ARIZONA continues to draw attention to itself, first with it's right wing "show your papers" citizenship law, then the decision to stop paying for organ transplants for people on Medicaid, then the murder of six and the wounding of over a dozen, including Rep Gabrielle Giffords (D AZ) at a Congress on the corner by a mentally deranged gunman armed with a legal semi-automatic pistol with clips holding 30+ bullets, and now by deciding the best way to help address their budget problems is to cut the poorest in the state, including children, from state Medicare programs. This from a state legislature and governor professing the Christianity of a majority of their members and officials. I'm still looking for the scripture references that justify taking from and denying the least among us......maybe someone from Arizona politics could offer some guidance? This from the Washington Post.....
By N.C. Aizenman
Republican efforts to repeal or limit the reach of the new health-care law took a new direction last week when Arizona lawmakers approved a novel and controversial attempt to cut Medicaid for 280,000 of the state's poor.
The bill, requested and signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R), empowers her to make a formal request, most likely this week, for a federal waiver to avoid complying with provisions of the law that prohibit states from tightening their eligibility requirements for Medicaid.
Twenty-nine Republican governors, including Brewer, have signed a letter calling on President Obama and congressional leaders to remove the provision from the law.
But Arizona is the first state to, in effect, play chicken with the Obama administration by directly requesting a reprieve and daring Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to refuse.
The move is widely regarded as a long shot. While a spokesman said the White House had no comment on Arizona's request, administration officials have shown scant interest when asked about the idea in the past.
Still, Arizona's move reflects two pressing realities: Many states face large budget shortfalls because of continuing economic difficulties, and Republican governors point to Medicaid cuts as one of the most logical ways to balance those budgets.
"The effect of federal requirements [in the new law] is unconscionable," the Republican governors wrote in their letter earlier this month. "States are unable to afford the current Medicaid program, yet our hands are tied."
Advocates for Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor and disabled that is jointly funded by states and the federal government, say the Republican argument amounts to political posturing at best and heartless, shortsighted policy at worst. Most of the men and women Arizona wants to cut from Medicaid have to earn less than $10,830 per year to qualify for the program.
"If you're a family and you hit tough times such that you can only afford to feed two out of your three children, you don't tell your third child, 'Sorry, Johnny, you're not going to eat.' You go out and find a way to get more food," said Arizona state Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Phoenix), who has made health care a focus.
Similarly, Sinema said, Brewer should attempt to restore the substantial cuts Arizona has already made to its Medicaid coverage in recent years, not seek new ones.
And while Sinema said she was confident that this latest effort at a rollback would be blocked by the Obama administration, she charged Brewer with engaging in a cynical strategy to win political cover for "gutting" other state programs if the Medicaid request is denied.
"She's trying to take an opportunity to stick it to the feds and blame Obama for our state budget crisis," she said.
No 'political ploy'
Beth Lazare, Brewer's deputy policy director, countered that the waiver request was a genuine effort to address the state's nearly $2 billion shortfall over the current and next fiscal years and that the governor had no Plan B.
"This is not a political ploy," Lazare said. "This is our plan. We don't see a whole lot of other options."
The economic downturn has been particularly devastating to Arizona, Lazare noted, depleting tax revenues even as it led to newly poor residents who swelled the state's Medicaid rolls by 46 percent over the past four years.
State lawmakers have already responded with some of the deepest Medicaid cuts of any state in recent years - slashing payment rates to doctors and other providers by 10 percent, freezing enrollment in the state's supplemental health insurance program for children, and ceasing to pay for Medicaid benefits including certain kinds of organ transplants.
When that last high-profile policy took effect in October, nearly 100 indigent patients who were on the waiting list for a transplant were told that the state would no longer cover the procedure.
Since then, one of those patients has died. Another was forced to give up the liver offered to him by a dying family friend. A third man was able to get funding for a bone marrow transplant from an anonymous donor but died of complications from his cancer before the operation could take place.
Since 2009, Arizona and other states have received tens of billions of dollars in additional federal Medicaid funding included as part of a congressional stimulus package and an associated extension.
Even so, Arizona's spending on Medicaid has increased by 65 percent over the past four years, now accounting for 29 percent of the state budget compared with 17 percent in 2006. And the extra federal Medicaid funding expires in June, contributing to an anticipated $1 billion shortfall for the state program in the 2012 fiscal year.
The new health-care law has also added limits on the state's room to maneuver.
To participate in Medicaid - and receive the billions in matching federal dollars it brings in - states must cover all children and pregnant women up to specified levels of poverty, as well some elderly, blind or disabled people, and parents of poor children, up to certain poverty levels.
Until recently, states also had the option of expanding that coverage with federal assistance by, for instance, raising the poverty threshold or including childless adults.
Beginning in 2014, the health-care law will require states to open eligibility to all individuals who earn up to 133 percent of the poverty level - with the federal government covering the lion's share of the extra cost. In the meantime, the law requires states to maintain their current levels of coverage, no matter how far above the original base line.
Waiver request
The waiver Brewer is seeking would effectively push out all 250,000 childless adults on Medicaid. An additional 30,000 parents whose incomes are above 50 percent of the poverty line would also lose their coverage.
Anticipating that the waiver would be granted six months into fiscal 2012, Brewer's staff projects that the move would save $541 million, then $900 million the following year.
Sinema said she and other state Democrats will be pushing to get the savings instead by closing some of what she maintained are at least $10 billion in corporate tax loopholes on Arizona's books - including tax exemptions for liposuction and country club memberships.
Meanwhile, the Medicaid battle with Arizona and other states is not expected to be resolved anytime soon. With the 2014 date looming for a greater expansion of Medicaid benefits, many say it will instead grow more heated and contentious.
Already, Republican governors from 26 states have sued the federal government to block that expansion, claiming it is unconstitutional.
BUCKNACKT'S SORDID TAWDRY BLOG We should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate, bier or wein in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WHOO-HOO, WHAT A RIDE!!!!!!"
Showing posts with label hypocricy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hypocricy. Show all posts
25 January 2011
21 January 2011
The GOP's rude awakening on health-care repeal from WASHINGTON POST 21JAN11
TEA-BAGGERS and right wing fanatics are finding out actually being responsible for governing is more difficult than just running their mouths.....
This whole health-care thing isn't quite working out the way Republicans planned. My guess is that they'll soon try to change the subject - but I'm afraid they're already in too deep.
Wednesday's vote to repeal President Obama's health insurance reform law was supposed to be a crowning triumph. We heard confident GOP predictions that cowed Democrats would defect in droves, generating unstoppable momentum that forced the Senate to obey "the will of the people" and follow suit. The Democrats' biggest domestic accomplishment would be in ruins and Obama's political standing would be damaged, perhaps irreparably.
What actually happened, though, is that the Republican majority managed to win the votes of just three Democrats - all of them Blue Dogs who have been consistent opponents of the reform package anyway. In terms of actual defectors, meaning Democrats who changed sides on the issue, there were none. This is momentum?
The unimpressive vote came at a moment when "the will of the people" on health care is coming into sharper focus. Most polls that offer a simple binary choice - do you like the "Obamacare" law or not - show that the reforms remain narrowly unpopular. Yet a significant fraction of those who are unhappy complain not that the reform law went too far but that it didn't go far enough. I think of these people as the "public option" crowd.
A recent Associated Press poll found that 41 percent of those surveyed opposed the reform law and 40 percent supported it. But when asked what Congress should do, 43 percent said the law should be modified so that it does more to change the health-care system. Another 19 percent said it should be left as it is.
More troubling for the GOP, the AP poll found that just 26 percent of respondents wanted Congress to repeal the reform law completely. A recent Washington Post poll found support for outright repeal at 18 percent; a Marist poll pegged it at 30 percent.
In other words, what House Republicans just voted to do may be the will of the Tea Party, but it's not "the will of the people."
"The test of a first-rate intelligence," F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote, "is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." By this standard, House Republicans are geniuses. To pass the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act," they had to believe that the work of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is both authoritative and worthless.
The CBO, which "scores" the impact of proposed legislation, calculated that the health-reform law will reduce federal deficits by at least $143 billion through 2019. Confronted with the fact that repeal would deepen the nation's fiscal woes, Republicans simply claimed the CBO estimate to be rubbish. Who cares what the CBO says, anyway?
Er, um, Republicans care, at least when it's convenient. Delving into the CBO's analysis, they unearthed a finding that they proclaimed as definitive: The reform law would eliminate 650,000 jobs. Hence "Job-Killing" in the repeal bill's title.
One problem, though: The CBO analysis contains no such figure. It's an extrapolation of a rough estimate of an anticipated effect that no reasonable person would describe as "job-killing." What the budget office actually said is that there are people who would like to withdraw from the workforce - sometimes because of a chronic medical condition - but who feel compelled to continue working so they can keep their health insurance. Once the reforms take effect, these individuals will have new options. That's where the "lost" jobs supposedly come from.
The exercise in intellectual contortion that was necessary for the House to pass the repeal bill will be an excellent tune-up for what's supposed to come next. "Repeal and replace" was the promise - get rid of the Democrats' reform plan and design one of their own. This is going to be fun.
It turns out that voters look forward to the day when no one can be denied insurance coverage because of preexisting conditions. They like the fact that young adults, until they are 26, can be kept on their parents' policies. They like not having yearly or lifetime limits on benefits. The GOP is going to have to design something that looks a lot like Obamacare.
Meanwhile, Obama's approval ratings climb higher every week. Somebody change the subject. Quick!
eugenerobinson@washpost.com
This whole health-care thing isn't quite working out the way Republicans planned. My guess is that they'll soon try to change the subject - but I'm afraid they're already in too deep.
Wednesday's vote to repeal President Obama's health insurance reform law was supposed to be a crowning triumph. We heard confident GOP predictions that cowed Democrats would defect in droves, generating unstoppable momentum that forced the Senate to obey "the will of the people" and follow suit. The Democrats' biggest domestic accomplishment would be in ruins and Obama's political standing would be damaged, perhaps irreparably.
What actually happened, though, is that the Republican majority managed to win the votes of just three Democrats - all of them Blue Dogs who have been consistent opponents of the reform package anyway. In terms of actual defectors, meaning Democrats who changed sides on the issue, there were none. This is momentum?
The unimpressive vote came at a moment when "the will of the people" on health care is coming into sharper focus. Most polls that offer a simple binary choice - do you like the "Obamacare" law or not - show that the reforms remain narrowly unpopular. Yet a significant fraction of those who are unhappy complain not that the reform law went too far but that it didn't go far enough. I think of these people as the "public option" crowd.
A recent Associated Press poll found that 41 percent of those surveyed opposed the reform law and 40 percent supported it. But when asked what Congress should do, 43 percent said the law should be modified so that it does more to change the health-care system. Another 19 percent said it should be left as it is.
More troubling for the GOP, the AP poll found that just 26 percent of respondents wanted Congress to repeal the reform law completely. A recent Washington Post poll found support for outright repeal at 18 percent; a Marist poll pegged it at 30 percent.
In other words, what House Republicans just voted to do may be the will of the Tea Party, but it's not "the will of the people."
"The test of a first-rate intelligence," F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote, "is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." By this standard, House Republicans are geniuses. To pass the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act," they had to believe that the work of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is both authoritative and worthless.
The CBO, which "scores" the impact of proposed legislation, calculated that the health-reform law will reduce federal deficits by at least $143 billion through 2019. Confronted with the fact that repeal would deepen the nation's fiscal woes, Republicans simply claimed the CBO estimate to be rubbish. Who cares what the CBO says, anyway?
Er, um, Republicans care, at least when it's convenient. Delving into the CBO's analysis, they unearthed a finding that they proclaimed as definitive: The reform law would eliminate 650,000 jobs. Hence "Job-Killing" in the repeal bill's title.
One problem, though: The CBO analysis contains no such figure. It's an extrapolation of a rough estimate of an anticipated effect that no reasonable person would describe as "job-killing." What the budget office actually said is that there are people who would like to withdraw from the workforce - sometimes because of a chronic medical condition - but who feel compelled to continue working so they can keep their health insurance. Once the reforms take effect, these individuals will have new options. That's where the "lost" jobs supposedly come from.
The exercise in intellectual contortion that was necessary for the House to pass the repeal bill will be an excellent tune-up for what's supposed to come next. "Repeal and replace" was the promise - get rid of the Democrats' reform plan and design one of their own. This is going to be fun.
It turns out that voters look forward to the day when no one can be denied insurance coverage because of preexisting conditions. They like the fact that young adults, until they are 26, can be kept on their parents' policies. They like not having yearly or lifetime limits on benefits. The GOP is going to have to design something that looks a lot like Obamacare.
Meanwhile, Obama's approval ratings climb higher every week. Somebody change the subject. Quick!
eugenerobinson@washpost.com
19 January 2011
BOHICA! House Votes For Repeal Of Health Care Law from NPR & WASHINGTON POST 19JAN11
THE mainstream media, NPR & Washington Post included, is missing a major point in this story, the glaring hypocrisy of the representatives who voted to repeal the Affordable Health Care Act while keeping their insurance that is subsidized by the taxpayers at a cost of approximately $700 a month per policy. They feel they are entitled to government subsidized health care but nobody else is. They have the same lack of morality as the executives of the banks, financial institutions and companies who feel they are entitled to obscene bonuses after their companies were bailed out by the taxpayers. The gop/tea-bagger controlled House will make sure America does get one medical procedure, though it will be with greater frequency than recommended by the AMA......know what it is? Here's a hint....BOHICA!!!! BYOL (bring your own lube).....
The new Republican-controlled House voted Wednesday 245-189 to repeal the historic health care overhaul legislation signed last March by President Obama, but the measure appears destined to prove largely symbolic.
Top Democrats in the Senate, including Majority Leader Harry Reid, who characterized the House action as "partisan grandstanding," say they will block efforts to take up the bill.
And Obama, while signaling a willingness to work on aspects of the sweeping bill where compromise may be possible, has pledged to veto any effort to repeal the centerpiece of his domestic agenda.
Republicans lack the votes in the Senate to override a presidential veto.
But the up-or-down repeal vote fulfills a campaign promise many Republican candidates made last fall, and sets into motion a larger GOP strategy to use the power levers they control to chip away at aspects of the bill over the next two years.
During repeal debate that began Tuesday, and wound down late Wednesday afternoon, Republican Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon said that his party will come up with a "replacement bill."
Other House GOP leaders on the issue, including Rep. Steve King of Iowa, say the party will also use its muscle in the appropriations process to pull funding that would implement aspects of the bill, including enforcing the legislation's requirement that citizens have private or employer-provided health insurance.
Republican leaders say they don't have a deadline for producing new health care legislation — the "replace" part of their campaign promise of "repeal and replace."
But four House committees will be charged tomorrow with coming up with proposed changes to the existing bill. And more than two dozen states have joined a Florida lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the health care law.
Largely Respectful Debate, Except …
The seven hours of floor debate struck a largely respectful tone, with one glaring detour: Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee late Tuesday compared Republican arguments to Nazi propaganda and "blood libel." The term was recently invoked, to much criticism, by former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in a statement critical of the media's coverage of her in the wake of the recent shootings in Arizona that critically injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) and killed six people.
The health care measure, a hot-button political issue for more than 18 months and the first bill considered under House Republican control in the new Congress, is officially titled the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act."
Before the Tucson massacre, the impending repeal debate appeared likely to be stridently partisan — a replay, perhaps, of last year's debate, when terms like "death panels" were casually employed. But, as was the case Tuesday when the bill came to the floor, the language remained - with an exception or two - largely focused on well-worn talking points Wednesday.
House Speaker John Boehner, noting that Obama has indicated that the health care bill needs work, said: "If we agree that this law needs improving, why would we keep it on the books?"
Obama in a statement this week said that while "we can't go backward," he is "willing and eager" to work with members of both parties to "improve the Affordable Care Act."
Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi, who was House Speaker when the bill passed, defended popular aspects of the bill that have already gone into effect, including barring insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, to allowing adult children up to age 26 to remain on their parents' policies.
"Repeal would be devastating to so many Americans," Pelosi said.
House Republicans have already indicated that they are unlikely to strip the pre-existing condition rule from any plan going forward.
But they also warned opponents not to underestimate their determination or their willingness to use parliamentary maneuvers to deny the Obama administration funds needed to carry out the law.
"Repeal doesn't mean we aren't for health care reform, quite the contrary," said Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN), an obstetrician-gynecologist. "This bill does increase the number of people who are insured. But it does nothing to decrease the costs."
That, he predicted, will make Obama's expansion of coverage unsustainable.
Both Parties Seize Opportunity To Make Case
Many Democrats were defiant during the debate. "We are not interested in taking down, repealing and destroying," said Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA).
They also held an informal hearing Tuesday featuring actual people who are benefiting from some of the parts of the law that have already taken effect.
Republicans are "re-litigating, regurgitating and re-arguing" a debate that was settled last year, said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ). Repeal is "the wrong bill at the wrong time," he added.
Republicans argued that the law gives the federal government too much power, particularly the requirement that nearly every American either have health insurance or else pay a penalty.
"If this law is constitutional, if Congress has such broad power, our limited federal government will have become limitless," said Michigan freshman Republican Rep. Justin Amash.
The GOP's Health Care Priorities
The House is scheduled to vote Thursday to instruct several major committees to draft health care legislation that reflects Republican priorities, including limits on medical malpractice awards and stricter language barring taxpayer funding for abortions. But an earlier GOP bill that offered a competing vision to the Democrats' only covered a fraction of the people reached by Obama's law.
No matter, Republicans say. A modest, step-by-step approach may turn out to be more sustainable in the long run than a major new government program whose costs and consequences are still unclear.
The fate of the repeal-and-replace effort hinges on the quality of the replacement legislation and the care that Republicans put into drafting it, said Rep. Chris Gibson (R-NY), a freshman. If it meets the needs and concerns of the public, Gibson said, he believes Democrats in the Senate may be persuaded to give it serious consideration.
Easier said than done, Democrats say. For example, Republicans say they also want to help people with pre-existing medical conditions find affordable coverage. But many experts say that won't be possible unless there is some kind of requirement that healthy people get into the insurance pool as well, thereby helping to keep premiums down.
"They're going to have to deal with that," said Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat.
But while the legislative battle is likely to end in a draw, at least for now, the battle for public opinion rages on. A new CNN poll provides more ammunition for both sides. For Republicans, it finds that half of those polled think the law should be repealed. But Democrats will take heart in the fact that nearly 80 percent of Americans favor at least some aspect of the health law.
Contributing: Julie Rovner; Liz Halloran; The Associated Press
House votes to repeal health-care law
By Felicia Sonmez and David A. Fahrenthold
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 19, 2011; 6:33 PM
The House on Wednesday evening passed a bill that would repeal the national health care overhaul, approving the measure on a largely party-line vote.
The repeal bill passed 245 to 189, with three Democrats - Reps. Mike Ross (Ark.), Dan Boren (Okla.) and Mike McIntyre (N.C.) - joining Republicans in backing the measure. The three were among the four Democrats who voted earlier this month to advance the measure. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who remains in serious condition following this month's mass shooting in Tucson, was the only lawmaker not voting.
The bill's passage came after Democrats unsuccessfully staged an eleventh-hour vote in an effort to derail the Republican-sponsored measure.
The Democratic move, which would have made the repeal effort ineffective unless a majority of lawmakers gave up their federal health care benefits within 30 days of the bill's passage, fell short in the GOP-led House.
While the repeal passed the House, ultimately, it is expected to fail.
To actually repeal the law, Republicans would need the approval of the Democrat-controlled Senate and President Obama, unless they have enough votes to override his veto. They are not likely to get that approval.
That made Wednesday's debate look like a dress rehearsal for an entirely different discussion: not whether the bill should be repealed, but how it might be changed.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in his remarks on the House floor that repeal would prevent more than $770 billion in tax hikes, reduce spending by $540 billion and protect more than 7 million seniors from losing or being denied coverage through Medicare Advantage.
"Repeal means paving the way for better solutions that will lower the cost without destroying jobs or bankrupting our government, and repeal means keeping a promise," Boehner said. "This is what we said what we'd do. We listened to the people; we made a commitment to them, a pledge to make their priorities, our priorities."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended the law by citing some of the stories of seven Americans who gave testimony on Tuesday at a hearing called by House Democrats. "Nothing speaks more eloquently to the success of health care reform than the success of their own personal stories," she said.
"We don't want them to think that in order for them to have the same kind of access to health care that we do, we should say to them, 'Run for Congress,'" Pelosi said.
Throughout Wednesday's debate, some Republicans said that elements of the current law - such as a ban on denying coverage for for pre-existing conditions, or the ability for parents to keep young adult children on their insurance - might be included in a replacement bill they want to write.
"We will address, with a replacement bill, pre-existing conditions," said Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.). But Walden said Republicans wanted to to keep out of the replacement bill other elements of the overhaul law, which he said included an increase in the overall cost of healthcare.
"We can do better than this, given a chance," Walden said.
Democrats also said they would be willing to change elements of the law.
"This is political theater. It's a charade," Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said of the repeal proposal. He continued: "I'm willing to change the bill. But repealing it is the absolutely wrong way of doing it."
The two sides still seemed a long way from actual compromise. Republicans have not said exactly how they would replace the current bill with one that provided these benefits with lower costs. And Democrats seem unwilling to budge on some elements most unpopular with Republicans, like the requirement that all individuals buy health insurance.
The tone of Wednesday's debate was far more muted than the first debate over the healthcare overhaul--there were fewer mentions of "job-killing," or comparisons of the bill to socialism.
But, as the day went on, both sides slipped in bitter jabs at the other. Freshman Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), compared his state's fight against the health-care overhaul to the American Revolution.
"We did not accept the chains of George III, nor will we accept the chains of Obamacare," Griffith said.
After him, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) said Republicans were telling untruths about the healthcare legislation. He said that, if anyone watching on television was playing a drinking game that required them to drink when a Republican bent the truth, they needed to get a designated driver.
Weiner said the Republicans' tactics should be called the "'We don't really mean it' strategy."
The night before, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) had compared the Republican tactics on this issue to ones used by the Nazis.
"They say it's a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels," Cohen said. "You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That's the same kind of thing.
"The Germans said enough about the Jews and people believed it--believed it and you have the Holocaust," Cohen said.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) on Wednesday called the health care overhaul "the crown jewel of socialism." And a handful of members of both parties used heated rhetoric in charging that the health care overhaul would "kill jobs" -- or that its repeal would result in "killing Americans."
Wednesday's floor debate was a chance for both sides to try out the arguments they are likely to use in this year's longer debate, as Congress considers changing or eliminating the healthcare legislation one piece at a time.
Republicans largely used their floor remarks to tie the health care law to the economy, arguing that the health care overhaul will do away with fiscal discipline through increased spending and higher taxes, cost the country jobs and create economic uncertainty.
Some lawmakers went further, arguing that the law itself is unconstitutional, would overextend the reach of government and would allow for taxpayer-funded abortions, even though Democrats say that is not the case.
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), a prominent conservative who is mulling a bid for president or governor, said that with Wednesday's vote, House Republicans "are going to stand with the American people and vote to repeal their government takeover of health care lock, stock and barrel."
"Now I know the other side and some liberals in the media don't like us using that term -- government takeover of health care -- but let me break it down for you: When you mandate that every American purchase health insurance whether they want it or need it or not ... and you throw in public funding of abortion against the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the American people, that's a government takeover of health care and the American people know it," Pence said in his floor remarks.
In the battle of constituent anecdotes, Republicans told stories about small businessmen worried about the bill's costs. Democrats, on the other hand, talked about patients: people who would get help paying for pre-natal care, or the treatment of cancer or other diseases.
At one point, Reps. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) sparred over how women would be affected by a repeal of the health care law.
"Thanks to the new law, women do not have to worry anymore about being treated as second-class citizens or about being discriminated against for being a woman," Slaughter said, arguing that the health care law made it illegal for insurance companies to charge women higher premiums and would require that insurers provide coverage for victims of domestic violence.
Blackburn shot back that the health care overhaul would make it "more difficult for women under the age of 50 and over the age of 75 to get mammograms."
"One of our primary concerns with this legislation was the way in which women would be adversely impacted," Blackburn said, adding that "we need this bill off the books."
The new Republican-controlled House voted Wednesday 245-189 to repeal the historic health care overhaul legislation signed last March by President Obama, but the measure appears destined to prove largely symbolic.
Top Democrats in the Senate, including Majority Leader Harry Reid, who characterized the House action as "partisan grandstanding," say they will block efforts to take up the bill.
And Obama, while signaling a willingness to work on aspects of the sweeping bill where compromise may be possible, has pledged to veto any effort to repeal the centerpiece of his domestic agenda.
Republicans lack the votes in the Senate to override a presidential veto.
But the up-or-down repeal vote fulfills a campaign promise many Republican candidates made last fall, and sets into motion a larger GOP strategy to use the power levers they control to chip away at aspects of the bill over the next two years.
During repeal debate that began Tuesday, and wound down late Wednesday afternoon, Republican Rep. Greg Walden of Oregon said that his party will come up with a "replacement bill."
Other House GOP leaders on the issue, including Rep. Steve King of Iowa, say the party will also use its muscle in the appropriations process to pull funding that would implement aspects of the bill, including enforcing the legislation's requirement that citizens have private or employer-provided health insurance.
Republican leaders say they don't have a deadline for producing new health care legislation — the "replace" part of their campaign promise of "repeal and replace."
But four House committees will be charged tomorrow with coming up with proposed changes to the existing bill. And more than two dozen states have joined a Florida lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the health care law.
Largely Respectful Debate, Except …
The seven hours of floor debate struck a largely respectful tone, with one glaring detour: Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee late Tuesday compared Republican arguments to Nazi propaganda and "blood libel." The term was recently invoked, to much criticism, by former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in a statement critical of the media's coverage of her in the wake of the recent shootings in Arizona that critically injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) and killed six people.
The health care measure, a hot-button political issue for more than 18 months and the first bill considered under House Republican control in the new Congress, is officially titled the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act."
Before the Tucson massacre, the impending repeal debate appeared likely to be stridently partisan — a replay, perhaps, of last year's debate, when terms like "death panels" were casually employed. But, as was the case Tuesday when the bill came to the floor, the language remained - with an exception or two - largely focused on well-worn talking points Wednesday.
House Speaker John Boehner, noting that Obama has indicated that the health care bill needs work, said: "If we agree that this law needs improving, why would we keep it on the books?"
Obama in a statement this week said that while "we can't go backward," he is "willing and eager" to work with members of both parties to "improve the Affordable Care Act."
Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi, who was House Speaker when the bill passed, defended popular aspects of the bill that have already gone into effect, including barring insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, to allowing adult children up to age 26 to remain on their parents' policies.
"Repeal would be devastating to so many Americans," Pelosi said.
House Republicans have already indicated that they are unlikely to strip the pre-existing condition rule from any plan going forward.
But they also warned opponents not to underestimate their determination or their willingness to use parliamentary maneuvers to deny the Obama administration funds needed to carry out the law.
"Repeal doesn't mean we aren't for health care reform, quite the contrary," said Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN), an obstetrician-gynecologist. "This bill does increase the number of people who are insured. But it does nothing to decrease the costs."
That, he predicted, will make Obama's expansion of coverage unsustainable.
Both Parties Seize Opportunity To Make Case
Many Democrats were defiant during the debate. "We are not interested in taking down, repealing and destroying," said Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA).
They also held an informal hearing Tuesday featuring actual people who are benefiting from some of the parts of the law that have already taken effect.
Republicans are "re-litigating, regurgitating and re-arguing" a debate that was settled last year, said Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ). Repeal is "the wrong bill at the wrong time," he added.
Republicans argued that the law gives the federal government too much power, particularly the requirement that nearly every American either have health insurance or else pay a penalty.
"If this law is constitutional, if Congress has such broad power, our limited federal government will have become limitless," said Michigan freshman Republican Rep. Justin Amash.
The GOP's Health Care Priorities
The House is scheduled to vote Thursday to instruct several major committees to draft health care legislation that reflects Republican priorities, including limits on medical malpractice awards and stricter language barring taxpayer funding for abortions. But an earlier GOP bill that offered a competing vision to the Democrats' only covered a fraction of the people reached by Obama's law.
No matter, Republicans say. A modest, step-by-step approach may turn out to be more sustainable in the long run than a major new government program whose costs and consequences are still unclear.
The fate of the repeal-and-replace effort hinges on the quality of the replacement legislation and the care that Republicans put into drafting it, said Rep. Chris Gibson (R-NY), a freshman. If it meets the needs and concerns of the public, Gibson said, he believes Democrats in the Senate may be persuaded to give it serious consideration.
Easier said than done, Democrats say. For example, Republicans say they also want to help people with pre-existing medical conditions find affordable coverage. But many experts say that won't be possible unless there is some kind of requirement that healthy people get into the insurance pool as well, thereby helping to keep premiums down.
"They're going to have to deal with that," said Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 Democrat.
But while the legislative battle is likely to end in a draw, at least for now, the battle for public opinion rages on. A new CNN poll provides more ammunition for both sides. For Republicans, it finds that half of those polled think the law should be repealed. But Democrats will take heart in the fact that nearly 80 percent of Americans favor at least some aspect of the health law.
Contributing: Julie Rovner; Liz Halloran; The Associated Press
House votes to repeal health-care law
By Felicia Sonmez and David A. Fahrenthold
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 19, 2011; 6:33 PM
The House on Wednesday evening passed a bill that would repeal the national health care overhaul, approving the measure on a largely party-line vote.
The repeal bill passed 245 to 189, with three Democrats - Reps. Mike Ross (Ark.), Dan Boren (Okla.) and Mike McIntyre (N.C.) - joining Republicans in backing the measure. The three were among the four Democrats who voted earlier this month to advance the measure. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who remains in serious condition following this month's mass shooting in Tucson, was the only lawmaker not voting.
The bill's passage came after Democrats unsuccessfully staged an eleventh-hour vote in an effort to derail the Republican-sponsored measure.
The Democratic move, which would have made the repeal effort ineffective unless a majority of lawmakers gave up their federal health care benefits within 30 days of the bill's passage, fell short in the GOP-led House.
While the repeal passed the House, ultimately, it is expected to fail.
To actually repeal the law, Republicans would need the approval of the Democrat-controlled Senate and President Obama, unless they have enough votes to override his veto. They are not likely to get that approval.
That made Wednesday's debate look like a dress rehearsal for an entirely different discussion: not whether the bill should be repealed, but how it might be changed.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in his remarks on the House floor that repeal would prevent more than $770 billion in tax hikes, reduce spending by $540 billion and protect more than 7 million seniors from losing or being denied coverage through Medicare Advantage.
"Repeal means paving the way for better solutions that will lower the cost without destroying jobs or bankrupting our government, and repeal means keeping a promise," Boehner said. "This is what we said what we'd do. We listened to the people; we made a commitment to them, a pledge to make their priorities, our priorities."
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended the law by citing some of the stories of seven Americans who gave testimony on Tuesday at a hearing called by House Democrats. "Nothing speaks more eloquently to the success of health care reform than the success of their own personal stories," she said.
"We don't want them to think that in order for them to have the same kind of access to health care that we do, we should say to them, 'Run for Congress,'" Pelosi said.
Throughout Wednesday's debate, some Republicans said that elements of the current law - such as a ban on denying coverage for for pre-existing conditions, or the ability for parents to keep young adult children on their insurance - might be included in a replacement bill they want to write.
"We will address, with a replacement bill, pre-existing conditions," said Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.). But Walden said Republicans wanted to to keep out of the replacement bill other elements of the overhaul law, which he said included an increase in the overall cost of healthcare.
"We can do better than this, given a chance," Walden said.
Democrats also said they would be willing to change elements of the law.
"This is political theater. It's a charade," Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said of the repeal proposal. He continued: "I'm willing to change the bill. But repealing it is the absolutely wrong way of doing it."
The two sides still seemed a long way from actual compromise. Republicans have not said exactly how they would replace the current bill with one that provided these benefits with lower costs. And Democrats seem unwilling to budge on some elements most unpopular with Republicans, like the requirement that all individuals buy health insurance.
The tone of Wednesday's debate was far more muted than the first debate over the healthcare overhaul--there were fewer mentions of "job-killing," or comparisons of the bill to socialism.
But, as the day went on, both sides slipped in bitter jabs at the other. Freshman Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), compared his state's fight against the health-care overhaul to the American Revolution.
"We did not accept the chains of George III, nor will we accept the chains of Obamacare," Griffith said.
After him, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) said Republicans were telling untruths about the healthcare legislation. He said that, if anyone watching on television was playing a drinking game that required them to drink when a Republican bent the truth, they needed to get a designated driver.
Weiner said the Republicans' tactics should be called the "'We don't really mean it' strategy."
The night before, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) had compared the Republican tactics on this issue to ones used by the Nazis.
"They say it's a government takeover of health care, a big lie just like Goebbels," Cohen said. "You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, and eventually, people believe it. Like blood libel. That's the same kind of thing.
"The Germans said enough about the Jews and people believed it--believed it and you have the Holocaust," Cohen said.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) on Wednesday called the health care overhaul "the crown jewel of socialism." And a handful of members of both parties used heated rhetoric in charging that the health care overhaul would "kill jobs" -- or that its repeal would result in "killing Americans."
Wednesday's floor debate was a chance for both sides to try out the arguments they are likely to use in this year's longer debate, as Congress considers changing or eliminating the healthcare legislation one piece at a time.
Republicans largely used their floor remarks to tie the health care law to the economy, arguing that the health care overhaul will do away with fiscal discipline through increased spending and higher taxes, cost the country jobs and create economic uncertainty.
Some lawmakers went further, arguing that the law itself is unconstitutional, would overextend the reach of government and would allow for taxpayer-funded abortions, even though Democrats say that is not the case.
Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), a prominent conservative who is mulling a bid for president or governor, said that with Wednesday's vote, House Republicans "are going to stand with the American people and vote to repeal their government takeover of health care lock, stock and barrel."
"Now I know the other side and some liberals in the media don't like us using that term -- government takeover of health care -- but let me break it down for you: When you mandate that every American purchase health insurance whether they want it or need it or not ... and you throw in public funding of abortion against the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the American people, that's a government takeover of health care and the American people know it," Pence said in his floor remarks.
In the battle of constituent anecdotes, Republicans told stories about small businessmen worried about the bill's costs. Democrats, on the other hand, talked about patients: people who would get help paying for pre-natal care, or the treatment of cancer or other diseases.
At one point, Reps. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) sparred over how women would be affected by a repeal of the health care law.
"Thanks to the new law, women do not have to worry anymore about being treated as second-class citizens or about being discriminated against for being a woman," Slaughter said, arguing that the health care law made it illegal for insurance companies to charge women higher premiums and would require that insurers provide coverage for victims of domestic violence.
Blackburn shot back that the health care overhaul would make it "more difficult for women under the age of 50 and over the age of 75 to get mammograms."
"One of our primary concerns with this legislation was the way in which women would be adversely impacted," Blackburn said, adding that "we need this bill off the books."
06 August 2010
And the Most Inspiring Good News Story of the Year Is...6AUG10
I have worked really hard not to purchase items made in the prc since the Tienanmen Square massacre over 20 years ago. I have gone without a lot of things without any suffering, in fact I have learned to live a simpler life. And I have to confess, there have been a couple of times, in spite of my best efforts, that I have had to buy a few things made in the prc because I could not find the items made anywhere else and they were necessary purchases. These caused me feelings of guilt and hypocrisy, and I would end up making a donation to a human rights or humanitarian organization as penance. I also felt anger because I know corporations, especially WAL-MART, have forced many American jobs to china. I also know that the selfishness of the average American consumer, the one who wants a good paying job with benefits and wants to buy according to their wants, not needs, and who doesn't care if anyone else has a good job with benefits AND has no concern at all about foreign slave labor economies has rewarded corporate America for exporting American jobs so that we are in the economic mess we are in now. Maybe someday workers here will show the courage and solidarity of our parents and grandparents eras and someday stand together for better jobs, benefits and working conditions. Maybe we can learn some lessons from today's Chinese labor organizers.
At first, this isn't going to sound like a good news story, never mind one of the most inspiring stories in the world today. But trust me: it is.
Yan Li spent his life tweaking tiny bolts, on a production line, for the gadgets that make our lives zing and bling. He might have pushed a crucial component of the laptop I am writing this article on, or the mobile phone that will interrupt your reading of it. He was a typical 27-year old worker at the gigantic Foxconn factory in Shenzen, Southern China, which manufactures iPads and Playstations and mobile phone batteries.
Li was known to the company by his ID number: F3839667. He stood at a whirring line all day, every day, making the same tiny mechanical motion with his wrist, for 20 pence an hour. According to his family, sometimes his shifts lasted for 24 hours; sometimes they stretched to 35. If he had tried to form a free trade union to change these practices, he would have been imprisoned for twelve years. On the night of May 27th, after yet another marathon-shift, Li dropped dead.
Deaths from overwork are so common in Chinese factories they have a word for it: guolaosi. China Daily estimates 600,000 people are killed this way every year, mostly making goods for us. Li had never experienced any health problems, his family says, until he started this work schedule; Foxconn say he died of asthma and his death had nothing to do with them. The night Li died, yet another Foxconn worker committed suicide -- the tenth this year.
For two decades now, you and I have shopped until Chinese workers dropped. Business has bragged about the joys of the China Price. They have been less keen for us to see the Human Price. KYE Systems Corp run a typical factory in Donguan in southern mainland China, and one of their biggest clients is Microsoft - so in 2009 the US National Labour Committee sent Chinese investigators undercover there. On the first day a teenage worker whispered to them: "We are like prisoners here."
The staff work and live in giant factory-cities that they almost never leave. Each room sleeps ten workers, and each dorm houses 5000. There are no showers; they are given a sponge to clean themselves with. A typical shift begins at 7.45am and ends at 10.55pm. Workers must report to their stations fifteen minutes ahead of schedule for a military-style drill: "Everybody, attention! Face left! Face right!" Once they begin, they are strictly forbidden from talking, listening to music, or going to the toilet. Anybody who breaks this rule is screamed at and made to clean the toilets as punishment. Then it's back to the dorm.
It's the human equivalent to battery farming. One worker said: "My job is to put rubber pads on the base of each computer mouse... This is a mind-numbing job. I am basically repeating the same motion over and over for over twelve hours a day." At a nearby Meitai factory, which made keyboards for Microsoft, a worker said: "We're really livestock and shouldn't be called workers." They are even banned from making their own food, or having sex. They live off the gruel and slop they are required to buy from the canteen, except on Fridays, when they are given a small chicken leg and foot, "to symbolize their improving life."
Even as their work has propelled China towards being a super-power, these workers got less and less. Wages as a proportion of GDP fell in China every single year from 1983 to 2005.
They can be treated this way because of a very specific kind of politics that has prevailed in China for two decades now. Very rich people are allowed to form into organizations -- corporations -- to ruthlessly advance their interests, but the rest of the population is forbidden by the secret police from banding together to create organizations to protect theirs. The political practices of Maoism were neatly transferred from communism to corporations: both regard human beings as dispensable instruments only there to serve economic ends.
We'll never know the names of all the people who paid with their limbs, their lungs, or their lives for the goodies in my home and yours. Here's just one: think of him as the Unknown Worker, standing for them all. Liu Pan was a 17 year old operating a machine that made cards and cardboard that were sold on to big name Western corporations, including Disney. When he tried to clear its jammed machinery, he got pulled into it. His sister said: "When we got his body, his whole head was crushed. We couldn't even see his eyes."
So you might be thinking -- was it a cruel joke to bill this as a good news story? Not at all. An epic rebellion has now begun in China against this abuse -- and it is beginning to succeed. Across 126,000 Chinese factories, workers have refused to live like this any more. Wildcat unions have sprung up, organized by text message, demanding higher wages, a humane work environment, and the right to organize freely. Millions of young workers across the country are blockading their factories and chanting "there are no human rights here!" and "we want freedom!" The suicides were a rebellion of despair; this is a rebellion of hope.
Last year, the Chinese dictatorship was so panicked by the widespread uprisings that they prepared an extraordinary step forward. They drafted a new labor law that would allow workers to form and elect their own trade unions. It would plant seeds of democracy across China's workplaces. Western corporations lobbied very hard against it, saying it would create a "negative investment environment" - by which they mean smaller profits. Western governments obediently backed the corporations and opposed freedom and democracy for Chinese workers. So the law was whittled down and democracy stripped out.
It wasn't enough. This year Chinese workers have risen even harder to demand a fair share of the prosperity they create. Now company after company is making massive concessions: pay rises of over 60 percent are being conceded. Even more crucially, officials in Guandong province, the manufacturing heartland of the country, have announced they are seriously considering allowing workers to elect their own representatives to carry out collective bargaining after all.
Just like last time, Western corporations and governments are lobbying frantically against this -- and to keep the millions of Yan Lis stuck at their assembly lines into the 35th hour.
This isn't a distant struggle: you are at its heart, whether you like it or not. There is an electrical extension cord running from your laptop and mobile and games console to the people like Yan Li and Liu Pan dying to make them. So you have to make a choice. You can passively let the corporations and governments speak for you in trying to beat these people back into semi-servitude - or you can side with the organizations here that support their cry for freedom, like No Sweat in Britain, or the National Labour Committee in the US, by donating to them, or volunteering for their campaigns.
Yes, if this struggle succeeds, it will mean that we will have to pay a little more for some products, in exchange for the freedom and the lives of people like Yan Li and Liu Pan. But previous generations have made that choice. After slavery was abolished in 1833, Britain's GDP fell by 10 percent -- but they knew that cheap goods and fat profits made from flogging people until they broke were not worth having. Do we?
At first, this isn't going to sound like a good news story, never mind one of the most inspiring stories in the world today. But trust me: it is.
Yan Li spent his life tweaking tiny bolts, on a production line, for the gadgets that make our lives zing and bling. He might have pushed a crucial component of the laptop I am writing this article on, or the mobile phone that will interrupt your reading of it. He was a typical 27-year old worker at the gigantic Foxconn factory in Shenzen, Southern China, which manufactures iPads and Playstations and mobile phone batteries.
Li was known to the company by his ID number: F3839667. He stood at a whirring line all day, every day, making the same tiny mechanical motion with his wrist, for 20 pence an hour. According to his family, sometimes his shifts lasted for 24 hours; sometimes they stretched to 35. If he had tried to form a free trade union to change these practices, he would have been imprisoned for twelve years. On the night of May 27th, after yet another marathon-shift, Li dropped dead.
Deaths from overwork are so common in Chinese factories they have a word for it: guolaosi. China Daily estimates 600,000 people are killed this way every year, mostly making goods for us. Li had never experienced any health problems, his family says, until he started this work schedule; Foxconn say he died of asthma and his death had nothing to do with them. The night Li died, yet another Foxconn worker committed suicide -- the tenth this year.
For two decades now, you and I have shopped until Chinese workers dropped. Business has bragged about the joys of the China Price. They have been less keen for us to see the Human Price. KYE Systems Corp run a typical factory in Donguan in southern mainland China, and one of their biggest clients is Microsoft - so in 2009 the US National Labour Committee sent Chinese investigators undercover there. On the first day a teenage worker whispered to them: "We are like prisoners here."
The staff work and live in giant factory-cities that they almost never leave. Each room sleeps ten workers, and each dorm houses 5000. There are no showers; they are given a sponge to clean themselves with. A typical shift begins at 7.45am and ends at 10.55pm. Workers must report to their stations fifteen minutes ahead of schedule for a military-style drill: "Everybody, attention! Face left! Face right!" Once they begin, they are strictly forbidden from talking, listening to music, or going to the toilet. Anybody who breaks this rule is screamed at and made to clean the toilets as punishment. Then it's back to the dorm.
It's the human equivalent to battery farming. One worker said: "My job is to put rubber pads on the base of each computer mouse... This is a mind-numbing job. I am basically repeating the same motion over and over for over twelve hours a day." At a nearby Meitai factory, which made keyboards for Microsoft, a worker said: "We're really livestock and shouldn't be called workers." They are even banned from making their own food, or having sex. They live off the gruel and slop they are required to buy from the canteen, except on Fridays, when they are given a small chicken leg and foot, "to symbolize their improving life."
Even as their work has propelled China towards being a super-power, these workers got less and less. Wages as a proportion of GDP fell in China every single year from 1983 to 2005.
They can be treated this way because of a very specific kind of politics that has prevailed in China for two decades now. Very rich people are allowed to form into organizations -- corporations -- to ruthlessly advance their interests, but the rest of the population is forbidden by the secret police from banding together to create organizations to protect theirs. The political practices of Maoism were neatly transferred from communism to corporations: both regard human beings as dispensable instruments only there to serve economic ends.
We'll never know the names of all the people who paid with their limbs, their lungs, or their lives for the goodies in my home and yours. Here's just one: think of him as the Unknown Worker, standing for them all. Liu Pan was a 17 year old operating a machine that made cards and cardboard that were sold on to big name Western corporations, including Disney. When he tried to clear its jammed machinery, he got pulled into it. His sister said: "When we got his body, his whole head was crushed. We couldn't even see his eyes."
So you might be thinking -- was it a cruel joke to bill this as a good news story? Not at all. An epic rebellion has now begun in China against this abuse -- and it is beginning to succeed. Across 126,000 Chinese factories, workers have refused to live like this any more. Wildcat unions have sprung up, organized by text message, demanding higher wages, a humane work environment, and the right to organize freely. Millions of young workers across the country are blockading their factories and chanting "there are no human rights here!" and "we want freedom!" The suicides were a rebellion of despair; this is a rebellion of hope.
Last year, the Chinese dictatorship was so panicked by the widespread uprisings that they prepared an extraordinary step forward. They drafted a new labor law that would allow workers to form and elect their own trade unions. It would plant seeds of democracy across China's workplaces. Western corporations lobbied very hard against it, saying it would create a "negative investment environment" - by which they mean smaller profits. Western governments obediently backed the corporations and opposed freedom and democracy for Chinese workers. So the law was whittled down and democracy stripped out.
It wasn't enough. This year Chinese workers have risen even harder to demand a fair share of the prosperity they create. Now company after company is making massive concessions: pay rises of over 60 percent are being conceded. Even more crucially, officials in Guandong province, the manufacturing heartland of the country, have announced they are seriously considering allowing workers to elect their own representatives to carry out collective bargaining after all.
Just like last time, Western corporations and governments are lobbying frantically against this -- and to keep the millions of Yan Lis stuck at their assembly lines into the 35th hour.
This isn't a distant struggle: you are at its heart, whether you like it or not. There is an electrical extension cord running from your laptop and mobile and games console to the people like Yan Li and Liu Pan dying to make them. So you have to make a choice. You can passively let the corporations and governments speak for you in trying to beat these people back into semi-servitude - or you can side with the organizations here that support their cry for freedom, like No Sweat in Britain, or the National Labour Committee in the US, by donating to them, or volunteering for their campaigns.
Yes, if this struggle succeeds, it will mean that we will have to pay a little more for some products, in exchange for the freedom and the lives of people like Yan Li and Liu Pan. But previous generations have made that choice. After slavery was abolished in 1833, Britain's GDP fell by 10 percent -- but they knew that cheap goods and fat profits made from flogging people until they broke were not worth having. Do we?
24 April 2010
Arizona’s Immigration Bill is a Social and Racial Sin, THE CHURCH WILL NOT COMPLY from SOJO 23APR10
A call to action from Sojourners, click on the header to participate. After this was sent out the Gov. of Arizona did sign the bill into law Friday afternoon. I am torn on this issue, I resent illegal immigrants for taking jobs at wages lower that American workers would demand and receive, but I really resent the way corporate America and all levels of government turn a blind eye to the exploitation of immigrants, legal and illegal, and so create the incentive for illegals to come here. There's is a lot of hypocrisy among regular Americans too, even those that rail against illegal immigrants, but will hire them to do housework, yard work or childcare because they are cheaper that their fellow Americans and American companies. And these hypocrites too often will not report companies or their neighbors for hiring illegals. So, I will not condone denying these people the rights they have once in America as guaranteed by our Constitution, and I will not deny them shelter, food, health care and education, as we are told by Christ to welcome the stranger to our land and to share with them, see Matthew 25.
I got up at 4:30 a.m. on Tuesday to fly to Phoenix, Arizona, to speak at a press conference and rally at the State Capitol at the invitation of the state’s clergy and other leaders in the immigration reform movement. The harshest enforcement bill in the country against undocumented immigrants just passed the Arizona state House and Senate, and is only awaiting the signature of Governor Janet Brewer to become law.
Senate Bill 1070 would require law enforcement officials in the state of Arizona to investigate someone’s immigration status if there is “reasonable suspicion” that the person might be undocumented. I wonder who that would be, and if anybody who doesn’t have brown skin will be investigated. Those without identification papers, even if they are legal, are subject to arrest; so don’t forget your wallet on your way to work if you are Hispanic in Arizona. You can also be arrested if you are stopped and are simply with people who are undocumented — even if they are your family. Parents or children of “mixed-status families” (made up of legal and undocumented, as many immigrant families are out here) could be arrested if they are found together. You can be arrested if you are “transporting or harboring” undocumented people. Some might consider driving immigrant families to and from church to be Christian ministry — but it will now be illegal in Arizona.
For the first time, all law enforcement officers in the state will be enlisted to hunt down undocumented people, which will clearly distract them from going after truly violent criminals, and will focus them on mostly harmless families whose work supports the economy and who contribute to their communities. And do you think undocumented parents will now go to the police if their daughter is raped or their family becomes a victim of violent crime? Maybe that’s why the state association of police chiefs is against SB 1070.
This proposed law is not only mean-spirited — it will be ineffective and will only serve to further divide communities in Arizona, making everyone more fearful and less safe. This radical new measure, which crosses many moral and legal lines, is a clear demonstration of the fundamental mistake of separating enforcement from comprehensive immigration reform. We all want to live in a nation of laws, and the immigration system in the U.S. is so broken that it is serving no one well. But enforcement without reform of the system is merely cruel. Enforcement without compassion is immoral. Enforcement that breaks up families is unacceptable. And enforcement of this law would force us to violate our Christian conscience, which we simply will not do. It makes it illegal to love your neighbor in Arizona.
Before the rally and press event, I visited some immigrant families who work at Neighborhood Ministries, an impressive community organization affiliated with Sojourners’ friends at the Christian Community Development Association. I met a group of women who were frightened by the raids that have been occurring, in which armed men invade their homes and neighborhoods with guns and helicopters. When the rumors of massive raids spread, many of these people flee both their homes and their workplaces, and head for The Church at The Neighborhood Center as the only place they feel safe and secure. But will police invade the churches if they are suspected of “harboring” undocumented people, because it is the law? Will the nurse practitioner I met at their medical clinic serving only uninsured people be arrested for being “with” the children of families who are here illegally as she treats them?
At the rally, I started with the words of Jesus (which drew cheers from the crowd gathered at the state Capitol), who instructed his disciples to “welcome the stranger,” and said that whatever we do to “the least of these, who are members of my family” we do to him. I think that means that to obey Jesus and his gospel will mean to disobey SB 1070 in Arizona. I looked at the governor’s Executive Tower and promised that many Christians in Arizona won’t comply with this law because the people they will target will be members of our “family” in the body of Christ. And any attack against them is an attack against us, and the One we follow.
Catholic Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles just called this Arizona measure “the country’s most retrogressive, mean-spirited, and useless immigration law.” On CNN, I defended the Cardinal’s comments, which likened the requirement of people always carrying their “papers” to the most oppressive regimes of Nazism and Communism. I wonder whether the tea party movement that rails against government intrusion will rail against this law, or whether those who resist the forced government registration of their guns will resist the forced government requirement that immigrants must always carry their documentation. Will the true conservatives please stand up here? We are all waiting.
Arizona’s SB 1070 must be named as a social and racial sin, and should be denounced as such by people of faith and conscience across the nation. This is not just about Arizona, but about all of us, and about what kind of country we want to be. It’s time to stand up to this new strategy of “deportation by attrition,” which I heard for the first time today in Arizona. It is a policy of deliberate political cruelty, and it should be remembered that “attrition” is a term of war. Arizona is deciding whether to wage war on the body of Christ. We should say that if you come after one part of the body, you come after all of us.
Jim Wallis is the author of Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street, and Your Street — A Moral Compass for the New Economy, and is CEO of Sojourners. He blogs at www.godspolitics.com.
I got up at 4:30 a.m. on Tuesday to fly to Phoenix, Arizona, to speak at a press conference and rally at the State Capitol at the invitation of the state’s clergy and other leaders in the immigration reform movement. The harshest enforcement bill in the country against undocumented immigrants just passed the Arizona state House and Senate, and is only awaiting the signature of Governor Janet Brewer to become law.
Senate Bill 1070 would require law enforcement officials in the state of Arizona to investigate someone’s immigration status if there is “reasonable suspicion” that the person might be undocumented. I wonder who that would be, and if anybody who doesn’t have brown skin will be investigated. Those without identification papers, even if they are legal, are subject to arrest; so don’t forget your wallet on your way to work if you are Hispanic in Arizona. You can also be arrested if you are stopped and are simply with people who are undocumented — even if they are your family. Parents or children of “mixed-status families” (made up of legal and undocumented, as many immigrant families are out here) could be arrested if they are found together. You can be arrested if you are “transporting or harboring” undocumented people. Some might consider driving immigrant families to and from church to be Christian ministry — but it will now be illegal in Arizona.
For the first time, all law enforcement officers in the state will be enlisted to hunt down undocumented people, which will clearly distract them from going after truly violent criminals, and will focus them on mostly harmless families whose work supports the economy and who contribute to their communities. And do you think undocumented parents will now go to the police if their daughter is raped or their family becomes a victim of violent crime? Maybe that’s why the state association of police chiefs is against SB 1070.
This proposed law is not only mean-spirited — it will be ineffective and will only serve to further divide communities in Arizona, making everyone more fearful and less safe. This radical new measure, which crosses many moral and legal lines, is a clear demonstration of the fundamental mistake of separating enforcement from comprehensive immigration reform. We all want to live in a nation of laws, and the immigration system in the U.S. is so broken that it is serving no one well. But enforcement without reform of the system is merely cruel. Enforcement without compassion is immoral. Enforcement that breaks up families is unacceptable. And enforcement of this law would force us to violate our Christian conscience, which we simply will not do. It makes it illegal to love your neighbor in Arizona.
Before the rally and press event, I visited some immigrant families who work at Neighborhood Ministries, an impressive community organization affiliated with Sojourners’ friends at the Christian Community Development Association. I met a group of women who were frightened by the raids that have been occurring, in which armed men invade their homes and neighborhoods with guns and helicopters. When the rumors of massive raids spread, many of these people flee both their homes and their workplaces, and head for The Church at The Neighborhood Center as the only place they feel safe and secure. But will police invade the churches if they are suspected of “harboring” undocumented people, because it is the law? Will the nurse practitioner I met at their medical clinic serving only uninsured people be arrested for being “with” the children of families who are here illegally as she treats them?
At the rally, I started with the words of Jesus (which drew cheers from the crowd gathered at the state Capitol), who instructed his disciples to “welcome the stranger,” and said that whatever we do to “the least of these, who are members of my family” we do to him. I think that means that to obey Jesus and his gospel will mean to disobey SB 1070 in Arizona. I looked at the governor’s Executive Tower and promised that many Christians in Arizona won’t comply with this law because the people they will target will be members of our “family” in the body of Christ. And any attack against them is an attack against us, and the One we follow.
Catholic Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles just called this Arizona measure “the country’s most retrogressive, mean-spirited, and useless immigration law.” On CNN, I defended the Cardinal’s comments, which likened the requirement of people always carrying their “papers” to the most oppressive regimes of Nazism and Communism. I wonder whether the tea party movement that rails against government intrusion will rail against this law, or whether those who resist the forced government registration of their guns will resist the forced government requirement that immigrants must always carry their documentation. Will the true conservatives please stand up here? We are all waiting.
Arizona’s SB 1070 must be named as a social and racial sin, and should be denounced as such by people of faith and conscience across the nation. This is not just about Arizona, but about all of us, and about what kind of country we want to be. It’s time to stand up to this new strategy of “deportation by attrition,” which I heard for the first time today in Arizona. It is a policy of deliberate political cruelty, and it should be remembered that “attrition” is a term of war. Arizona is deciding whether to wage war on the body of Christ. We should say that if you come after one part of the body, you come after all of us.
Jim Wallis is the author of Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street, and Your Street — A Moral Compass for the New Economy, and is CEO of Sojourners. He blogs at www.godspolitics.com.
25 March 2010
House Gives Final Approval To Health Care Overhaul 25MAR10
In spite of all the lies and hypocrisy of the Republicans we got this done! Thank you God!!!! The first story is from NPR, the second is from the Washington Post.
Capping a bitterly fought battle over the top item on President Obama's domestic agenda, the House gave final approval to the health overhaul Thursday, after the Senate made changes and returned the measure earlier in the day.
The House voted 220-207 for bill, which now heads to President Obama for his signature. No Republicans supported the measure.
Democrats who were eager to put the long fight over health care behind them had hoped a Senate vote would finish the job. But Republicans identified problems with two provisions relating to Pell Grants for low-income students that violated the rules of the budget reconciliation process, which Democrats were using to speed the bill's passage and block a filibuster.
The provisions were stripped from the bill, and the Senate passed it on a 56-43 party line vote. No Republicans voted for the measure, and three Democrats also opposed it.
Under reconciliation rules, the legislation had to get kicked back to the House because of the changes.
Shortly before the Senate vote, President Obama delivered a message to Republicans who said they'll try to repeal his health care overhaul: "Go for it." Obama was at a campaign-style rally in Iowa to bolster support for the new law and explain what it means to average Americans.
A Barrage Of Amendments
The Senate vote followed a nine-hour marathon session stretching past 2 a.m. in which Democrats defeated 29 Republican amendments, any one of which would have sent the legislation back to the House.
Although Obama signed the health care bill into law Tuesday, the package of changes sought by the House still needed to get through the Senate. So Republicans sought to gum up the process by issuing the barrage of amendments.
One by one, Democrats voted down GOP proposals that, for example, would have rolled back cuts to Medicare and barred tax increases for families earning less than $250,000. They also defeated an amendment that would have prohibited federal money for the purchase of Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs for sex offenders. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) introduced the amendment, saying it would save millions of dollars. Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) called the proposed change "a crass political stunt."
"There's no attempt to improve the bill. There's an attempt to destroy this bill," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.
"The majority leader may not think we're serious about changing the bill, but we'd like to change the bill, and with a little help from our friends on the other side we could improve the bill significantly," answered Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
Democrats noted that nearly every reconciliation bill has been subject to last-minute revisions.
Republicans And 'Armageddon'
Obama's trip to Iowa City, Iowa — where as a presidential candidate he announced his health care blueprint — was the first of many appearances around the country to sell the overhaul to voters before the fall congressional elections.
"Three years ago, I came here to this campus to make a promise," Obama told the crowd gathered at the University of Iowa, "that by the end of my first term in office, I would sign legislation to reform our health insurance system."
The president said there had been "plenty of fear-mongering and overheated rhetoric" about the health care overhaul.
"Leaders of the Republican Party, they called the passage of this bill 'Armageddon,' the end of freedom as we know it," Obama said. "So, after I signed the bill, I looked around to see if there were any asteroids falling," he said to laughter and applause.
"But from this day forward, all of the cynics and the naysayers will have to finally confront the reality of what this reform is and what it isn't," the president said.
Threats And Intimidation Tactics
As Congress wrangles with legislative details, discontent over changes to the nation's health care system has spilled over into threats of violence against lawmakers who voted for the overhaul.
The FBI is investigating at least four incidents in which bricks were thrown through the windows of Democratic offices in New York, Arizona and Kansas, including Rep. Louise Slaughter's district headquarters in Niagara Falls, N.Y. And at least 10 members of Congress reported receiving threatening e-mails, phone calls and faxes.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference Thursday that intimidation tactics "must be rejected," adding that such behavior has "no place in a civil debate in our country."
Some of the worst threats targeted Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, an anti-abortion Democrat who cast a key vote for the overhaul in exchange for an executive order prohibiting federal funding of abortion. One man called Stupak's office to say he hopes the congressman gets cancer and dies, while a female caller said "millions of people wish you ill" and "those thoughts will materialize into something that's not very good for you."
House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said in a statement that while many Americans are angry over the bill's passage, "violence and threats are unacceptable."
"That's not the American way," he said. "We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change."
Later, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor went on the offensive, saying Democratic leaders were "reckless to use these incidents as media vehicles for political gain."
Cantor said his own campaign office had been shot at and that he had received threatening e-mails this week, but didn't elaborate. He said he would not release the e-mails "because I believe such actions will encourage more to be sent."
Material from The Associated Press was used in this report
House passes reconciliation bill on 220 to 207 vote
By Lori Montgomery, Shailagh Murray and William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 25, 2010; 9:10 PM
Congress passed the final piece of President Obama's landmark health-care package Thursday, the last legislative hurdle in a year-long debate over the issue.
On a 220 to 207 vote Thursday night, the House approved a reconciliation bill that amends the newly enacted health-care law and includes a major overhaul of the student loan program and expansion of Pell Grants. The bill now goes to Obama for his signature.
The House vote was actually its second on the reconciliation bill. It narrowly approved the bill late Sunday night, but it came back after Republicans identified two minor violations of reconciliation rules that forced changes to a provision on student loans.
The Senate passed the reconciliation bill -- with the two small changes -- by a vote of 56 to 43.
Democratic leaders said the provisions that were struck -- from the part of the bill dealing with Pell Grants for college students -- did not significantly affect the student loan program or the overall health-care bill.
"Of all the things they could have sent back, this is probably the most benign [and] easily fixed," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters.
Senators stood and voted from their desks as the roll was called, a tradition reserved for high-profile bills. Before the vote, the Senate observed a moment of silence for the late senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the Democratic champion of health-care reform, who died last year midway through the debate.
Three Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, both of Arkansas, and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. All three lawmakers supported the legislation that was signed into law on Tuesday but objected to particular provisions in the reconciliation bill.
In Iowa, Obama dared Republicans to make good on their pledge to run in November's midterm elections on a platform of repealing the health-care overhaul, telling them to "go for it" if they want to campaign on rolling back benefits he said would start taking effect this year.
The return to the House of the reconciliation bill was required after Senate parliamentarian Alan Frumin "struck two minor provisions," because they were found to violate reconciliation rules, the complicated set of procedures that protected the bill from filibuster, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), told reporters shortly after 3 a.m.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said one of the deleted provisions was a technical item that he considered "as close to a 'nothing' as you can come around here." The second, more substantive provision would have set a formula for establishing maximum Pell Grant awards. But Conrad said the formula would not have taken effect for two years, giving Congress time to restore it in another bill.
Frumin deemed both measures to be out of order because they had no budget implications, Conrad said Thursday.
For much of Wednesday and into Thursday morning, Senate Republicans offered dozens of amendments, which would have altered central elements of the health-care law, but each one was rejected.
As the Senate staged a series of rapid-fire votes, only a handful of Democrats defected, suggesting that the package of changes would easily be approved in the final vote.
Although much smaller than the bill Obama has signed, the reconciliation bill makes major changes to that legislation to bring the final package in line with a compromise worked out between House and Senate leaders. Federal subsidies will be expanded slightly for people who need help buying insurance, and the coverage gap known as the doughnut hole in the Medicare prescription drug program will be closed by 2020. Seniors who fall into the doughnut hole this year will be eligible for a $250 rebate.
The measure also changes the annual penalty on individuals who do not purchase insurance to at least $695 a year or as much as 2.5 percent of annual income. And it dramatically increases the penalty facing employers who do not offer affordable coverage, to as much as $2,000 per worker.
The most significant change, however, is the method of financing the overhaul. A new 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance policies will be delayed until 2018 and replaced by a new tax on the nation's highest earners. Families earning more than $250,000 a year will for the first time have to pay a 3.8 percent Medicare payroll tax on capital gains, dividends and other investment income.
Staff writer Ben Pershing contributed to this report.
Capping a bitterly fought battle over the top item on President Obama's domestic agenda, the House gave final approval to the health overhaul Thursday, after the Senate made changes and returned the measure earlier in the day.
The House voted 220-207 for bill, which now heads to President Obama for his signature. No Republicans supported the measure.
Democrats who were eager to put the long fight over health care behind them had hoped a Senate vote would finish the job. But Republicans identified problems with two provisions relating to Pell Grants for low-income students that violated the rules of the budget reconciliation process, which Democrats were using to speed the bill's passage and block a filibuster.
The provisions were stripped from the bill, and the Senate passed it on a 56-43 party line vote. No Republicans voted for the measure, and three Democrats also opposed it.
Under reconciliation rules, the legislation had to get kicked back to the House because of the changes.
Shortly before the Senate vote, President Obama delivered a message to Republicans who said they'll try to repeal his health care overhaul: "Go for it." Obama was at a campaign-style rally in Iowa to bolster support for the new law and explain what it means to average Americans.
A Barrage Of Amendments
The Senate vote followed a nine-hour marathon session stretching past 2 a.m. in which Democrats defeated 29 Republican amendments, any one of which would have sent the legislation back to the House.
Although Obama signed the health care bill into law Tuesday, the package of changes sought by the House still needed to get through the Senate. So Republicans sought to gum up the process by issuing the barrage of amendments.
One by one, Democrats voted down GOP proposals that, for example, would have rolled back cuts to Medicare and barred tax increases for families earning less than $250,000. They also defeated an amendment that would have prohibited federal money for the purchase of Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs for sex offenders. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) introduced the amendment, saying it would save millions of dollars. Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) called the proposed change "a crass political stunt."
"There's no attempt to improve the bill. There's an attempt to destroy this bill," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said.
"The majority leader may not think we're serious about changing the bill, but we'd like to change the bill, and with a little help from our friends on the other side we could improve the bill significantly," answered Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
Democrats noted that nearly every reconciliation bill has been subject to last-minute revisions.
Republicans And 'Armageddon'
Obama's trip to Iowa City, Iowa — where as a presidential candidate he announced his health care blueprint — was the first of many appearances around the country to sell the overhaul to voters before the fall congressional elections.
"Three years ago, I came here to this campus to make a promise," Obama told the crowd gathered at the University of Iowa, "that by the end of my first term in office, I would sign legislation to reform our health insurance system."
The president said there had been "plenty of fear-mongering and overheated rhetoric" about the health care overhaul.
"Leaders of the Republican Party, they called the passage of this bill 'Armageddon,' the end of freedom as we know it," Obama said. "So, after I signed the bill, I looked around to see if there were any asteroids falling," he said to laughter and applause.
"But from this day forward, all of the cynics and the naysayers will have to finally confront the reality of what this reform is and what it isn't," the president said.
Threats And Intimidation Tactics
As Congress wrangles with legislative details, discontent over changes to the nation's health care system has spilled over into threats of violence against lawmakers who voted for the overhaul.
The FBI is investigating at least four incidents in which bricks were thrown through the windows of Democratic offices in New York, Arizona and Kansas, including Rep. Louise Slaughter's district headquarters in Niagara Falls, N.Y. And at least 10 members of Congress reported receiving threatening e-mails, phone calls and faxes.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference Thursday that intimidation tactics "must be rejected," adding that such behavior has "no place in a civil debate in our country."
Some of the worst threats targeted Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, an anti-abortion Democrat who cast a key vote for the overhaul in exchange for an executive order prohibiting federal funding of abortion. One man called Stupak's office to say he hopes the congressman gets cancer and dies, while a female caller said "millions of people wish you ill" and "those thoughts will materialize into something that's not very good for you."
House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio said in a statement that while many Americans are angry over the bill's passage, "violence and threats are unacceptable."
"That's not the American way," he said. "We need to take that anger and channel it into positive change."
Later, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor went on the offensive, saying Democratic leaders were "reckless to use these incidents as media vehicles for political gain."
Cantor said his own campaign office had been shot at and that he had received threatening e-mails this week, but didn't elaborate. He said he would not release the e-mails "because I believe such actions will encourage more to be sent."
Material from The Associated Press was used in this report
House passes reconciliation bill on 220 to 207 vote
By Lori Montgomery, Shailagh Murray and William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 25, 2010; 9:10 PM
Congress passed the final piece of President Obama's landmark health-care package Thursday, the last legislative hurdle in a year-long debate over the issue.
On a 220 to 207 vote Thursday night, the House approved a reconciliation bill that amends the newly enacted health-care law and includes a major overhaul of the student loan program and expansion of Pell Grants. The bill now goes to Obama for his signature.
The House vote was actually its second on the reconciliation bill. It narrowly approved the bill late Sunday night, but it came back after Republicans identified two minor violations of reconciliation rules that forced changes to a provision on student loans.
The Senate passed the reconciliation bill -- with the two small changes -- by a vote of 56 to 43.
Democratic leaders said the provisions that were struck -- from the part of the bill dealing with Pell Grants for college students -- did not significantly affect the student loan program or the overall health-care bill.
"Of all the things they could have sent back, this is probably the most benign [and] easily fixed," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told reporters.
Senators stood and voted from their desks as the roll was called, a tradition reserved for high-profile bills. Before the vote, the Senate observed a moment of silence for the late senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), the Democratic champion of health-care reform, who died last year midway through the debate.
Three Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor, both of Arkansas, and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. All three lawmakers supported the legislation that was signed into law on Tuesday but objected to particular provisions in the reconciliation bill.
In Iowa, Obama dared Republicans to make good on their pledge to run in November's midterm elections on a platform of repealing the health-care overhaul, telling them to "go for it" if they want to campaign on rolling back benefits he said would start taking effect this year.
The return to the House of the reconciliation bill was required after Senate parliamentarian Alan Frumin "struck two minor provisions," because they were found to violate reconciliation rules, the complicated set of procedures that protected the bill from filibuster, Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), told reporters shortly after 3 a.m.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said one of the deleted provisions was a technical item that he considered "as close to a 'nothing' as you can come around here." The second, more substantive provision would have set a formula for establishing maximum Pell Grant awards. But Conrad said the formula would not have taken effect for two years, giving Congress time to restore it in another bill.
Frumin deemed both measures to be out of order because they had no budget implications, Conrad said Thursday.
For much of Wednesday and into Thursday morning, Senate Republicans offered dozens of amendments, which would have altered central elements of the health-care law, but each one was rejected.
As the Senate staged a series of rapid-fire votes, only a handful of Democrats defected, suggesting that the package of changes would easily be approved in the final vote.
Although much smaller than the bill Obama has signed, the reconciliation bill makes major changes to that legislation to bring the final package in line with a compromise worked out between House and Senate leaders. Federal subsidies will be expanded slightly for people who need help buying insurance, and the coverage gap known as the doughnut hole in the Medicare prescription drug program will be closed by 2020. Seniors who fall into the doughnut hole this year will be eligible for a $250 rebate.
The measure also changes the annual penalty on individuals who do not purchase insurance to at least $695 a year or as much as 2.5 percent of annual income. And it dramatically increases the penalty facing employers who do not offer affordable coverage, to as much as $2,000 per worker.
The most significant change, however, is the method of financing the overhaul. A new 40 percent excise tax on high-cost insurance policies will be delayed until 2018 and replaced by a new tax on the nation's highest earners. Families earning more than $250,000 a year will for the first time have to pay a 3.8 percent Medicare payroll tax on capital gains, dividends and other investment income.
Staff writer Ben Pershing contributed to this report.
Former militiaman unapologetic for calls to vandalize offices over health care 25MAR10
This guy is sick, and a hypocrite as he receives disability checks from the U.S. government. If socialized medicine is so bad he should refuse this money. And he is a coward, he isn't out there throwing bricks, he isn't risking arrest, he is just running his BIG MOUTH. Pathetic.
By Philip Rucker
Washington Post Staff Writer
The call to arms was issued at 5:55 a.m. last Friday.
"To all modern Sons of Liberty: THIS is your time. Break their windows. Break them NOW."
These were the words of Mike Vanderboegh, a 57-year-old former militiaman from Alabama, who took to his blog urging people who opposed the historic health-care reform legislation -- he calls it "Nancy Pelosi's Intolerable Act" -- to throw bricks through the windows of Democratic offices nationwide.
"So, if you wish to send a message that Pelosi and her party [that they] cannot fail to hear, break their windows," Vanderboegh wrote on the blog, Sipsey Street Irregulars. "Break them NOW. Break them and run to break again. Break them under cover of night. Break them in broad daylight. Break them and await arrest in willful, principled civil disobedience. Break them with rocks. Break them with slingshots. Break them with baseball bats. But BREAK THEM."
In the days that followed, glass windows and doors were shattered at local Democratic Party offices and the district offices of House Democrats from Arizona to Kansas to New York. At least 10 Democratic lawmakers reported death threats, incidents of harassment or vandalism at their offices over the past week, and the FBI and Capitol Police are offering lawmakers increased protection.
Local Democratic Party officials in New York have called for Vanderboegh's arrest, believing he is implicated in the vandalism in Rochester, but Vanderboegh said he has not yet been questioned by any law enforcement authorities.
Vanderboegh was unapologetic in a 45-minute telephone interview with The Washington Post early Thursday. He said he believes throwing bricks through windows sends a warning to Democratic lawmakers that the health-care reform legislation they passed Sunday has caused so much unrest that it could result in a civil war.
"The federal government should not have the ability to command us to buy something that it decides we should buy," Vanderboegh said. The government, he added, has "absolutely no idea the number of alienated who feel that their backs are to the wall are out here . . . who are not only willing to resist this law to the very end of their lives, but are armed and are capable of making such resistance possible and perhaps even initiating a civil war."
The law will set in motion over the next 10 years a complex series of changes to the nation's health insurance market. An estimated 24 million people who lack access to affordable coverage through their workplace will be eligible for tax credits to buy insurance on new state-based exchanges. Nearly everyone who earns less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level will become eligible for the government-run Medicaid. And for the first time, individuals will face fines of as much as $695 a year for refusing to buy insurance, and employers with more than 50 workers that do not provide coverage could also face significant fines.
Vanderboegh said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Democrats should beware "unintended consequences of their actions." Vanderboegh outlined a complicated theory that IRS agents will go after people who refuse to buy insurance or pay the fines, ultimately resulting in "civil war."
"The central fact of the health-care bill is this, and we find it tyrannical and unconstitutional on its face," Vanderboegh said. "The federal government now demands all Americans to pay and play in this system, and if we refuse, we will be fined, and if we refuse to pay the fine, they will come to arrest us, and if we resist arrest . . . then we will be killed. The bill certainly doesn't say that, but that's exactly and precisely what is behind every bill like this."
He said his call for people to throw bricks is "both good manners and it's also a moral duty to try to warn people."
Vanderboegh, who lives in the Birmingham suburb of Pinson, described himself as a "Christian libertarian" and said he has long been a gun rights advocate. He said he joined a clandestine militia group called the "Sons of Liberty" and later became a public leader of the First Alabama Cavalry, Constitutional Militia.
In 2006, Vanderboegh advocated hurling bricks through the windows of members of Congress who supported giving illegal immigrants the same rights as U.S. citizens, according to news reports at the time. He said those bricks should be used to build a wall sealing off the United States from Mexico.
Vanderboegh has no criminal record in Jefferson County, Ala., according to a court clerk there.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist and hate groups, has been following Vanderboegh since the mid-1990s, when he first surfaced in Alabama militia groups, said Heidi Beirich, the center's research director.
"He has been on our radar forever," she said. "He hasn't been involved in any kind of violence that we know of ourselves, but these causes that he's involved in led to a lot of violence. The ideas that Vanderboegh's militia groups were pushing were the same extreme anti-government ideas that inspired [Timothy] McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing."
Vanderboegh said he once worked as a warehouse manager but now lives on government disability checks. He said he receives $1,300 a month because of his congestive heart failure, diabetes and hypertension. He has private health insurance through his wife, who works for a company that sells forklift products.
Born in Michigan and raised in Ohio, Vanderboegh said he was not always a libertarian. He once was active in the Young Socialist Alliance and the Progressive Labor Party. "In my youth, I was a communist," he said. But in the mid-1970s, Vanderboegh read Friedrich von Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom," among other books, and had an epiphany.
"From that point on, I could never take Marxism-Leninism seriously again," Vanderboegh said.
He said he long opposed President Obama because he believed the president has "collectivism" tendencies. But he became especially energized during the health-care debate.
Vanderboegh said he advocates breaking windows only of Democratic Party offices, not congressional offices, and that he does not condone the death threats and other incidents of harassment that some Democratic lawmakers have faced.
"Obviously I not only deplore or decry that, but I denounce that vigorously because it has nothing to do with what I was advocating," he said.
Still, Vanderboegh's public cry for vandalism has made him vulnerable to the same threats.
"Frankly," he said, "my phone's been ringing off the hook with death threats the last few days."
Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.
By Philip Rucker
Washington Post Staff Writer
The call to arms was issued at 5:55 a.m. last Friday.
"To all modern Sons of Liberty: THIS is your time. Break their windows. Break them NOW."
These were the words of Mike Vanderboegh, a 57-year-old former militiaman from Alabama, who took to his blog urging people who opposed the historic health-care reform legislation -- he calls it "Nancy Pelosi's Intolerable Act" -- to throw bricks through the windows of Democratic offices nationwide.
"So, if you wish to send a message that Pelosi and her party [that they] cannot fail to hear, break their windows," Vanderboegh wrote on the blog, Sipsey Street Irregulars. "Break them NOW. Break them and run to break again. Break them under cover of night. Break them in broad daylight. Break them and await arrest in willful, principled civil disobedience. Break them with rocks. Break them with slingshots. Break them with baseball bats. But BREAK THEM."
In the days that followed, glass windows and doors were shattered at local Democratic Party offices and the district offices of House Democrats from Arizona to Kansas to New York. At least 10 Democratic lawmakers reported death threats, incidents of harassment or vandalism at their offices over the past week, and the FBI and Capitol Police are offering lawmakers increased protection.
Local Democratic Party officials in New York have called for Vanderboegh's arrest, believing he is implicated in the vandalism in Rochester, but Vanderboegh said he has not yet been questioned by any law enforcement authorities.
Vanderboegh was unapologetic in a 45-minute telephone interview with The Washington Post early Thursday. He said he believes throwing bricks through windows sends a warning to Democratic lawmakers that the health-care reform legislation they passed Sunday has caused so much unrest that it could result in a civil war.
"The federal government should not have the ability to command us to buy something that it decides we should buy," Vanderboegh said. The government, he added, has "absolutely no idea the number of alienated who feel that their backs are to the wall are out here . . . who are not only willing to resist this law to the very end of their lives, but are armed and are capable of making such resistance possible and perhaps even initiating a civil war."
The law will set in motion over the next 10 years a complex series of changes to the nation's health insurance market. An estimated 24 million people who lack access to affordable coverage through their workplace will be eligible for tax credits to buy insurance on new state-based exchanges. Nearly everyone who earns less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level will become eligible for the government-run Medicaid. And for the first time, individuals will face fines of as much as $695 a year for refusing to buy insurance, and employers with more than 50 workers that do not provide coverage could also face significant fines.
Vanderboegh said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Democrats should beware "unintended consequences of their actions." Vanderboegh outlined a complicated theory that IRS agents will go after people who refuse to buy insurance or pay the fines, ultimately resulting in "civil war."
"The central fact of the health-care bill is this, and we find it tyrannical and unconstitutional on its face," Vanderboegh said. "The federal government now demands all Americans to pay and play in this system, and if we refuse, we will be fined, and if we refuse to pay the fine, they will come to arrest us, and if we resist arrest . . . then we will be killed. The bill certainly doesn't say that, but that's exactly and precisely what is behind every bill like this."
He said his call for people to throw bricks is "both good manners and it's also a moral duty to try to warn people."
Vanderboegh, who lives in the Birmingham suburb of Pinson, described himself as a "Christian libertarian" and said he has long been a gun rights advocate. He said he joined a clandestine militia group called the "Sons of Liberty" and later became a public leader of the First Alabama Cavalry, Constitutional Militia.
In 2006, Vanderboegh advocated hurling bricks through the windows of members of Congress who supported giving illegal immigrants the same rights as U.S. citizens, according to news reports at the time. He said those bricks should be used to build a wall sealing off the United States from Mexico.
Vanderboegh has no criminal record in Jefferson County, Ala., according to a court clerk there.
The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist and hate groups, has been following Vanderboegh since the mid-1990s, when he first surfaced in Alabama militia groups, said Heidi Beirich, the center's research director.
"He has been on our radar forever," she said. "He hasn't been involved in any kind of violence that we know of ourselves, but these causes that he's involved in led to a lot of violence. The ideas that Vanderboegh's militia groups were pushing were the same extreme anti-government ideas that inspired [Timothy] McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing."
Vanderboegh said he once worked as a warehouse manager but now lives on government disability checks. He said he receives $1,300 a month because of his congestive heart failure, diabetes and hypertension. He has private health insurance through his wife, who works for a company that sells forklift products.
Born in Michigan and raised in Ohio, Vanderboegh said he was not always a libertarian. He once was active in the Young Socialist Alliance and the Progressive Labor Party. "In my youth, I was a communist," he said. But in the mid-1970s, Vanderboegh read Friedrich von Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom," among other books, and had an epiphany.
"From that point on, I could never take Marxism-Leninism seriously again," Vanderboegh said.
He said he long opposed President Obama because he believed the president has "collectivism" tendencies. But he became especially energized during the health-care debate.
Vanderboegh said he advocates breaking windows only of Democratic Party offices, not congressional offices, and that he does not condone the death threats and other incidents of harassment that some Democratic lawmakers have faced.
"Obviously I not only deplore or decry that, but I denounce that vigorously because it has nothing to do with what I was advocating," he said.
Still, Vanderboegh's public cry for vandalism has made him vulnerable to the same threats.
"Frankly," he said, "my phone's been ringing off the hook with death threats the last few days."
Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.
05 March 2010
TEA PARTY MILITIAS?:TELLING MAINSTREAM CONSERVATIVES FROM RIGHT WING EXTREMIST from SOJO 4MAR10
This article is followed by one from the Southern Poverty Lawn Center titled 'Rage on the Right'. Last is a list of active "patriot" groups in the U.S. in 2009....see who's in your community or state!
by Alan Bean 03-04-2010
The Southern Poverty Law Center has issued a frightening report on the explosive growth of extremist organizations on the radical right. It is hard to know how to account for this phenomenon. How do we distinguish, for instance, between mainstream conservatism and right wing fanaticism? As Mark Potok of the SPLC writes, “The ‘tea parties’ and similar groups that have sprung up in recent months cannot fairly be considered extremist groups, but they are shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories, and racism.”
Suspicion of the federal government appears to be at an all-time high. A recent CNN poll showed that a majority of Americans (including “37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and nearly 7 in 10 Republicans”) believe that “the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans.”
You have to be careful with numbers. Anyone conversant with the covert work perpetrated by federal entities like the CIA and the FBI over the years understands instinctively that federal power has always had its dark side. This likely explains why more than a third of Democrats are concerned about the feds.
But much of the rage and resentment we have witnessed in recent months is rooted in dark political fantasy with very little basis in fact. Notice, for instance, that the Tea Party folk, although they have no particular love for Wall Street, are inclined to blame Congress instead of the banks. The unswerving assumption is that free enterprise is good and government is bad. This dogma makes it impossible for the Tea Party zealots to understand what’s going on. It wasn’t the government that created the current economic meltdown. Government failed us by doing too little to regulate Wall Street and the financial industry, too much regulation was the least of our worries.
Please give the SPLC report your careful attention and let us know what you make of all this.
Alan Bean is the executive director of Friends of Justice
FROM THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
Intelligence Report, Spring 2010, Issue Number: 137
RAGE ON THE RIGHT By Mark Potok
Copy and paste this link for the articla on the SPLC website
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/spring/rage-on-the-right?ondntsrc=MBQ100370YNH&newsletter=newsgen-20100302
The radical right caught fire last year, as broad-based populist anger at political, demographic and economic changes in America ignited an explosion of new extremist groups and activism across the nation.
Hate groups stayed at record levels — almost 1,000 — despite the total collapse of the second largest neo-Nazi group in America. Furious anti-immigrant vigilante groups soared by nearly 80%, adding some 136 new groups during 2009. And, most remarkably of all, so-called "Patriot" groups — militias and other organizations that see the federal government as part of a plot to impose “one-world government” on liberty-loving Americans — came roaring back after years out of the limelight.
The anger seething across the American political landscape — over racial changes in the population, soaring public debt and the terrible economy, the bailouts of bankers and other elites, and an array of initiatives by the relatively liberal Obama Administration that are seen as "socialist" or even "fascist" — goes beyond the radical right. The "tea parties" and similar groups that have sprung up in recent months cannot fairly be considered extremist groups, but they are shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories and racism.
“We are in the midst of one of the most significant right-wing populist rebellions in United States history,” Chip Berlet, a veteran analyst of the American radical right, wrote earlier this year. "We see around us a series of overlapping social and political movements populated by people [who are] angry, resentful, and full of anxiety. They are raging against the machinery of the federal bureaucracy and liberal government programs and policies including health care, reform of immigration and labor laws, abortion, and gay marriage."
Sixty-one percent of Americans believe the country is in decline, according to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. Just a quarter think the government can be trusted. And the anti-tax tea party movement is viewed in much more positive terms than either the Democratic or Republican parties, the poll found.
The signs of growing radicalization are everywhere. Armed men have come to Obama speeches bearing signs suggesting that the "tree of liberty" needs to be "watered" with "the blood of tyrants." The Conservative Political Action Conference held this February was co-sponsored by groups like the John Birch Society, which believes President Eisenhower was a Communist agent, and Oath Keepers, a Patriot outfit formed last year that suggests, in thinly veiled language, that the government has secret plans to declare martial law and intern patriotic Americans in concentration camps. Politicians pandering to the antigovernment right in 37 states have introduced "Tenth Amendment Resolutions," based on the constitutional provision keeping all powers not explicitly given to the federal government with the states. And, at the "A Well Regulated Militia" website, a recent discussion of how to build "clandestine safe houses" to stay clear of the federal government included a conversation about how mass murderers like Timothy McVeigh and Olympics bomber Eric Rudolph were supposedly betrayed at such houses.
Doing the Numbers
The number of hate groups in America has been going up for years, rising 54% between 2000 and 2008 and driven largely by an angry backlash against non-white immigration and, starting in the last year of that period, the economic meltdown and the climb to power of an African American president.
According to the latest annual count by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), these groups rose again slightly in 2009 — from 926 in 2008 to 932 last year — despite the demise of a key neo-Nazi group. The American National Socialist Workers Party, which had 35 chapters in 28 states, imploded shortly after the October 2008 arrest of founder Bill White for making threats against his enemies.
At the same time, the number of what the SPLC designates as "nativist extremist" groups — organizations that go beyond mere advocacy of restrictive immigration policy to actually confront or harass suspected immigrants — jumped from 173 groups in 2008 to 309 last year. Virtually all of these vigilante groups have appeared since the spring of 2005.
But the most dramatic story by far has been with the antigovernment Patriots.
The militias and the larger Patriot movement first came to Americans’ attention in the mid-1990s, when they appeared as an angry reaction to what was seen as a tyrannical government bent on crushing all dissent. Sparked most dramatically by the death of 76 Branch Davidians during a 1993 law enforcement siege in Waco, Texas, those who joined the militias also railed against the Democratic Clinton Administration and initiatives like gun control and environmental regulation. Although the Patriot movement included people formerly associated with racially based hate groups, it was above all animated by a view of the federal government as the primary enemy, along with a fondness for antigovernment conspiracy theories. By early this decade, the groups had largely disappeared from public view.
But last year, as noted in the SPLC’s August report, "The Second Wave: Return of the Militias," a dramatic resurgence in the Patriot movement and its paramilitary wing, the militias, began. Now, the latest SPLC count finds that an astonishing 363 new Patriot groups appeared in 2009, with the totals going from 149 groups (including 42 militias) to 512 (127 of them militias) — a 244% jump.
That is cause for grave concern. Individuals associated with the Patriot movement during its 1990s heyday produced an enormous amount of violence, most dramatically the Oklahoma City bombing that left 168 people dead.
Already there are signs of similar violence emanating from the radical right. Since the installation of Barack Obama, right-wing extremists have murdered six law enforcement officers. Racist skinheads and others have been arrested in alleged plots to assassinate the nation’s first black president. One man from Brockton, Mass. — who told police he had learned on white supremacist websites that a genocide was under way against whites — is charged with murdering two black people and planning to kill as many Jews as possible on the day after Obama’s inauguration. Most recently, a rash of individuals with antigovernment, survivalist or racist views have been arrested in a series of bomb cases.
As the movement has exploded, so has the reach of its ideas, aided and abetted by commentators and politicians in the ostensible mainstream. While in the 1990s, the movement got good reviews from a few lawmakers and talk-radio hosts, some of its central ideas today are being plugged by people with far larger audiences like FOX News’ Glenn Beck and U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn). Beck, for instance, re-popularized a key Patriot conspiracy theory — the charge that FEMA is secretly running concentration camps — before finally “debunking” it.
Last year also experienced levels of cross-pollination between different sectors of the radical right not seen in years. Nativist activists increasingly adopted the ideas of the Patriots; racist rants against Obama and others coursed through the Patriot movement; and conspiracy theories involving the government appeared in all kinds of right-wing venues. A good example is the upcoming Second Amendment March in Washington, D.C. The website promoting the march is topped by a picture of a colonial militiaman, and key supporters include Larry Pratt, a long-time militia enthusiast with connections to white supremacists, and Richard Mack, a conspiracy-mongering former sheriff associated with the Patriot group Oath Keepers.
What may be most noteworthy about the march, however, is its date — April 19. That is the date of the first shots fired at Lexington in the Revolutionary War. And it is also the anniversary of the fiery end of the government siege in Waco and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
FROM THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
08/2009
The Second Wave: Return of the Militias
Copy and paste the link for the article on the SPLC website
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/splc-report-return-of-the-militias
The 1990s saw the rise and fall of the virulently antigovernment "Patriot" movement, made up of paramilitary militias, tax defiers and so-called "sovereign citizens." Sparked by a combination of anger at the federal government and the deaths of political dissenters at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas, the movement took off in the middle of the decade and continued to grow even after 168 people were left dead by the 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City's federal building — an attack, the deadliest ever by domestic U.S. terrorists, carried out by men steeped in the rhetoric and conspiracy theories of the militias. In the years that followed, a truly remarkable number of criminal plots came out of the movement. But by early this century, the Patriots had largely faded, weakened by systematic prosecutions, aversion to growing violence, and a new, highly conservative president.
They're back. Almost a decade after largely disappearing from public view, right-wing militias, ideologically driven tax defiers and sovereign citizens are appearing in large numbers around the country. "Paper terrorism" — the use of property liens and citizens' "courts" to harass enemies — is on the rise. And once-popular militia conspiracy theories are making the rounds again, this time accompanied by nativist theories about secret Mexican plans to "reconquer" the American Southwest. One law enforcement agency has found 50 new militia training groups — one of them made up of present and former police officers and soldiers. Authorities around the country are reporting a worrying uptick in Patriot activities and propaganda. "This is the most significant growth we've seen in 10 to 12 years," says one. "All it's lacking is a spark. I think it's only a matter of time before you see threats and violence."
A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. That, coupled with high levels of non-white immigration and a decline in the percentage of whites overall in America, has helped to racialize the Patriot movement, which in the past was not primarily motivated by race hate. One result has been a remarkable rash of domestic terror incidents since the presidential campaign, most of them related to anger over the election of Barack Obama. At the same time, ostensibly mainstream politicians and media pundits have helped to spread Patriot and related propaganda, from conspiracy theories about a secret network of U.S. concentration camps to wholly unsubstantiated claims about the president's country of birth.
Fifteen years ago, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote then-Attorney General Janet Reno to warn about extremists in the militia movement, saying that the "mixture of armed groups and those who hate" was "a recipe for disaster." Just six months later, Oklahoma City's federal building was bombed. Today, the Patriot movement may not have the white-hot fury that it did in the 1990s. But the movement clearly is growing again, and Americans, in particular law enforcement officers, need to take the dangers it presents seriously. That is equally true for the politicians, pundits and preachers who, through pandering or ignorance, abet the growth of a movement marked by a proven predilection for violence.
FROM THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
Intelligence Report, Spring 2010, Issue Number: 137
Active 'Patriot' Groups in the United States in 2009
Copy and past this link for the article on the SPLC website
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/spring/active-patriot-groups-in-the-united-s
The Intelligence Project identified 512 "Patriot" groups that were active in 2009. Of these groups, 127 were militias, marked with an asterisk, and the remainder includes "common-law" courts, publishers, ministries and citizens' groups. Generally, Patriot groups define themselves as opposed to the "New World Order," engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines. Listing here does not imply that the groups themselves advocate or engage in violence or other criminal activities, or are racist. The list was compiled from field reports, Patriot publications, the Internet, law enforcement sources and news reports. Groups are identified by the city, county or region where they are located.
ALABAMA (7)
2nd Alabama Militia *
Mobile
Alabama Shoals Badgers *
Tuscumbia
Constitution Party
Montgomery
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
THREE%ER
Pinson
We the People
Madison County
ALASKA (5)
Alaska Citizens Militia *
Nikiski
Constitution Party (Alaskan Independence Party)
Soldotna
John Birch Society - Alaskans for Restoring our Constitutional System
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Homer
ARIZONA (10)
American Grand Jury
Nogales
American Patriot Friends Network
Peoria
Arizona Citizens Militia *
Douglas
Arizona Militia *
Glendale
Cochise County Militia *
Tombstone
Constitution Party
Goodyear
John Birch Society
Statewide
Northern Arizona Militia *
Flagstaff
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Statewide
ARKANSAS (6)
Constitution Party
Fayetteville
John Birch Society
Statewide
Militia of Washington County *
Fayetteville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Bentonville
Searcy
CALIFORNIA (22)
American Armenian Militia *
Los Angeles/San Fernando Valley Area
American Independent Party
Vacaville
Constitution Party
Riverside
Freedom Force International
Thousand Oaks
Freedom Law School
Phelan
Free Enterprise Society
Fresno
John Birch Society
Chula Vista
Roseville
San Luis Obispo County
Northern California State Militia *
Falcon Creek
Sunnyvale
Oath Keepers
High Desert
Northern California
San Diego
Southern California
Second Amendment Committee
Hanford
State of California Unorganized Militia *
Monrovia
Truth Radio
Delano
We Are Change
Chico
Oakland
Sacramento
San Francisco Bay Area
COLORADO (10)
America First Party
Boulder
American Freedom Network
Johnstown
Constitution Party
Arvada
John Birch Society
Aurora
Minutemen Militia *
Fort Collins
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Colorado Springs
Huerfano
Statewide
We the People
Gunnison
CONNECTICUT (6)
Connecticut Survivalist Alliance
Middlefield
Constitution Party - Concerned Citizens Party
Plantsville
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Meriden
We the People
Statewide
DELAWARE (3)
Constitution Party
Bear
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (2)
Oath Keepers
Washington DC
We the People
Washington DC
FLORIDA (11)
America First Party of Florida
Mims
Constitution Party
West Palm Beach
Florida Free Alliance *
Nokomis
Florida Free Militia *
Palm Coast
John Birch Society
Newberry
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Fort Walton Beach
Jacksonville
Orlando
Tampa
We the People
Statewide
GEORGIA (15)
Constitution Party
Woodstock
Georgia Militia *
Chatham County
Cobb County
Gwinnett County
Newton County
John Birch Society
Statewide
Militia of Georgia *
Lawrenceville
Militia Recruiting Command *
Columbus
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Society for American Sovereignty
Marrietta
We Are Change
Atlanta
Columbus
LeGrange
Trenton
We the People
Statewide
HAWAII (3)
Constitution Party
Honolulu
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
IDAHO (11)
Constitution Party
Parma
Idaho Citizens Constitutional Militia *
Statewide
Idaho Observer
Spirit Lake
John Birch Society
Nampa
North Idaho Light Foot Militia*
Bonner County
Boundary County
Kootenai County
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Police & Military Against the New World Order
Kamiah
We Are Change
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
ILLINOIS (10)
135th Illinois Volunteer Cavalry *
Statewide
America First Party of Illinois
Rolling Meadows
Camp FEMA
Northbrook
Constitution Party
East Peoria
Illinois State Militia (Unorganized) 167th Battalion, 21st FF *
Statewide
John Birch Society
Statewide
Martial Law Survival
Thomson
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Restore the Republic
Northbrook
We the People
Statewide
INDIANA (21)
Constitution Party
Indianapolis
Indiana Citizens Volunteer Militia, 3rd Brigade *
Tippecanoe County
Indiana Constitutional Militia *
Statewide
Indiana Militia Corps *
Ingalls
Northeast
Northwest
Pendleton
Southeast
Southwest
Indianapolis Baptist Temple
Indianapolis
Indiana Sedentary Militia *
Hendricks County
Southern
Southwest
Statewide
Western
Indiana's Greene County Militia *
Greene County
Indiana State Militia 14th Regiment *
Owen County
John Birch Society
Indianapolis
NORFED – National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act
Evansville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
IOWA (5)
Constitution Party
Oskaloosa
We Are Change
Cedar Falls
Des Moines
Quad Cities
We the People
Statewide
KANSAS (7)
Constitution Party
Wichita
John Birch Society
Statewide
Kansas State Militia *
Wichita
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Lawrence
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
KENTUCKY (13)
1st Joint Public Militia *
Bowling Green
Jefferson County
Louisville
Marshall County
Northern
Statewide
Constitution Party
Lexington
John Birch Society
Statewide
Kentucky State Militia - Ohio Valley Command *
Louisville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
PatriotResistance.com
Lexington
Take Back Kentucky
Clarkson
We the People
Statewide
LOUISANA (10)
Constitution Party
Mandeville
Louisiana Militia *
Statewide
Louisiana Unorganized Militia *
Abbeville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Truth Attack
Shreveport
We Are Change
Arcadia
New Orleans
Shreveport
Slidell
We the People
Statewide
MAINE (7)
Constitution Party
New Castle
John Birch Society
Statewide
Maine Constitutional Militia *
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
New England Area
Portland
We the People
Statewide
MARYLAND (8)
America's Survival, Inc.
Owings
Constitution Party
Pocomoke
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Save A Patriot Fellowship
Westminster
Southern Sons of Liberty *
Statewide
We Are Change
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
MASSACHUSETTS (7)
America First Party of Massachusetts
New Bedford
Constitution Party
Amesbury
John Birch Society
Hyde Park
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Boston
Cape Cod
We the People
Statewide
MICHIGAN (47)
America First Party of Michigan
Ypsilanti
Constitution Party (U.S. Taxpayers Party of Michigan)
Grand Rapids
Delta 5 Mobile Light Infantry Militia *
Eaton County
East-Central Volunteer Militia of Michigan *
Lapeer County
Hutaree Militia *
Southern
Jackson County Volunteers *
Jackson County
John Birch Society
Statewide
Lenawee County Free and Independent Militia *
Adrian
Michigan Militia *
Redford
Michigan Militia Corps Wolverines 8th Division *
South Central
Michigan Patriot Alliance *
Arenac County
Bay County
Cheboygan County
Clinton County
Crawford County
Genesee County
Gladwin County
Gratiot County
Jackson County
Lapeer County
Macomb County
Midland County
Oakland County
Oceana County
Presque Isle County
Saginaw County
St. Clair County
Sanilac County
Shiawassee County
Tuscola County
Northern Michigan Backyard Protection Militia *
Northern
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Patriot Broadcasting Network
Dexter
Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia *
Livingston County
Macomb County
Oakland County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
We Are Change
Battlecreek
Clio
Detroit
Flint
Royal Oak
Schoolcraft
Statewide
West Michigan Volunteer Militia *
Muskegon County
We the People
Statewide
MINNESOTA (8)
Constitution Party
Redwood Falls
John Birch SocietyStatewide
Minnesota Militia/Army of Mississippi *
St. Cloud
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Duluth
Minneapolis
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
MISSISSIPPI (6)
America First Party of Mississippi
Greenwood
Constitution Defense Militia of Attala County (CDMAC) *
Attala County
Constitution Party
Okolona
East Central Mississippi Militia *
East CentralOath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
MISSOURI (9)
America First Party of Missouri
Imperial
Constitution Party
Arnold
John Birch Society
St. Peters
Liberty Restoration Project
St. Louis
Missouri Militia *
Kansas CitySt. Louis
Oath Keepers
Statewide
United American Freedom Foundation
Grandview
We the People
Statewide
MONTANA (9)
Celebrating Conservatism
Missoula
Constitution Party
Great Falls
John Birch Society
Statewide
Lincoln County Watch
Bozeman
Militia of Montana *
Noxon
Oath Keepers
Bozeman
We Are Change
Billings
Missoula
We the People
Statewide
NEBRASKA (7)
Constitution Party
Omaha
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Dakota
Omaha
Tri-Cities Area
We the People
Statewide
NEVADA (7)
Center for Action
Sandy Valley
Independent American Party (Constitution Party)
Elko
Oath Keepers
Northern
Southern
Sovereign People's Court for the United States of America
Las Vegas
We Are Change
Reno
We the People
Statewide
NEW HAMPSHIRE (6)
America First Party of New Hampshire
Windham
Constitution Party
Concord
New Hampshire Patriot Militia *
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
United States Constitution Rangers *
West Lebanon
We the People
Statewide
NEW JERSEY (8)
Constitution Party
Cinnaminson
John Birch Society
Ringwood
New Jersey Militia *
Trenton
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Cape May
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
Wolfpack Militia *
Statewide
NEW MEXICO (5)
Constitution Party
Albuquerque
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
NEW YORK (17)
America First Party of New York
Lynbrook
Constitution Party
New York
Empire State Militia 11th Field Force *
Northwestern
Oneida Area
Staten Island
Ulster County
Westchester Area
The Jekyll Island Project
Queensbury
Oath Keepers
Chatham
We Are Change
Hempstead
Ithaca
Long Island
New York City
Oswego County
Staten Island
We The People
Queensbury
Statewide
NORTH CAROLINA (10)
Constitution Party
Fuquay-Varina
John Birch Society
Raleigh
North Carolina Citizens Militia *
Charlotte
Coastal Area
Sandhills Area
Waynesville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Mount Airy
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
NORTH DAKOTA (3)
Constitution Party
Casselton
John Birch Society
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
OHIO (13)
America First Party of Ohio
Cleveland
Constitution Party
DelawareConstitutional Militia of Clark County *
Clark County
John Birch Society
Columbus
Northeastern Ohio Defense Force 3BN *
Lisbon
Northwestern Ohio Defense Force 4BN *
Kenton
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Ohio Defense Force State Headquarters *
Zanesville
Ohio Militia *
Statewide
Southeastern Ohio Defense Force 3rd Platoon *
Belmont County
Southwestern Ohio Defense Force 5BN *
Lebanon
Unorganized Militia of Champaign County *
St. Paris
We the People
Statewide
OKLAHOMA (5)
Constitution Party
Chandler
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
OK SAFE, Inc. (Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise)
Tulsa
We the People
Statewide
OREGON (14)
Constitution Party
Hubbard
Embassy of Heaven
Stayton
Emissary Publications
Clackamas
Freedom Bound International
Klamath Falls
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Oregon Militia Corps *
Statewide
Southern Oregon Militia *
Eagle Point
We Are Change
Cave Junction
Eugene
Florence
Portland
Salem
We the People
Statewide
PENNSYLVANIA (9)
America First Party of Pennsylvania
Ridgway
Constitution Party
Blawnox
Keystone Freedom Fighters *
Gettysburg
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Harrisburg
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Scranton
We the People
Statewide
RHODE ISLAND (3)
Constitution Party
Middletown
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
SOUTH CAROLINA (7)
Constitution Party
Greenville
John Birch Society
Greenville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
The Patriot Network
Anderson
We Are Change
Columbia
Greenville
We the People
Statewide
SOUTH DAKOTA (3)
Constitution Party
Brandon
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
TENNESSEE (12)
Constitution Party
Englewood
East Tennessee Militia *
East
John Birch Society
Lascassas
Memphis
Lawful Path
Lynnville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Cookeville
Johnson City
Knoxville
Memphis
Nashville
We the People
Statewide
TEXAS (52)
The American Open Currency Standard
Frisco
American Patriots for Freedom Foundation *
Spring
Brave New Books
Austin
Buffalo Creek Press
Cleburne
Central Texas Militia *
Central
Church of God Evangelistic Association
Waxahachie
Constitution Party
Cleburne
Constitution Society
Austin
John Birch Society
Cypress
McKinney
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Republic Broadcasting
Round Rock
Republic of Texas
Bastrop County
Bexar County
Bowie County
Brazos County
Colorado County
Fayette County
Galveston County
Goliad County
Gonzales County
Harris County
Harrison County
Houston County
Jackson County
Jasper County
Jefferson County
Lamar County
Liberty County
Matagorda County
Milam County
Montgomery County
Nacogdoches County
Red River County
Refugio County
Robertson County
Rusk County
Sabine County
Shelby County
Travis County
Victoria County
Washington County
Texas Well Regulated Militia *
Edwards County
We Are Change
Austin (2)
Dallas
Fort Worth
Pasadena
San Antonio
San Marcos
Tyler
We the People
Statewide
UTAH (10)
Constitution Party
Layton
Hutaree Militia *
Statewide
JoelSkousen.com
Orem
John Birch Society
Springville
Liberty News Radio
Highland
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Orem
Salt Lake City
West Valley City
We the People
Statewide
VERMONT (3)
Constitution Party
Williston
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
VIRGINIA (7)
Constitution Party
Vienna
Oath Keepers
Statewide
U.S. National Party
Oakton
Virginia Citizens Militia *
Roanoke
We Are Change
ShenandoahStatewide
We the People
Statewide
WASHINGTON (11)
Constitution Party
Kent
Grays Harbor Civilian Defense Force *
Grays Harbor
John Birch Society
Puyallup
Kitsap County WA Militia *
Kitsap County
National Association of Rural Land Owners
Fall City
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Washington State Militia *
Statewide
We Are Change
Bellingham
Seattle
Spokane
We the People
Statewide
WEST VIRGINIA (5)
Constitution Party
Martinsburg
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Huntington
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
WISCONSIN (13)
America First Party of Wisconsin
Muscoda
Constitution Party
Ripon
John Birch Society
Appleton
John Birch Society Shop JBS
Appleton
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Green Bay
Kenosha
Madison
Milwaukee
Oshkosh
Racine
Stockbridge
We the People
Statewide
WYOMING (4)
Constitution Party
Afton
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
by Alan Bean 03-04-2010
The Southern Poverty Law Center has issued a frightening report on the explosive growth of extremist organizations on the radical right. It is hard to know how to account for this phenomenon. How do we distinguish, for instance, between mainstream conservatism and right wing fanaticism? As Mark Potok of the SPLC writes, “The ‘tea parties’ and similar groups that have sprung up in recent months cannot fairly be considered extremist groups, but they are shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories, and racism.”
Suspicion of the federal government appears to be at an all-time high. A recent CNN poll showed that a majority of Americans (including “37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and nearly 7 in 10 Republicans”) believe that “the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans.”
You have to be careful with numbers. Anyone conversant with the covert work perpetrated by federal entities like the CIA and the FBI over the years understands instinctively that federal power has always had its dark side. This likely explains why more than a third of Democrats are concerned about the feds.
But much of the rage and resentment we have witnessed in recent months is rooted in dark political fantasy with very little basis in fact. Notice, for instance, that the Tea Party folk, although they have no particular love for Wall Street, are inclined to blame Congress instead of the banks. The unswerving assumption is that free enterprise is good and government is bad. This dogma makes it impossible for the Tea Party zealots to understand what’s going on. It wasn’t the government that created the current economic meltdown. Government failed us by doing too little to regulate Wall Street and the financial industry, too much regulation was the least of our worries.
Please give the SPLC report your careful attention and let us know what you make of all this.
Alan Bean is the executive director of Friends of Justice
FROM THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
Intelligence Report, Spring 2010, Issue Number: 137
RAGE ON THE RIGHT By Mark Potok
Copy and paste this link for the articla on the SPLC website
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/spring/rage-on-the-right?ondntsrc=MBQ100370YNH&newsletter=newsgen-20100302
The radical right caught fire last year, as broad-based populist anger at political, demographic and economic changes in America ignited an explosion of new extremist groups and activism across the nation.
Hate groups stayed at record levels — almost 1,000 — despite the total collapse of the second largest neo-Nazi group in America. Furious anti-immigrant vigilante groups soared by nearly 80%, adding some 136 new groups during 2009. And, most remarkably of all, so-called "Patriot" groups — militias and other organizations that see the federal government as part of a plot to impose “one-world government” on liberty-loving Americans — came roaring back after years out of the limelight.
The anger seething across the American political landscape — over racial changes in the population, soaring public debt and the terrible economy, the bailouts of bankers and other elites, and an array of initiatives by the relatively liberal Obama Administration that are seen as "socialist" or even "fascist" — goes beyond the radical right. The "tea parties" and similar groups that have sprung up in recent months cannot fairly be considered extremist groups, but they are shot through with rich veins of radical ideas, conspiracy theories and racism.
“We are in the midst of one of the most significant right-wing populist rebellions in United States history,” Chip Berlet, a veteran analyst of the American radical right, wrote earlier this year. "We see around us a series of overlapping social and political movements populated by people [who are] angry, resentful, and full of anxiety. They are raging against the machinery of the federal bureaucracy and liberal government programs and policies including health care, reform of immigration and labor laws, abortion, and gay marriage."
Sixty-one percent of Americans believe the country is in decline, according to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. Just a quarter think the government can be trusted. And the anti-tax tea party movement is viewed in much more positive terms than either the Democratic or Republican parties, the poll found.
The signs of growing radicalization are everywhere. Armed men have come to Obama speeches bearing signs suggesting that the "tree of liberty" needs to be "watered" with "the blood of tyrants." The Conservative Political Action Conference held this February was co-sponsored by groups like the John Birch Society, which believes President Eisenhower was a Communist agent, and Oath Keepers, a Patriot outfit formed last year that suggests, in thinly veiled language, that the government has secret plans to declare martial law and intern patriotic Americans in concentration camps. Politicians pandering to the antigovernment right in 37 states have introduced "Tenth Amendment Resolutions," based on the constitutional provision keeping all powers not explicitly given to the federal government with the states. And, at the "A Well Regulated Militia" website, a recent discussion of how to build "clandestine safe houses" to stay clear of the federal government included a conversation about how mass murderers like Timothy McVeigh and Olympics bomber Eric Rudolph were supposedly betrayed at such houses.
Doing the Numbers
The number of hate groups in America has been going up for years, rising 54% between 2000 and 2008 and driven largely by an angry backlash against non-white immigration and, starting in the last year of that period, the economic meltdown and the climb to power of an African American president.
According to the latest annual count by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), these groups rose again slightly in 2009 — from 926 in 2008 to 932 last year — despite the demise of a key neo-Nazi group. The American National Socialist Workers Party, which had 35 chapters in 28 states, imploded shortly after the October 2008 arrest of founder Bill White for making threats against his enemies.
At the same time, the number of what the SPLC designates as "nativist extremist" groups — organizations that go beyond mere advocacy of restrictive immigration policy to actually confront or harass suspected immigrants — jumped from 173 groups in 2008 to 309 last year. Virtually all of these vigilante groups have appeared since the spring of 2005.
But the most dramatic story by far has been with the antigovernment Patriots.
The militias and the larger Patriot movement first came to Americans’ attention in the mid-1990s, when they appeared as an angry reaction to what was seen as a tyrannical government bent on crushing all dissent. Sparked most dramatically by the death of 76 Branch Davidians during a 1993 law enforcement siege in Waco, Texas, those who joined the militias also railed against the Democratic Clinton Administration and initiatives like gun control and environmental regulation. Although the Patriot movement included people formerly associated with racially based hate groups, it was above all animated by a view of the federal government as the primary enemy, along with a fondness for antigovernment conspiracy theories. By early this decade, the groups had largely disappeared from public view.
But last year, as noted in the SPLC’s August report, "The Second Wave: Return of the Militias," a dramatic resurgence in the Patriot movement and its paramilitary wing, the militias, began. Now, the latest SPLC count finds that an astonishing 363 new Patriot groups appeared in 2009, with the totals going from 149 groups (including 42 militias) to 512 (127 of them militias) — a 244% jump.
That is cause for grave concern. Individuals associated with the Patriot movement during its 1990s heyday produced an enormous amount of violence, most dramatically the Oklahoma City bombing that left 168 people dead.
Already there are signs of similar violence emanating from the radical right. Since the installation of Barack Obama, right-wing extremists have murdered six law enforcement officers. Racist skinheads and others have been arrested in alleged plots to assassinate the nation’s first black president. One man from Brockton, Mass. — who told police he had learned on white supremacist websites that a genocide was under way against whites — is charged with murdering two black people and planning to kill as many Jews as possible on the day after Obama’s inauguration. Most recently, a rash of individuals with antigovernment, survivalist or racist views have been arrested in a series of bomb cases.
As the movement has exploded, so has the reach of its ideas, aided and abetted by commentators and politicians in the ostensible mainstream. While in the 1990s, the movement got good reviews from a few lawmakers and talk-radio hosts, some of its central ideas today are being plugged by people with far larger audiences like FOX News’ Glenn Beck and U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn). Beck, for instance, re-popularized a key Patriot conspiracy theory — the charge that FEMA is secretly running concentration camps — before finally “debunking” it.
Last year also experienced levels of cross-pollination between different sectors of the radical right not seen in years. Nativist activists increasingly adopted the ideas of the Patriots; racist rants against Obama and others coursed through the Patriot movement; and conspiracy theories involving the government appeared in all kinds of right-wing venues. A good example is the upcoming Second Amendment March in Washington, D.C. The website promoting the march is topped by a picture of a colonial militiaman, and key supporters include Larry Pratt, a long-time militia enthusiast with connections to white supremacists, and Richard Mack, a conspiracy-mongering former sheriff associated with the Patriot group Oath Keepers.
What may be most noteworthy about the march, however, is its date — April 19. That is the date of the first shots fired at Lexington in the Revolutionary War. And it is also the anniversary of the fiery end of the government siege in Waco and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
FROM THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
08/2009
The Second Wave: Return of the Militias
Copy and paste the link for the article on the SPLC website
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/splc-report-return-of-the-militias
The 1990s saw the rise and fall of the virulently antigovernment "Patriot" movement, made up of paramilitary militias, tax defiers and so-called "sovereign citizens." Sparked by a combination of anger at the federal government and the deaths of political dissenters at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, and Waco, Texas, the movement took off in the middle of the decade and continued to grow even after 168 people were left dead by the 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City's federal building — an attack, the deadliest ever by domestic U.S. terrorists, carried out by men steeped in the rhetoric and conspiracy theories of the militias. In the years that followed, a truly remarkable number of criminal plots came out of the movement. But by early this century, the Patriots had largely faded, weakened by systematic prosecutions, aversion to growing violence, and a new, highly conservative president.
They're back. Almost a decade after largely disappearing from public view, right-wing militias, ideologically driven tax defiers and sovereign citizens are appearing in large numbers around the country. "Paper terrorism" — the use of property liens and citizens' "courts" to harass enemies — is on the rise. And once-popular militia conspiracy theories are making the rounds again, this time accompanied by nativist theories about secret Mexican plans to "reconquer" the American Southwest. One law enforcement agency has found 50 new militia training groups — one of them made up of present and former police officers and soldiers. Authorities around the country are reporting a worrying uptick in Patriot activities and propaganda. "This is the most significant growth we've seen in 10 to 12 years," says one. "All it's lacking is a spark. I think it's only a matter of time before you see threats and violence."
A key difference this time is that the federal government — the entity that almost the entire radical right views as its primary enemy — is headed by a black man. That, coupled with high levels of non-white immigration and a decline in the percentage of whites overall in America, has helped to racialize the Patriot movement, which in the past was not primarily motivated by race hate. One result has been a remarkable rash of domestic terror incidents since the presidential campaign, most of them related to anger over the election of Barack Obama. At the same time, ostensibly mainstream politicians and media pundits have helped to spread Patriot and related propaganda, from conspiracy theories about a secret network of U.S. concentration camps to wholly unsubstantiated claims about the president's country of birth.
Fifteen years ago, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote then-Attorney General Janet Reno to warn about extremists in the militia movement, saying that the "mixture of armed groups and those who hate" was "a recipe for disaster." Just six months later, Oklahoma City's federal building was bombed. Today, the Patriot movement may not have the white-hot fury that it did in the 1990s. But the movement clearly is growing again, and Americans, in particular law enforcement officers, need to take the dangers it presents seriously. That is equally true for the politicians, pundits and preachers who, through pandering or ignorance, abet the growth of a movement marked by a proven predilection for violence.
FROM THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
Intelligence Report, Spring 2010, Issue Number: 137
Active 'Patriot' Groups in the United States in 2009
Copy and past this link for the article on the SPLC website
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/spring/active-patriot-groups-in-the-united-s
The Intelligence Project identified 512 "Patriot" groups that were active in 2009. Of these groups, 127 were militias, marked with an asterisk, and the remainder includes "common-law" courts, publishers, ministries and citizens' groups. Generally, Patriot groups define themselves as opposed to the "New World Order," engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines. Listing here does not imply that the groups themselves advocate or engage in violence or other criminal activities, or are racist. The list was compiled from field reports, Patriot publications, the Internet, law enforcement sources and news reports. Groups are identified by the city, county or region where they are located.
ALABAMA (7)
2nd Alabama Militia *
Mobile
Alabama Shoals Badgers *
Tuscumbia
Constitution Party
Montgomery
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
THREE%ER
Pinson
We the People
Madison County
ALASKA (5)
Alaska Citizens Militia *
Nikiski
Constitution Party (Alaskan Independence Party)
Soldotna
John Birch Society - Alaskans for Restoring our Constitutional System
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Homer
ARIZONA (10)
American Grand Jury
Nogales
American Patriot Friends Network
Peoria
Arizona Citizens Militia *
Douglas
Arizona Militia *
Glendale
Cochise County Militia *
Tombstone
Constitution Party
Goodyear
John Birch Society
Statewide
Northern Arizona Militia *
Flagstaff
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Statewide
ARKANSAS (6)
Constitution Party
Fayetteville
John Birch Society
Statewide
Militia of Washington County *
Fayetteville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Bentonville
Searcy
CALIFORNIA (22)
American Armenian Militia *
Los Angeles/San Fernando Valley Area
American Independent Party
Vacaville
Constitution Party
Riverside
Freedom Force International
Thousand Oaks
Freedom Law School
Phelan
Free Enterprise Society
Fresno
John Birch Society
Chula Vista
Roseville
San Luis Obispo County
Northern California State Militia *
Falcon Creek
Sunnyvale
Oath Keepers
High Desert
Northern California
San Diego
Southern California
Second Amendment Committee
Hanford
State of California Unorganized Militia *
Monrovia
Truth Radio
Delano
We Are Change
Chico
Oakland
Sacramento
San Francisco Bay Area
COLORADO (10)
America First Party
Boulder
American Freedom Network
Johnstown
Constitution Party
Arvada
John Birch Society
Aurora
Minutemen Militia *
Fort Collins
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Colorado Springs
Huerfano
Statewide
We the People
Gunnison
CONNECTICUT (6)
Connecticut Survivalist Alliance
Middlefield
Constitution Party - Concerned Citizens Party
Plantsville
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Meriden
We the People
Statewide
DELAWARE (3)
Constitution Party
Bear
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (2)
Oath Keepers
Washington DC
We the People
Washington DC
FLORIDA (11)
America First Party of Florida
Mims
Constitution Party
West Palm Beach
Florida Free Alliance *
Nokomis
Florida Free Militia *
Palm Coast
John Birch Society
Newberry
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Fort Walton Beach
Jacksonville
Orlando
Tampa
We the People
Statewide
GEORGIA (15)
Constitution Party
Woodstock
Georgia Militia *
Chatham County
Cobb County
Gwinnett County
Newton County
John Birch Society
Statewide
Militia of Georgia *
Lawrenceville
Militia Recruiting Command *
Columbus
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Society for American Sovereignty
Marrietta
We Are Change
Atlanta
Columbus
LeGrange
Trenton
We the People
Statewide
HAWAII (3)
Constitution Party
Honolulu
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
IDAHO (11)
Constitution Party
Parma
Idaho Citizens Constitutional Militia *
Statewide
Idaho Observer
Spirit Lake
John Birch Society
Nampa
North Idaho Light Foot Militia*
Bonner County
Boundary County
Kootenai County
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Police & Military Against the New World Order
Kamiah
We Are Change
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
ILLINOIS (10)
135th Illinois Volunteer Cavalry *
Statewide
America First Party of Illinois
Rolling Meadows
Camp FEMA
Northbrook
Constitution Party
East Peoria
Illinois State Militia (Unorganized) 167th Battalion, 21st FF *
Statewide
John Birch Society
Statewide
Martial Law Survival
Thomson
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Restore the Republic
Northbrook
We the People
Statewide
INDIANA (21)
Constitution Party
Indianapolis
Indiana Citizens Volunteer Militia, 3rd Brigade *
Tippecanoe County
Indiana Constitutional Militia *
Statewide
Indiana Militia Corps *
Ingalls
Northeast
Northwest
Pendleton
Southeast
Southwest
Indianapolis Baptist Temple
Indianapolis
Indiana Sedentary Militia *
Hendricks County
Southern
Southwest
Statewide
Western
Indiana's Greene County Militia *
Greene County
Indiana State Militia 14th Regiment *
Owen County
John Birch Society
Indianapolis
NORFED – National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act
Evansville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
IOWA (5)
Constitution Party
Oskaloosa
We Are Change
Cedar Falls
Des Moines
Quad Cities
We the People
Statewide
KANSAS (7)
Constitution Party
Wichita
John Birch Society
Statewide
Kansas State Militia *
Wichita
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Lawrence
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
KENTUCKY (13)
1st Joint Public Militia *
Bowling Green
Jefferson County
Louisville
Marshall County
Northern
Statewide
Constitution Party
Lexington
John Birch Society
Statewide
Kentucky State Militia - Ohio Valley Command *
Louisville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
PatriotResistance.com
Lexington
Take Back Kentucky
Clarkson
We the People
Statewide
LOUISANA (10)
Constitution Party
Mandeville
Louisiana Militia *
Statewide
Louisiana Unorganized Militia *
Abbeville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Truth Attack
Shreveport
We Are Change
Arcadia
New Orleans
Shreveport
Slidell
We the People
Statewide
MAINE (7)
Constitution Party
New Castle
John Birch Society
Statewide
Maine Constitutional Militia *
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
New England Area
Portland
We the People
Statewide
MARYLAND (8)
America's Survival, Inc.
Owings
Constitution Party
Pocomoke
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Save A Patriot Fellowship
Westminster
Southern Sons of Liberty *
Statewide
We Are Change
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
MASSACHUSETTS (7)
America First Party of Massachusetts
New Bedford
Constitution Party
Amesbury
John Birch Society
Hyde Park
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Boston
Cape Cod
We the People
Statewide
MICHIGAN (47)
America First Party of Michigan
Ypsilanti
Constitution Party (U.S. Taxpayers Party of Michigan)
Grand Rapids
Delta 5 Mobile Light Infantry Militia *
Eaton County
East-Central Volunteer Militia of Michigan *
Lapeer County
Hutaree Militia *
Southern
Jackson County Volunteers *
Jackson County
John Birch Society
Statewide
Lenawee County Free and Independent Militia *
Adrian
Michigan Militia *
Redford
Michigan Militia Corps Wolverines 8th Division *
South Central
Michigan Patriot Alliance *
Arenac County
Bay County
Cheboygan County
Clinton County
Crawford County
Genesee County
Gladwin County
Gratiot County
Jackson County
Lapeer County
Macomb County
Midland County
Oakland County
Oceana County
Presque Isle County
Saginaw County
St. Clair County
Sanilac County
Shiawassee County
Tuscola County
Northern Michigan Backyard Protection Militia *
Northern
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Patriot Broadcasting Network
Dexter
Southeast Michigan Volunteer Militia *
Livingston County
Macomb County
Oakland County
Washtenaw County
Wayne County
We Are Change
Battlecreek
Clio
Detroit
Flint
Royal Oak
Schoolcraft
Statewide
West Michigan Volunteer Militia *
Muskegon County
We the People
Statewide
MINNESOTA (8)
Constitution Party
Redwood Falls
John Birch SocietyStatewide
Minnesota Militia/Army of Mississippi *
St. Cloud
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Duluth
Minneapolis
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
MISSISSIPPI (6)
America First Party of Mississippi
Greenwood
Constitution Defense Militia of Attala County (CDMAC) *
Attala County
Constitution Party
Okolona
East Central Mississippi Militia *
East CentralOath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
MISSOURI (9)
America First Party of Missouri
Imperial
Constitution Party
Arnold
John Birch Society
St. Peters
Liberty Restoration Project
St. Louis
Missouri Militia *
Kansas CitySt. Louis
Oath Keepers
Statewide
United American Freedom Foundation
Grandview
We the People
Statewide
MONTANA (9)
Celebrating Conservatism
Missoula
Constitution Party
Great Falls
John Birch Society
Statewide
Lincoln County Watch
Bozeman
Militia of Montana *
Noxon
Oath Keepers
Bozeman
We Are Change
Billings
Missoula
We the People
Statewide
NEBRASKA (7)
Constitution Party
Omaha
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Dakota
Omaha
Tri-Cities Area
We the People
Statewide
NEVADA (7)
Center for Action
Sandy Valley
Independent American Party (Constitution Party)
Elko
Oath Keepers
Northern
Southern
Sovereign People's Court for the United States of America
Las Vegas
We Are Change
Reno
We the People
Statewide
NEW HAMPSHIRE (6)
America First Party of New Hampshire
Windham
Constitution Party
Concord
New Hampshire Patriot Militia *
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
United States Constitution Rangers *
West Lebanon
We the People
Statewide
NEW JERSEY (8)
Constitution Party
Cinnaminson
John Birch Society
Ringwood
New Jersey Militia *
Trenton
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Cape May
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
Wolfpack Militia *
Statewide
NEW MEXICO (5)
Constitution Party
Albuquerque
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
NEW YORK (17)
America First Party of New York
Lynbrook
Constitution Party
New York
Empire State Militia 11th Field Force *
Northwestern
Oneida Area
Staten Island
Ulster County
Westchester Area
The Jekyll Island Project
Queensbury
Oath Keepers
Chatham
We Are Change
Hempstead
Ithaca
Long Island
New York City
Oswego County
Staten Island
We The People
Queensbury
Statewide
NORTH CAROLINA (10)
Constitution Party
Fuquay-Varina
John Birch Society
Raleigh
North Carolina Citizens Militia *
Charlotte
Coastal Area
Sandhills Area
Waynesville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Mount Airy
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
NORTH DAKOTA (3)
Constitution Party
Casselton
John Birch Society
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
OHIO (13)
America First Party of Ohio
Cleveland
Constitution Party
DelawareConstitutional Militia of Clark County *
Clark County
John Birch Society
Columbus
Northeastern Ohio Defense Force 3BN *
Lisbon
Northwestern Ohio Defense Force 4BN *
Kenton
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Ohio Defense Force State Headquarters *
Zanesville
Ohio Militia *
Statewide
Southeastern Ohio Defense Force 3rd Platoon *
Belmont County
Southwestern Ohio Defense Force 5BN *
Lebanon
Unorganized Militia of Champaign County *
St. Paris
We the People
Statewide
OKLAHOMA (5)
Constitution Party
Chandler
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
OK SAFE, Inc. (Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise)
Tulsa
We the People
Statewide
OREGON (14)
Constitution Party
Hubbard
Embassy of Heaven
Stayton
Emissary Publications
Clackamas
Freedom Bound International
Klamath Falls
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Oregon Militia Corps *
Statewide
Southern Oregon Militia *
Eagle Point
We Are Change
Cave Junction
Eugene
Florence
Portland
Salem
We the People
Statewide
PENNSYLVANIA (9)
America First Party of Pennsylvania
Ridgway
Constitution Party
Blawnox
Keystone Freedom Fighters *
Gettysburg
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Harrisburg
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Scranton
We the People
Statewide
RHODE ISLAND (3)
Constitution Party
Middletown
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
SOUTH CAROLINA (7)
Constitution Party
Greenville
John Birch Society
Greenville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
The Patriot Network
Anderson
We Are Change
Columbia
Greenville
We the People
Statewide
SOUTH DAKOTA (3)
Constitution Party
Brandon
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
TENNESSEE (12)
Constitution Party
Englewood
East Tennessee Militia *
East
John Birch Society
Lascassas
Memphis
Lawful Path
Lynnville
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Cookeville
Johnson City
Knoxville
Memphis
Nashville
We the People
Statewide
TEXAS (52)
The American Open Currency Standard
Frisco
American Patriots for Freedom Foundation *
Spring
Brave New Books
Austin
Buffalo Creek Press
Cleburne
Central Texas Militia *
Central
Church of God Evangelistic Association
Waxahachie
Constitution Party
Cleburne
Constitution Society
Austin
John Birch Society
Cypress
McKinney
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Republic Broadcasting
Round Rock
Republic of Texas
Bastrop County
Bexar County
Bowie County
Brazos County
Colorado County
Fayette County
Galveston County
Goliad County
Gonzales County
Harris County
Harrison County
Houston County
Jackson County
Jasper County
Jefferson County
Lamar County
Liberty County
Matagorda County
Milam County
Montgomery County
Nacogdoches County
Red River County
Refugio County
Robertson County
Rusk County
Sabine County
Shelby County
Travis County
Victoria County
Washington County
Texas Well Regulated Militia *
Edwards County
We Are Change
Austin (2)
Dallas
Fort Worth
Pasadena
San Antonio
San Marcos
Tyler
We the People
Statewide
UTAH (10)
Constitution Party
Layton
Hutaree Militia *
Statewide
JoelSkousen.com
Orem
John Birch Society
Springville
Liberty News Radio
Highland
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Orem
Salt Lake City
West Valley City
We the People
Statewide
VERMONT (3)
Constitution Party
Williston
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
VIRGINIA (7)
Constitution Party
Vienna
Oath Keepers
Statewide
U.S. National Party
Oakton
Virginia Citizens Militia *
Roanoke
We Are Change
ShenandoahStatewide
We the People
Statewide
WASHINGTON (11)
Constitution Party
Kent
Grays Harbor Civilian Defense Force *
Grays Harbor
John Birch Society
Puyallup
Kitsap County WA Militia *
Kitsap County
National Association of Rural Land Owners
Fall City
Oath Keepers
Statewide
Washington State Militia *
Statewide
We Are Change
Bellingham
Seattle
Spokane
We the People
Statewide
WEST VIRGINIA (5)
Constitution Party
Martinsburg
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Huntington
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
WISCONSIN (13)
America First Party of Wisconsin
Muscoda
Constitution Party
Ripon
John Birch Society
Appleton
John Birch Society Shop JBS
Appleton
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We Are Change
Green Bay
Kenosha
Madison
Milwaukee
Oshkosh
Racine
Stockbridge
We the People
Statewide
WYOMING (4)
Constitution Party
Afton
John Birch Society
Statewide
Oath Keepers
Statewide
We the People
Statewide
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)