuses HERE IN THE USA. To that end I will be
broadcasting most of this interview about the case of the Cuban 5.

I'll also look at the inequities in the death penalty and focus a bit on
case of Stanly "Tookie" Williams inn California.

producer/host "Catalyst",Tues. 11am KFAI Radio 90/3fm Mpls 106.7 fm St
Paul all shows archived for 2 weeks after broadcast www.kfa,org


--------2 of 17--------

From: Bharti [at] mnwomen.org
Subject: Child care law 12.06 11:30am

Tuesday December 6, 11:30am-1:30pm at Lasting Impressions Child Care
Center, 2515 Wabash Avenue, St. Paul 55114, Child Care WORKS will host an
Issues Advisory Meeting to help create the child care legislative agenda for
the 2006 session.  For more information, write cbreva [at] childcareworks.org.


--------3 of 17--------

From: Charles Underwood <charleyunderwood [at] hotmail.com>
Subject: Catholic worker mvt 12.06 12noon

Tuesday, 12/6, noon, former priest Frank Cordaro speaks on the Catholic
Worker Movement, St. Kate's north sacristy by the chapel, near Randolf and
Fairmount, St. Paul.  realchai2001 [at] yahoo.com


--------4 of 17--------

From: humanrts [at] umn.edu
Subject: China/US$ 12.06 4pm

December 6 - Dollars vs RMB: What Does a Devaluation of the Chinese
Currency Mean for the U.S. Economy?.  4-6pm.  Cost: Free and open to the
public.

The China Center's 2005 Bob & Kim Griffin Building U.S.-China Bridges
Lecture will feature Dr. Arthur Rolnick, senior vice president, Federal
Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. He will discuss the impact of recent and
future devaluations of the Chinese RMB on jobs, trade, and the prices we
pay for the things we need. What are the implications for other Asian
currencies and the U.S. economic relationships in Asia? What strategies do
businesses need to hedge against this change? Lecture starts at 4pm;
reception and refreshments at 5:30pm.

Location: Coffman Memorial Union, University of Minnesota East Bank campus,
Minneapolis MN


--------5 of 17--------

From: wamm <wamm [at] mtn.org>
Subject: Arab film 12.06 6pm

Perspectives on the Arab World Film Series: "The English Sheik and the
Yemeni Gentleman" Free film, pizza and pop.

Tuesday December 6, 6pm. Macalester College, Carnegie Hall 76, 1600 Grand
Avenue, St. Paul.

"The English Sheik and the Yemeni Gentleman." Trials and tribulations of
global life unfold in this film as it meanders through colorful Yemen,
pairing up an English born Yemeni filmmaker living in London with a better
guide to the country, a residing Englishman (Bader Ben Hirsi, 2000, 76
min., English and Arabic with subtitles). In conjunction with
"Contemporary Arab Society". Endorsed by WAMM Middle East Committee.


--------6 of 17--------

From: humanrts [at] umn.edu
To: humanrts [at] umn.edu
Subject: Human rights film 12.06 6pm

The Human Rights Center will feature the second screening in the 2005-
2006 Human Rights Film series on TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6. 6-9pm

Through screenings and panel discussions, the Human Rights Center brings
experts and community members together to raise awareness,
promotediscussion, and take action on issues affecting the human rights
community in Minnesota, the U.S., and the world.

Choropampa: the Price of Gold is a film about the struggle of the town of
Choropampa, Peru to win compensation from the Yanacocha gold mine after a
mercury spill results in an outbreak of serious illness in Choropampa and
the surrounding area. The mine is jointly owned by a Peruvian Company, the
Newmont Mining Corporation of Colorado, and the World Bank.  This
documentary follows the resulting political and social struggle over a
two-year period after the spill.

Location: *Room 40* (instead of 45), Mondale Hall, University of Minnesota
Law School, 229 19th Ave South, Minneapolis, MN 55455
                    *Free and Open to the Public*

                         Schedule of Events
6:00-6:30 pm: Reception and Registration
6:30-6:40 pm: Introduction to Event
6:40-7:55 pm: Film Screening: Choropampa: The Price of Gold
7:55-8:00 pm: Introduction to Panelists*
8:00-9:00 pm: Panel Discussion

We hope that you can join us for this film and discussion event on the 6th of
                              December!
*Panelists yet to be finalized


--------7 of 17--------

From: humanrts [at] umn.edu
Subject: NGO pro party 12.06 6pm

December 6 - The Midwest International NGO Network (MINN) presents
Holiday Happy Hour.  6pm

This event is brought to you by the Midwest International NGO Network
(MINN): a group of Midwestern professionals in the fields of international
development and humanitarian aid.  The mission of MINN is to provide an
open environment for the exchange of experiences, ideas, and best
practices.  MINN is responsible for planning outreach, education, and
networking events for international NGO professionals in our area.  If you
are interested in meeting your colleagues in a casual environment this is
one event you do not want to miss!

RSVP to ingos_of_midwest [at] yahoo.com as to whether or not you are able to
attend. Location: Blue Nile Restaurant, 2027 E. Franklin Ave, Minneapolis,
MN 55404


--------8 of 17--------

From: Patty Guerrero <pattypax [at] earthlink.net>
Subject: Salon 64A rep 12.06 6:30pm

This coming Tuesday, Dec 6 the guest at the salon will be Jim White.  Jim
is a candidate for DFL endorsement for Mn House of Representatives in
District 64A, in St Paul. This seat being vacated by Matt Entenza.  Come
and meet this very nice person and learn what he has to say.

Salons are held (unless otherwise noted in advance):
Tuesdays, 6:30 to 8:30pm.
Mad Hatter's Tea House,
943 W 7th, St Paul, MN

Salons are free but donations encouraged for program and treats.
Call 651-227-3228 or 651-227-2511 for information.


--------9 of 17--------

From: joel m. albers <joel [at] uhcan-mn.org>
Subject: Uhcan-mn potluck 12.06 7pm

The MN Universal Health Care Action Network
  (www.uhcan-mn.org , 612-384-0973, joel [at] uhcan-mn.org).

Holiday Potluck & Meeting TUESDAY, December 6, 7pm

Walker Church Basement, 3104 16th ave S.(near Lake Str and Bloomington ave
in Minneapolis). Open to all. Bring food or drink. Holiday cheer and
thanks to many for their work, also to welcome new people.

Meeting items:
1. Our upcoming, soon to be released, film about the health care crisis in
Minnesota. Sanat Mohanty will show a sampler preview of the film, and seek
your input as to venues to show and publicize the film.

2. Alternatives to Medicare Part D. Taking advantage of the huge media
attention and turning it into opportunities for getting our message out.
Brainstorming how to defend our elders, parents, grandparents.

3.  Other items, reportbacks ?


--------10 of 17--------

From: "brian bates" <brianbates [at] uswest.net>
Subject: Open space 12.06 7pm

First meeting of the open space sub-committee of the St. Paul
Enviropnmental Roundtable? Tuesday 12/6, 7-9 pm at the Hamline Midway
Community Council offices at 1564 LaFond.


--------11 of 17--------

From: Carl Holmquist <carlholmquist [at] yahoo.com>
Subject: Save the parks 12.06 7pm

For anyone who cares about the green space & privatization of our park
system, on Tuesday, Dec 6, 7pm at 43rd and Xerxes (Park Bldg), the Linden
Hills neighborhood will have Park Commissioners - Bob Fine, Annie Young,
M. Anderson, Tom Nordyke presenting a Lake Calhoun Development proposal
for the south shore. Both Linden Hills and ECCO read a resolution to the
Park Board on June 15, 2005 opposing any building on this pristine shore.


--------12 of 17--------

From: Joanna Dornfeld <jdornfeld [at] mhponline.org>
Subject: Housing/homeless 12.06

Join a growing statewide campaign to secure SIGNIFICANT, NEW, DEDICATED
resources to fund LOW-INCOME RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

Dear Affordable Housing Supporters:

Housing and homelessness programs have been targeted for significant cuts
in recent years (most recently the proposed cuts in 2005 to the Housing
Challenge Fund and the renter's credit). Advocates joined forces to fight
the deep cuts - and we succeeded!

We can take this energy and momentum to promote a proactive agenda for
housing and homelessness programs! Real progress needs to start NOW to
address the needs of the 300,000 low-income MN households who can't afford
their housing before that number grows to the projected 330,000 households
by 2010. ("The Next Decade of Housing in Minnesota," BBC Research and
Consulting, 2003.)

The policy proposal, introduced during the 2005 Legislative Session, would
add a deed surcharge to the existing deed tax to generate the revenue for
much-needed low-income housing assistance. The surcharge could raise
significant new resources for Minnesota's housing programs. An 8% increase
would raise $10 million each year while a 20% increase could raise over
$25 million each year.

The funds would be dedicated to two of Minnesota's most flexible statewide
housing programs - half to the Housing Trust Fund for rental assistance
and half to the Challenge Fund for production and rehab. (For more
information on the specifics, view the policy brief at
http://www.mnhomelesscoalition.org/Downloads/Download_deedsurcharge.pdf.)

To kick off this campaign we have invited Mary Brooks, director of the
Housing Trust Fund Project, to Minnesota to share her expertise as the
foremost authority nationwide on efforts to secure dedicated housing
funds. She will provide a daylong training on Dec. 6th on local, state,
and federal housing trust funds. On Dec. 8th she will speak at a special
informational hearing before the Minnesota Senate Housing Policy
Committee, chaired by Sen. Scott Dibble. The training flyer and
registration form are online at www.mnhomelesscoalition.org.

We invite you to join us in this campaign. SIGN ON by contacting Rachel
Callanan at callanan [at] mnhomelesscoalition.org and providing us with the
following information:

Organization:
Contact Name:
Address:
Phone:
E-mail:OR

Contact Rachel Callanan
State Policy Director
Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless
Tel: 612-230-3285, Fax 612-870-9085, E-mail callanan [at] mnhomelesscoalition.org.

Thank you!Campaign supporters include: Minnesota Coalition for the
Homeless, HousingMinnesota, Family & Children's Service, HOME Line,
Corporation for Supportive Housing, Minnesota Land Trust Coalition,
Minneapolis Consortium of Community Developers, St. Paul Coalition for
Community Development, MICAH, Hennepin County/Minneapolis Community
Advisory Board on Homelessness, and the list is growing each day.

Joanna Dornfeld Communications and Media Specialist HousingMinnesota (651)
649-1710 ext. 108 www.housingminnesota.org

HousingMinnesota is a program of the Minnesota Housing Partnership.


--------13 of 17-------

Jesse Mortenson '05 has announced his candidacy for the seat held by Matt
Entenza '83, who is running for Attorney General

An article on Jesse ran in the December 2 edition of The Mac Weekly: 
http://www.themacweekly.com/article.php?arid=140

Recent Alumnus to run for State House seat
Patricia Bass
Staff Writer

While many college graduates spend their first six months of "freedom"
transitioning from Café Mac and term papers to a nine to five workday,
Jesse Mortenson '05 has announced that he will run for a seat in the
Minnesota House of Representatives.

Mortenson, a sociology major, small business owner and Green Party member,
announced his candidacy for seat 64A on Nov. 16 to a group of supporters
at the state capital building. The seat, which represents a district that
includes the Macalester-Groveland area, was previously held by another
Macalester alumnus, DFL House Minority Leader Matt Entenza '83, who will
leave the seat open next year in order to run for Attorney General.

"It is going to be an uphill battle," Mortenson said. "There is still age
discrimination out there, and we are going to have to work harder than any
of the other candidates."

He attended the Nov. 18 Macalester student forum to let students know he
was running, get their input, and tell them about the MacUnion web site
which he developed last year to coordinate activism between current
students and alumni.

"[At Macalester], there is very incredible creative thinking about where
we're at and how to bring groups together who are historically torn
apart," he said.

As a student, Mortenson was known for his on-campus activism.

"He's one of the brightest students I've taught at Macalester," Sociology
Department Chair Terry Boychuk said. "I taught him in three classes, and I
am both amazed and awed by the way he was a great student and a committed
activist. He gives a damn and I admire that."

Fellow students also plan to support Mortenson in his campaign.

"Jesse's a great activist," Erik Forman '08 said. "He's done a lot for the
school and I'm sure he'll do a lot for the state."

Mortenson's platform includes a dedication to small local business,
grassroots action and progressive politics.

"This is the opportunity to elect somebody who is not the typical urban
liberal legislator," Mortenson said. "I want to make politics accountable
to the progressive movement."

Specifically, he said he plans to organize and promote local businesses
over corporate chains, fight jumps in tuition for higher education and
work on increasing the availability of healthcare. He is also dedicated to
bringing home the Minnesota National Guard, which he calls "historically
state-based, making a resolution passed at state-level a strong
statement."

Mortenson will find out in the spring whether he will receive the Green
Party endorsement that he is seeking. He has worked with the Green Party
at the state level for three years, and at the local level for one and a
half years. He also organized the Midway Citizen Consumer Community
Coalition, which fought to raise standards for the Wal-Mart store that
recently moved into the Midway area.

"We need to bring back the idea that legislators can also be community
leaders," Mortenson said. "We need someone who will grant credibility to
progressive politics."

His supporters at Macalester seem to think he can bring that credibility.

"I wish him the best," Boychuk said. "I think it would be the best thing
for Minnesota if he were elected."

---

Here¹s a link to the PDF version, which includes photos of Jesse: 
http://www.themacweekly.com/pdfs/20051202/out.pdf

If there are folks who want to work on Jesse's campaign, he can be reached
at jesse [at] jessemortenson.com


--------14 of 17--------

From: Wyn Douglas <wyn_douglas [at] yahoo.com>
Subject: Give Green for peace and non violence

Dear Green Party Members & Supporters,

The Green Party's message of Peace is needed this Holiday Season perhaps
more than ever before.  Help spread Peace by helping the Party remain
financially strong. A stronger Party will promote the message of Non
Violence via the Sunflower News and it's Green Party Candidates.

The first 200 Green Party members and or supporters who give $50 before
December 31, 2005, will receive a 1/4 lb. of Organic Peace Coffee.  You
will also be eligible to receive a $50 refund per person or $100 per
couple, from the State of Minnesota, called the Minnesota Political
Contribution Refund Program.

Yes! If you give a Holiday Season gift of $50 to the Green Party of
Minnesota, you will receive a gift of Peace Coffee from the Party and the
State will give refund your donation too.  By giving the Party a gift
loan, you receive Peace Coffee as an interest payment, and the State of
Minnesota refunds your loan to the Party.

The Minnesota Political Contribution Program is very easy to use.  When
the Party receives your donation, we will send you out a receipt and the
proper PCRP form to fill out. Your refund will come within several weeks
after filing.  It's easy, It's cheery, it's quick, and you get your money
back for helping the Green Party.

Your help matters!  If you and 199 others Give a Gift to the Party, the
Party can start 2006 on solid ground. This is going to be a big year for
State Elections, where the Green Party can spread the values of
Nonviolence, Ecological Wisdom, Grassroots Democracy and Social and
Economic Justice.

Please, give to the Party this Holiday Season, and help the Green Party
spread the message of Non Violence in 2006.  We will show our appreciation
by giving you a gift of Peace Coffee.  Help us today, and help spread the
word of peace tomorrow.

Sincerely, Gerry D'Amour Finance Committee Minnesota Green Party

Donations received by Dec 18, will receive their Peace Coffee by Dec. 26th
Questions, please call Gerry at 612-817-4205


--------15 of 17--------

Profit-driven Medicare drug plan stirs confusion and anger
By Andre Damon
3 December 2005
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/dec2005/medi-d03.shtml

Registration for Medicare new prescription drug plan opened November 15,
provoking widespread anger and confusion among its potential
beneficiaries. The drug benefit, also known as Medicare Part D, is a
government-subsidized, privatized insurance program that covers a portion
of prescription drug costs.

Under the new program's guidelines, eligible citizens must choose between
dozens of private insurance plans, each offering access to a specific list
of drugs and pharmacies, and each with its own distinctive premiums,
deductibles, and co-pay rates. But first, beneficiaries must decide
whether to participate in the plan at all.

In many cases, Medicare recipients could end up paying more for insurance
coverage than they stand to benefit, but this option must be balanced
against the fact that the price of coverage goes up permanently by one
percent for each month that a recipient waits before joining the program
after the official deadline of May 15, 2006. Thus, many elderly people are
forced to decide whether they should purchase coverage that they don't
need now, or risk paying more in the future for the same plan if their
health declines.

Further complexity is added by the "donut hole" in the plan's benefits
gradient. According to the model insurance plan proposed by the
government, after paying a deductible and premiums, recipients must pay
for 25 percent of their prescription drug expenses up to $2,550. Between
$2,550 and $5,100-the donut hole-co-payments jump to 100 percent of
expenses, before returning to 5 percent for expenses exceeding $5,100.
According to the bill, insurers must offer a plan along these lines or one
that is "actuarially equivalent." The explicit purpose of this provision
is to force beneficiaries to still pay a substantial portion of their drug
costs.

The plan's complexity is especially problematic for Medicare
beneficiaries, a large percentage of whom have cognitive, hearing, and/or
visual difficulties. Needless to say, Medicare recipients are finding
themselves overwhelmed and frustrated by the absurd complexity of the
benefit plans. Many are unable to effectively select between plans that
will determine what kind of drugs they can take, which pharmacies they can
go to, and how much of their limited income they must pay on premiums and
deductibles.

The frustration that the plan has created for many of its potential
beneficiaries is a reflection of the actual interests that the new bill
was crafted to serve. The legislation was written largely by and for the
pharmaceutical and insurance industries, which stand to gain billions of
dollars.

In the short term, it is estimated that the program would cut the average
senior's drug costs by only 25 percent. However, even these limited gains
would be rapidly erased by rising costs. According to the AARP, drug
prices rose 7 to 8 percent in 2004, three times faster than the general
rate of inflation. The very structure of the program, including a
prohibition against Medicare negotiating lower drug prices, is designed to
prevent any curbs on cost inflation.

Moreover, some three-quarters of the 6.4 million beneficiaries who now
qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid stand to pay more under the new
plan, as it eliminates Medicaid coverage for premiums that must be paid
under Medicare.

In addition to a direct handout to sections of corporate America, the new
drug benefit is part of a longer-term strategy to privatize the Medicare
program.

Medicare is a federal entitlement program that provides health insurance
for over 40 million elderly and disabled Americans. The program was
created in the 1960s as part of President Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society"
reforms, which also included Medicaid and a variety of other social
programs. At the time, many had hoped the program would grow to eventually
form a universal healthcare system.

The Medicare program enjoys overwhelmingly support from the vast majority
of Americans. However, a major shortcoming of the program has always been
the absence of prescription drug coverage. Due to the high rate of drug
price inflation prevalent in the United States since the 1980s, there has
been popular pressure for a Medicare prescription plan to ease the
financial burden on the elderly and disabled.

The Bush administration and its congressional allies are now exploiting
this weakness in the program-the lack of prescription drug coverage-in
order to promote their right-wing social agenda. Medicare Part D was
created under the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and
Modernization Act (MPDIMA). The US House of Representatives approved the
measure by the narrowest possible margin in November 2003, amid
allegations that the House Republican leadership participated in outright
bribery and intimidation to secure its passage.

The cost of the plan over ten years, which was originally estimated at
under $380 billion, has ballooned to $724 billion. The pharmaceutical
companies have the most to gain from the bill. These corporations generate
huge profits, while expending most of their resources on marketing and
lobbying instead of researching innovative new drugs. In 2002, the ten
pharmaceutical companies on the Fortune 500 list made more profit than the
other 490 corporations combined ($39.5 vs. $33.7 Billion).

However, these profits do not reflect an underlying health within the
industry as a whole, as the recent mass layoffs announced by drug giant
Merck demonstrate. American pharmaceutical companies are in the midst of a
crisis inherent to their method of doing business. Their primary focus is
to patent and market "blockbuster" drugs, which become unprofitable once
their patents run out. A cluster of such patents began expiring in 2001, a
trend that continues through next year, when patents for blockbuster drugs
from Pfizer, Merck, and Bristol-Myers Squibb are set to expire.

Nevertheless, the pharmaceutical industry has leveraged its profits to
achieve enormous influence in Congress, and the industry also has close
ties to the Bush administration. According to the consumer-advocacy group
Public Citizen, "Drugmakers and HMOs hired 952 individual [federal]
lobbyists in 2003-nearly half of whom had 'revolving door' connections to
Congress, the White House or the executive branch. That's nearly 10
lobbyists for every US senator." With the new Medicare reforms, the
millions that big pharmaceuticals have spent in lobbying will be paid back
in spades.

In addition to assuring the big pharmaceuticals a profit windfall, the
MPDIMA also banned Medicare from either negotiating lower drug prices from
these companies or re-importing drugs from Canada, where prescription
drugs are on average 50 percent less expensive due to price controls.
Instead of regulating the pharmaceutical corporations' economically
destructive price-gouging, the Republican right is directly supporting the
inflationary trend in drug prices via the obstruction of trade, an action
that flies in the face of all rhetoric about the importance of "free
markets." For the political forces that pushed for Medicare Plan D,
veneration of the free market is secondary to the drive to secure profits
for their corporate sponsors.

          Big profits for private insurance corporations

Next to pharmaceutical corporations, the insurance industry will take home
the biggest slice of the $724 billion pie. Medicare part D subsidizes
dozens of private insurance companies to offer competing plans for
prescription drug coverage. These corporations can count on even greater
profits in the coming years, as other sections of Medicare become
privatized.

Private insurance is inherently inefficient. According to Public Citizen,
"The Medicare program [prior to the new drug plan] spends a mere 2 percent
on administrative costs, according to the Medicare Board of Trustees. By
contrast, according to the Inspector General of the Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS), HMOs [Health Maintenance Organizations, which
are privately-run health service providers and insurers] on average spend
15 percent of their revenue on administrative costs rather than on health
care. Some HMOs spend as much as 32 percent of their revenue on
administration."

While part of this 13 to 30 percent disparity is lost to the
inefficiencies of competition (marketing, administration, etc), the
remainder goes directly into the coffers of the stockholders and
executives.

In addition, the managed care organizations (MCOs) that handle privatized
Medicare decrease the efficiency of the entire medical economy by creating
profit-driven restrictions as to which procedures, doctors, pharmacies,
and drugs are covered. Managed care organizations (including HMOs) have
final say over what procedures and medicines will be paid for, essentially
superseding the decisions of doctors in judging the types of treatment
patients require. Owing to their existence as profit-making entities, MCOs
are innately stingy, paying for quick (often pharmaceutical) fixes at the
expense of patients' overall health.

Pharmaceutical and insurance provider interests dovetail neatly with the
plans of the most right-wing sections of the ruling elite to scrap
Medicare altogether as an entitlement program. In 1995, former Speaker of
the House Newt Gingrich bluntly stated the Republican right's agenda for
traditional Medicare: "Now, we don't get rid of it in round one because we
don't think that's politically smart and we don't think that's the right
way to go through a transition. But we believe it is going to wither on
the vine because we think people are voluntarily going to leave
it-voluntarily."

For politicians who support Medicare privatization, the problem with
Gingrich's proposal is getting people to voluntarily leave Medicare. The
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 introduced the option of leaving Medicare for
private managed care plans. Less than 10 percent of the Medicare
population elected to exercise this option, known first as Medicare +
Choice and now called Medicare Advantage. Even this percentage is rapidly
shrinking. Medicare part D strengthens the thrust toward privatization by
economically obligating seniors who don't have separate insurance to join
private plans if they wish to have any protection at all from escalating
drug costs.

One provision of the 2003 bill prohibits an increase in corporate or
income taxes to fund future Medicare costs beyond a certain threshold.
This means that, with the inevitable escalation of drug prices, either
payroll taxes or premiums will be increased, or there will be cuts in
other Medicare services. The future costs associated with the new drug
plan will be used to justify scaling back the Medicare entitlement program
as a whole.

Among those who favor the "reform" of Medicare, there are divisions over
how this should be done. There is opposition to the prescription plan from
those who see it as a distraction from the drive to privatize the whole
system as quickly as possible.

A November 26 editorial in the Wall Street Journal highlighted the nature
of these divisions. After noting the large number of insurance plans that
have been offered by private companies to cover the drug benefit, the
newspaper stated that "our more optimistic friends say this all shows that
competition can work in Medicare and that the drug benefit will pave the
way for systemic reform down the road," that is, that it will eventually
lead to the destruction of Medicare as it exists today. However the
editors expressed their doubts: "No matter how efficiently the private
sector runs the drug benefit, it is still going to be a hugely expensive
new taxpayer liability. And we suspect more direct price controls will be
a first, not a last, political resort."

Instead of the drug benefit, the Journal pointed to Medicare Advantage,
which it called the "model for overall reform" of Medicare. Rather than
create a new benefit, no matter how limited, the Journal advocates new
measures to push people off Medicare altogether.

The next step in the privatization agenda is the introduction of health
insurance vouchers in six major metropolitan areas in 2010. In these
areas, eligible citizens will be given a dollar amount to purchase medical
insurance, and will have the choice of paying for either Medicare or
private plans. Even though private managed care organizations are far less
efficient than Medicare, insurance providers will inevitably cherry-pick
the healthiest and least costly customers, much as they have in the
Medicare Advantage program, where Medicare is left with twice the
percentage of members with cognitive and physical disabilities in
comparison to private plans.

The Bush administration is also pushing for the reduction of doctors'
Medicare fees by 4.4 percent next year, even as medical costs are set to
rise by 1.5 percent. As a direct result of this fee reduction, many
doctors may deem it unprofitable to provide services to Medicare patients
in the future.

Meanwhile, the other major medical entitlement program, Medicaid, is also
on the chopping block. Most states across the country have enacted sharp
cuts in eligibility and services, while the federal government is moving
to cut billions from its spending obligations. In Florida, Governor Jeb
Bush has gained federal approval for a Medicaid plan that resembles the
new Medicare drug plan, substituting government-guaranteed services with
subsidized private insurance schemes. This plan is being hailed as a model
for other states to follow.

While the Republican Party has been leading the campaign to gut
entitlement programs, including in the still on-going budget negotiation
process in Congress, the attack on these programs is a decidedly
bipartisan affair. The 1997 Balanced Budget Act was passed under the
Clinton administration with significant bipartisan support, as was the
1996 welfare "reform" measure. At the state level, Democratic Party
governors have participated just as much as Republicans in cutting
Medicaid services. No section of the political establishment has offered
any proposals that seriously address the immense social and medical needs
of modern society.

The fact that the wealthiest nation in the world can find no reasonable
way to provide for the basic health of its population is a scathing
indictment of the obsolete and irrational nature of the capitalist system
as a whole.


--------16 of 17--------

As many as 60 U.S. Congressmen may be implicated in Bribery scandal
Friday 2nd December 2005
The Abramoff affair: Corruption scandal threatens Republican control of
US Congress
<http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/abr1-n29.shtml>

Michael Scanlon, a Republican political operative, publicist and former
press spokesman for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, pled guilty
November 21 to conspiring with lobbyist Jack Abramoff to bribe a
Republican congressman and cheat several American Indian tribes out of
tens of millions of dollars.

Scanlon's guilty plea-and even more his agreement to cooperate fully
with federal prosecutors and testify against former colleagues-has sent
a chill through Republican ranks and raised the prospect of numerous
indictments, convictions and jail terms for congressmen and
congressional staffers as well as Bush administration officials involved
in the rampant corruption of official Washington.

By the end of last week, there were press reports that at least four
Republican legislators and 17 staffers and former staffers were the
targets of the Justice Department investigation into the Abramoff
affair. The Wall Street Journal named DeLay, Congressman Robert Ney of
Ohio, Congressman John Doolittle of California, and Senator Conrad Burns
of Montana as targets, as well as several former Bush administration
officials. The Washington Post reported that prosecutors had informed
Congressman Ney that he was the subject of a bribery investigation and
added that the wives of DeLay and Doolittle had also been linked to
Abramoff's influence-peddling schemes.

The Abramoff affair could have much wider implications. A reporter for
BusinessWeek, on a television interview program, said that his Justice
Department sources had told him that as many as 60 congressmen could be
implicated in the bribery scandal-far more than enough to threaten
control over the House of Representatives, where the Republican majority
is 231-202, with one independent.

The Associated Press named eight more congressmen and senators who
received contributions engineered by Abramoff in return for political
favors, four Republicans and four Democrats. The Republicans were
congressmen Charles Taylor of North Carolina, J. D. Hayworth of Arizona,
Todd Tiahrt of Kansas and Dave Camp of Michigan. The Democrats included
three senators, Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Byron
Dorgan of North Dakota (the senior Democrat on the committee now
investigating the Abramoff affair), and Congressman Dale Kildee of
Michigan.

Previous press accounts have noted that House Speaker Dennis Hastert of
Illinois, a Republican, and the leading Democrat in the Senate, Minority
Leader Harry Reid, received substantial campaign contributions from
groups directed by Abramoff, most of them Indian tribes seeking
congressional favors for their casino gambling operations.

While some of these contributions went to leading Democrats,
particularly members of the Indian Affairs committees of both houses,
the bulk of the cash went to the Republicans-both because they had the
deciding role, as the majority party in both houses, and because
Abramoff built his lobbying empire on his longstanding ties to top
Republican figures like DeLay, chief Bush political aide Karl Rove,
anti-tax lobbyist Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed, former head of the
Christian Coalition.

When Abramoff was president of the National College Republicans in the
mid-1980s, his two top deputies were Norquist and Reed. All three went
on to prominent positions in far-right politics. Abramoff turned to
lobbying for the Nicaraguan contras and anti-communist terrorist groups
in southern Africa, and then, especially after the Republican takeover
of Congress in 1994, to lobbying for commercial and business interests.

With the installation of the Bush administration, the well-connected
Republican lobbyist could virtually name his price for
influence-peddling, and he rapidly became a multi-millionaire
wheeler-dealer, representing, among other companies, Tyco International
and Unisys Corp.

The essential mechanism of Abramoff's operations, as detailed in press
accounts and Senate hearings over the past 18 months, was to plunder the
extensive lobbying funds provided by Indian tribes with lucrative
gambling operations. Abramoff directed much of these funds to Scanlon,
who left DeLay's office in 2000 to set up a publicity firm in Washington
to cash in on his high-level Republican connections. Scanlon then kicked
back half the profits secretly to Abramoff.

 From 2001 to 2004, according to documents filed in federal court in
Washington DC, Abramoff and Scanlon together raked in some $82 million
in payments from the Indian tribes. Scanlon himself billed four Indian
tribes $53 million during this period, while kicking back $19 million
under the table to Abramoff.

The 35-year-old Scanlon, who was still paying off college loans from his
congressional staff salary in 1999, became a millionaire overnight,
buying several million dollars in beachfront property in Delaware
shortly after going into business for himself. Five years later, even
after agreeing to $19 million in restitution to the tribes, according to
one press account, he still retains significant personal wealth.

Abramoff manipulated the Native American tribes, using his influence
with Christian fundamentalist groups opposed to gambling in order to
extract what amounted to political protection money. In the most
notorious case, Abramoff mobilized the Christian fundamentalists to
spike the bid of a smaller Indian tribe to establish a casino that would
have undercut the profits of his clients, the Louisiana band of
Coushatta Indians.

The Coushattas hired Abramoff and Scanlon to shut down a casino run by
the Jena band, another Louisiana tribe, at Livingston, Texas, on the
Texas-Louisiana border. At Abramoff's direction, the Coushattas funneled
money to various Republican political action committees and conservative
groups, including two campaign committees run by DeLay, ARMPAC and TRMPAC.

Abramoff and Scanlon used Ralph Reed as their contact with Christian
right groups and also contacted John Cornyn, then the Texas attorney
general, now a US Senator, seeking legal action to block the Jena
casino. Reed organized a group of 50 pastors to meet with Cornyn. He
subsequently told Abramoff in an e-mail, "We have also choreographed
Cornyn's response. The AG will state that the law is clear... and pledge
to take swift action to enforce the law." The ministers were reportedly
unaware that their moral outrage at gambling was being used to aid one
gambling interest against another.

Even more brazen was the effort of Abramoff and Scanlon to funnel
millions of dollars through Reed for a campaign to shut down the El
Paso, Texas casino run by the Tigua tribe. After the casino was shut
down, Abramoff and Scanlon induced the Tiguas to hire them to wage a
campaign to allow the casino's reopening. Although the Tiguas paid out
millions, however, this effort failed.

Abramoff and Scanlon discussed their devious operations in language of
unvarnished cynicism, as revealed in e-mail exchanges made public by the
Senate Indian Affairs Committee. In one memo to Abramoff, Scanlon wrote,
referring to the Christian fundamentalists: "The wackos get their
information through the Christian right, Christian radio, mail, the
internet and telephone trees. Simply put, we want to bring out the
wackos to vote against something and make sure the rest of the public
lets the whole thing slip past them."

This could serve as a crude but nonetheless telling summary of the
entire political strategy of the Bush administration: mobilize the
"wackos" while keeping everyone else in the dark.

While there has been substantial media publicity over Abramoff's gulling
of the Indian tribes, the Republican lobbyist has been indicted so far
only in an unrelated case of business swindling in south Florida, when
he and an associate took control of SunCruz, a cruise line that offered
gambling tours, using allegedly fraudulent financial information and bad
checks.

With Scanlon's testimony, however, an indictment for swindling the
Indian tribes could be forthcoming shortly. The most recent Wall Street
Journal and Washington Post accounts reveal that the Justice Department
task force looking into the influence-peddling cases has grown to 35-40
people, suggesting that multiple high-level criminal cases could be
brought.

Particularly ominous, from the standpoint of targeted congressmen, is
the prospect that criminal bribery charges could be brought over
campaign contributions, even though the cash did not go directly into
the congressmen's pockets, but to finance their reelection efforts. The
whole purpose of the elaborate Federal Election Commission ritual has
been to legalize the escalating financial subsidies from corporate
interests to legislators.

One of Abramoff's favorite tactics was to hire the wives of
congressional staffers or of the congressmen themselves, providing what
amounted to a direct payoff under the cover of employment. One
Abramoff-linked company, Alexander Strategy Group, run by former DeLay
staffers Edwin Buckham and Tony Rudy, hired Christine DeLay, the
congressman's wife, "to determine the favorite charity of every member
of Congress," according to a Washington Post account. This not terribly
complex job-presumably 435 phone calls would have sufficed-resulted in
payments to Christine DeLay of $3,200 to $3,400 a month for three years,
for a total of $115,000. The DeLays' family lawyer, Richard Cullen, told
the Post, "It wasn't like she did this 9 to 5, but it was an ongoing
project. This was something that she found to be very interesting, very
challenging and very worthwhile."

As the criminal information published by the Justice Department in
connection with Scanlon's guilty plea states, the contributions to the
congressional campaign funds as well as personal gifts, such as Super
Bowl tickets, vacation trips, and expensive restaurant meals, were "in
exchange for a series of official acts." These included passing
legislation, agreeing to put statements into the Congressional Record,
contacting federal officials to influence decisions, meeting with
Abramoff's clients, and awarding contracts for improvements in
congressional office buildings.

While the Republican lobbyist has so far only been indicted in the
Florida case, and has not yet been convicted of any crime, the details
flooding out into the media demonstrate the extraordinarily corrupt
alliance of Christian fundamentalists, Jewish ultra-Zionists, anti-tax
zealots and rabid neo-conservative ideologues in the service of
corporate America.

The scandal-the word is unavoidable but inadequate, since it is here
describing the rule, not the exception, in today's Washington-reaches
into the highest rungs of the Republican Party leadership and the Bush
administration. DeLay, forced to step down as House Majority Leader
after his indictment on an unrelated political corruption case in Texas,
is the first top-level casualty. He once described Abramoff as "one of
my closest and dearest friends."

A mid-level White House official, David Safavian, chief procurement
officer at the Executive Office and previously chief of staff at the
General Services Administration, was indicted last month on charges that
he lied to federal investigators about a junket he took with Abramoff,
Reed and Congressman Ney to Scotland.

There may well be further White House reverberations. According to
documents released November 9, Abramoff sought a $9 million payment from
the West African nation of Gabon to arrange a meeting with President
Bush. Abramoff asked for the money to be paid through wire transfers to
a company he controlled privately, rather than to the lobbying firm of
Greenberg Traurig, where he was then employed. President Omar Bongo met
with Bush in the Oval Office 10 months later, but there has as yet been
no confirmation that he either made the payment to Abramoff or received
the invitation in return. White House officials denied any connection,
claiming that the Bongo visit was "part of the president's outreach to
the continent of Africa."


--------17 of 17--------

BUSH PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY DESTROYED BY FLOOD

Crawford, Texas -- A tragic flood this morning destroyed the personal
library of President George W. Bush. The flood began in the presidential
bathroom where both of the books were kept. Both of his books have been
lost.

A presidential spokesman said the president was devastated, as he had
almost finished coloring the second one.

[Fortunately he had punched all the paper dolls out of the first one, but
none of their clothes or smaller sidearms. -ed]

The White House tried to call FEMA but there was no answer.

[The good news is that the three-piece wooden jigsaw puzzle was recovered,
and the president and his top aides are hard at work on it. -ed]


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   - David Shove             shove001 [at] tc.umn.edu
   rhymes with clove         Progressive Calendar
                     over 2225 subscribers as of 12.19.02
              please send all messages in plain text no attachments