It’s a threat that will become very real on the streets of Chicago this weekend, as a new breed of journalists and onlookers attempt to cover the protests surrounding the NATO summit.

 Just ask Carlos Miller. The photojournalist has been arrested three times. His “crime?”  [read more →]]]> World Press Freedom Day came and went earlier this month. While it’s important to take a day to recognize our right to speak and share information, threats to our First Amendment freedoms happen all the time, everywhere.

 It’s a threat that will become very real on the streets of Chicago this weekend, as a new breed of journalists and onlookers attempt to cover the protests surrounding the NATO summit.

 Just ask Carlos Miller. The photojournalist has been arrested three times. His “crime?” Photographing the police. Most recently, in January, Miller was filming the eviction of Occupy Wall Street activists from a park in downtown Miami.

 In twist that’s become too familiar to many, the journalist became the story as police focused their crackdown on the scrum of reporters there to cover the eviction. Miller came face to face with Officer Nancy Perez, who confiscated his camera and placed him under arrest.

 And Miller is not alone. Since Occupy Wall Street began last September, more than 75 journalists have been arrested. My colleague Josh Stearns has chronicled these arrests since the movement’s earliest days. Stearns expects to see an uptick in arrests as thousands of protesters and reporters converge on Chicago.

Radical Transparency and the Police

Journalists record many of these arrests themselves as they’re shoved to the ground, shackled and hauled off to jail. Onlookers have documented many of these arrests as well.

The ubiquity of camera-ready smartphones has spawned legions of “live-streamers” who can be found at every large-scale protest streaming a close-up account of almost every arrest. It’s a new form of journalism that’s open to anyone with a mobile phone and the resolve to get between police and protesters.

In the chaos of these events, many live-streamers have been snared in mass arrests. Others are deliberately targeted by officers who aren’t accustomed to the radical transparency of the smartphone era.

Tim Pool has seen the live-streaming phenomenon grow exponentially since he first started streaming Occupy Wall Street protests using a live-linked Galaxy S2 phone. “Most of the people are live-streaming because they think the mainstream media isn’t telling the story that needs to be told,” he says.

 The audience for Pool’s smartphone stream peaked above 30,000 simultaneous viewers during last year’s Occupy evictions, making Pool’s raw and unedited reporting a model hundreds of other live-streamers have followed.

 Pool plans to organize a global collective of live-streamers to create an alternative news network that gets the story live on the streets before the traditional news vans arrive. “There are not enough streamers for breaking 24-hour global news coverage,” he says, “but we’re getting pretty close.”

 The First Amendment a ‘Nuisance’

 The ubiquity of smartphones has contributed to America’s decline as a champion of free speech and freedom of the press. The U.S. dropped to 22nd place on Freedom House’s annual ranking of press freedoms. We’re now tied with Estonia and Jamaica. Our flagging status is due to the “detentions, rough police tactics, and other difficulties encountered [by those] covering protests associated with the Occupy movement,” according to Freedom House.

 Many arrests result from snap judgments officers make when encountering a swarm of smartphone-carrying citizen reporters.

 People, and even police officers, often don’t understand our rights with regard to public photography. At the local level the newsgathering rights of every individual, whether credentialed as a journalist or not, become even murkier.

 But that’s changing:

• In January, the Justice Department filed a statement urging the U.S. District Court of Maryland to uphold an individual’s “First Amendment right to record police officers in the public discharge of their duties” and to find that “officers violate citizens’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights when they seize and destroy such recordings without warrant or due process.”
• In late March, Simon Glik won a civil suit against the City of Boston, after the First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled against his arrest for attempting to record police brutality. The court found that Glik had a “constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public.”
• In early May, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ordered a preliminary injunction against the Illinois Eavesdropping Act, which made the recording of police officers without their consent a felony, punishable by four to 15 years in prison.
• Earlier this week the Justice Department again intervened in the Maryland case, with a unequivocal statement supporting the right to record police officers, urging the Baltimore Police Department to instruct its officers to protect this First Amendment freedom.

 Police departments like having a degree of flexibility in interpreting the law as it gives their officers loose rein to arrest anyone they deem a nuisance, even when they know their case will collapse before the courts.

 ”When I have been confronted by officers the implicit threat is that if I continued to videotape, they would take away my liberty,” says advocacy journalist Bill Huston. Police have harassed Huston as he’s attempted to record public events related to the fracking controversy in Pennsylvania and New York.

 ”Even though this is constitutionally protected behavior, the police will intimidate you and demand that you follow their orders,” he said. “Even though we may get a legal remedy in the courts we are still prevented from videotaping on the scene. Our rights are still violated. This is not how the system is supposed to work.”

 Your Phone Is Political

 Though cases involving our right to record have not yet reached the Supreme Court, it may only be a matter of time. Thus far most of the lower courts have found a rock-solid First Amendment argument for taking photos and video of law enforcement officers in public.

 The nation’s leading free speech and civil rights groups agree. Earlier this month, we wrote U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder urging him to address ongoing abuse of our First Amendment freedoms and protect everyone’s right to record.

 While the media landscape has changed, our First Amendment rights haven’t. Freedom of the press is more important, not less, when anyone with a mobile phone and an Internet connection can act as a journalist.

via huffingtonpost.com

If Washington DC is the new Versailles, run by corporate overlords and their lobbyist-hired guns, then the 50 statehouses are its paternal twins. That is, while they look different in form, they share the same genetic function as avenues for the fulfillment of the corporate agenda.

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) has made  [read more →]]]> Taxpayer-subsidized stealth lobbyists: Lobbyists who circumvent normal lobbying regulations and procedures to advance the corporate agenda in statehouses nationwide on the taxpayer dime.

If Washington DC is the new Versailles, run by corporate overlords and their lobbyist-hired guns, then the 50 statehouses are its paternal twins. That is, while they look different in form, they share the same genetic function as avenues for the fulfillment of the corporate agenda.

The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) has made this abundantly clear through its ongoing ALEC Exposed project, bringing sunshine to the tax-deductible, statehouse-level influence-peddling efforts made by corporations through the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC has been described by CMD as a “corporate bill mill.” (Full disclosure: Steve Horn is a former reporter and researcher at CMD. He was on the team that broke ALEC Exposed in the summer of 2011.)

ALEC, though, is not the only “corporate bill mill” playing this game.

“Taxpayer-subsidized stealth lobbyists” have upped the ante and skillfully advanced their agendas through bipartisan “trade associations” for state government officials – in particular, the Council of State Governments (CSG) whose multimillion-dollar budget is mostly funded by taxpayers. Through CSG and Friends, lobbyists exploit a well-tethered network of nonprofits representing state-level officials to advance the agenda of their corporate clientele.

“In a climate of stalled federal initiatives, and what I think is really unprecedented partisan battling and bickering, these state legislatures are really shaping the national policy environment,” explained one such stealth lobbyist, Michael Behm, in an interview. “I really think they are the real engines of government. And that’s why the private sector is interested, quite frankly.”

This, then, is part one of a four-party story about how the “real engines of government” work. First stop on the voyage: the CSG.

“That Other Bill Mill”: Council of State Governments (CSG)

ALEC is far and away the most well known of the consortium of 501(c)(3) organizations that allow corporate influence to seep into every facet of state-level government affairs. CSG, on the other hand, is not so well known.

Upon being sworn into office, all state-level legislators (there are about 7,500 of them total), as well as their respective legislative staffs, automatically become CSG members. The organization’s membership also includes representatives from the executive and judicial branches of state governments.

Between 2009 and 2011, CSG’s Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 990 forms indicate revenue between $29 and $34 million annually. While most of its sizable budget is covered by taxpayers, some 43 percent – or roughly between $12.5 and 14.6 million, according to its web site; another 29 percent – or almost $8.4 to $9.9 million of these funds – come from what it describes as “entrepreneurial efforts” which can be loosely interpreted to mean anything from publication sales to a sizable chunk from corporate patronage.

Some perspective is warranted: 990s filed by ALEC in 2010 placed its entire budget at just under $6 million.

“CSG has long believed private sector involvement in the American governance system is critical in formulating sound solutions to public policy challenges,” reads the web page for the organization’s private enterprise Associates Program. The page also explains a range of benefits special interest groups will receive for annual dues of $6,000.

Many corporations spend additional money sponsoring leadership trainings and conferences.

The CSG “Dating Service”

ALEC has recently taken the hot seat for many of its model bills and for its lobbyist-politician “dating service” process. Yet the idea behind the ALEC model legislation process was, to be clear, originally conceived by CSG, which was founded in 1933. ALEC was born 40 years later, in 1973.

To date, CSG is responsible for publishing between 30-40 model bills annually, in a process called Suggested State Legislation (SSL). These bills are distributed to the states as templates of bipartisan “best practices” often promoting the agendas of multinational corporations.

Behm, the lobbyist, wrote the following about the SSL process:

Few other state officials meetings or forums capture the attention – and stimulate the heart rates – of government affairs professionals as does the Council of State Governments’ Committee on Suggested State Legislation.We pour through the Committee Dockets the minute they are released searching for those bills, or that one law, that caused us so much heartburn earlier in the session season and hoping that it didn’t find its way onto the ‘Committee List.’ A flurry of emails begins, conference calls are scheduled and a full-court press of lobbying is launched on the Committee members.

One only has to look briefly at the most recent SSL dockets to see that the private sector is often successful in its lobbying endeavors.

Most recently, the 2013 SSL docket includes legislation written by and for the shale gas industry  on hydraulic fracturing (fracking), as well as a corporate-backed, union-busting collective bargaining “reform” bill. Both of these policies have been, to date, associated exclusively with ALEC by critical observers.

Some other policy highlights of the past decade include, but are by no means limited to, these SSL templates, as well as policy position papers and what CSG calls its “Innovation Awards,” (templates for executive-level initiatives) in the following arenas:

• Biometric testing
• Union-busting through acts like the Puerto Rico Public/Private Partnership Act
• Cracking down on “illegal immigration” in a wide array of legislative packages
• Carbon sequestration and storage (alias “clean coal”)
• Nuclear energy promotion
• Teacher tenure “reform”
• Charter schools/virtual charter schools
• Anti-terrorism

CSG’s SSL record makes clear that corporations, above and beyond promoting models beneficial to big business, simultaneously block the passage of models that could harm their bottom line.

Exhibit A: the behavior of the international pharmaceutical company, Metabolife International, Inc.

Frustrated with consumer complaints about the adverse effects of Metabolife 356 (a dietary supplement containing the problematic epinephrine), during an October 8, 2002, Congressional testimony, David W. Brown, CEO of Metabolife, spoke in favor of his company’s 1998 CSG model. The SSL was designed to keep products containing epinephrine on the market by introducing a standardized regulation process.

Then, in 2003, Metabolife moved to crush other CSG model legislation that would have otherwise prohibited its dietary supplement from sale. The same docket included a model promoting the “use of epinephrine auto-injectors” to combat allergies and was included in the final volume.

Due to its $25,000, five-year CSG membership through the Twenty-First Century Foundation, Metabolife (like ALEC) was given a “voice and a vote” alongside politicians on the relevant task forces to recommend that the 2003 proposal be rejected from the SSL docket.

The CSG Badge of Approval

CSG SSL templates are widely distributed, explained Kelley Arnold, CSG’s director of membership, marketing and media in an interview. “Electronic copies of every SSL volume are available online at www.csg.org, hard copies are mailed to majority and minority leaders in the legislature and to the governor in each state,” she said. “Any state official may call and request a complimentary copy.”

But how does a bill get to CSG in the first place? Reached by email, Arnold wrote, “All legislation submitted for consideration MUST have been introduced in at least one state and the CSG Committee on Suggested State Legislation prefers to consider legislation that has been enacted into law by at least one state.”

These CSG bills, unlike ALEC bills – which at this point have a negative stigma in the public sphere – are viewed as having a “badge of approval” of sorts granted by politicians on both sides of the aisle.

“These Docket items can carry with them the imprimatur of a widely-respected state officials’ group,” Behm wrote in a blog post. He also cautioned that, “adverse legislation can get as widely distributed around the country as good legislation.”

Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Lena Taylor, famous for her role in the winter 2011 “Fab 14” (often also referred to as The Heroic Wisconsin 14) Democratic Party officials’ exodus from the state in protest of the then- proposed and now enacted anti-union legislation, said that the bipartisan nature of SSL makes it more respected than ALEC’s model bills, and, therefore, potentially more easily adopted.

“It’s known that Republicans and Democrats have worked together to create what you have,” Taylor explained. “There are experts that can help you to navigate the process of explaining it to individuals and helping to make sure its implementation happens appropriately, so to say, in your state.”

Virtual Charter Schools

As a 2007 graduate of CSG Midwest’s leadership training program, the Bowhay Institute for Legislative Leadership Development (BILLD), a corporate-financed training, which, amongst other things, promotes the charter school agenda, Taylor introduced a bill to the Wisconsin Senate in 2008 promoting, you guessed it, virtual charter schools. Later, the bill was adopted as a CSG model and has since passed in Indiana, Mississippi, North Carolina and other states.

K12 Inc., the nation’s largest supplier of online K-12 educational platforms, has opened a school in Wisconsin as a direct result of the passage of Taylor’s bill. CMD has linked a similar ALEC model bill to K12 Inc.

Until now, the virtual charter school agenda has been linked exclusively to ALEC, though this is far from the case. It is common to see corporations and special interests groups use both CSG and ALEC to promote their agenda – a two-pronged attack, if you will.

Guns

The National Rifle Association (NRA), the most powerful lobbying force in the United Statess, is now notorious for its role in the promotion of ALEC’s Castle Doctrine bill, which codified the conditions that helped lead to the murder of Trayvon Martin in February 2012. A little-known fact is that the NRA also played a role in promoting a slightly tamer – and much less controversial – pro-gun model through CSG.

According to a 2010 Associated Press report, the NRA-endorsed CSG model, titled “Preserving Right to Keep and Bear Arms in Motor Vehicles,” includes a measure based on a 2008 Florida law that says employers shall not prohibit workers from storing guns in cars parked in company lots. “The law has also been also been enacted in Arizona, Louisiana and Utah, according to the AP.

Tort Reform

CSG and ALEC have also broken bread over the so-called “tort reform” agenda.

A compilation report by Media Matters for America, as a case in point, shows that Crown Holdings, Inc., a Fortune 500 corporation, is using models promoted through both CSG and ALEC to avoid compensating cancer and mesothelioma victims who were exposed to asbestos by a company it purchased.

The company has already spent more than $700 million on asbestos-related claims and expenses. Supporters claim that the passage of the ALEC/CSG model legislation around the country is “essential as a matter of fundamental business fairness” and job creation. Most recently the model was considered in the Michigan House of Representatives.

ALEC published its asbestos model first in 2003, with CSG following its lead in 2008. That said, there are also examples where the order of publication is reversed.

CSG and its corporate patrons obviously wield much influence in statehouses nationwide. But CSG is not the only Other ALEC.

The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) has been the basis of juxtaposition to ALEC for some, and has been written off as being a different breed than ALEC, an organization that dances to a different tune.

But is it really?

National Conference of State Legislatures: Corporate-Sponsored “Schmoozapalooza”

The NCSL, considered an “instrumentality of the states” by the IRS, has served a “forum for America’s Ideas since 1975.” NCSL plays host to a series of educational conferences and task force meetings, and like its cousin, CSG, it boasts a membership that includes every state-level elected official in the United States.

One article comparing NCSL and ALEC reads, “ALEC may appear on the surface to mimic the bipartisan educational archetype of … NCSL, but ALEC’s corporate governance structure, near total reliance on corporate funding, and strong ties to legislators from predominantly one political party make it distinctly different.”

Yet, the situation is not so cut-and-dry. Yes, NCSL is different from ALEC, but it still a key tool for corporations.

“Schmoozapalooza” in Action

The Seattle Times quoted one lobbyist who described the 2005 NCSL National Summit in Seattle as a “schmoozapalooza,” reporting that there were over twice as many lobbyists as legislators at the event. Over six thousand people signed up for the event, yet only 1,300 of them were politicians, the rest being “lobbyists or people representing businesses, labor unions and other interest groups,” according to The Times.

Corporations spent a lump sum of $1.3 million on the 2005 summit, including paying for politicians and lobbyists to attend “a (Seattle) Mariners game (a $142,000 expense, with the wine alone costing $12,000 for the day) and a fully catered Washington Extravaganza at Seattle Center (a $402,800 expense).” Boeing, Microsoft and the Gates Foundation chipped in $100,000 apiece to take part in the fun.

Summit speakers included Bill Gates and 2004 Democratic Party presidential candidate, US Sen. John Kerry (D-Massachusetts).

The Washington legislature went so far as to eviscerate its state ethics laws in preparation for the “schmoozapalooza.”

“To help cover the convention’s entertainment costs, the legislature two years ago approved an exemption in the state ethics law allowing lawmakers to solicit unlimited contributions from businesses and special interests,” explained The Times.

The most damning evidence of NCSL’s shenanigans comes from an October 2010 report from ABC News’ “Nightline” on the July 2010 NCSL Legislative Summit, which took place in Louisville, Kentucky.

NCSL – due to ABC’s reporting – was the inspiration for a broader US Department of Justice (DOJ) investigation on corruption in state politics. “Nightline” went so far as to describe state governments as the new “ground zero of influence peddling” for corporate lobbyists, using NCSL as a case in point.

Some of the investigative highlights of the “Nightline” report:

• Golfing: One legislator, Alabama Democrat Rep. Artis J. McCampbell, out on the golf links with lobbyists from the gaming industry and, ironically, skipping an NCSL ethics class, threatened to beat the journalist covering the outing with one of his golf clubs. “Look,” he told the journalist, “if you don’t want me to take this to you, then leave, leave, leave, leave.” Other politicians on the scene included Alabama Democrat Sen. Bobby Singleton, and Alabama Democrat Rep. Oliver Robinson and Republican Rep. Harry Shriver, according to The Huntsville Times.
• Groping: At one of the many parties hosted by the conference, Puerto Rico lawmaker Jorge Navarro Suarez attempted to “grope and kiss” a “Nightline”journalist on the job.
• Dancing, drinking and horse-race extravaganzas: “Nightline” describes the scene best: “Corporate sponsors and lobbyists helped foot the bill for an extravagant river-front party featuring Kentucky barbecue, private dancing on the deck of the steamer Belle of Louisville, and live music … all invitation only.

It continued, “Later in the week, lawmakers were invited to Churchill Downs, where they were treated to private thoroughbred races, barrels of free bourbon, platters of tenderloin and prime rib, and the chance to win free access to a 2011 Kentucky Derby box.”

“There’s one thing you can say about Louisville, Kentucky,” said Kentucky House Speaker, Democratic Rep. Gregory D. Stumbo of the scene. “They know how to party.”

Bankrolled by Corporate Largesse

Though NCSL is primarily supported by public dollars through state dues payments – over $10 million in taxpayer money went toward NCSL in fiscal year 2011 – it also maintains a corporate-funded foundation, with sponsorship levels ranging from $7,500-$25,000.

NCSL Foundation had enjoyed a budget of $1.7 to $1.9 million for the past three years, according to its IRS 990 forms. A quick glance at the sponsorship list shows many of the largest multinational corporations in the world. By way of this tax-deductible route, corporate sponsors gain access to the conferences and task forces while funneling money into select NCSL programs, as well.

In 2011, upon his fifth re-election to the NCSL Foundation’s board of directors, corporate stealth lobbyist Behm was recognized for actively promoting “public-private interaction and discussion of major state issues” and bolstering private sector “fundraising efforts.”

“ more important than ever during this day and age of cutbacks because, I’m just telling you, when the states have to cut back on their budgets, NCSL feels definitely feels the pain,” Behm said in an interview.

The private sector has a vested interest in NCSL, which adopts policy position papers used to lobby the federal government on behalf of the states. In general, these policies promote states’ “flexibility” (translated: cuts and privatization) in spending in areas like public higher education, as well as other spheres.

The NCSL Higher-Education Privatization Agenda

A prime example of the push for so-called flexibility ensued in June 2011, when NCSL promoted the privatization efforts of public universities. “There is an important new conversation brewing,” wrote NCSL in an article titled, “Taking the ‘State’ Out of State Universities.”

“Can states continue to afford higher education? How important is it to maintain a public system? Why can’t higher education be run more like a private business?”

NCSL has received over $1 million since 2007 from the Lumina Foundation to push the higher education privatization effort in the states. By contrast, ALEC has received $595,000 since 2008 from Lumina, all according to Lumina’s web site’s section on grants.

The funding stream behind Lumina’s existence speaks volumes about the higher education agenda it is pushing. “Lumina Foundation is a conversion foundation created in mid-2000 as USA Group, Inc., the nation’s largest private guarantor and administrator of education loans, sold most of its operating assets to Sallie Mae,” explains Lumina on its web site.

Sallie Mae, lo and behold, gave nearly $21 billion dollars in student loans in fiscal year 2009, feasting on skyrocketing student tuition fees, which are directly linked to the “flexibility” efforts the foundation Sallie Mae bankrolls is pushing through NCSL (and ALEC).

In the meantime, scores of students are defaulting on these student loans.

Corporate-Funded Tutelage Academy: State Legislative Leaders Foundation

Though not directly responsible for any policy positions, per se, the State Legislative Leaders Foundation (SLLF), with an annual budget in the $2.5 to $3 million range, can best be described as a corporate-funded tutelage academy for majority and minority state-level legislative leaders nationwide. The organization’s bipartisan board of directors consists of 32 legislators: 16 Democrats and 16 Republicans.

SLLF’s frequently-asked-questions section says that it is a “nonprofit, nonpartisan organization established in 1972 for the express purpose of providing our nation’s state legislative leaders with information on critical public policy issues and aspects of leadership.”

Further, it emphasizes that it does not accept public funding or members dues, and that all of its funding, without exception, comes from “contributions from the private sector, registration fees, and grants and contracts with governmental agencies and philanthropic foundations.”

The SLLF Advisory Council consists of scores of multinational corporations.

Tutelage Academy in Action

On an annual basis, SLLF hosts the Emerging Leaders Program (ELP), sponsored by companies like Altria, Comcast, GlaxoSmithKline and Walmart, among others.

ELP is described by SLLF as “designed for those men and women who are judged by their peers to be likely future leaders in their state. For three days, more than 50 of these potential leaders convene for a series of intense interactive and often provocative discussions led by a distinguished University of Virginia, Darden (Business) School faculty member.”

SLLF also hosts several other leadership forums on an annual basis. Like all of the Other ALECs highlighted in this article, the corporate-funded tutelage academy aspect is an often overlooked but vital part of these organizations’ missions.

The Big Picture

ALEC and its Republican Party-allied base are responsible for a plentitude of legislation that has passed in the 50 statehouses.

At this juncture, however, and contrary to the public narrative offered so far, ALEC’s hyperconservative agenda actually is beginning to diverge in some key ways from the corporate agenda. It has become, to use the words of The Washington Post, a “liability” for big business.

ALEC’s changing position was proven by the over a dozen corporations that withdrew their support from the group in recent weeks, citing its extreme agenda. “Our involvement with ALEC was focused on efforts to oppose discriminatory food and beverage taxes, not on issues that have no direct bearing on our business,” read Coca-Cola’s statement on the issue.

Other notables divesting from ALEC thus far include Kraft, Reed Elsevier, Intuit, McDonald’s and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Many of touted these corporate dumpings as a victory, yet the corporations that bankroll ALEC continue to engage in stealth lobbying through CSG, NCSL and SLLF (and ALEC in most cases, for that matter).

The citizen’s lobbying group Common Cause filed a lawsuit challenging ALEC’s tax-exempt status, saying that it is an organization that lobbies in direct violation of its 501(c)(3) legal status. Not mentioned in the suit are 501(c)(3)’s like CSG, NCSL and SLLF, which engage in many identical lobbying practices under the auspices of bipartisan neutrality.

The Glue That Binds “The Other ALECs” Together

The next installment of “The Other ALECs” will reveal the glue connecting all of them, namely, stealth lobbyists working at Washington DC-based firms. These firms wed corporate clients to state-level legislators nationwide.

Also highlighted will be a revolving door arrangement between dozens of politicians and lobbyists who also have leadership positions in a number of the Other ALECs.

The fun, as they say, has only just begun.

via truth-out.org

The Secure Communities deportation program is especially problematic in the Bronx, where discriminatory policing practices such as stop-and-frisk and racially biased marijuana possession arrests have already lead to thousands of unlawful arrests each year.  [read more →]]]> The Bronx Defenders re-affirmed today its long-standing opposition to the activation of the Secure Communities program in New York. Under Secure Communities, individuals may be deported as a result of any arrest, even for the most minor offense, and regardless of whether they are convicted.

The Secure Communities deportation program is especially problematic in the Bronx, where discriminatory policing practices such as stop-and-frisk and racially biased marijuana possession arrests have already lead to thousands of unlawful arrests each year. By funneling non-citizens into deportation proceedings without due process or representation, Secure Communities raises the stakes considerably. Together, these policies make communities less safe by creating environments of fear and distrust of law enforcement, and unfairly targeting immigrant groups.

The Bronx is a borough of immigrants, and over 30% of residents are foreign-born according to the last U.S. Census. Robin Steinberg, Executive Director of The Bronx Defenders, stated, “Given the over-policing and sheer number of arrests within the borough and the immigrant make-up of the community, our clients and their families will be especially hard-hit by Secure Communities. We call for the immediate suspension of the program. In the meantime, The Bronx Defenders remains committed to fiercely fighting for all of our clients’ rights, including their ability to remain in the country with their families.”

Under current policing practices in the Bronx, most arrests by the NYPD are for non-violent minor misdemeanor offenses. Nearly all of these arrests result in dismissals or non-criminal convictions that do not carry any jail sentence.

Jennifer Friedman, Supervising Immigration Attorney at The Bronx Defenders stated, “Under Secure Communities, identification by ICE and subsequent deportation are triggered by any encounter with law enforcement, including any arrest, even a traffic violation, and regardless of whether or not there is a conviction. This is an extreme and draconian system that doesn’t leave room for discretionary determinations. Secure Communities will not make the Bronx community secure; to the contrary, it will hurt the community by eroding trust in law enforcement, tearing families apart, and shattering lives.“

The Bronx Defenders is part of the “Stop S-Comm NY” Coalition, a diverse group of federal and state lawmakers, immigrants and advocates seeking to end Secure Communities in New York and around the country.

via bronxdefenders.org

May 15th Global Day of Action against the financial institutions that has caused the global crisis, and in solidarity with #BARCELONA #15M and All Occupiers Worldwide.

Hundreds rallied in New York throughout midtown Manhattan as part of the Occupy Wall Street’s day of action – protesting America’s banks and their corporate policies. Part of what they described as a global protest against international financial crimes.

Tuesday’s demonstrators  [read more →]]]>

May 15th Global Day of Action against the financial institutions that has caused the global crisis, and in solidarity with #BARCELONA #15M and All Occupiers Worldwide.

Occupy Wall Street rally as day of action

Tuesday’s demonstrators took a walking tour past the corporate offices of Citi Group, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase and Bank of America.

Protestors are encouraging each other and the general public to take their money out of America’s biggest banks. Many here feel the corporate financial institutions are responsible for the current economic crisis and should be rewarded foe creating the mess in the first place.

Just this week a top Executive at JP Morgan Chase was forced into retirement after it was learned her investment gambles cost the company and its customers more than 2 billion dollars.

As an alternative to banking at large corporate banks some here are promoting smaller institutions called community credit unions The groups converged in Times Square where they continued to shout their demands for more accountability by banks.

Accountability to the people whose money helps these companies earns billions of dollars a year.

via presstv.ir

Friday, May 18 – 5:15 pm. – Gather Main Entrance at 2853 Southern Blvd, Bronx, NY.At 6:00 pm.   Archbishop Timothy Dolan will be presenting the Fordham Baccalaureate Mass for the Fordham University Commencement for the Class of 2012. Urge Archbishop Dolan to speak out against the drones controlled out of Hancock Air Base in Syracuse, NY, which is part of his eccelesiastical province.

 Saturday, May 19 – 9:15  [read more →]]]> Stop the Drone War Weekend @ Fordham & Radio City

Friday, May 18 – 5:15 pm. – Gather Main Entrance at 2853 Southern Blvd, Bronx, NY.At 6:00 pm.   Archbishop Timothy Dolan will be presenting the Fordham Baccalaureate Mass for the Fordham University Commencement for the Class of 2012. Urge Archbishop Dolan to speak out against the drones controlled out of Hancock Air Base in Syracuse, NY, which is part of his eccelesiastical province.

October 15, 2011: The movement goes global.

Today is the one year anniversary of the 15-M movement in Spain, which continues to mobilize hundreds of thousands of people and inspire the world. The following text is an excerpt from 15-M: What Is The Plan? orginally published on TakeTheSquare.net in March. It is republished in part to give our readers a better understanding of the 15-M movement, who we are, what our goals  [read more →]]]>

15-M One Year Later

October 15, 2011: The movement goes global.

Today is the one year anniversary of the 15-M movement in Spain, which continues to mobilize hundreds of thousands of people and inspire the world. The following text is an excerpt from 15-M: What Is The Plan? orginally published on TakeTheSquare.net in March. It is republished in part to give our readers a better understanding of the 15-M movement, who we are, what our goals and tactics are, and what we are fighting for.

Today is also a day of action against the banks that caused the global crisis and the culmination of the Another NYC Is Possible Week of Actions Against Budget Cuts And Austerity. Join us in solidarity with the indignad@s for a mass rally at Times Square at 6pm!

1.1: Arab Spring: One goal, One strategy

The Arab Spring was sparked by the first protests that occurred in Tunisia on 18 December 2010 following Mohamed Bouazizi‘s self-immolation in protest of police corruption and ill treatment. With the success of the protests in Tunisia, a wave of unrest sparked by the Tunisian “Burning Man” struck Algeria, Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Yemen, then spread to other Arab countries. Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali fled to Saudi Arabia on 14 January following the Tunisian revolution protests. In Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak resigned on 11 February 2011 after 18 days of massive protests, ending his 30-year presidency.

A major slogan of the demonstrators in the Arab world has been “ash-shab yurid isqat an-nizam” (“the people want to bring down the regime”) and they did it in Tunisia and Egypt with a sustained campaign of “non-stop protest” involving strikes, demonstrations, marches, occupations…

Note:
The Icelandic rejection of the debt and the Greek mobilizations against austerity plans, as well as the surge of new technologies with the uprising of movements such as Anonymous, Zeitgeist, Wikileaks, Democracy Now, Yes Men, amongst others, have also been of great influence to this (r)evolution.

1.2 Real Democracy Now, birth of a new movement

All through the winter of 2010 the collective “Democracia Real Ya!” (DRY), in association with approximately 200 smaller organizations, had been preparing a huge demonstration for real democracy in Spain. The protest movement gained momentum on May 15 with a camping occupation in Madrid’s main square, the Puerta del Sol, spreading to squares in 57 other major and smaller cities in Spain, and then to Spanish embassies all around the world.

Via its Spanish server tomalaplaza and its international version Takethesquare, the re-baptized 15M movement (also called “indignados” by the media) became a transnational movement. It exploded in Greece ten days later (on May 25) and while taking place, with lesser intensity, in France, Italy, Portugal and Ireland with a culmination point on June 19 when “the outraged” took the street in hundreds of cities around the world in support of this first global day (3.000.000 just in Spain).

In opposition to the Arab spring, 15M doesn’t fight towards ending a regime but has a holistic objective, it demands a Real Democracy, not just a revolution but an Evolution. The organization denounces the way big businesses and banks dominate the political and economical sphere and aims to propose a series of solutions to these problems through grassroots participatory democracy, which is based on people’s assemblies and consensus decision making. It maintains no affiliation with any political party or labor union and has not appointed any single leader and is unwilling to join any of the existing political bodies. It also promotes non-violent protesting.

1.3 15O Road to dignity, Occupy the world

On mid June 2011, Takethesquare network and the international DRY platform started to work together on a global day for October 15 with a first objective of exporting the movement (assemblies and possibly camps) to a maximum of cities around the world. The first international meeting took place in Lisbon on the 10 and 11 of July with participants from Iceland, Greece, Spain, Italy, etc. Israel social justice protest rose up on July 14 with hundreds of thousands of people mobilized in the different protest camps all around the country. Around this time 8 marches began walking, from different areas of Spain, towards Madrid, starting people’s assemblies in every village they crossed, while organizing the second international meeting (a week-long social forum) which would be held on July 23 in their destination.

After this, a new march left Madrid to walk to Brussels, and was quickly joined by six other European itinerant protests (coming from Barcelona, Saragossa, Toulouse, Sicily, Berlin and Amsterdam). They stopped in Paris on September 17 for the Global Anti-Bankster Day, (thought of as a means to test the international coordination before the 15O), when actions like the occupation of stock markets and central banks were taken against the financial dictatorship in a number of cities such as Barcelona, Athens, Tel Aviv, New York and Mexico; and the third international meeting (AgoraParis) was held. In September the first Hub meeting in Barcelona took place. Hubs meetings are working areas focused on a concrete project but open to a maximum of collectives, this one in particular being focused on the coordination of the 15O Global Day.

The fourth international meeting (AgoraBrussels) was held from the 8 of October until the 15O Global Day, when millions of people took to the streets in almost 1000 cities around the world, setting up General Assemblies and Occupations. Although incomparable in their intensity to Tunisia, Egypt, Spain, Greece and Israel, the actions of 15O still were present in all the continents and in 82 countries.

Note:
Under the strong cultural and mass-media influence of New York, movements in a lot of cities changed their name to “Occupy” and focused their action in denouncing the “1%” with anti-capitalist actions like the 5th. of November Bank Transfer Day, the RobinHood Tax March or the G20 counter summit and the occupation of other stock markets and banks in London, Zurich, Frankfurt…

2/ PRINCIPLES AND DEMANDS, AIMS OF THE MOVEMENT

2.1 Who are we at a local and global level?

Regarding our background we can conclude that we are:

a) Non-stop protests maintaining occupations, strikes, direct actions, information campaigns, day after day to apply real pressure on institutions (political, financial, military, environmental…) we want to reform or rebuild.

b) Communities including camps, squats, itinerant walkers, neighborhoods, eco-villages, co-operatives and alternative projects… self-managed by what we all recognize as the only real democratic process (horizontal, open to everybody, non-partisan, transparent, non-violent, inclusive…) through the General Assembly.

c) Working groups of people co-operating on specific projects (communication, direct action, outreach, international, economy…)

2.2 What do we want at a local and global level?

The first and maybe only thing we all want is for power to be given back to the people, by joint-decision making. Because since the beginning of this movement we have always practiced and improved on this process, we now know what real democracy looks like and will only recognize a way of organization through self-management.

As a movement, we want to expand this process to a maximum of places around the world (15O plan or geographic expansion), creating and connecting a maximum of communities that work with it. We all agree that our methodology of assembly/consensus is the way to organize our communities and all the institutions that rule our lives (political, economical, educational, environmental…). Although there is a group who want to reform these institutions and make them adopt our process and another group who wish to create their own institutions from scratch, all the members of our movement want and recognize the same process (15M plan or systematic expansion).

2.3 What are our next concrete objectives at a local and global level?

a) Generalization of the non-stop protests:

A first phase of local convergence of struggles or “outreach” missions, (will) give way to the coordination of fights towards a sustained and general action which can be global.

Therefore, our direct action groups must firstly generalize the actions and, in collaboration with outreach groups, give a maximum of different sectors of the population (farmers, students, immigrants, workers, retired…) the tools to coordinate direct actions.

b) Generalization of the communities:

A first phase of linking/supporting/creating local co-operatives (will) give way to the coordination of those alternative projects in holistic co-operatives which can, in turn, be global or regional.

Therefore, our different public services and alternative projects have to collaborate in holistic platforms to answer to the needs of our communities (education, health, food, transport, culture…)

via occupywallst.org

Join T.A. and the Bronx Helpers as we celebrate a little victory that’s going to make a Bronx neighborhood a whole lot safer. At this kid-friendly block party in the Bronx, we’ll play in the street  [read more →]]]> For two years, T.A. has been helping a group of young people in the Bronx fight for a safer intersection. After thousands of signatures in support of traffic calming for 172nd Street and Townsend Avenue in the Mount Eden neighborhood of the Bronx, they won!

Join T.A. and the Bronx Helpers as we celebrate a little victory that’s going to make a Bronx neighborhood a whole lot safer. At this kid-friendly block party in the Bronx, we’ll play in the street and talk about how it only takes a little community organizing to make change in any New York City neighborhood. Come out for the party and get inspired about how you can change your block.

Bronx Helpers Victory Block Party
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
5:30 – 7 pm
Townsend Avenue between 171st and 172nd Street
Bronx

No city better epitomizes the escalating conflict between journalists — both professional and citizen — than New York, where  [read more →]]]> Since September, police have arrested dozens of journalists and activists around the country for the “crime” of trying to document political protests in public spaces. People using smartphones and mobile devices are changing the way we record and share breaking news. In return, police have targeted, harassed, and in many cases, arrested those trying to capture images and video of public events.

No city better epitomizes the escalating conflict between journalists — both professional and citizen — than New York, where more than 30 people have been arrested while reporting on Occupy Wall Street. This conflict has now sparked a major lawsuit that brings together an odd coalition of plaintiffs including five elected officials, professional and citizen journalists, and Occupy Wall Street activists, who are suing the city alleging that the NYPD is out of control. The federal court suit was announced the day before massive May 1 protests marked the next stage of Occupy Wall Street around the country. The details of the suit, Rodriguez v. Winski, provide a stark look at how clashes between police and the public are threatening critical freedoms, just as new technology is encouraging more people than ever to commit acts of journalism.

America’s slipping press freedom rank

I have documented more than 75 arrests across the country since the Occupy Wall Street movement began. It has gotten so bad that America’s global press freedom ranking has dropped to a historic low, according to two separate surveys.

In recognition of World Press Freedom Day on May 3, Freedom House, an international human rights organization, released its 2012 press freedom rankings, noting that the United States had dropped to No. 22 in the world. Earlier this year, Reporters Without Borders revealed that the U.S. had plummeted to No. 47 in its press freedom index. Both organizations point to the ongoing assaults and arrests of journalists at Occupy protests as a key factor in the United States’ slipping rank.

As the media landscape changes, new First Amendment conflicts are emerging on city streets and in the halls of power. However, the First Amendment doesn’t just apply to journalists, nor to the risks associated with flexing your First Amendment rights. Police across the U.S. continue to crack down on bystanders using their phones to record police in public. In early May, for example, two Mississippi teenagers were arrested for using their phones to record police investigating a shooting at their apartment building. Even though the 19-year-olds were recording police activity in a public place, officers stormed into their apartment, handcuffed them, and seized the cell phone.

protecting the first amendment for all

Image by Patrick Finney via DanLawton.com

We cannot take a narrow view of the First Amendment when technology is expanding our engagement with media as consumers and creators. With that in mind, Free Press and a coalition of free speech and digital rights groups are standing up for the millions who want the freedom to document events in public spaces. The group, including Access, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Free Press, the National Press Photographers Association, the New America Foundation, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Reporters Without Borders and Witness, sent a letter urging Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department to defend our “right to record.”

Whether you’re a credentialed journalist, a protester, or a bystander with a smartphone, you are guaranteed freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of access to information. Your right to document public events must also be protected.

In the letter delivered to Holder, the groups wrote:

The right to record is an essential component of our rights at a time when so many of those witnessing public protests carry networked, camera-ready devices such as smartphones. Continuous access to the open Internet and social media — over both wired and wireless networks — is also essential.

Unfortunately, not everyone sees it this way. During the May 1 Occupy protests, at least three journalists were arrested and many more reported rough treatment at the hands of local police. This isn’t an issue specific to one city or one group of protests. This is a national problem that is threatening to undermine one of our core freedoms. Conflicts like this are escalating in cities large and small, and all too often, the First Amendment is caught in the middle.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has used World Press Freedom Day to remind journalists and media makers that they must also be advocates for everyone’s freedoms. “On World Press Freedom Day — and every day — we must speak out whenever we see or experience the press being stifled,” wrote Executive Director Lucy Dalglish.

What’s becoming increasingly clear, is that the public also has a critical role to play. It is essential for journalists and the public to work together to defend our shared rights and protect our shared freedoms.

via pbs.org