Notes from the Left Coast

Drummond Pike’s Blog

Wade Rathke has done something some would never have predicted. Resigned as ACORN’s Chief Organizer. Who ever would have imagined?

I met Wade in 1972, as best I can recall. Marge Tabankin and I were running the Youth Project (she was my boss) and had developed a bit of a competition to find the most impressive new organizers “out there.” The YP, begun in the Center for Community Change’s basement, was an operation to leverage foundation $$ into community organizing that involved young people – an attempt to bring the national movements of the day down into the everyday lives of disenfranchised communities. I came up with Mike Miller from Organize, Inc. in SF – a skilled, talented follower of Saul Alinsky’s Industrial Areas Foundation approach: parish based, working class organizing. Alinsky had defined the field in many ways and his Rules for Radicals was found on the shelves of an entire college generation at the time. Margie’s choice was this kid named Wade Rathke.
(more…)

There has been a battle raging in the philanthropic rag, “Chronicle on Philanthropy” that was inspired by a fear-mongering conservative named William Schambra of the Bradley Center for Philanthropy and Civic Renewal at the Hudson Institute. He started with the worst of fear-mongering which you can derive from the title to his prominent editorial, “Philanthropy’s Jerimiah Wright Problem.” The article basically tried to equate Wright’s outlandish rhetoric (albeit taken out of context) with a body of very thoughtful work being done by a number of non-profits and foundations that addresses an emerging analysis called structural racism. (more…)

From the front page of the NY Times today described the first day of the economic policy debate that will likely dominate the upcoming presidential campaigns. Why? Simple: folks are hurting. For all the good and bad things happening in the world, it’s pretty clear that no amount of social “wedge issues,” like gay marriage, choice, or whether America is a “Christian country” or not, will obscure the pain of the subprime meltdown or $4 gasoline. Cooper and Rohter in the Times wrote, “It is a battle between Republican supply-side economics and a Democratic tradition that uses government levers to try to reduce inequality and spur the economy.” Indeed, this may well emerge as the clearest ideologically-based choice voters have had since 1932.

We have had for nearly 3 decades an unchallenged rhetoric that argues that we have to “free up” capital by lowering taxes on investments (capital gains) in order to stimulate the economy. While progressives have been shouting unheard into the media wind that real wages have been flat for YEARS and that letting the rich get richer doesn’t really help working people, somehow the notion hasn’t gotten traction that the economic policy elite wasn’t really moving on the right set of tracks. Some, like ex-Nixon speech writer Kevin Phillips, have been decrying the emergence of a new Golden Age, more similar to the 1890’s or 1920’s when the rich were fabulously so, while ordinary folks wallowed unable to get ahead. This disparity between the rich and the poor, he argued in Wealth and Democracy, threatens democracy at its roots when the wealthy gain unfettered access to the power of government, turning it to their purposes.

So, have Naomi Klein’s “disaster capitalists” been hiding out in the candy store after hours, gorging themselves on no-bid contracts, crop subsidies, military cost overruns, and government policy aided media monopolies? Sure seems so. Just listen to Larry Lessig on the toxic power of lobbyists, or Dan Rather on why corporate interests, particularly conglomerates that own some media but also a lot of other things, have everything to gain from a muzzled media. News has become all-Paris Hilton all the time. And meanwhile, who has noticed the corruption that seems to have broken out in DC?

Let’s hope the people have, and maybe that’s why folks are finally looking so closely at the economy as we enter this election process. How refreshing!

Someone to watch closely on this: Jason Furman, the new economic policy guy in the Obama campaign. Labor folks are unhappy with his strong ties to Robert Rubin, the bigtime Wall Street insider and former Secretary of the Treasury under Clinton.

I read this morning that the Honorable Tom Tancredo, Representative to Congress from Colorado’s 6th District, has found His Holiness the Pope wanting with regard to his sympathetic, supportive stance regarding immigrants. From today’s NY Times:

Accusing the pope of “faith-based marketing,” Mr. Tancredo said Benedict’s comments welcoming immigrants “may have less to do with spreading the Gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the Church.” Mr. Tancredo, a former Catholic who now attends an evangelical Christian church, said it was not in the pope’s “job description to engage in American politics.”

Representative Tancredo is but the most recent example of the remarkable American trait of generational amnesia. All four of his grandparents immigrated to the US from Italy, part of some 4 million Italians who arrived here between 1880 and 1920. As a third generation American, Mr. Tancredo has adopted another uniquely American trait – “we got here first, so you stay away.” A quick review of the history of American Immigration Law reveals repeated exclusions of immigrants based largely on race: Chinese, Japanese, South Asians, and Filipinos all can claim their own special Congressionally approved bans, each in place for years before repeal. The racial underpinnings of our evolving immigration laws will confound any remaining skeptics of the concept of structural racism. Race has clearly been the basis of immigration policy over and over again, and especially so during the period that Mr. Tancredo’s grandparents were making their way to the US.

What’s intriguing about the son of a son of an immigrant becoming the Chief Immigrant Baiter among right wing politicians who collectively seem intent on blaming Spanish-speaking immigrants for every ill, is that it so clearly reflects an element of self-hatred. When Italians came in droves to the big cities of America a century ago, they were termed “Birds of Paradise” arriving to earn some money and return home, just as many, if not most, of our current undocumented workers wish to do (and have done for decades). The irony, of course, is that the conservative response to date, dampened only by the change in Congressional majorities two years ago, has been to erect barriers that prevent transit across the borders, thus effectively trapping these “remittance workers” here indefinitely when they used to return home seasonally.

As a Californian, the issue of immigration imbues both current and historical politics. This state, originally a part of Mexico, has inarguably been built on the labor of its immigrants. What few recall in the current debate, is that California is the only state in the nation that attempted to prevent immigration from other states. In 1937, California enacted the so-called “Anti-Okie Law” which was not overturned until 1941. It’s purpose? – stem the tide of Okies, Arkies, ‘Texicans’, and other predominantly white refugees from the famed Dust Bowl of the thirties in the mid-west. Just as Mexican and Central American migrant laborers do today, they largely came west to pick crops and scrape out a meager living, having suffered through one of the worst environmental calamities to afflict modern America. Okies were demonized more than Arabs are today throughout the media, that is until John Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath was made into one of Hollywood’s greatest films.

There is no suitable response to Tancredo’s critique of the Pope other than to quietly say that freedom in America means that even really stupid, rude, wrong things get said at times. That the sayer is a Member of Congress ought to be deeply embarrassing to those Coloradans living in the 6th District, just south of Denver. It surely is to me.

Have you ever met Ms. American Express? Or, Mr. Exxon? No, neither have I, but the odd thing is that under the law, they are, roughly speaking, the same as any normal sentient person. This is the result not of a Supreme Court decision, but rather a Supreme Court Reporter’s description of a decided case – a statement without precedential value – that has been disputed ever since. That the reporter was a retired railroad executive and the plaintiffs were rail companies in the late 1800’s, seems to have been left in the dust of history. The rail companies, you see, were trying to reinterpret the 14th Amendment that was passed shortly after the end of the Civil War; its purpose was to address the history of slavery in the south by precluding a state’s right to pass any law that “abridge[d] the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States…” In short, if held to be a legal “person,” a corporation could argue that a state couldn’t individually regulate its affairs; only the federal government could. In any event, by chicanery or innocent error, Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad became the means that turned corporations into legal “people.”

There is more than a modicum of irony in this, since many of the rail corporations that benefitted from the 1886 decision, and they did so handsomely, also readily embraced the Jim Crow laws of the post Civil War period that continued the subjugation of most ex-slaves and their progeny for a hundred years. I doubt they ever made the connection between their economic advantage and the use of the Amendment intended to ensure freedoms to those freed by the passage of the 13th Amendment banning slavery.

What inspired this line of thought? I read in today’s NY Times that over recent years, the US Justice department has been signing dozens of “deferred prosecution agreements.” These have them paying fines, opening themselves to ‘outside monitors,’ and otherwise not admitting responsibility. Many of these agreements are secret, to boot, so we don’t even know about them. Now, that’s what I call having your cake and eating it, too, because I don’t think real people get anywhere near that kind of a break. No, we seem perfectly content to lock real people up or – at the very least – have them plead guilty to a lesser charge. Criminal cases don’t have “settlement agreement” options…unless you are a corporate “legal person.”

Think of all the money we could save if we allowed people indicted for crimes to have “deferred prosecution agreements.” None of those Enron guys would have gone to jail – they’d just have bought themselves out of the jam just like Monsanto evidently did. In the Times article, they described Monsanto’s deed: knowingly bribing an Indonesian official in return for looser regulations for those using their modified crop strains. The company knew about and approved the bribe (not some maverick executive, to be clear), but they never faced criminal charges of the kind that drove Authur Anderson out of business. Ah, the new era of “free market capitalism” seems to have been given a new meaning for “free.”

Evidently the current administration’s perspective is that free market corporations ought to have a permanent “get out of jail free” card. Any idea where I can get one of those?

Oh, one more thing. Remember John Ashcroft, our former Attorney General who oversaw the Justice Department? Well his firm just got a $50 million deal to monitor a “deferred prosecution agreement” between Justice and a medical services company. Sweet, huh? Just kinda makes one want to go into public service….and then jump into the greenback-lined “post-prosecutorial era.”

Tides’ presence was strong at the Bioneers conference last weekend. Tides folk, ably led by Berit Ashla, produced three panels, including “Race, Class, and Power: Structural Analysis and Fairness.”

Over 350 participants filled a conference room to learn from: Gihan Perera (Miami Worker Center),
Manuel Pastor (USC, Economist),
Colette Pichon Battle (Moving Forward Gulf Coast),
and Van Jones (Ella Baker Center).

I thought they were at the top of their game addressing themes central to Tides Foundation’s emerging ECO Initiative, including:

• How environmental degradation in communities of color is a symptom of the way we have structured the economy, distributed resources and excluded communities of color
• Communities of color must be part of the solution, and that means political and economic power building in communities of color
• There are terrific opportunities based on current work, and there is a need to build more and different kinds of capacity; and
• The high costs we will all pay if we don’t recognize the critical importance of this work.

It’s that time again, please circulate amongst folks who may want to apply! As many of you probably already know, it’s a pretty prestigious award and a great way to refresh and rejuvenate many folks of color whose work has helped push forward social change to a higher level. I’ve been fortunate to have worked with and for some of the past recipients of this award program and know how much it helped sustain and renew their fervor in their work.

The Alston/Bannerman Fellowship Program

Long-Time Activists of Color Invited to Apply for Sabbatical Program

Deadline: December 15, 2007

The Alston/Bannerman Fellowship Program is committed to advancing progressive social change by helping to sustain long-time activists of color. The program honors those who have devoted their lives to helping their communities organize for racial, social, economic, and environmental justice, and provides resources for these organizers to take sabbaticals for reflection and renewal.

To qualify for an Alston/Bannerman Fellowship, applicants must:

• be a person of color;
• have more than ten years of community organizing experience; be committed to continuing to work for social change;
• and live in the United States or its territories.

Both full-time and volunteer activists are eligible to apply.

Fellows receive a $25,000 award to take sabbaticals of three months or more.

Fellows are expected to stop their day-to-day work activities for at least three months and devote that time to activities that are substantially different from their normal routine. Fellows have the freedom to use their sabbaticals however they think will best re-energize them for the work ahead. Past fellows have used the time and resources to travel, study, visit with other activists, read, relax, acquire new skills, explore new interests, spend time with their families, restore their health, plan, evaluate, and “just be still.”

Visit the program’s Web site for complete program details:
http://fconline.foundationcenter.org/pnd/10009223/alstonbannerman

Alston/Bannerman Fellowship Progam
1627 Lancaster Street, Baltimore, MD 21231
Phone: 410-327-6220
Fax: 501-421-5862
E-mail: info@Alston/Bannerman.org
Web: www.AlstonBannerman.org

I also want to acknowledge the stellar work of Maritza Schafer and Christopher Herrera on The Right to the City, Tides’ newest Donor Guide.

If you haven’t picked up a copy from Maritza (or viewed the video documentary on the Tides Foundation’s website), you should. The content offers a powerful model for organizing to revitalize our cities, and introduces basic issues of human rights.

It is a model for what Tides can achieve, bringing together donors and activists to maximize our impact and create strategic change.