[ January 2000 ] [ February 2000 ] [ March 2000 ] [ April 2000 ] [ May 2000 ] [ June 2000 ] [ July 2000 ] [ August 2000 ] [ September 2000 ] [ October 2000 ] [ November 2000 ] [ December 2000 ]

In This Issue:

• In 1999, GAP Inc., the owners of GAP, Old Navy and Banana Republic, earned $1.1 billion in profits off of $11.6 billion in sales. GAP CEO Millard Drexler is one of the best compensated executives in the country, receiving $172.8 million in salary, bonuses and stock options.

• But the corporation refuses to pay its workers a living wage and guarantee they are not facing sweatshop abuses.

• In Central Mexico, workers in Tehuacan make our jeans for 28 cents an hour. Workers say they need just $1.00 an hour to provide for their families.

• Here in the U.S., on the Pacific island of Saipan, the women in GAP sweatshops make only $3.05 an hour and often must pay exorbitant fees just to get their jobs and sign contracts that take away their basic rights.

• Challenged with a lawsuit, more than a dozen companies have settled the suit and promised to stop abuses in Saipan. But the GAP still refuses to make the same guarantee.

Help us to CLOSE THE WAGE GAP. Come to one of the ongoing demonstrations at The GAP, show your solidarity with the Gap 20 defendants by coming to the court hearings, and/or contribute to the Gap 20 legal defense fund.

The Community Alliance is sponsoring a fund raiser for the Gap 20 legal defense fund. The Fresno Premier of GOLDEN LANDS - WORKING HANDS will be shown Friday, November 17 at 7 PM at the Unitarian-Universalist Church, 4144 N. Millbrook, south of Ashlan. The film's producer, Fred Glass will be present, and George "Elfie" Ballis will show the latest installment of our family story/docu-poem about the Gap 20 arrests and legal proceedings. Tickets are $10 each, but nobody will be turned away for lack of money.

More GAP photos can be viewed at
http://www.fresnoalliance.com/home/gaphotos.htm

(back to top)

---

THE STORY OF A MAQUILADORA WORKER

Interview with Omar Gil by David Bacon

NUEVO LAREDO, TAMAULIPAS

I come from Mexico City. My father had a business there, a small bookstore, until I was 11 years old. Then, because of the devaluation of the peso, his store went broke. My parents looked for work in Mexico City, but they couldn't find any, so they decided to come here to the border, to Nuevo Laredo.

We came here looking for a way to subsist. So I went to school on the border. When I finished preparatory school, my plan was to go back to Mexico City to the university, to study physics and mathematics or law. But I couldn't continue my studies because we didn't have the money. I had to go to work.

At first I began taking classes in air conditioning, so that I could get some training for a better job. It wasn't my intention to work full time, but to study and work at the same time. But working in the maquiladoras, it's not really possible to go to school, mainly because of time. Also, the pay is low, and my job is very insecure. Despite all this, I haven't lost hope yet that I'll be able to go back. It's just that I'm not 100% sure anymore. Now there are other factors as well. I don't have any time to rest, and I'm getting physically exhausted. It's very hard. I've been in these factories since I was 19 years old, and now I'm 26. I've gotten more and more worried, because I don't have time for any kind of personal life. I leave work so tired that on the weekends I don't want to even leave the house to go anywhere. I just want to rest. All my personal development has been put on hold so that I can just rest, just so I'll be able to work. I feel like my youth has passed me by.

Back in 1993 I got my first job in a maquiladora, at Delphi Auto Parts. They paid 360 pesos a week (about $40). There was a lot of pressure from the foremen on the assembly lines to work hard and produce, and a lot of accidents because of the bad design of the lines. The company didn't give us adequate protective equipment to deal with the chemicals; we didn't really have any idea of the dangers, or how we should protect ourselves. The union there did nothing to protect us. From Delphi I went to another company, National Auto Parts. In that plant we made car radiators for Cadillacs and Camaros and there was a lot of sickness and accidents there, too. I worked in the area with the metal presses. There were no ventilators to take the fumes out of the plant, and they didn't give us any gloves. We had to handle the parts with our bare hands, and people got cut up a lot. I worked in an area with a lot of lead. If you work with lead, you're supposed to have special clothing and your clothes should be washed separately. But the company didn't give us any of that. We had to work in our street clothes. For all that they paid 400 pesos a week (about $43). We had no union and there was the same pressure for production from the foremen and the group leaders as I saw at Delphi.

Now I work at TRW, where I've been for about a month and a half. There's really no difference in the conditions in any of these plants - if anything, my situation now is even worse. You could say it's forced labor, considering how the foremen talk to the workers, and how much psychological pressure they put on people. We work an average of 14-15 hours a day. There's no transport service to and from work and we get off shift at 4 o'clock in the morning. Usually we have to wait until 7 AM before we can catch a public bus. And when a bus does come, getting home costs 20 pesos. That makes a very big dent in your take-home pay - 380 to 400 pesos a week ($40-43).

My job is bending steel cables for seatbelts for GM, Ford and some European car models. The cable is about a centimeter thick, and I have to bend about 3500 a day. Because of what's passing through my hands every day, I can hardly sleep at night - the pain is so bad. Then I have to get up in the morning to do it again. In the future, I know that I can get carpal tunnel problems, which is a very scary idea. I've asked to change to another position, but no one wants to change because whoever works in this job gets a lot of pain in their wrists.

I feel that in three or four years my hands are going to be useless. I've been thinking that I'll have to get another job. What else can I do? They say work in the maquiladoras is the best paid work here in the city. But there's not much difference from one factory to another. This is all just normal - the standard. Really, I'm living my whole life in the factory. Because of the time and money pressure, I have no ability to develop myself even as a worker, much less as a human being.

After I had been working in Delphi for a year, I was invited to join a group that was trying to learn about workers' rights. People in this group said that things needed to be changed and better protections given to us, but that the companies didn't want to do it. At first I was undecided because I thought that I could get into a lot of trouble if I got involved. I thought I would get fired, or other bad things would happen to me. I heard about the movement in 1994 when Martha Ojeda [currently director of the Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras - ed.] and others tried to democratize the union at Sony, to make it one which represented the workers and fought for their rights. For many years, Martha was a union leader in Nuevo Laredo, and during that time, she tried to democratize the unions here. But the union leaders in Mexico City refused to recognize her. In 1994 the union general secretary here called her an agitator and a Communist, and she was forced to leave. But she became well-known among the workers because she tried to help them at other plants, too. Then it seemed the whole world painted Martha Ojeda as a ghost to scare people, and used her as example of what could happen if you got into these problems. But a couple of years later, when I was invited to join one of the groups again, I went. They invited me to a workshop about health and safety - the problems you could suffer because of repetitive motion. I realized that it was ridiculous to believe that it was bad to show workers the dangers in their jobs. The companies and the newspapers say we're putting the maquiladoras in danger, but we're just showing workers what's wrong with the way the work is organized. When I understood that, I decided to become a voluntary organizer and we've been working together ever since. Everything I learn I try to pass on, so that it will help everyone else.

Every movement starts with just a small group, but they evolve and get bigger and bigger. Lots of people say you're just wasting your time because you'll never be able to change anything. But I say no. Nothing will ever change if we just sit on our hands. You have to keep trying and trying.

And the little that we're able to achieve will grow, step by step.

(back to top)

---

FRESNO WORKERS MARCH FOR AMNESTY

On October 14 about 300 undocumented immigrants and supporters from unions and community groups marched in Fresno supporting amnesty for these immigrants and legalizing their productive presence in the U.S.

For more information contact Leonel Flores at the Northern California Coalition for Immigrant Rights (559) 490-1089 <nccircv@jps.net>.

ORGANIZATIONS SUPPORTING THE AFL-CIO CALL FOR A NEW AMNESTY PROGRAM FOR UNDOCUMENTED WORKERS

As of October 21, 2000

• American Friends Service Committee

• California Faculty Association (CSUF)

• CWA Nabet Local 51

• El Comite No Nos Vamos

• El Concilio Immigrant Project

• Family and Friends of Prisoners Support Group of Fresno and Clovis

• Fresno Chapter ACLU

• Green Party - Fresno Chapter

• Hotel and Restaurant Workers (HERE) Local 11

• La Nueva Alianza Oaxaqueno

• Labor Community Alliance

• MAPA De Valle

• Menonite Central Committee

• Metro Ministry

• Mt. Carmel Catholic Church

• Pan Valley Institute

• Proyecto Campesino - Visalia

• Radio Bilingue KSJV FM 91

• Service Employees International Union Local 250

• St. Alfonsus Catholic Church

• The Fresno Center for Non-Violence

• The Unitarian Universalist Church

• United Farm Workers of America

• United Steelworkers Local 703

• Women's International League for Peace & Freedom

(back to top)

---

2001: A Sprawl Odyssey?

By Kevin Hall

The coming year will prove to be pivotal in setting the future course for Fresno County. New government policies affecting sprawl, transportation and air pollution will be set and tested. Environmental legal action should increase. Tensions will rise. The following is an overview of several key developments.

City of Fresno General Plan Update. Outgoing mayor Jim Patterson is attempting to force through the revised plan prior to his end in office. While it contains some seemingly progressive policies on urban growth limits and corridor densities, the plan is critically short on implementation methods and real community input has not been sought. Nonetheless, the rapidly imploding city council is expected to approve the plan and its environmental impact report by year's end. Meanwhile, the council is set to reconsider northend developments along Willow Ave. without assessing critically important impact fees for increased traffic, and the first white flags of surrender have been waved toward developers who want to see the city's sphere of influence pushed north along the San Joaquin River.

Fresno County General Plan. The recently approved county update also contains progressive language on land use, but the new board can expect immediate requests for exemptions. For example, at the same October meeting at which county supervisors approved the plan Clovis's city manager requested that northeast lands be considered suitable for near-term development. More significant is the poison pill contained in the Copper River Ranch proposal (see below). Also, the 'supes' have virtually abdicated all responsibility for transportation planning and air pollution reduction to the Council of Fresno County Governments (not the safest of hands).

Copper River Ranch. This one's really hard to swallow. Copper River Ranch contains an amendment to the County General Plan creating a new land use designation called Planned Urban Village. Sadly, it's none of those things -- planned, urban or village-like. It calls for development to occur in chunks of at least 500 acres without specific development plans or environmental impact reports (that would be planning); on the outside edge of cities' spheres of influence (that's rural, not urban); with a maximum density of eight units per acre (again, not urban); and would foster home prices and rental rates that will exclude middle and lower income people (enclave, not village). Developers would excrete these square-mile compounds along Friant Road, Willow Ave., Freeway 168, Academy Ave. and places unimagined. This proposal has been pushed through the process in order to allow the current County Board of Supervisors to decide it -- draw your own conclusions.

Regional Transportation Plan. The Council of Fresno County Governments (COG) will update the county's 20-year plan this Spring. Updated every three years, the 2001 plan is unusually significant because it follows our air district's bump-up to severe nonattainment for ozone. As a result, it will be subjected to much closer scrutiny for traffic impacts on air pollution (more below). Furthermore, it will lay the groundwork for the Measure C transportation sales tax renewal effort in 2002. Paradoxically, if not predictably, the powers that be are compiling a list of freeway horrors (witness Herndon's two miles of submerged freeway from Palm to First, or the Clovis Noose complete with a river-crossing at Copper -- yes, as in Copper River Ranch). The plan is devoid of alternative transportation elements.

State Implementation Plan. This is the big one and will lead to open bureaucratic warfare (sharpen your pencils!) between the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District and the valley's eight county Transportation Planning Agencies (another function of the COGs). Because of the ozone bump-up, the valley must rework its failed 1990 attainment plan. The lead culprit, transportation, will no longer escape its responsibilities. This plan must be approved by federal EPA, an agency subjected to increasing environmental litigation for its failure to enforce the Clean Air Act provisions governing this threat to public health. The result of failure to comply is profound: withdrawal of federal highway dollars. Those same dollars could be used toward alternative transportation measures that would reduce vehicle use, had we any such plans in place.

So, as the good spaceship San Joaquin heads off into the 21st century with the pedal to the metal, local politicos and their backers will fight hard to stay on the old course. For relief, sanity, equity and basic safety, concerned citizens may be forced to turn to the third branch of government -- the judiciary, and Fresno County environmental and social activists may be pushed to prepare for an anti-Measure C renewal fight if local transportation planning remains mired in the exhausted visions of a 1950s autopia.

(Kevin Hall works on the issues of transportation, air pollution and global warming for the Sierra Club-Tehipite Chapter. He also hosts "Clearing the Air: Transportation, Land Use and Air Quality in the San Joaquin Valley," a monthly radio show airing on the fourth Friday of each month from 3:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on KFCF 88.1 FM.)

(back to top)

STATUS REPORT: Before the end of the year, many of you will be receiving our annual letter soliciting your support, financial and otherwise. This coming year will be a little different for us: as we plan for our 10th anniversary (in 2002) we will be evaluating where we go next. Do we maintain our current status? Or do we try to take a next big step--like having a paid director or purchasing our own facility?

In reality, the answer will not depend on our current active core. The real question is if we can attract key commitments of NEW people who are willing to invest significant energy and resources to our enterprise.

Our greatest asset is, in this regard, also our greatest liability. Our focus is general, not built around the single hot issue that more readily attracts activists and loyalists. We ask of people that they see the big picture, the interconnection of different concerns, the necessity of slowly building alliances based on personal relationship. And above all, we ask people to pay attention to how means affect ends, to scrutinize how WE conduct business as well as how our ideological opposites do.

People who seriously enter into our approach are usually delighted to come to our monthly board meetings (typically lasting 3 hours) because these gatherings are so full of information and high-level discussion. They are people who are concerned especially with affecting how others think, and about the decision-making processes of both individuals and interest groups.

Out of this approach we are able to sustain a modest facility that offers a home and resources to flegling activist groups. We are able to initiate or help sustain short-term actions or movements (like opposition to the ongoing Iraqi sanctions). And we help bring together coalitions among the wide spectrum of groups that we have contact with--ranging from gay support groups to neighborhood activists to anti-sweatshop demonstrators..

We're proud of what we manage to do. And there's so much more that could be done with more people involved. But the main thing we offer is the fellowship of likeminded souls, seeking together to find ways to act responsibly, intelligently and compassionately in our daily lives. Anyone interested? Call me (Richard) at 266-2559.

 

VETERANS DAY: One of our annual events is a gathering on (or near) Veterans Day to honor those who have used "the weapons of nonviolence" to fight their battles. This year we are inviting war veterans to come talk about how, for them, the experience of participating in armed conflict affected their peace-time living. Two of our Board members, Drs. Siegel and Welch, will be among the participants. The program will be on Sat. Nov. 11th at 2:00 p.m., with a 1:00 optional potluck.

(back to top)

THE WELCH REPORT

October 16, 2000
Jack H. Welch, M.D.

Comparing the presidential candidates of the two major parties, both George Bush and Al Gore propose increasing Pentagon spending, Bush by $45b over the next decade, and Gore, by an astonishing $100b over the same period. Both men would spend $60b or more on a "Star Wars" anti-missile system, although Bush's intention is to protect our (European) allies as well as the 50 US states -- given the highly unlikely assumption that the technology is feasible.

Gore supports the ratification of the test ban treaty (CTBT), which Bush does not -- a major difference. Neither candidate would end sanctions on food and medicine to Iraqi civilians, or require labor rights and environmental protections in all trade agreements.

In fairness, Ralph Nader of the Green Party disagrees with all of these positions except for his support for CTBT. (Peace Action, Washington, D.C.)

An outrageous example of rhetorical excess in the present election campaign have been George Bush's statements about a "readiness crisis" in the US military, based upon an Army report last fall documenting a "lack of readiness" in two Army divisions.

"Readiness requires adequate training and stockpiles of spare parts for quick repairs, funding for which normally is covered in the Operations and Maintenance budget." This budget is to be cut in 2002, whereas weapons procurement is slated to increase by $38b (40%), half going to new weapons systems.

Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has declared his party has added more than $44b to rebuild our military through improved quality of life, enhanced readiness and equipment modernization. Actually, what he added was pork, including $425m for an unrequested helicopter carrier to be made in Lott's home state of Mississippi. Later, Lott and 73 of his Senate colleagues rejected an amendment to the FY 1999 Defense Authorization bill to begin providing childcare for the nearly 50% of military families without it" -- the cost of which would have been less than one quarter the cost of the carrier! (California Peace Action, Berkeley, CA Sept. 27, 2000)

"The use of only 2 1/2% of the present US nuclear arsenal could produce the deaths of 50 million Russians!" ("Rehearsing Doomsday", a documentary, CNN October 15, ‘00)

On behalf of 48 religious leaders from a cross-section of faith groups, a new ten-question survey of presidential candidates on nuclear weapons and disarmament has been released. Neither George Bush nor Al Gore answered a question on the morality of possession, threatened use and actual use of nuclear weapons. Ralph Nader called the US refusal to adopt a no—first—use policy "political immorality",

Importantly, neither Gore nor Bush had plans to carry out nuclear disarmament, which is an obligation of the nuclear states that are signatories to the Nuclear Non—Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

All three candidates have a strong commitment to further reductions in the US strategic arsenal (START III negotiations). (California Peace Action Sept. 27, 2000)

(back to top)

---

ELECTIONS 2000
LET THE PEOPLE SPEAK!

The Labor/Community/Alliance asked readers who they will vote for in the presidential race this November 7, and why. It is clear that readers of this newsletter are not torn between the two options (Gore and Bush) most voters feel they have to choose between. Our readers like Ralph Nader’s politics but many are afraid that a vote for Ralph is a vote for the Shrub. Here is what our readers have to say about who they will vote for in this year's presidential race:

Gore has moved democrats too far to the right. I listened to the second presidential debate a few days ago, and I was struck by two things. 1) The candidates seemed to agree more than they disagreed. 2) On the few points where they disagreed, Gore sometimes seemed to be to the right of Bush. Let me reinforce my first point by citing filmmaker Michael Moore who reported on "Democracy Now" that he had counted 32 points of agreement between Bush and Gore in the second debate. One of their points of agreement was about the Gulf War, with Gore crowing about how he had been one of only a handful of Democratic Senators to give his early and wholehearted support to Bush's Daddy's war against Iraq. On the second point, Gore bragged that he would expand military spending by $100 billion over the next ten years, compared to Bush's mere $45 billion. Bush, on the other hand, was the one to say that the U.S. has too many troops overseas, and it is time to bring some of them home--something the peace movement has been saying for decades. And it took Bush to remind Gore that racial profiling is not only wrong when practiced against African Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans, but also when practiced against Arab Americans as is currently done by several federal agencies. I don't really see how anyone committed to peace or racial justice can vote for Bush or Gore, which is why I am voting for Ralph Nader.

Gerry Bill
Sociology Instructor, Fresno City College, and Center Director, Fresno Center for Nonviolence.

*******

I support Al Gore for President because his election over George Bush does make a difference. It makes a difference to the millions of women in America who want to have control over their reproductive choices, to the millions of seniors and future seniors who need Social Security for their survival, to the millions of Americans that cannot afford both basic necessities and needed medications, and to the millions of current and future students in public education who need to be supported and not abandoned to vouchers for the few. While I do not agree with Al Gore and Joe Lieberman on all their positions, I do agree with them on many. There are few, if any, major issues with which I am in agreement with George Bush and Dick Cheney. Of the greatest importance, will be the 3-4 appointments to the U. S. Supreme Court the next President will likely make. There is a difference between having more Ruth Ginzburgs rather than more Clarence Thomases as new appointees. The next President will impact court decisions for at least 20 more years. The Supreme Court is but a few votes away from destroying the wall of separation between church and state. If that wall is destroyed, the radical right will be well on their way to legally controlling the future of this country. If George Bush carries California, he will win the Presidency. Such a result would ill-serve the progressive community.

Howard K. Watkins
Local attorney and community activist

*******

In how many presidential elections have I voted for a non-progressive candidate simply because of the fear that the Republican, who was usually quite scary, might win because of my one vote denied the Democratic candidate? And then there has been the Supreme Court argument. What kind of right wing nut would the Republican appoint to the powerful Court? Well, you know what? This time I'm going to be courageous and vote for Ralph Nader! The worst that can happen is that "Shrub" Bush will get elected. Sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better.

Carol Bequette
Retired education and community activist

*******

I am going to vote against one-party rule. This is not a two-party system. Both political parties, and all the election hoopla and propaganda from each, are financed by the same interlocking corporate elite who own and control the major news sources that provide virtually all of what the public is allowed to know about world, national, and local events. In reality, it's one party with two candidates, and both are financed by the same corporate elite. In every presidential election, one wing of the party runs a nice, down-home, just-plain-folks kind of guy, and the other wing runs a mean dummy. The voting public gets to choose one or the other based upon massive moronic television advertising, and national debates on corporate television that exclude all but the two corporate-controlled parties. The outcome of the election is a moot point. The actual policies of the plain likeable one, and the actual policies of the dumb one, will be the policies desired by the corporate elite, who control both parties and thereby control the government. So, I'm not voting for "the lesser of two evils." A vote for good ol' Al Gore is a vote for rule by the global corporations. To hell with that! Let democracy ring! Power to the People!

Bob Fischer
Sociology Professor, CSUF

******

I'm voting for Ralph Nader because he is not controlled by special interest money and his values represent mine better than any other candidate.

Steve Sacks
Registered Democrat

******

I am going to vote for Al Gore for president. First, he has a track record and proven capability to hold the office and second, nobody else can beat George Bush. Even though there are areas where I wish the democrats were more progressive, I am not tempted to go in any other direction. It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! But, I also don’t see a proactive women’s agenda from anyone but the Democrats. I think that women, labor, and other under represented people need to support this ticket.

Karen Humphrey
Former Mayor of Fresno

******

I will vote for Ralph Nader. Gore is expected to carry California anyway so it is not seen as a vote for Bush. More than that, I resent the way the moneyed interest behind the dem. and rep. parties control the forums to prevent third parties that could actually raise important issues and significant competition for bland and blander. They are both so phony. I think one of these years, people will finally see through these guys and this process in large enough numbers to make a difference. Nader has always stood for people as opposed to standing for corporate money.

Evo Bluestein.
Musician / Teacher

******

Neither Bush nor Gore excite me very much and the thought of listening/seeing either on TV for the next four years is reason enough to disconnect the set, but I will vote for Al Gore. Why? Bush's stand on issues and his statement that he would use Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas as his models for selecting appointees (maybe three or four) to the court. Now that's scary!

Robin Greiner, Jr.
Central California Alliance

******

I will be voting for Al Gore. He is a Democrat. I do support Democrats. Also he supports a woman’s right for choice. He is very strong on his support of the Hate Crime Bill that may become a federal law if he is elected.

Gail Gaston
Commissioner on the Human Relations Commission, City of Fresno
Chair of the Martin Luther King Unity Committee, City of Fresno

******

Visualize 1978, just before the election. It’s Nixon and Humphrey. David Harris (Mr. Joan Baiz) and Joanie come to Fresno State speaking against the Viet Nam war. Harris has just spent a year in the cooler for refusing to fight. After singing and speeching, the inevitable question comes.

“Who are you going to vote for? Humphrey or Nixon?”

“It doesn’t make any difference. For example, if you are at the beach and watch a really top flight surfer do his stuff, you don't say ‘Look at that guy push that wave around.’ You say ‘Look at that guy ride that wave.’

“So, the job for those of us seeking positive social change is not to choose politicians (surfers) to ride the wave, but to create the wave that all politicians must ride.”

Elfie
Sun Mountain
Dreaming realist or realistic dreamer

******

I'm voting for Al Gore. Because of his lengthy government experience in the House, the Senate, and as VP, he knows how things work (or should by now). Even with a Senate/House Democratic majority it will be an uphill battle to get important healthcare and environmental issues passed. Also the next administration will probably select one to three Supreme Court justices who will have a profound effect on the future of the rights of women and minorities. Two conservative oil men in the White House will not speak well for the environment. I'm convinced that a vote for Ralph Nader, whom I much admire, would be a vote for Bush.

Pat Wolk

******

I'm voting for Ralph Nader for President because I'm tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils and want to feel good when I walk out of the voting booth. I want to send a message that money can't buy my principles or my vote.

Lauralee Crain Carbone
Member of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom; a local La Leche League Leader/Breastfeeding Counselor; and a homeschooling mother of two.

******

I have never had such a difficult decision to make in voting for president. I truly have looked at all of the arguments for Nader and Gore and have decided my vote will be for Gore.

Vincent J. Lavery
Fresno Center for Nonviolence

I may still change however.!!!

******

I'm voting for Ralph Nader for two reasons. First, Ralph is an honorable person who has made great personal sacrifices while fighting for consumers and the general public for all his adult life, creating numerous nonprofit watchdog groups. Second, the two major parties are so corrupt due to the infusion of big money from corporate America that there is no way they could possibly represent and fight for the people. I want an end to our corporate-run government and a return to a government of, by, and for the people.

Matthew A. Jendian
Instructor in the sociology dept. at Fresno State and Campus Director of the American Humanics Certificate Program in Nonprofit Management and Leadership.

******

Utah Phillips tells the story of an anarchist walking thru skid-row one night who is approached by a big drunk with a gun. The drunk points the gun at him & asks, "How are you voting this year, Republican or Democrat?" The anarchist replies, "Shoot me!" Jerry Rubin (or was it Abby Hoffman?) exhorted us to vote Republican, that that would surely foment revolution in the streets. This year I am not voting for the evil of two lessers. Mr. Nader will receive OUR votes for President. I know damn good & well that it will make no difference in the long run if shrub or bore win.

Jeff & Jayne at The Movies

******

This year I will be voting for Al Gore even though I have been a lifelong avid supporter of Ralph Nader. Because of my concern for the sanctity and protection of Roe v. Wade, and because there will be critical Supreme Court appointments made during the years of the next administration, I choose to deter the Presidency of Bush. Gore, I believe will affirm Roe V Wade and he will also protect the environment...

Shirley Kirsten, M.A.
Pres National Substitute Teachers Alliance
Pres FASTA.

******

You can download and view a copy of the Community Alliance's endorsements for the November Election here.

Voting Grid. PDF

Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader. Free from Adobe's website
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep.html

(back to top)

---

THE REAL TEXAS UNDER BUSH REIGN

The George W. Bush Texas legacy:

1st in Children without Health Insurance…US Bureau of Census

5th in Highest Teen Birth Rate…US Dept. of Health & Human Services

3rd in Highest number of children living in poverty…US Bureau of Census

1st in Toxic Air Releases…EPA and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission

1st in Smog Days (Houston)...EPA and Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Houston Chronicle

1st in poorest counties (3)...US Bureau of Census

3rd in Hunger...45th in Mothers Receiving Pre-Natal Care...Children's Rights Council

46th in Public Libraries and Branches...Statistical Rankings by State

46th in High School Completion Rate...US Dept of Education

46th in Water Resources Protection...EPA

47th in Delivery of Social Services...State Rankings

48th in Literacy...Texas Workforce Commission and others

48th in Per Capita Funding for Public Health...State Rankings

48th in Best Place to Raise Children (29th before Bush became governor)...Children's Rights Council

48th in Spending for Parks and Recreation...Texas Observer

48th in Spending for the Arts...Texas Observer

49th in Spending for the Environment...Texas Observer

50th in Teachers' Salaries/Benefits...US Dept. Education Agency

1st in DWI deaths...Texas Department of Public Safety

2nd in 18-wheeler accidents...Texas Department of Public Safety

1st in Gun Related child injuries and deaths.

1st in the number of prisoners executed since 1976.

2nd (behind Louisiana) in number of people incarcerated.

9th on what it spends on prisons (prisons are big business).

41st on what it spends on kindergarten thru 12th grade education.

Only one accredited child-care center exists for every 2,637 children in the state.

A fourth of the children still are not immunized by age 2.

(back to top)

---

STUDENTS FOR FREEDOM

A new progressive student organization was established in October at Fresno State, The Students for Freedom. The goal of the organization is to bring the attention of the community and fellow students to civil and human rights violations around the world, the United States, and Fresno. The Students for Freedom would like to uphold the values inherent in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are mankind's inalienable rights.

The Students for Freedom is recognized by the California State University, Fresno, and plans to hold informative events, demonstrations, and rallies on campus. Members of the organization would like to manifest that a new generation is ready to take part in the fight against injustice, disenfranchisement and discrimination. Contact: Sandor Nagy, email: sandor@csufresno.edu

(back to top)

---

THE MEASURE “A” DILEMMA

By Gregory P. Fletcher

Measure "A" would fund a variety of local cultural and artistic programs through a slight increase in the local sales tax. The Measure raises several important issues.

First, whether government funding for the arts should be supported. Would our society ever produce a Van Gogh or a Mozart if all culture were left to the “private” sector? The development of our culture should not be left to the lowest common denominator of market forces. If we are only going to allow popular whims to decide what has merit in culture, we will lose much of lasting value that might arbitrarily be out of fashion when created.

Further, the arts and culture are like clean air and clean water, and are part of the public good. It makes no sense to leave these things to the private sector. Individuals cannot opt out of the public good or there would be a collapse of the society. We accept this premise when it comes to infrastructure like police and fire protection, but when it comes to the arts public funding suddenly becomes controversial.

However, if one accepts social justice as a key value, all people in society should equitably share the burden of taxes. Sales tax is one of the most regressive methods of taxation, which disproportionately affects those with the least means. In the case of Measure "A", those least likely to be able to afford or take advantage of the programs slated for funding would be asked to pay the highest percentage of their income to support them. However deserving any individual program or institution may, be the method of funding under Measure "A" would be fundamentally unfair.

Unfortunately, this may be the only method of funding for the arts that our political system will allow, given the present hostility to social spending of any kind. One must face this reality when deciding whether to vote for Measure “A”.

(back to top)

HEY FRESNO - CHECK IT OUT / STIR IT UP! programs produced by local activists. Every Wednesday from 3:30-4 PM on KFCF 88.1 FM 1st Wed. of the month: Hosted by Pam Whalen of the Community Alliance. A program focusing on labor organizing, workplace issues and immigration. 2nd: Hosted by Richard Stone and Vincent Lavery of the Fresno Center for Non-Violence. A program looking at issues concerning peace, social justice, health and community relations at the local and regional level. 3rd: Hosted by the Fresno County Green Party and Theresa Louise Rogerson. This program focuses on environmental issues, planning, transportation and grass roots democracy. 4th: Hosted by Zay Guffy-Bill and Lauralee Carbone of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. The program will cover local impacts and activities concerning national and international politics, economics and human rights.

(back to top)

HOMECARE WORKERS NEED COMMUNITY SUPPORT

For the first time in 28 years, the nine thousand homecare workers in Fresno County have a chance to make more than minimum wage. Due to pressure from the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and other groups, this year's state budget includes funds to raise these workers' salaries and provide for health care coverage.

Homecare workers provide critical services for the elderly and disabled, allowing them to remain in their homes . While the state has allocated dollars for much needed salary increases for these workers, the final decision remains with the county. The workers, who are members of SEIU 250, will address the Fresno County Board of Supervisors on Nov. 7 and ask them to pass the 3% state increase on to the workers. "We need community activist and advocates to come and support us on Nov. 7", said Annie Durazo, organizer for SEIU. "We are also asking community groups to join our coalition to advocate for quality homecare for Fresno County."

Anyone interested in helping homecare workers fight for a living wage should attend the Board of Supervisors meeting on Nov.7 at 9AM and call Annie Durazo at (559) 277-4372 to find out how to join the Homecare Coalition.

Homecare worker Elen Dowing addresses the Fresno County Board of Supervisors on the need for a living wage.

(back to top)

---

OUR CHOICE MATTERS

By Vinh T. Ngo

How many times have you heard someone say they just can't get excited about voting because politicians are all the same? Or it doesn't count? Or the outcome isn't going to affect their life anyway?

Next time you hear a comment like that, ask the person if they'd like to have the government telling them they can't get confidential birth control because they're under 21. Or they can't get an abortion because they're poor. Or they can't teach accurate sex education in school because it might give teens ideas.

These aren't fantasy scripts. They're already a reality in some communities and they could become the laws of the land if American voters don't pay attention to this November election.

Reproductive choice - the right to choose whether or when to have a child, without coercion or veto power of the government or other persons - seems so fundamental today, that it's hard to imagine a time when it didn't exist. But that time wasn't so long ago and it could return.

In 1965, 17% of all deaths due to pregnancy and childbirth were the result of illegal abortions. It was only in 1973 that the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision Roe v. Wade decision established the right to choose a safe legal abortion for all American women. Some people think the right to choose is safe today. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. The next president of the United States may be able to appoint as many as three of the nine Supreme Court justices, setting the direction of the Court for years to come.

The Court's most recent vote on abortion rights in June this year upheld reproductive choice by a narrow 5-4 margin, relying on critical swing votes. The appointment of an anti-choice Justice could launch the rapid erosion of reproductive rights and access to health services. Choice is one robe away from being overturned.

In addition to nominating Justices to the U.S. Supreme Court the next president has many executive powers that could be used to threaten - and ultimately to eliminate - the right to choose a legal abortion, as well as to jeopardize other reproductive rights. The next president will nominate judges to federal appellate and trial courts who will decide state restrictions on the right to choose. He will nominate the U.S. Attorney General who has the power to prosecute crimes of violence against health care centers. He will nominate the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) who has the power to reverse the legalization of RU-486 in this country. And he will influence the direction of public policy on family planning and abortion. He has executive power to restrict family planning programs and implements abstinence only education program in schools Clearly, the President of the United States can affect reproductive rights more than any other single person.

Choice is still an issue because safe, legal abortion protects women's lives, health and dignity. It respects their moral authority to make decisions about critical issues in their lives, and enables them to make responsible choices.

Given the President's crucial influence on women's reproductive rights, your choice matters. Governor George W. Bush has said, "I will do everything in my power to restrict abortions." Vice President Al Gore recently affirmed, "I will always, always, defend a woman's right to choose."

A review of the presidential candidates' positions on reproductive rights demonstrates the dramatic difference between them:

Governor Bush: As governor of Texas, he opposed clinic protection legislation that would have protected women and doctors from violence at reproductive helth clinics and facilities

Vice President Gore: Supports the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrance Act (FACE), and making those convicted of clinic violence pay their penalties.

Governor Bush supports continuing to prohibit abortions at military facilities in the U.S. or in foreign countries, even when the woman pays with her own money.

Vice President Gore opposes the ban on privately funded abortions at military facilities.

Governor Bush is silent of increasing federal family planning funding.

Vice President Gore supports increased federal family planning funding

So when you vote on November 7th, keep this in mind: The outcome of the 2000 Presidential election will determine whether the right to legal abortion remains secure for the next generation of American women. This is not about the next four years, but the next 40 years. This is the most important national election since 1932.

(back to top)

---

FRESNO MONORAIL

It's 1950. The speaker arises to declare his vision. "In the future, people will live in suburbia. You will live in single family homes with two door detached garages. Everyone over 16 years of age will own a car. It will cost every family $10,000 per year and require that the 2-wage earner families become the norm. But, you'll love it."

In 1950, America would have dismissed him as crazy. But over the past 50 years, this is exactly what we have done. In 1950, we went to work building the greatest freeway system in the world and discovered the suburbs. In moving to those suburbs, we did something so benign it was invisible. We simply increased the distance between travel points. But this was sufficient to increase our dependency on the automobile proportionately. So, the one car family of the 1950's became the 3 car family today. Today, transportation has replaced the home as the largest expense to a household. With some of the highest car ownership per capita in the nation, the capital flight from our collective car payments directly contributes to Fresno's 15% unemployment and diminished quality of life.

Thankfully, Fresno is getting a second chance. Researchers from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, (Cal Poly) through the sponsorship of the Fresno Area Sky Train Committee (F.A.S.T.), will soon undertake a ground breaking transportation study for the Fresno/Clovis Metropolitan area. An elevated monorail system promising 10 minute waits and walking distances of two blocks or less will be evaluated. It will directly access malls, hospitals and other major destination points using existing boulevards as transportation corridors. Lead engineer, Dr. Alypios Chatziioanou and economist, Dr. Walter Rice, will publish their findings.

Interested parties wishing to support this project may make a tax deductible donation to the Cal Poly Foundation c/o Fresno Area Sky Train Committee at 4175 W. Sierra Madre #102, Fresno, CA 93722. (559) 275-7021 http://www.skytraincorp.com/

(back to top)

WILPF PEACE COMMUNITY CRAFTS FAIRE The annual WILPF Peace Community Crafts Faire (formerly known as the Holiday Boutique) will be held this year on Saturday, December 2 from 10-4 p.m. at the First Congregational Church aka The Big Red Church on Van Ness and Yale Avenues. This is WILPF's biggest fundraiser and social event so we invite all you local Peace organizations to attend and to have a literature table and/or a "goodies" (baked goods, crafts, tapes, C.D's, etc) table to help your own organization make a bit of change for the new year. Also, we are in need of donated soups and breads for our infamous hot lunch served at the faire. If you would like to have a table for your organization, would like to donate soup and/or bread for the luncheon, or know of some crafty person who would like to sell their wares at this very popular event, please call Carol at 229-9661 or Zay at 227-2133.

(back to top)

GRASSROOTS ORGANIZER NEEDED

California ACORN is significantly expanding it's organizing presence in California, in cities including Sacramento, Oakland, San Jose, Stockton, Fresno, Los Angeles, San Diego and beyond, including other western states.

Work as a grassroots organizer to build power for low- and moderate-income communities and communities of color. Don't just help people win on their day-to-day and long-term issues; help alter the relations of power between the "haves" and the "have-nots" by building dynamic mass-based organizations.

Right now, California is fighting for and winning the following:

• Raising the state minimum wage to $8

• Racial and economic justice in the funding of youth and after-school programs in Sacramento and Oakland

• Direct action empowerment of renters in view of the nation's worst housing crisis (San Jose, Los Angeles)

• Living wage policies in Sacramento (we've already won in Oakland, and helped win in San Jose)

• Ending predatory mortgage lending and racial discrimination in banking

• Environmental justice at McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, a toxic Superfund site

• Political empowerment of a new, grassroots majority

• Much, much more.

All ACORN's positions are full time (regular evening work) with salary, good benefits, and the best training around.

Organizers learn to run social justice campaigns, work with grassroots leadership, build movement organizations, construct powerful coalitions, and much more.

For more information or to apply, email or call to:

Brian Kettenring
California ACORN
(916) 455-1795
(888) 918-8818 (toll free voicemail)
caacornsaro@acorn.org

Please also visit www.acorn.org for more information.

(back to top)

LABOR/COMMUNITY The Community Alliance newsletter is an independent voice for workers and progressive groups in Fresno and the Central San Joaquin Valley. We support the struggle for social and economic justice and believe that all workers should be paid a living wage. The Community Alliance is affiliated nationally with Jobs with Justice. Meetings are held on the last Monday of each month at The Fresno Center for Nonviolence, 985 N Van Ness at 6:30 PM. This newsletter is published monthly. Editor: Mike Rhodes Editorial Board Members: Nancy Marsh, Ed Perez, Leonel Flores Jeffrey Paris, Diane Scott, Mark Stout Richard Stone, James Todd, Pam Whalen Community Alliance P.O. Box 5077 Fresno, CA 93755 (559) 233-3978 / 226-3962 (fax) E-mail: AllianceEditor@comcast.net http://www.fresnoalliance.com/home/ For advertising rates see: Ad Rates This project is funded in part by the Unitarian Universalist Fund For a Just Society

(back to top)

---

[ Up ] [ January 2000 ] [ February 2000 ] [ March 2000 ] [ April 2000 ] [ May 2000 ] [ June 2000 ] [ July 2000 ] [ August 2000 ] [ September 2000 ] [ October 2000 ] [ November 2000 ] [ December 2000 ]

Designed and maintained by:
Hume Printing and The Community Alliance ©2003
Contact webmaster@fresnoalliance.com