Response from Johnny Isakson
Posted On Friday, October 23, 2009 at at 10:25 AM by Dan
On Wednesday, October 21 I received this thoughtful reply from Sen. Johnny Isakson concerning his no vote on S. Amendment 2588. That amendment, introduced by Sen. Al Franken, would deny federal contracts to employers who deny their employee's right to go to court regarding sexual assault and sexual discrimination. I am reprinting the letter verbatim. I will have a response to this letter since the Senator has mistaken intent with impact. For example, one can intend to protect people from sexual assault yet vote for something that has the impact of making it easier to cover up sexual assault.
------------
Thank you for contacting me regarding an amendment included in the Senate-passed Department of Defense Appropriations Act for 2010, that prohibits funding for federal contractors who require the use of arbitration to settle employment disputes. I appreciate hearing from you and the opportunity to respond.
Senate amendment 2588 to H.R.3326, Department of Defense Appropriations Act for 2010, was introduced by Senator Al Franken in response to the case of Jamie Leigh Jones, a 22-year-old Texan who alleges that in 2005 she was drugged and gang raped by fellow contract workers while working for defense contractor Halliburton/KBR at Camp Hope in Baghdad. Ms. Jones sued Halliburton/KBR and a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in September 2009 that Jones' employment contract with Halliburton/KBR does not prohibit her from suing over the claims she has made and that her lawsuit against Halliburton/KBR can go to trial. I am glad Ms. Jones is getting her day in court for these civil claims against the company, and I believe that if the charges bear out, those responsible for this horrific crime should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I voted against this amendment in accordance with the recommendation of the President and his Department of Defense, which opposed this amendment. Under the Franken amendment, defense contractors who receive federal funding could no longer require that employees sign contracts mandating that they settle employment disputes through arbitration. The amendment applies to current defense contracts and thus contractors who have employment arbitration agreements with their employees and who have already completed work for the military would not be able to paid for that work, under the Franken amendment.
In addition, I believe that this amendment would reverberate far beyond Ms. Jones' claim against Halliburton because it would lead to defense contractors eliminating arbitration altogether as an option for employees. Arbitration is a proven process that offers fast and fair resolutions of employment disputes, and its must be preserved as an option.
Without arbitration, employees are left with only the option of going to court, which is a very expensive and lengthy process. Arbitration allows employees to still make their claim and pay nothing or nearly nothing to do so because an employee does not have to hire an attorney for arbitration. Additionally, statistics show that employees actually fair better in the arbitration process than they do in court. According to a survey, employees have a 63 percent chance of prevailing in arbitration versus a 43 percent chance of prevailing in court.
The Franken amendment ultimately passed by a vote of 68 to 30, and some are characterizing the 30 senators who voted against the Franken amendment as "Pro-Rape" or "Pro-Gang Rape." This is politics at its worst. I am a husband, a father of a daughter, and a grandfather to three granddaughters, and it is absolutely ludicrous to characterize me or my colleagues as "pro-rape." Rape is a heinous crime and those who commit sexual assault should be punished, and I believe that the U.S. Justice Department should become more aggressive in prosecuting cases of rape and violent crime in combat zones such as Iraq. Unfortunately, the Franken amendment would not do anything to protect women from violence or to punish criminals. If it had, I would certainly have voted for the amendment.
Thank you again for contacting me. Please visit my webpage at http://isakson.senate.gov/ for more information on the issues important to you and to sign up for my e-newsletter.
Sincerely,
Johnny Isakson
United States Senator
For future correspondence with my office, please visit my web site at http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm.
From the WTF File of Sen. Chambliss
Posted On Monday, October 19, 2009 at at 1:21 PM by Dan
I just got an email from Sen. Chambliss. I have no idea why. I sent him an email about supporting gang rape, and he sent me an email about Kevin Jennings. Way to deal with things head on! My response is below and the Senator's email is at the bottom.
Dear Senator Chambliss:
On October 13 I sent you a letter and Sen. Johnny Isakson asking you to explain why you voted against S. 2588. This amendment would deny federal contracts to employers that deny employees the right to sue against sexual harassment, assault, and discrimination. This amendment would allow a young woman, gang raped in Iraq by her coworkers, to have her day in court. You apparently voted in favor of gang rape.
Today, October 19, you sent me an email about my concern about Kevin Jennings. In the email you mentioned I had contacted you about my concern about Kevin Jennings. Senator, I have never emailed you, or anyone else, about Kevin Jennings. I don't care about Kevin Jennings and find any reference to him to be a distraction. Let the man do his job and concetrate on real issues. An example of a real issue would be shielding war privateering corporations like Haliburton from charges of covering up gang rape.
I would like you to please explain why you would oppose S. 2588. Thank you.
Dan
------------
Dear Daniel:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the appointment of Kevin Jennings to the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools. It is good to hear from you.
Kevin Jennings was recently appointed as Assistant Deputy Secretary for the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools under the Department of Education on May 19, 2009. The Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools is charged with assisting in drug and violence prevention activities for students at all grade levels. I understand your concerns regarding this appointment and will keep your thoughts in mind.
If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov. Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.
Very truly yours,
Saxby Chambliss
SC:md
Jon Stewart on the Gang Rape Amendment
Posted On Friday, October 16, 2009 at at 10:38 AM by Dan
In an earlier post I wrote a letter to Sen. Johnny Isakson and Sen. Saxby Chambliss about their inexplicable support of Haliburton's efforts to cover up gang rape committed by their employees in Iraq. To date, I haven't heard a reply from the senators. Jon Stewart has a great 4 minute clip on this amendment. Although he doesn't mention the good senators from Georgia, he hits all of the arguments.
If you would like, you contact the Senators yourself:
Sen. Johnny Isakson
One Overton Park, Suite 970
3625 Cumberland Blvd
Atlanta, GA 30339
Tel: (770) 661-0999
Fax: (770) 661-0768
Email Contact
Sen. Saxby Chambliss
100 Galleria Parkway
Suite 1340
Atlanta, GA 30339
Main: 770-763-9090
Fax: 770-226-8633
Email Contact
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Rape-Nuts | ||||
| ||||
Did My Senators Really Vote to OK Gang Rape?
Posted On Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at at 5:35 PM by Dan
Dear Senator Johnny Isakson & Senator Saxby Chambliss:
The 2010 Defense Appropriations bill had an amendment introduced by Sen. Al Franken. The amendment was S. Amdt. 2588. Sen. Franken's amendment would ban companies that restrict their employees' ability to take sexual assault cases to court. According to an article on Alternet, Sen. Franken specifically offered this amendment to provide relief for Jamie Leigh Jones. Jones was gang raped by her co-workers at Haliburton while she was in Iraq. She was then threatened if she left Iraq for medical treatment. This is according to ABC News.
Apparently, both Sen. Isakson and Sen. Chambliss voted against this amendment. I'd like to know why. You must have a good reason. Sen. Sessions from Alabama suggested that the amendment would violate the due process clause of the Constitution. Was that your reason? Sen. Franken did a good job of explaining how an amendment, one that does target a specific company but does specify how federal funds are to be spent, is quite constitution. But if that was your reason, why do both you Sen. Isakson and Sen. Chambliss support, nay co-sponsor, an amendment to insure ACORN no longer receives federal money. If a bill that would target a specific organization is not un-Constitutional in your mind, how would a bill that doesn't target a specific company be unconstitutional?
Sen. Chambliss, you said that organizations that "undermine our democratic process should not be eligible for taxpayer dollars." Doesn't raping a woman, covering up the crime, and not allowing her access to the courts count as undermining democracy? Sen. Isakson you signed on to a letter that said, in part, "American taxpayers must be able to trust that their money is being spent responsibly and is not being used to fund criminal enterprises." Why is it that when it comes to ACORN both of you are able to feel such outrage, yet an effort to make sure women have a chance to hold rapists receiving federal funds accountable gets a no vote? Can you explain this to me?
Thanks,
Dan
Great Win for CIW
Posted On Friday, October 09, 2009 at at 9:10 AM by Dan
Labor Notes is reporting that the Coalition of Immokalee Workers have scored a great win. They've been running campaigns against restaurants for a penny raise for tomatoes and have won. Now they are breaking the back of the growers. In the middle of a recession farmworkers, those workers with the least amount legal protections, have scored a great victory. Yeah, sometimes we win.
Florida Tomato Pickers Score ‘Greatest Victory’ in Decades
http://labornotes.org/node/2488
by Sean Sellers 
After two years of delay, farmworkers in Florida will finally start getting a penny more per pound for tomatoes they pick.
Organizing with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW), farmworkers had reached agreements over the last five years with Yum Brands, McDonald’s, Burger King, Subway, and Whole Foods to improve harvesters' wages and working conditions, but the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange (FTGE), a powerful industry lobby group, had blocked efforts to pass on the raise to workers, leaving the money in escrow. Now one of the largest growers has broken ranks and agreed to pass on the extra penny, which gives that grower an edge in selling to the chains.
CIW members were joined September 25 by Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis and representatives of the food service company Compass and the tomato producer East Coast Growers and Packers to announce the accord.
With the support of Compass, which had $9 billion in revenues last year, the CIW has effectively broken the logjam of resistance created two years ago by the FTGE.
And with employers’ unity cracking, farmworkers expect that other growers may jump, too—and that the deluge of worker and consumer pressure will convince industry leaders to finally address unconscionable labor abuse in the Florida tomato fields.
Since 2007, the CIW had been unable to secure a large Florida grower willing to meet the higher standards set and funded by the agreements between CIW and the food retailers. East Coast Growers and Packers is the third-largest producer of Florida tomatoes, and Eric Schlosser, Fast Food Nation author and longtime observer of the CIW campaign, described its announcement to implement the CIW program as “the greatest victory for farmworkers since Cesar Chavez in the 1970s.”
The agreement between the CIW and Compass outlines two key areas of reform to be put in place within the retailer’s tomato supply chain.
First, workers harvesting tomatoes for Compass will receive an immediate raise. The accord requires Compass to pay an additional penny per pound for the tomatoes it purchases, as a supplement to the picking piece rate, with the ultimate goal of a guaranteed minimum fair wage for harvesters. This means an extra 32 cents per bucket for tomatoes harvested under the Fair Food agreements, a raise that ranges from 60 to 80 percent depending on where a worker is employed.
Average wages for a Florida farmworker are about $10,000 a year currently.
Second, the agreement provides a framework to improve working conditions at the farm level. Suppliers are now required to cooperate with the CIW to improve wage and hour record-keeping, to establish employee-controlled health and safety committees, to create a worker grievance system, and to permit third-party auditing for full transparency. Significantly, the CIW is allowed to conduct worker education on company time and property.
The CIW contends worker education and participation are essential to the supplier standards’ having a real impact on the agricultural industry. Towards that end, staff and members are creating educational materials that explain the new rights established under the code of conduct, which all workers at the farms where the agreements are in place will receive. Meanwhile, the CIW plans to use an already existing third-party monitor, with the goal of creating an outside monitor to watch over the entire industry.
The industry obviously needs a watchdog.
Exempt from federal protections for overtime pay and collective bargaining, farm workers are among the poorest and least protected in the U.S.
In the extreme, these workers face situations of forced labor. In the past decade alone the CIW has aided the Department of Justice in the successful prosecution of six modern-day slavery cases involving more than 1,000 farmworkers. Twelve farm labor supervisors are currently serving sentences in federal prison as a result of these cases.
The picking piece rate for Florida tomatoes has remained stagnant since 1980. A worker today must pick and haul roughly two and a half tons of tomatoes to earn minimum wage for a typical 10-hour day. Given the seasonal and precarious nature of farm labor, workers experience significant periods of unemployment and underemployment, all of which contributes to sub-poverty annual earnings.
Immokalee, an unincorporated community on the edge of the Everglades, is at the heart of this grueling work regimen. As the central production and distribution hub of Florida's massive tomato industry, the region is responsible for nearly 90 percent of the fresh tomatoes grown in the U.S. between October and June. Tomatoes are one harvest among many, however: Each year, Florida-based growers employ tens of thousands of primarily Mexican, Guatemalan, and Haitian workers to plant and pick crops ranging from tomatoes and citrus to cucumbers and watermelons.
In the months ahead, as the CIW undertakes the intricate task of implementing the agreement, workers in Immokalee and their allies will press ahead in their campaign by targeting supermarkets such as Publix and Kroger and food service providers Sodexo and Aramark, using many of the same tactics—including educational tours and protest actions—honed during its earlier battles with the fast-food industry.
“Much work remains to be done before the harvesting season begins in a few weeks, but we're really excited about the challenge,” says CIW staff member Gerardo Reyes. “We’re finally starting to see the changes that we've been fighting for for so many years.”
Jensen: White People are the Problem
Posted On Tuesday, October 06, 2009 at at 1:02 PM by Dan
I don't know if I agree with some particulars of how Jensen sees white supremacy as functioning, but the talk is a big-picture lecture. All in all, this is an interesting video. Below is the introduction taken from Zmag, you can access a lot more articles from Jensen at that site as well.
INTRODUCTION FROM Z
In The Souls of Black Folk, W.E.B. DuBois suggested that the question white people so often want to ask black people is, How does it feel to be a problem? This program turns the tables and recognizes some simple facts: Race problems have their roots in a system of white supremacy. White people invented white supremacy. Therefore, the color of the race problem is white. White people are the problem. White people have to ask ourselves: How does it feel to be a problem?
Following the ideas in his book The Heart of Whiteness, Jensen argues that -- even decades after the significant achievements of the civil-rights movement and with an African-American president -- it is still appropriate to describe the United States as a white-supremacist society, in terms of how we think and how we live. Through an analysis of contemporary racial ideology, Jensen presents a framework for critiquing the naturalizing of power and privilege in other arenas of our lives (gender, class, nationality, and ecology). How have we come to accept so easily systems of domination and subordination? How did we become resigned to hierarchy? How can we challenge the unjust and unsustainable nature of the systems in which we live?
Interview with Rep. Grayson
Posted On Saturday, October 03, 2009 at at 11:22 AM by Dan
I'm glad Grayson is making the distinction between a truly criminal organization, like Blackwater, and ACORN. If Congress would cut off funding to any corporation guilty of violating federal law, then that legislation would be valuable. Otherwise, it's simply a right-wing attack on community organizing. This article is taken from The Huffington Post.
It's Not Just ACORN, Says Congressman Grayson
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathleen-wells/its-not-just-acorn-says-c_b_307999.html?view=print
Posted Oct 2, 2009.
Freshman Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) is making national headlines with his success in broadening the reach of a bill Congress recently passed that will preclude the controversial community organizing group known as ACORN from receiving any federal money. He believes the bill can and should also be used to stop federal funding of government contractors that he says have earned the title of "crook."
I talked with Congressman Grayson in detail about his efforts to stop the government cash flow to contractors that cheat the government and overcharge the American taxpayers.
Kathleen Wells: What do you believe was the intent behind the recently passed legislation known as the Defund ACORN Act?
Congressman Alan Grayson: I think that the Republicans' intent was to defund ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). But in the process, they defunded crooks all through the military industrial complex and I look forward to their inadvertent efforts in the future to bring about world peace and end hunger.
Kathleen Wells: You're convinced that Republicans were intent on specifically eliminating federal funding for ACORN?
Congressman Grayson: Yes.
Kathleen Wells: But the bill also eliminated funding for other government contractors.
Congressman Grayson: Crooked contractors, yes.
Kathleen Wells: Does ACORN fall into the category of crooked organizations?
Congressman Grayson: Well, it's for the justice system to determine that, not me. I'm not a judge. I'm not a jury. I haven't heard the evidence. I don't know how it would be meaningful for someone who hasn't heard any of the evidence to give an opinion about that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but one is innocent until proven guilty. At least, that's what I thought.
Kathleen Wells: The Congressional Research Institute has indicated that the Defund ACORN Act is likely to be ruled unconstitutional. What are the consequences with your legislative history being attached to this bill?
Congressman Grayson: I think that when the courts decide -- if it comes to whether the bill is constitutional or not -- they [the courts] will take into account the legislative history that I [have] offered.
Kathleen Wells: This bill was introduced and passed after an ACORN employee(s) in Baltimore were/was caught with a hidden camera making incriminating statements to a man and a woman posing as a pimp and a prostitute. Although ACORN has a 30-year history of helping low-income people, many Democrats voted in favor of the Defund ACORN bill. Do you think those Democrats who supported the bill are being short sighted?
Congressman Grayson: I think your question doesn't properly characterize the reason why I voted for the bill. I voted for the bill because it defunds crooks. You have to ask other people why they voted for the bill -- I can't speak for them. I voted because I saw the possibility that we could actually shut off the flow of cash to contractors who have cheated the taxpayers and hurt the troops.
Kathleen Wells: Tell me about the Project Of Government Oversight (POGO).
Congressman Grayson: Sure. POGO was [sic] a long-standing organization. We called them for help after the bill passed and before we put in our legislative history to help us identify all the different contractors who have been found guilty of fraud and are still receiving contracts from the government. They gave us their list and we also went online and received literally hundreds of tips about contractors, along with specific documentation, showing that they had cheated the government. We are in the process of putting that information together and using it. When I say using it, what I mean by that is, defunding the crooks.
Kathleen Wells: How do you specifically intend to do that?
Congressman Grayson: We are going to push to make sure the legislation is signed by the President. We are also going to take the information that we received and make sure that the agency authorities (I'm referring to debarring officials) who are in charge of making sure that contracts don't go to corrupt contractors [will] have the information that we have.
Kathleen Wells: Why is an effort to defund these crooks just being done now?
Congressman Grayson: Because I just got elected.
Kathleen Wells: Why wasn't anyone doing it before?
Congressman Grayson: You'd have to ask them - I don't know. But I've been fighting war profiteers in Iraq for five years. That's what I've been doing. I guess we all have to decide how we are going to spend our time. We have a lot of freedom in Congress to make our own priorities and this is one of mine.
Kathleen Wells: Why are you the only one speaking out on this issue?
Congressman Grayson: I don't think I'm the only one. For goodness sake, look at Congressman Waxman, who is now the Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. He has been speaking out about this for literally decades.
Kathleen Wells: Yet, nothing has been done?
Congressman Grayson: Well, I wouldn't say nothing has been done. But now, we are going to finally put the nail in their coffin.
Kathleen Wells: What is your position on Blackwater?
Congressman Grayson: Blackwater, like many other contractors, has already been found guilty of over-charging the government or liable for over-charging the government and I think the problem is pervasive throughout the entire military industrial complex. In the case of Blackwater, they have done far worse. They have seriously undermined the safety of the troops and undermined the [troops'] mission. But the bill, as written, applies to contractors who cheat the government whether or not it has that awful effect [like that created by contractors such as Blackwater].
Kathleen Wells: Approximately how many government contractors are included on your list?
Congressman Grayson: Hundreds.
Kathleen Wells: What does that say to you?
Congressman Grayson: It's says to me that corruption, cheating the taxpayer and hurting the troops and their mission is something that has become pervasive in government contracting.
Kathleen Wells: Tell me how hiring crooked contractors are hurting the troops? Be specific.
Congressman Grayson: I think we've all heard over and over again how that happens. They have electrocuted our troops in their showers. They have feed them poisoned water, dirtier than the Euphrates River. Time and time again, they have endangered the troops and, from time to time, even killed them.
The Army found KBR guilty of homicide. That's the Army's own finding.
Kathleen Wells: What was done about that?
Congressman Grayson: Nothing.
Kathleen Wells: You say this is something that has become pervasive in government contracting?
Congressman Grayson: Don't take my word for it. Just look at the list. Go ahead and attach our list to your report. People can draw their own conclusions. It's not a matter of what I say. That's not important. What's important are the facts that we have already collected. Look at POGO's list. POGO's list has virtually every single one of the top hundred government contractors being found guilty of over-charging the government and cheating the taxpayers. Look at the list - it's documented.
Kathleen Wells: If you are successful in defunding the hundreds of allegedly dishonest contractors on your list, will there be other, honest contractors to replace them?
Congressman Grayson: Of course. This is America. It's not that hard to find honest people.
Kathleen Wells: If it's not hard to find honest people, then why does your list total hundreds?
Congressman Grayson: Because the government has tolerated this and rewarded it by giving these people more contracts.
Kathleen Wells: You paint a picture of the government being the victim. What do you say about the government being complicit?
Congressman Grayson: The government is a big place. You should be more specific. Who are you talking about when you are talking about the government being complicit? Are you talking about the executive branch, the legislative branch [or] the judicial branch? Are you talking about specific agencies? What do you mean?
Kathleen Wells: Who is specifically in charge of hiring these crooked contractors?
Congressman Grayson: Well, it's the executive branch and, specifically, the contracting officers. And it's a phenomenon called the revolving door. What happens is: they keep giving contracts to contractors, no matter what their ethics or lack thereof, because, in many cases, they hope that one day these contractors will hire them and, in many cases, they do. In many cases, they hire them for four times their government salary and everybody is happy, except the American taxpayer.
Kathleen Wells: Is the Government Oversight Committee looking at this situation?
Congressman Grayson: Certainly, when Chairman Waxman was in charge of that Committee, they looked at it vigorously and consistently and I think that Chairman Edolphus Towns will do the same.
Kathleen Wells: Would you say there's been a pattern and practice?
Congressman Grayson: Of course. Look at POGO's list. We've reached the point now where the honest ones feel stupid.
Kathleen Wells: There have been rumblings that SEIU (Service Employees International Union) will be the next GOP target for defunding because of the relationship SEIU has with ACORN. What are your thoughts on that prospect?
Congressman Grayson: It's what I [have] said before. We live in a system of laws, not organizations. Every allegation of misconduct should be investigated thoroughly and whatever punishment is appropriate should be meted out. We can't run this country on the basis of a Republican "enemies list." We have to allow justice to take its course. In the case of these contractors, justice has already taken its course. These are contractors who been found guilty or liable for cheating the government already.
Kathleen Wells: Yet, those same contractors continue to receive government funding.
Congressman Grayson: That's right.
Kathleen Wells: Is this something you have been pursuing before?
Congressman Grayson: Government contracting - for sure. Before I was elected to Congress, I prosecuted war profiteers in Iraq and I was a government contract lawyer for 20 years.
Kathleen Wells: So, this is a continuation of that for you?
Congressman Grayson: Well, you could call it that. But really [it] is a continuation to make sure that taxpayer dollars are not wasted.
Kathleen Wells: Was addressing this issue your primary purpose in running for Congress?
Congressman Grayson: No, I specifically ran for Congress, more than anything else, to try and end the war. But I [also] ran for Congress because I thought I could do a better a job representing my people, the people of central Florida, than the four-term Republican incumbent who had done nothing.
Right Wing is Not Attacking ACORN, They're Attacking Organizing
Posted On Thursday, October 01, 2009 at at 12:47 PM by Dan
This is a great article by Rinku Sen. It puts the attacks in great perspectives.
ACORN Is the New Dirty Word
New America Media, Commentary, Rinku Sen, Posted: Oct 01, 2009
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=e73a5389ff08d6f3779f0480ec5a5d64
Over the last 18 months, conservatives have launched a nationwide assault on the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), which is now peaking with widespread media coverage and Congressional action. This isn’t the first time that the 37-year-old organization has been under attack. With chapters in more than half the 50 states, it is arguably the largest national network that consistently organizes truly poor people, the vast majority being immigrants and people of color. In that time, ACORN has helped communities organize for desperately needed changes, from living wage ordinances to policies that protect every child’s right to a high quality education. In this time, ACORN has angered many a local politician and multinational corporation, and these folks would be perfectly happy not only to see ACORN go down, but also to deal a blow to poor people organizing for power.
There are three major accusations against the group. First, that there is widespread financial corruption; second that they engage in massive voter fraud; and finally that they have too many different entities hiding their relationship to each other to get around legal limitations. As a natural outgrowth of its organizing, ACORN has provided critical services, including mortgage counseling, voter registration and tax preparation. These services were sometimes funded through federal government contracts, and it is those contracts that Congress is now threatening to end.
The only hard fact is that there was embezzlement. Though problematic, it was addressed both within and outside of the organization. The rest is a mash-up of misinformation with a lot of red-baiting and race-baiting, as Peter Dreier, the Dr. E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics, and director of the Urban & Environmental Policy Program at Occidental College in Los Angeles, and others have reported.
These fabrications are designed to arouse distrust of collective action. The campaign against ACORN serves as an attack on organizing as a whole, which no community of color can afford not to do. We can see it from the denunciation of President Obama’s background in community organizing to Glenn Beck’s attacks on environmental leader Van Jones, cultural leader Yosi Sergeant and FCC Diversity Chief Mark Lloyd. This attack, like those, is a warning to anyone who adopts organizing as a social change strategy.
Does ACORN need tighter internal controls? Certainly, and so do most community organizations, which are perpetually cash-strapped, in part because funders are never interested in funding “overhead” and “administration.” If the search for “corruption” among community-based organizations gathers steam, I guarantee that any number of groups will be tied up in investigative hell for years. It’s dangerous to imagine that once they’re done with ACORN, the right won’t come looking for that one mistake you made years ago that can be attached to a bunch of lies to discredit and take down your organization. Obviously, we should pay attention to our inner workings, whether someone is paying for that or not, but even the most rigorous internal scrutiny won’t save us from a well-funded opposition that is willing to lie.
The attack on ACORN isn’t about fighting corruption. If it was, then dozens of corporations with federal contracts far larger than ACORN’s would be under investigation now, or would already have been cut off. The anti-ACORN Senate bill implicates any government contractor that has fraudulent paperwork, or is accused of violating lobbying or campaign finance laws. That list includes Blackwater, the private security contractor that has been implicated in civilian deaths during the Iraq war. Florida Congressman Alan Grayson is collecting a list of such contractors.
Of course, Congress could make ACORN obsolete by passing and enforcing laws that protect poor people from being pushed to the margins of society. Instead of paying ACORN to register voters, the federal government could actually punish voter suppression, which is largely directed at people of color and immigrants. It could adopt automatic voter registration systems that would be triggered by an 18th birthday or driver’s license being issued. It could pass predatory lending laws that protect us from insane interest rates, and then ACORN wouldn’t have to counsel its members about avoiding foreclosure.
The assault on ACORN is an assault on community organizing. Organizing is essential to building the power of poor people, immigrants and people of color to protect their interests. This is the time to stand up for ACORN, not just to keep this vital part of our national infrastructure, but also to prevent the hate from tying up all of us. That’s why we must demand that our election officials and media outlets stop this unwarranted campaign against the poor and people of color.
