|
Home
|
|
The Democratic Party , the favored party of finance capital |
|
Written by mike bernhard
|
|
Sunday, 03 January 2010 |
Obama at One Year Old
Stanley Aronowitz
People cannot live without hope. The long night of the eight Bush years were tolerated only because many of us believed they would come to an end. That Obama seized on that belief better than his Democratic primary opponents is a testament to the high expectations people had that regime change in Washington just might bring about a better life. While Hillary Clinton, his main primary opponent invoked the traditional symbols of military preparedness combined with liberal domestic policies, Obama steadfastly preached the gospel of peace and hope and carefully avoided making lavish promises. She won the backing of most of Organized Labor, womens' organizatons and major Democratic politicians. But Obama, the only fresh face in the gallery of candidates, had a strategy capable of out -maneuvering the traditional party dons. With little support at the top, Obama went for the grass roots, correctly gauging the country's mood to be done with the old ties and old ide as.
Obama had the advantage of being African American, even though many black politicians hopped on the Clinton bandwagon early in the campaign. But Obama's not so secret weapon was his appeal among the tens of thousands of youth who, responding to his bold message of hope and change, literally came out of the woodwork to volunteer in his campaign, trudged door to door in the big and medium sized cities and tipped the balance in states like California, Pennsylvania and Ohio. They also delivered much of the West to the insurgent. What befuddled the pros and the pundits was Obama's ability to mobilize youth who chronically stay away from the polls, largely because they see little point in voting. He seemed to have the power to once again make them believe in the system. Although the overall vote count was not remarkable compared to past presidential elections, the proportion of voting youth and blacks helped give Obama a relatively easy victory over John McCain, the lapsed ma verick.
For many who voted for Obama, 2009 has been a year of deep disillusionment. The degree to which the Obama administration revealed its basic war and big business orientation was first shown by his major cabinet and staff appointees. Robert Gates, Bush's defense secretary, was held over; Hillary Clinton, perhaps the Senate's leading hawk, became secretary of state; the crucial position of Treasury Secretary went to a Federal Reserve bureaucrat and Wall Street ally, Tim Geithner; And Lawrence Summers, Bill Clinton's last Treasury head became Obama's chief economic advisor..
What was obscured by Obama's rousing campaign and nimble rhetoric has become brutally apparent in the aftermath. The Democratic Party has, since the end of World War Two, been the favored party of finance capital. Recall that mantle once belonged to the Republicans-the fabled party of the rich and wealthy. But the GOP has sunk into a right-wing party of opposition, and no longer pretends to be a party of government. Its cast, begun as far back as the Goldwater takeover in 1964, is anti-internationalist, narrowly ideological and administratively incompetent.
Meanwhile, the Democrats live a glaring contradiction: on the one hand, they rely on labor and the new social movements of feminism, ecology, and black freedom both for votes and for a large portion of their political cadres. On the other, they need the hundreds of millions to oil the party apparatus and run five hundred thirty five national election campaigns. Aside from the unions, most of this money comes from corporate sponsors and wealthy individuals.
This contradictory existence accounts for several important political realities: despite a large "progressive" Congressional delegation, especially in the House, the weight of governance falls on its debts to, and alliances with, the leading financial corporations. For example, that the Democrats are forced to sponsor some version of health care "reform" cannot disguise the fact that the big insurance companies have called the tune on the legislation. Nor, are their ostensible commitments to dealing with global warming and climate change as powerful as the influence of the energy giants who have systematically thwarted any significance steps to address what may be the cutting edge public issue of this century. And as we have seen, the most profound economic crisis since the Great Depression has been met by the Obama administration by continuing the Bush policy of bailing out the banks and insurance companies and virtually ignoring rising joblessness, burgeoning foreclosures a nd deepening black and Latino poverty. In short, Obama is the perfect manifestation of the contradiction that rips across the DP bough
According to historical myth, during the Depression Roosevelt saved US capitalism by instituting vast regulation of capital. In this tale, the so-called "second" New Deal of social reform was a reflection of the administration's move to the Left. What this version of history usually fails to notice is that these reforms were preceded by a mass workers movement armed with the tools of direct action that within a few short years transformed the face of the American workplace. Roosevelt was both appalled and politically astute: from an open-throated voice of capital expressed chiefly in the National Industrial Recovery Act, aimed at reviving capitalism by throttling workers wages, he forged an image of a the Democrats as the party of the working people, the poor and the oppressed. That image was, to some degree, backed by concrete steps such as social security, but it did not take long before the Democrats, spurred by the imperatives of anti-communism and the Cold War, reve rted to conservative policies, Except for the enactment of medicare in 1966, there have been no major social reforms since 1938 when the wage and hour bill became law.
And as Obama has made plain, the Democrats have retained their character as the War party. Apart from World War Two, clearly a bi-partisan effort Korea, the Dominican Republic, Vietnam, the opening rounds of the Iraq war in the late 1990s, and the escalation of the Afghanistan military intervention are their products Only the Bushes proved equally committed to aggressive foreign military intervention.
Meanwhile, as the economy continued to sink, the administration asked Congress to emulate the Bush bank bailouts as the major weapon to combat the crisis. Under Fed chair Bernanke's, Summers' and Geithner's direction, Obama was prepared to transfer trillions in taxpayer funds to the leading institutions of the financial system, And a bundle went to General Motors and Chrysler, who were now free to chop jobs at will in order to save their corporations from bankruptcy. Even as official joblessness kept climbing to more than 10%--and nearly 20% among blacks-the Obama emphasis remained to "stabilize" the financial system.
Early in the new administration Obama told the country his first major priority was to enact a universal health care program. Congress and social health movements accepted the challenge and prepared themselves for the long battle ahead. But Obama disappointed again. Instead of sending to Congress a single payer proposal that would have eliminated the power of the insurance companies, he allowed conservatives and insurance company lobbyists to write much of the bills that passed both houses. The final version will not include a public option, nor will it likely sanction the right of women to unambiguously obtain an abortion within the framework of their coverage. Under the legislation most Americans will be forced to buy private insurance and pay big Pharma's exhorbitant costs of prescription drugs.
Obama is an ordinary, though talented, center -right president. While surrendering to the Right, he has maintained a sizeable constituency among liberals and even some on the Left. That a vigorous anti-war movement has not emerged to fight the escalations and betrayals of his war policies, there are no major direct actions against the phony health care bill about to become law and, equally important, we have seen no significant demonstrations for jobs and income testifies to the torpor that has overcome large sections of the American people, including a portion of the Left. Among the reasons for this apparent passivity is that we still labor under the illusion that the Democrats are, at least in part, the party of the people and have failed to recognize their vital role in perpetuating capitalist rule. Are we so pre-occupied with the myriad personal crises that afflict all subordinate social classes? Are we exhausted in the wake of the battering of the media, the flood of nev er-ending catastrophies, the defeats suffered by the popular forces?. Are the progressive forces ready to occupy the political space of the opposition rather than the "left-wing" of the possible that moves ceaselessly to the right? Events belie forecasts so, as America's wont, the explosion is likely to come as an unexpected Hurricane. Perhaps the starting point would be the Left's clean break from the Democrats.
|
|
|
Smithville (Chenango County) unanimous: WITHDRAW THE SGEIS |
|
Written by mike bernhard
|
|
Friday, 01 January 2010 |
|
REGULAR MEETING OF THE SMITHVILLE TOWN BOARD MONDAY DECEMBER 21, 2009 RESOLUTION NO # 59 (2009) REQUEST TO GOVERNOR DAVID A. PATERSON to withdraw the draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact statement Related to Horizontal Drilling and High -Volume Hydraulic Fracturing to Develop Marcellus Shale and Other Low – Permeability Gas Reservoirs.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
As Public Comment Period Ends, Statewide Gas Ban Movement Asks, "Is NYC’s Approach Industry-Friendly |
|
Written by mike bernhard
|
|
Friday, 01 January 2010 |
(December 29th, New York) As the comment period for the State Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS) is set to expire December 31st, many environmental scientists and activists are raising pointed objections to recent decisions made by New York City-based politicians and corporate environmental organizations. In its report released last week on the SGEIS, regarding the use of hydraulic fracturing in the extraction of natural gas from shale rock, the Bloomberg Administration concluded that this technique of gas drilling should be banned around the reservoirs which provide water to New York City, due to its potentially harmful effects on the city's water supply. As a result, Mayor Bloomberg announced his official position in support of a ban on drilling, but only in the New York City Watershed. "Studies of the effects of gas drilling in Western states have proven that partial or two-tiered regulatory structures do not work. A ban on drilling only in the NYC watershed would be wholly inadequate in protecting the state’s water, air and farmland," declared Gusti Bogok of the Safe Water Movement, an environmental organization based in New York City.
Mike Bernhard, spokesperson for the Chenango Delaware Otsego Gas Drilling Opposition Group (CDOG) said "A ban that applies only to the City’s water supply not only abandons its fellow New Yorkers upstate, but also leaves New York City residents vulnerable to the serious health hazards and environmental degradation posed by this destructive drilling process."
"A ban in what is mistakenly referred to as 'the NYC watershed' would create an 'us vs. them' scenario, playing directly into the hands of the fossil-fuel industry and its political cohorts," stated Robert Jereski, a Democratic Party County Committeeman from New York City and signatory to the statewide ban petition. "If it's unsafe near our water supplies, why doesn't the Mayor oppose this unsafe drilling technique near all water supplies, including those of upstate residents or in the city's foodsheds there?" he asked. The petition has garnered thousands of signatures in New York City and across the state.
“We applaud the DEP’s efforts to reveal the dangers of frack drilling, but disagree with their limited conclusion," added Harry J. Bubbins, Director of the Friends of Brook Park. The South Bronx based organization has spearheaded the creation of a local Community Supported Agriculture program and Farmer’s Market which are reliant on fresh organic vegetables from upstate regions. "The only way to safeguard our food and water supply here in New York is to advance a state-wide ban. If they drill one foot outside of the Catskill watershed everything is still in danger of ruin,” Bubbins pointed out. "Doesn't the City's approach to drilling seem too deferential to this industry? Isn't its response to the real environmental dangers posed unscientific?" he asked rhetorically.
The scientific evidence gathered from states where gas drilling has already taken place, has revealed migration of dangerous chemical fluids and contamination of aquifers, rivers and agricultural lands miles away from drilling sites, while toxic fracking gases flow downwind and contribute to ozone and greenhouse gas pollution. SWiM and a growing movement of environmental activists statewide recognize that the only way to protect all New Yorkers is to implement a comprehensive and state-wide ban of hydraulic fracturing.
|
|
|
TOWN OF TOMPKINS (Delaware Co): WITHDRAW the SGEIS |
|
Written by mike bernhard
|
|
Tuesday, 29 December 2009 |
The following letter was sent to DEC from the Town Board of the Town of Tompkins, Delaware County, NY.
TOWN OF TOMPKINS HOME OF THE CANNONSVILLE RESERVOIR DELAWARE COUNTY PO BOX 139 TROUT CREEK, NY 13847 December 17, 2009 Mr. Jack Dahl Bureau of Oil & Gas Regulation Attn: dSGEIS Comments NYSDEC Division of Mineral Resources 625 Broadway, Third Floor Albany, NY 12233-6500 Dear Mr. Dahl, On December 14, 2009, the board of the Town of Tompkins in Delaware County, NY, unanimously endorsed the letter from Town of Tompkins resident Stephen Dungan (originally written and sent to Governor Paterson), and joins with him in calling for “a one year minimum continuation of the statewide moratorium on gas drilling and high volume hydrofracturing, until such time as the document can be rewritten to provide adequate protections to the environment and the citizens of the State.” What follows is Mr. Dungan’s letter.
December 2, 2009
Dear Governor Paterson,
I implore you to withdraw the DEC Draft SGEIS on Horizontal Gas Drilling, High Volume Hyrofracturing and Production and declare a one year minimum continuation of the statewide moratorium on gas drilling and high volume hydrofracturing, until such time as the document can be rewritten to provide adequate protections to the environment and the citizens of the State. As presented, the DSGEIS fails to adequately address numerous aspects that would provide those protections.
Before any drilling and production may commence, you must direct the Commissioner of DEC to completely rewrite the DSGEIS and require that it includes and details:
Fully adequate environmental and community safeguards taking into account cumulative impacts of this type of drilling, hyrofracturing and gas production. There must be a clear plan for fully assessing and mitigating the cumulative impacts of gas drilling and extraction on water, air, land use and values, forests, plants, animals, people and community character
A clear plan for DEC inclusion and collaboration of local government and communities in reviewing all aspects of gas drilling and production including location and density of all drilling pads and bores, central storage and support facilities, compressor stations, pipelines, etc.
A ban gas well drilling in the floodplain
The final SGEIS must require that gas companies adhere to all requirements of Federal Clean Water and Air Legislation
A complete ban on the use of any known toxic chemicals in fracking fluids
A clear plan with specified limitations and community safeguards for any and all water withdrawals that protects and prevents depletion of local water sources, public and private
A clear plan, requirements and gas company liability for handling, storing, tracking, transporting and processing all waste including any drilling and fracking fluid materials, and all toxic chemicals, gases, minerals and radiation produced or released in the process, with clear protocols for each
A clear plan and requirements for fully protecting all aquifers, public and private drinking water sources and required pre drilling and ongoing test well monitoring at each well site and along all horizontal bores as well as pre and ongoing testing of any public or private water sources within one mile of well sites and bores.
Clearly specified gas company financial responsibility for all water source monitoring with DEC responsibility to conduct all monitoring or oversee independent contracting of it
A clear plan and requirements for preventing any and all releases of toxic gases into the air including gas company responsibility for collecting and appropriately processing any and all gases produced during all phases drilling, hydrofracturing and ongoing production as well as clearly specified gas company financial responsibility for all air quality monitoring with DEC responsibility to conduct all monitoring or oversee independent contracting of it
A clear plan for assessing and mitigating community impacts of all aspects of gas drilling and production
There must be a specific assessment of the impacts of related heavy truck and machinery traffic on local roads and bridges with pre drilling and ongoing assessments as well as clearly specified gas company liability for the costs of any and all needed repairs
There must be a specific assessment of the impacts and mitigation of all emissions of trucks and related drilling and production machinery
All accidents related to gas drilling and production need to be regulated with clearly specified liability and mitigation requirements.
The DEC must promulgate accompanying regulations with appropriate rule making procedures covering all of the above, not simply suggest conditions. Any and all costs of implementing and monitoring DEC Regulations and requirements must be borne by the gas companies. There must be a clear DEC plan for adequate staffing and support for regulatory oversight and monitoring with gas company financial responsibility and bonding to ensure adequate oversight and monitoring over the lifetime of drilling, production, closure and ongoing monitoring.
No costs or unwanted responsibilities shall be passed to local government and communities.
Only when these provisions are included, can the DSGEIS on Horizontal Gas Drilling, High Volume Hyrofracturing and Production be considered as providing adequate environmental and community protections.
Respectfully,
Stephen Dungan Respectfully submitted, William Layton, Supervisor Howard Buttel, Board Member Timothy LaTourette, Board Member Peggy Backus, Board Member Carl Stuendel, Board Member
|
|
| | << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 31 - 35 of 238 |
|
|