Dems to water down EFCA and betray workers

[From: www.counterpunch.org] [The following article documents the fact that Washington lobbyists with strong connections to the Democratic Party are busily trying to persuade Congress *not* to pass the pro-union Employee Free Choice Act. This is another proof that the Democrats constantly *betray* those who put them in office, just as they did in 2007-2008, by voting hundreds of billions of dollars to continue Bush's endless wars in the Middle East, after the US electorate had handed them, the Democrats, both Houses of Congress, with a single mandate, to extricate the US from conflicts in the Middle East, just as Obama did, starting *two days* after his inauguration, when he began to expand US attacks on Pakistan, the next big theater of action in the everlasting US wars in Mideast, and just as Bill Clinton did, in the space between his election in 1992 and his inauguration, the time when Wall Street lawyer Robert Rubin persuaded Clinton to turn his back on the campaign slogan, "Putting people first," by putting the big financial interests in first place, as documented in Robert Pollin's book, "Contours of Descent." No one will ever lose money by betting that the Democrats are going to betray their working-class supporters. -- Yosef M]

April 24-26, 2009

The Big Betrayal
Democratic Lobbyists Key to Fight Against Employee Free Choice Act
By CHRIS KROMM

If you missed, Tom Frank had a provocative column in the Wall Street Journal yesterday about the likely demise of the Employee Free Choice Act -- the bill that labor has made its #1 priority for the new era of Obama and Democratic politics.

First, it's important to note the EFCA isn't dead yet. Labor has vowed it will keep fighting, and as Roll Call reports they were in full force during the recent Congressional recess:

Union organizers held more than 400 grass-roots events, sent more than 27,000 letters to Members of Congress and put in nearly 100,000 calls supporting EFCA. Additionally, the unions spent more than $1 million on two TV ads over the recess, AFL-CIO spokeswoman Amaya Smith said.

But after the defections of key Senators like Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln -- and even pro-labor stalwarts like Ohio's Sherrod Brown (D) predicting it will be watered down -- Frank observes that the EFCA as we know it won't pass:

After massive lobbying both by labor and by business, it appears that the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which, as it now stands, would allow workers to organize in many cases merely by signing cards instead of holding elections, will not have the 60 votes required to get past a Republican filibuster in the Senate.

Even Andy Stern of the Change to Win labor federation is signaling compromise is on the horizon given the math.

But it's important to step back a moment and ask how, after the rush of hope that surrounded the victory of Obama and Congressional Democrats -- backed by millions in labor contributions -- did we get to this point?

Many have pointed to the well-financed corporate opposition to the act -- a war chest which, among other things, has been used to fund dubious research warning that the labor bill would cost "thousands of jobs."

But Frank points to an important and under-reported piece of the story -- lobbying firms with strong ties to Democrats who are helping deep-six labor's agenda. After asking why Democrats seem treat labor like an ATM machine for campaign cash, only to turn their backs on them in Congress, Frank offers these devastating set of facts:

[M]aybe it's just the money. Consider the lineup of lobbyists that retail giant Wal-Mart has assembled to make its case against EFCA. According to lobbying disclosure forms filed with the House and Senate we find that Wal-Mart's lobbyists include Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti (which employs former presidential candidate John Kerry's liaison to Congress during the 2004 campaign), a former legislative director for Rahm Emanuel, and a former assistant to Arkansas Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln.

Wal-Mart has also secured, according lobbying disclosure forms filed with Congress, the services of Tony Podesta, of the Podesta Group, one of the hottest lobby shops in Democratic D.C. Mr. Podesta is joined in pushing Wal-Mart's views on EFCA by a former assistant to Democrat Mark Pryor, the other senator from Arkansas. [FS note: The firm was co-founded with John Podesta, a lead Obama advisor, although he's no longer listed on the group's manifest.]

The real standout on Wal-Mart's labor-issues roster, though, is D+P Creative Strategies, which wears its liberalism as proudly as last week's tax protestors did their three-cornered hats. According to its Web site, D+P "highlights partnership, shared benefits, and a commitment to advancing social justice goals." The disclosure form for its Wal-Mart EFCA activities lists a former assistant to Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. The bio of its principal, Ingrid Duran, who is also listed as a Wal-Mart lobbyist, declares that the firm's mission is "to increase the role of corporate, legislative and philanthropic efforts in addressing the concerns of Latinos, women, and gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) communities."

There's much more evidence of the ties between these firms to the Democrats. For example, this month the Podesta Group -- which proudly boasts [pdf] of its special access in the new Democratic administration -- announced the addition of six new principals to their lobbying army. Half have solid Democratic resumes.

The case of the former aide to Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) -- Walter Pryor (no relation) -- now lobbying against the EFCA for Wal-Mart is especially bizarre. As Wal-Mart Watch pointed out last month, Walter Pryor's lobbying filing for Wal-Mart lists him as still being an aid to Sen. Pryor -- which is impossible, because legislative aides aren't allowed to lobby.

Melhman & Co. started out as a mostly GOP shop, but ever since 2006 has been cultivating its Democratic Party connections.

Labor has mobilized people and money in unprecedented amounts to get the Employee Free Choice Act passed. But at the end of the day, the money and connections of the corporate opposition -- including Democratic lobbyists -- may carry the day.

[* * *]

Chris Kromm is director the Institute for Southern Studies and publisher of Facing South, where this article originally appeared.

IMF: Advanced economies will shrink by "unprecedented" 3.8% in 2009

[From: www.australia.to Story written by Wayne Swan; edited for length]

IMF World Economic Outlook April 2009:

["the deepest global recession since the Great Depression," "a longer, deeper global recession," "The IMF expects every advanced economy except Cyprus to contract in 2009." " ... there is a real danger that the global economy will continue to deteriorate for a protracted period."]

In its latest World Economic Outlook (WEO) released overnight, the IMF paints a bleak outlook for the global economy, and particularly for advanced economies, which are expected to contract by an unprecedented 3.8 per cent in 2009.

The IMF notes that "the global economy is in a severe recession inflicted by a massive financial crisis and acute loss of confidence". It expects the global economy to contract by 1.3 per cent in 2009.

The IMF notes that "by any measure, this downturn represents by far the deepest global recession since the Great Depression"....

The IMF now envisages financial market stabilisation to take longer than previously expected and cautions that even once the crisis is over, growth may take some time to recover.

Against this backdrop, the IMF now expects a longer, deeper global recession. This latest report contains the fifth downgrade of the IMF's global growth forecasts in just over six months, illustrating just how rapidly the global economy has deteriorated....

Deep recessions are forecast for all major advanced economies. The United States is expected to contract by 2.8 per cent in 2009, the euro area by 4.2 per cent, the UK by 4.1 per cent and Japan by 6.2 per cent. The IMF expects every advanced economy except Cyprus to contract in 2009....

The IMF expects the global economy will recover gradually in 2010. However, it cautions that recovery will only be achieved if authorities continue efforts to heal the financial sector, while continuing to support demand with monetary and fiscal easing. The IMF warns that there is a real danger that the global economy will continue to deteriorate for a protracted period.

The global recession has severely eroded government budgets around the world, with budget deficits for major advanced economies expected to reach 10½ per cent in 2009....

Cancel the prohibition against US residents traveling to Cuba, Robert Kennedy's daughter asks

[Translated from http://www.aporrea.org/]

Cancel the prohibition against US residents traveling to Cuba, Robert Kennedy's daughter asks
By David Brooks in La Jornada 24/04/09


New York, April 23: At the end of 1963, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy sought to cancel the prohibition on travel to Cuba, and now his daughter, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, has said that President Barack Obama should consider this and support legislative initiatives to permit everyone in the US freely to travel to Cuba.

In official documents declassified by the National Security Archive research center, it is recorded that on December 12, 1963, less than a month after the assassaination of John F. Kennedy, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy sent a message to Secretary of State Dean Rusk, urging that regulations prohibiting travel by US residents to Cuba, be withdrawn.... He was trying to reverse the prohibition on travel imposed by his brother's administration.

Robert Kennedy argued that the prohibition violated US freedoms. According to the document, he asserted that the current restrictions on travel are inconsistent with traditional freedoms in the US.

But that position did not win the argument inside the administration of Lyndon B. Johnson; the State Department expressed the opinion that suspending the restrictions would be perceived as a weakening of the policy towards Cuba that formed part of a common effort by the United States and other republics of the Americas to isolate Cuba. The official documents can be consulted at http://www.nsarchive.org/

In an opinion piece by Kathleen Kennedy published today in the Washington Post, Robert Kennedy's daughter expresses her wish that her father's position should be adopted by Barack Obama's administration, and that it should be the position promoted by Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr., while the Obama administration considers its next step with Cuba, which should be to move beyond allowing only Cuban-Americans to travel freely to the island and should deal with the rights of all US residents, most of whom are not allowed to go to Cuba.

Kathleen Kennedy writes that, as Obama learned at last weekend's Summit, Latin American leaders adopted a common message on Cuba: now is the moment to normalize relations with Havana ... By continuing to try to isolate Cuba, they essentially said to Obama, Washington has only succeeded in isolating itself.

Thus, the niece of the President who tried to invade and overthrow the Cuban revolutionary government and impose the blockade, is joining a constantly growing chorus in favor of reversing those policies established fifty years ago.

6 years in prison for airing Hezbollah TV in NYC!

[From: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jp299Ir4bFhwRyM_7lpd_zLEU1EgD97OF46G1]
[Bye-bye, First Amendment! ]

6 years in prison for airing Hezbollah TV in NYC
By LARRY NEUMEISTER – 4 hours ago

NEW YORK (AP) — A Pakistani immigrant described by prosecutors as "Hezbollah's man in New York City" was sentenced Thursday to nearly six years in prison for airing the militant group's television station.

U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman handed down a sentence of five years and nine months to Javed Iqbal, who had pleaded guilty in December to providing aid to a terrorist organization.

Iqbal, 45, admitted as part of a plea agreement that he used satellite dishes on his Staten Island home to distribute broadcasts of Al Manar, the TV station of the Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which has been fighting Israel since the early 1980s and has been branded by the U.S. government as a terrorist group.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Snyder said Iqbal recruited Al Manar, even traveling to "the belly of the beast, South Beirut," to meet with its general manager.

"He was, in a very real sense, Hezbollah's man in New York City," Snyder said.

Snyder said Iqbal bought special satellite equipment to allow Al Manar to provide 24-hour programming from November 2005 through May 2006 so Hezbollah could use it to recruit followers and suicide bombers. Prosecutors said Iqbal's business was paid $28,000 monthly for at least five months for airing the station to its North American customers.

Iqbal's lawyer, Josh Dratel, said his client didn't intend to aid Hezbollah as he tried to build his Brooklyn-based satellite television company, HDTV Limited.

Dratel called the airing of Al Manar "one discreet and narrow aspect" of an otherwise legitimate broadcasting company that also aired Christian programming, adult entertainment, a Jamaican channel and a gay and lesbian channel.

Before Iqbal was sentenced, he had Dratel read aloud a statement he had written. The statement said that he did not make any profit by airing Al Manar and that the resulting criminal charges had "hurt me financially, emotionally and physically."

It asked for leniency from the judge.

In court papers, Dratel argued that Iqbal does not possess any ideology sympathetic to terrorism or other political doctrine, and he noted that one of HDTV's partners was a city police officer.

"He is a businessman and sought to provide services he thought would generate profits," Dratel wrote.

Iqbal, who has lived in the U.S. for more than 20 years, will most likely be deported once he has completed his prison sentence, Dratel said. Iqbal, a former car mechanic, is married with five children and a sixth child due in July.

The August 2006 arrest of Iqbal initially sparked a First Amendment battle, with claims by his lawyers that he was no different from major news companies and Internet providers, some of which permit live streaming broadcasts of Al Manar. But the arguments were rejected by the court, and there was no mention of the First Amendment at the sentencing.

Hezbollah recently has taken a moderate tone before Lebanon's June 7 parliamentary elections

Just like Bush, Obama will *not* prosecute CIA torturers

[From news.antiwar.com]

Emanuel: Obama Won’t Prosecute Officials Over Interrogations
Policy Makers Apparently Off the Hook for Harsh Treatment of Suspects
by Jason Ditz, April 19, 2009 [Sunday]

Speaking today on ABC’s “This Week” program, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said that President Barack Obama has not only no intention of prosecuting individual interrogators for following guidance of dubious legality regarding interrogations, but that policymakers and lawyers involved in drafting the guidance in the first place won’t face prosecution either.

“It’s not a time to use our energy and our time in looking back and any sense of anger and retribution,” Emanuel insisted, saying that the practices laid out in the released torture memos aren’t being used anymore. The White House released the redacted memos last week over the objection of officials from the Bush Administration, insisting there was no legal basis to keep the memos a secret.

The memos from the Bush-era Office of Legal Counsel were released (albeit redacted) Thursday after a long Freedom of Information Act battle between the government and the ACLU. They detailed the Justice Department’s legal advice regarding a shocking array of interrogation methods, from waterboarding to insect-based interrogations.

Bush-era officials and their supporters condemned the release, saying that it would fuel fear of recriminations among interrogators in the future, despite the Obama pledge not to charge any of them for all the laws they broke. However, Obama also was harshly criticized for the pledge, giving de facto immunity to torturers. In the end the president aimed for a middle ground - providing transparency without accountability, which ultimately satisfied virtually no one.

US--71% of us believe the criminal US trade embargo against CUBA should be lifted

[Translated from aporrea.org, Caracas]

71% of US citizens favor lifting the embargo against CUBA
By Telam Published on 4/19/2009

Former US diplomat Wayne Smith maintained that "71% of the citizens of the United States believe that relations with Cuba must be normalized, and the embargo must be lifted." "The opinion polls show that a majority of people in the US, around 71%, believe we should normalize relations and completely lift the embargo," Smith, a civil servant assigned to Havana during the 1959 Cuban Revolution, said. In an interview for the daily paper Página 12, the 76 year old former diplomat asserted that "there is a great deal of support for lifting the embargo against Cuba, but make no mistake, that support will not be reflected in crowds protesting and demonstrating in the streets in favor of Cuba," Smith anticipated. Smith worked with John F. Kennedy as one of his advisors for the region; Jimmy Carter named him to be the number one man in the new US Affairs Office in Havana. Smith recalled that "Cuba did not put restrictions on the trips of US citizens, nor did it block trade with the US," referring to recent decisions by the Barack Obama administration regarding Cuba. "If I know the Cubans a little, I know they will not accept conditions for so little; they never did that for anyone, and they will do it even less for Washington," the former official concluded. Smith warned that "until now we have not seen a change in United States policy towards Cuba," and the Department of State "goes on without speaking with the Cuban Interests Office in Washington and the United States Office in Havana, nor do they have a formal relationship with the Cuban diplomatic service." "The United States' policy towards the island is the same, and, regardless of what they may say in Washington, the ball is still in the United States' court," he related. Smith said US President Barack Obama "promised many changes in the election campaign, but I have the feeling that we won't see them." However, " it must not be forgotten that opposition to the blockade is growing stronger" in the US. In this connection, he reported that "the opinion polls show that the majority of those in the US, around 71%, believe we should normalize relations and completely lift the embargo." Finally, the former diplomat indicated that "changes from the United States could push Cuba a little from the pure socialist system, but it does not have that now," and he remarked that "beyond the adjustments that must take place, I believe the Cuban government is reasonably prepared to control the changes."

US--Average CEO made $10.4 million in 2008

[From: http://www.mediamouse.org/]

Average CEO Earned $10.4 Million in 2008

The AFL-CIO has launched its annual "PayWatch" website which reports that the average CEO received $10.4 million in total compensation in 2008.

According to the AFL-CIO: Even as the U.S. economy went into a tailspin, the median salary for CEOs of 200 large corporations increased by 4.5 percent to $1.08 million. On top of that, these corporations keep plying executives with generous freebies, despite the public outcry over private jets and other executive perks.

...the perks for executives rose on average by 12.5 percent in 2008 to $336,248--or nine times the median salary of a full-time worker. Even more appalling is the practice of rewarding executives who drive their companies into the ground.

For example, the site reports that in 2007--the year the financial crisis began to unfold--the top 10 recipients of the federal government's Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) collectively paid their CEOs a combined $242 million in total annual compensation. That averages nearly $25 million per CEO to run companies that might have gone bankrupt if not for billions of dollars in taxpayer assistance.

While CEO pay is down from 2007, it still dramatically outpaces earnings by workers. CEO pay has grown at an astronomical rate since 1980 when the average CEO earned 42 times what the average worker earned. In 2007, that had grown to 344 times.

The AFL-CIO also highlights a number of practices from stock options to retention bonuses that are keeping CEO pay high even as public outrage of CEO pay grows.

All of this is another reminder of why we need reforms like the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) to level the playing field between workers and CEOs. Strong unions and a revitalized labor movement are essential to reversing this dynamic.