Volume , Number
NOTE: Z Magazine subscribers and sustainers have access to all Z Magazine articles here and in the archive. The latest Z Magazine articles available to everyone are listed in the Free Articles box at the top of the table of contents, and are starred in the list below. Questions? e-mail Z Magazine Online.
Democrats Debate Universal Coverage
T he U.S. has entered a new phase in its everlasting debate about how to fix the health care mess. As Drew Altman, president of the fastidiously nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, put it to the Washington Post in March, “We’re at the beginning of the next great debate about health reform.” We are entering this stage not because Americans have changed (they have supported universal health insurance by large majorities since the Depression), but because the nation’s economic and political elite have become much more willing to call for universal health insurance or, as the more timid of them say, “affordable health care.” America has not heard this much chatter about health-care reform from business leaders, labor leaders, the media, and politicians since the years 1992 to 1994 when universal coverage through HMOs was all the rage.
The health insurance industry itself is contributing to the chatter. This industry—which has opposed universal health insurance since its inception in the early 1930s, and which funded the Harry and Louise ads opposing Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Health Security Act of 1993—has come to understand that its survival depends on how state legislatures and Congress respond to the growing number of uninsured. The industry correctly perceives that it will collapse unless government can be persuaded to funnel more dollars to insurance companies to replace the dollars the industry is losing as employers flee the health insur- ance market.
On November 13, 2006, the insurance industry executed what we might call a 150-degree turn when its trade group, America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), released a proposal calling for universal coverage of children within three years and 95 percent coverage of adults within ten years. Not surprisingly, AHIP proposed that the taxpayers subsidize the purchase of insurance from health insurance companies. In January of this year, a coalition, including AHIP and a rogues’ gallery of establishment groups— AARP, the American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association, the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer, and the Chamber of Commerce of the United States— called on the U.S. taxpayer to halve the number of uninsured by financing richer tax credits for people who buy health insurance and by expanding Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
The labor movement is also contributing to the renewed pressure for reform. On March 6, the 47-member executive committee of the AFL-CIO endorsed, at long last, achieving universal coverage by expanding Medicare to cover the entire U.S. population. The AFL-CIO could not bring itself to use the phrase “single payer,” but because a Medicare-for-all program is the equivalent of a single-payer system, the federation’s announcement was an indirect endorsement of single payer. Under a single-payer system, one government agency, not hundreds of insurance companies, reimburses clinics and hospitals and sets limits on what clinics, hospitals, and drug companies can charge. The AFL-CIO’s endorsement of Medicare for all was hailed by single-payer advocates around the country. “We recognize that the AFL-CIO is unlikely to lead the charge for single payer without more grassroots pressure,” said Dr. Ida Hellender, director of Physicians for a National Health Program, one of the leading single-payer organizations in the U.S., “but we feel this endorsement is a very important step for labor and a significant boost for the single-payer movement.”
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the largest of the unions to break with the AFL-CIO two years ago, has been much less helpful to the single-payer movement, but it has worked hard to intensify the health-care reform debate. Andy Stern, SEIU’s president, has made it clear he opposes any system that continues to rely on employers fund it, as well as a single-payer system.
Stern made his dislike of single payer obvious at a forum sponsored by the Brookings Institute in June 2006. After blasting the current employer-based system as unsustainable, he criticized “people who say let’s just go to Medicare for all…. There are not going to be single payers…in America,” he told the audience. Then Stern uttered this spectacular non sequitur: “I think the single-payer issue is a stalking horse for I am not sure what because we are going to have a multi-payer system….” In an interview with the Los Angeles Times on March 12, that is, six days after the AFL-CIO endorsed Medicare for all, Stern conceded that “single payer would be the most efficient system,” but then he repeated his claim that “Americans want to have an American solution, not a Canadian solution.” Stern did not explain why a universal system built on Medicare would be “un-American.”
Although it is not clear what solution to the health care crisis Stern supports, it is quite clear he intends to raise holy hell about the crisis. On February 7 he held a news conference with Lee Scott, Wal-Mart’s CEO, to announce yet another coalition for health care reform, this one called the Better Health Care Together Campaign. The statement the coalition released that day did not indicate what proposal, if any, it would support. It was not even clear whether the coalition supports universal health insurance. The word “universal” was conspicuously missing from the press release while the phrase “quality affordable health insurance” appeared repeatedly.
The Candidate Debate
T he rising demand for health care reform from the insurance industry and business and labor leaders is having an effect on politicians. This is most apparent in the debate among presidential contenders. “Every candidate [for president in 2008] is going to have to have a health-care plan, because it is the number one domestic policy issue on the minds of voters,” said Karen Ignagni, president of AHIP. For Democratic presidential candidates having a plan for universal coverage, not just “a health care plan,” is now a requirement.
This was obvious at an unusual candidates forum hosted by SEIU and the Center for American Progress (a think tank headed by former Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta) in Las Vegas on March 24. The forum was unprecedented. It focused solely on health policy; seven Democratic candidates participated (although Republican candidates were invited as well); and it went on for three hours. Each speaker was given 20 minutes alone on the stage—3 minutes to make an opening statement and 17 minutes to answer questions from the moderator and the audience. This unusual forum is worth reviewing in some detail because it illustrated the paradox of the latest phase of the health care reform debate: that public yearning for universal health insurance is now so strong that Democratic candidates feel obliged to support universal coverage, but public pressure is not yet strong enough to force most candidates to offer a plan that will achieve universal coverage.
As Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton noted when her turn to speak came, all seven Democratic candidates at the forum endorsed universal health insurance. That, unfortunately, is where the good news ends. Only two of the seven—Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Sen. John Edwards— had detailed proposals to present. Ku- cinich, a single-payer supporter, is not likely to win the nomination and Edwards’s plan may not work. The other five participants (Clinton, Sen. Christopher Dodd, former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, Sen. Barrack Obama, and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson) told horror stories about the current system and outlined vague, sleep-inducing principles upon which their health policy will be based: “all stakeholders must be involved”; “we must fund prevention”; “we [must] make better use of the money we have in the system”; “we must get costs under control”; “we must modernize the way we deliver health care”; etc. Clinton claimed she wanted to hear more ideas from the people before she developed a plan. Obama said he would unveil a plan within a few months. Dodd and Richardson never promised a plan.
Gravel was almost incomprehensible. He began by misusing the phrase “single-payer.” He proposed a “single-payer health care voucher plan” under which Americans could buy health insurance from five or six insurance companies. This is an oxymoron. The essential feature of a single-payer is that one payer reimburses clinics and hospitals directly; it does not reimburse insurance companies. Then he said that “single-payer” means “all Americans pay for it,” which is not accurate. By this definition, any universal plan paid for by taxes would be a single payer, regardless of whether the nation’s 1,500 health insurance companies continue to exist. Then he announced that Congress would never pass his plan and the only way we could get it enacted was with a national initiative process which does not currently exist, but allegedly will if Gravel becomes president.
Because Kucinich has promoted single-payer for years and because he was the only candidate supporting a real universal coverage bill in Congress (HR 676, the single-payer legislation sponsored by Rep. John Conyers), he was more articulate than any of the other candidates with the possible exception of Edwards. He explained clearly why high administrative costs generated by the current multiple-payer system would be reduced under a single-payer system. Kucinich was also the most passionate. Without naming the other six candidates, he lambasted them for assuming that it is impossible to create a health insurance system that does not rely on insurance companies. “It’s time we end the control that insurance companies have over health care and our political system,” he said angrily.
John Edwards, not coincidentally, was the only candidate other than Kucinich who used the phrase “single-payer” correctly. He explained to the moderator that he liked single-payer systems because they are so efficient, but he thought many Americans would resist a single-payer proposal. “It is true that single-payer systems dramatically reduce costs,” he said. “It’s also true that people like the health insurance they have now.” Edwards then explained that his proposal would divide the country into “health care markets” and, within each market, consumers could choose between a Medicare-like single-payer program and health insurance companies. He implied that the Medicare-like programs, with their lower overhead costs, would probably undersell the insurance companies and gradually end up being the only insurer—the one payer left standing—in a given region. “This may gravitate toward a single-payer system,” he con- cluded. “But consumers will decide that.”
Edwards’s statement that Americans “like” the insurance they have was wildly off the mark. According to Harris Polls going back at least a decade, public esteem for the health insurance industry is very low, comparable with tobacco and oil companies. But Edwards’s larger point—that establishing a single-payer system in one piece of legislation is going to be very difficult—is well taken. No single-payer system in the world was installed overnight. (California came close to pulling that off last year. The legislature in that state enacted a single-payer bill last summer, only to see Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger veto it in September.)
The insurance industry and their allies have proven themselves adept at keeping single-payer bills from getting hearings and defeating single-payer initiatives (single-payer initiatives presented to Californians in 1994 and to Oregon residents in 2002 lost by large margins). So the question of whether and how an American single-payer system could be phased in deserves careful thought.
T here are several ways to achieve a single-payer health system in the U.S. One could, for example, add all children under 19 to Medicare in year one, add all people age 55 to 64 in year two, and so on. Edwards’s method—letting market forces create a single-payer gradually—might work. (If it did, the irony would be indescribably delicious.) And it might not. The critical questions are whether the Medicare-like programs he has in mind would be true copies of the existing Medicare program, and whether these programs would start off with a large enough enrollee base to withstand “adverse selection,” which means disproportionate enrollment by sick people. It was impossible to tell from Edwards’s brief comments in Las Vegas, and it is impossible to tell from the data he has made available on his website, what the answers to these questions are.
There is no question that the traditional Medicare program is more efficient and more popular than any insurance company. It spends only 2 percent of its expenditures on overhead and spends the other 98 cents on health care while insurance companies spend 20 percent on overhead and 80 percent on health care. In theory, if Medicare were forced to compete with insurance companies, Medicare’s low overhead should give it a 15-to-20 percent price advantage over private insurance companies. Moreover, the traditional Medicare program (the original, single-payer Medi- care program in which 83 percent of Medicare beneficiaries are currently enrolled, as opposed to the HMO arm of the Medicare program in which the other 17 percent are enrolled) is more attractive to patients because it does not attempt to control costs by vetoing doctor-patient decisions. Because it is more efficient and more attractive, a program truly modeled after the traditional Medicare program should beat the pants off insurance companies.
But for some reason Edwards is not proposing to throw open the existing Medicare program, which now insures 43 million seniors and disabled people, to anyone who prefers to be insured by Medicare rather than Blue Cross Blue Shield or Aetna. He is instead proposing that smaller programs that resemble Medicare, but which are separate from it, operate in numerous “health markets” across the country (which he does not define) in competition with insurance companies. Would these Medicare-like programs start out with a sizable enrollment, say half a million to a million people, or would they go through a growth phase in which they are quite small? If they start out small, or never get to be very big, will they have to advertise heavily to attract enrollees (something Medicare does not do now) and, if so, won’t that drive up administrative costs and premiums? If they start out or remain small, won’t they be vulnerable to adverse selection, especially if private insurers deny health care to their sicker enrollees and encourage them to switch to the Medicare-like programs?
These and other problems caused by small size relative to the real Medicare, and by the need to compete with private insurers, could cause programs that bear the name “Medicare” to lose to the bloated insurance industry even though the real Medicare program is far more efficient than any insurance company. In that event, the single-payer movement will have suffered two setbacks. It will not only have failed to build a single-payer system via market forces, but a central premise of the single-payer movement—that Medicare is more efficient than the insurance industry—will have been falsely undermined.
Edwards deserves credit for putting a detailed proposal in front of the public and for being willing to describe single payer as good policy. But he needs to explain why creating numerous mini-Medicare programs for the non-elderly is a better idea than building on the existing Medicare base of 43 million people.
G iven her front-runner status and all the years she has studied health policy, Hillary Clinton’s comments at the Las Vegas forum were the most disappointing. Her remarks were a textbook illustration of the tension between Democrats’ hunger to deliver universal coverage and their fear of antagonizing the insurance industry and the other players that make up the health care industry. Clinton made no mention of single-payer as an option. She did go to great lengths to blister the insurance industry, but then she implied that she intended to leave the industry in control of the health-care system. For example, after telling a story of a woman who was denied medical services by her insurer because her condition was “pre-existing,” Clinton thundered, “We can’t get to universal coverage until we eliminate insurance discrimination once and for all.” This statement implies that Clinton intends to let insurance companies continue to run the system.
In addition to having nothing to say about single payer, Clinton endorsed the claim that “prevention” and electronic medical records (EMRs) will save money when in fact there is little evidence to support those claims. She was not alone; only Kucinich and Gravel resisted mouthing these platitudes. Preventive medicine can improve health, but as counterintuitive as it may sound, there is very little evidence for the claim that making preventive services more available saves money only on the grounds that good preventive medicine improves health. There is no solid evidence that more preventive services inevitably lead to lower costs. They may in fact lead to higher spending. Teaching primary care doctors to identify depression in their patients is a good example of a preventive measure that could very well increase costs as more depressed patients get more therapy sessions and start taking anti-depressants.
The argument for EMRs as a cost-containment method is even weaker. Although the insurance and computer industries have vigorously peddled hype about EMRs for 15 years, the small body of research on EMRs shows mixed results on quality and indicates universal adoption of EMRs will raise total spending on health care by perhaps 2 percent. The evidence that EMRs can actually harm patients includes, for example, a study published in a 2005 edition of Pediatrics that found that mortality rates in a children’s hospital in Pittsburgh doubled after introduction of an EMR.
In stark contrast to the Democrats who attended the Las Vegas forum, none of the Republican candidates supports universal coverage. The candidate who comes closest to endorsing such a position is Mitt Romney. As governor of Massachusetts, he signed a bill on April 12, 2006 that he and the bill’s Democratic supporters in the legislature claimed would reduce the uninsured rate in Massachusetts from 11 percent to 1 percent by 2010 without raising taxes. (Today the law’s supporters say the law will get the rate down to 5 percent.) The law requires Massachusetts residents to buy health insurance beginning July 1, and promises to provide subsidies to residents with incomes under three times the poverty level. Because Romney’s law generates many more customers for insurance companies, it is exactly the sort of law the insurance industry supports.
But the law Romney is so proud of is going to fail because it has no cost containment in it. Romney and other supporters of the Massachusetts law claim that costs will come down due to the provision of more preventive medical services, the spread of EMRs, and the publication of “report cards” on clinics and hospitals by a newly appointed state council using data stored on EMRs. But this fantasy will never come to pass. As a result, Massachusetts will face a choice, probably by no later than 2008, between raising taxes in order to pay for the subsidies necessary for the uninsured to buy insurance, letting insurance policies with shriveled coverage (including enormous deductibles) count as “insurance,” exempting millions from the new mandate to buy insurance, or some com- bination of the above.
Readers should keep an eye on Romney’s law. We are going to see more laws like it between now and the day when politicians find the will to enact a single- payer system. Romney-like laws—laws that seem to insure all or nearly all people but don’t—are likely because of the immense pressure politicians now feel to vote for universal coverage and the immense pressure they feel from the health care industry to do nothing meaningful to bring health care costs down.
We are indeed in a new phase of the American health-care reform debate. The demand for solutions to the health care crisis is louder now than it was even five years ago and much of the new demand is coming from the American elite. But more talk does not signify that Congress and state legislatures will enact effective solutions soon. With few exceptions, the talk is still about goals we can agree on (extending coverage and reducing costs), not effective means to achieve those goals. Until the public and the nation’s leaders start talking in detail about real solutions, we will get, at best, more Romney laws. The single-payer movement still has a lot of work to do.
Kip Sullivan is the author of The Health Care Mess: How We Got Into It and How We’ll Get Out of It (Author House, 2006).
Z Magazine Archive
AnnouncementsLABOR - May 1 is May Day. Workers of the world will celebrate the 124th anniversary of International Worker’s Day. Born out of a call for an 8-hour workday in the United States, this day is an opportunity for all workers to show their solidarity with one another, as well as to renew the call for labor rights.
FARM CONFERENCE - The Farm Conference on Community and Sustainability will be held May 24-26 in Summertown, TN, in partnership with the Fellowship of Intentional Communities. Tour green homes, see sustainable food production, learn about solar installations, alternative education, midwifery, and more.
Contact: Douglas@thefarmcommunity.com; http://www.thefarmcommunity.com/.
PALESTINE - The Conference of the Palestinian Shatat in North American will be held June 3-5 in Vancouver. The conference will examine the future of the Palestinian liberation movement.
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.palestinianconference.org/.
LABOR - The Pacific Northwest Labor History Association’s 45th annual conference will be held May 3-5, in Portland, OR. This year’s theme is Labor Under Attack: Learning from the Past and Preparing for the Future. A call for presentations, workshops and papers is currently underway.
Contact: PNLHA, 27920 68th Ave. East, Graham, WA 98338; 206-406-2604; PNLHA1@aol.com; http://www3.telus.net.
MARIJUANA - On the first Saturday of May marijuana legalization activists will hold informational and educational events, rallies and marches in over 300 cities around the world.
ECONOMICS - The Union For Radical Political Economics will hold its 39th annual conference May 9-11 in New York City.
RECLAIM THE DREAM - The 2013 Poor People’s Campaign & March from Baltimore to Washington D.C. will be May 11. Communities, schools and unions interested in participating are encouraged to contact the Baltimore People’s Assembly.
Contact: 410-500-2168; 410-218-4835; BaltimorePeoplesAssembly@gmail.com; Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Baltimore and the Baltimore Peoples Power Assembly, 2011 N. Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21218.
MOTHER’S DAY - The 17th Annual Mother’s Day Walk For Peace will be May 12th, in Dorchester, MA. The walk began in 1996 for families who had lost children to violence. The day has become a way for thousands of people to financially support the work of the Louis Brown Peace Institute.
Contact: http://www.ldbpeaceinstitute.org/; http://mothersdaywalk4peace.org/.
NATO 5 - An International Week of Solidarity with the NATO 5 has been called for May 16-21. Supports call on supporters to raise awareness of the NATO 5 and support funds for the defendants on the one-year anniversary of their preemptive arrests.
Contact: email@example.com; https://nato5support.wordpress.com.
MOUNTAINTOP - The 2013 Mountain Justice Summer Activist Training Camp will be held May 19-27 in Damascus, VA. It will be a week of workshops, field trips to view Mountain Top Removal coal mines, direct actions, and service project.
FEMINIST SCI-FI - The feminist science fiction convention WisCon 37 is scheduled for May 24-27 in Madison, WI.
Contact: WisCon, ? SF3, PO Box 1624, Madison, WI 53701; firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.wiscon.info/.
ANARCHY FEST - A month-long Festival of Anarchy is scheduled for May in Montreal. The festival includes The Montreal Anarchist Bookfair (May 19-20).
Contact: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/; http://www.radicalmontreal.com/.
LABOR - The International Labor Rights Forum will present: Down the Supply Chain, Driving Corporate Accountability, on May 22 in Washington, DC. The Labor Rights Awards Ceremony and Reception will honor pioneers in supply chain worker organizing, working solidarity and international labor rights policy.
MULTICULTURE - The 26th annual National Conference on Race & Ethnicity in American Higher Education (NCORE) will take place May 28-June 1, in New Orleans.
Contact: SWCHRS, 3200 Marshall Avenue, Suite 290, Norman, OK 73072; 405-325-3694; email@example.com; www.ncore.ou.edu.
MEDIA - The 2013 Alliance for Community Media Annual Conference will be held May 29-31, in San Francisco, CA. Participants will include educators, community leaders, media professionals, journalists, nonprofit leaders, policymakers and students.
RADIO - The 38th Annual Community Radio Conference is schedule for May 29-June 1, in San Francisco, CA, with discussions and workshops.
Contact: 1101 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20004; 202-756-2268; firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.nfcb.org/.
BRADLEY MANNING - On June 1, a rally will be held at Fort Meade in support of Bradley Manning.
BIKES - Bikes Not Bombs is holding its 24th annual Bike-A-Thon and Green Roots Festival in Boston, MA on June 3, with several bike rides scheduled, music, exhibitors and more.
Contact: Bikes Not Bombs, 284 Amory St., Jamaica Plain, MA 02130; 617-522-0222; email@example.com; www.bikesnotbombs.org.
LEFT FORUM - The 2013 Left Forum will be held June 7-9, at Pace University in New York City.
Contact: 365 Fifth Avenue, CUNY Graduated Center, ? Sociology Dept., New York, NY 10016; http://www.leftforum.org/.
VEGAN FEST - Mad City Vegan Fest will be held in Madison, WI, June 8. The annual event features food, speakers, and exhibitors.
Contact: 122 State Street, Suite 405 B, Madison, WI 53701; firstname.lastname@example.org; http://veganfest.org/.
ADC CONFERENCE - The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) holds its annual conference June 13-16, in Washington, DC, with panel discussions and workshops on civil rights, media and other topics.
Contact: 1990 M Street, Suite 610, Washington, DC, 20036; 202-244-2990; email@example.com http://convention.adc.org/.
CUBA/SOCIALISM - A Cuban-North American Dialog on Socialist Renewal and Global Capitalist Crisis will be held in Havana, Cuba, June 16-30. There will be a 5 day Seminar at University of Havana, plus visits to a cooperative, urban garden, community development project, social research centers, and educational & medical institutions.
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.globaljusticecenter.org/.
NETROOTS - The 8th Annual Netroots Nation conference will take place June 20-23 in San Jose, CA. The event features panels, trainings, networking, screenings, and keynotes.
Contact: 164 Robles Way, #276, Vallejo, CA 94591; email@example.com; http://www.netrootsnation.org/.
MEDIA - The 15th annual Allied Media Conference will be held June 20-23, in Detroit.
Contact: 4126 Third Street, Detroit, MI 48201; http://alliedmedia.org/.
GRASSROOTS - The United We Stand Festival will be hosted by Free & Equal, June 22 in Little Rock, Arkansas. The festival aims to reform the electoral process throughout the U.S.
SOCIALISM - The Socialism 2013 Conference is scheduled for June 27-30 in Chicago, featuring talks and panel discussions.
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.socialismconference.org.
LITERACY - The National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE) will hold its conference July 12-13 in Los Angeles under the heading, Intersections: Teaching and Learning Across Media.
Contact: 10 Laurel Hill Drive, Cherry Hill, NJ 08003; http://namle.net/conference/.
IWW - The North American Work People’s College will take place July 12-16 at Mesaba Co-op Park in northern Minnesota. The event will bring together Wobblies from branches across the continent to learn new skills and build One Big Union.
PEACESTOCK - On July 13th, the 11th Annual Peacestock: A Gathering for Peace, will take place at Windbeam Farm in Hager City, WI. The event is a mixture of music, speakers and community for peace. Sponsored by Veterans for Peace.
Contact: Bill Habedank, 1913 Grandview Ave., Red Wing, MN 55066; 651-388-7733; email@example.com; http://www.peacestockvfp.org.
CHILDREN’S DEFENSE - July 15-19, join clergy, seminarians, Christian educators, young adult leaders and other faith-based advocates for children at CDF Haley Farm in Clinton, Tennessee, for five days of spiritual renewal, networking, movement building workshops, and continuing education about the urgent needs of children at the 19th annual Proctor Institute for Child Advocacy Ministry.
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org; http://www.childrensdefense.org.
ACTIVIST CAMP - Youth Empowered Action (YEA) Camp will have sessions in July and August in Ben Lomond, CA; Portland, OR; Charlton, MA. YEA Camp is designed for activists 12-17 years old who want to make a difference in the world.
Contact: email@example.com; http://yeacamp.org/.
LA RAZA - The annual National Council of La Raza (NCLR) Conference is scheduled for July 18-19 in New Orleans, with workshops, presentations and panel discussions.
Contact: NCLR Headquarters Office, Raul Yzaguirre Building, 1126 16th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036; 202-785-1670; www.nclr.org.
LABOR - The Eastern Conference For Workplace Democracy: Growing Our Cooperatives, Growing Our Communities, will be held at Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA, July 26-28.
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org; http://east.usworker.coop/.
WOMEN/LYNNE STEWART- Radical Women is asking for support letters and cards to be sent to Lynne Stewart. Stewart is a civil rights attorney and political prisoner who is currently in jail. She has breast cancer and authorities have denied her request for transfer from her Texas prison to the New York City hospital where she received medical attention during a prior bout of breast cancer. Send messages and cards to: Lynne Stewart 53504-054, Federal Medical Center Carswell, P.O. Box 27137, Fort Worth, TX 76127.
Contact: 747 Polk Street, San Francisco, CA 94109; 415-864-1278; RadicalWomenUS@gmail.com; http://lynnestewart.org/; http://www.radicalwomen.org/.
HAITI/WOMEN - Haiti’s government is considering a legal reform measure that would prohibit and punish all sexual assault, including marital rape. MADRE and the International Campaign to Stop Rape & Gender Violence in Conflict are launching a petition to raise international support for this push to address violence against women in Haiti.
Contact: 121 West 27th Street, #301, New York, NY 10001; 212-627-0444; email@example.com; http://www.madre.org.
SYRIA/MIDDLE EAST - The Middle East Children’s Alliance (MECA) is currently seeking funds to assist more than 200,000 refugees fleeing violence in Syria.
FOLK FESTIVAL - The Falcon Ridge Folk Festival will be held August 2-4, in the Berkshires, NY.
Contact: http://www.falconridgefolk.com/; firstname.lastname@example.org.
WAR RESISTERS - The War Resisters League will hold its 90th anniversary conference, Revolutionary Nonviolence: Building Bridges Across Generations and Communities, August 1-4, at Georgetown University. The event will focus on the U.S.’ long history of antimilitarism.
Contact: 339 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10012; 212-228-0450; email@example.com; http://www.warresisters.org.
POPULAR ECONOMICS - The Center for Popular Economics is holding its 2013 Summer Institute August 4-9 at Hampshire College in Amherst, MA. No background in economics is needed for this intensive training. This year’s theme is, The Care Economy: Building a Just Economy with a Heart.
Contact: Center for Popular Economics, PO Box 785 Amherst, MA 01004; 413-545-0743; firstname.lastname@example.org; www.populareconomics.org.
VETERANS - Veterans for Peace is holding the 28th annual convention August 6-11 in Madison, WI. This year’s theme is, Power To The Peaceful.
DEMOCRACY - The Democracy Convention will take place August 7-11 in Madison, WI. The convention brings together nine conferences including topics such as media, education, defense, race, environment and others.
MEN - The 38th National Conference on Men & Masculinity: Forging Justice: Creating Safe, Equal and Accountable Communities, presented in partnership with HAVEN, will be held in Detroit, MI, August 8-10.
Contact: email@example.com; http://www.nomas.org/.
OCCUPY - An Occupy National Gathering will be held in Kalamazoo, MI, August 21-25.
Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org; http://occupynationalgathering.net/.
COMMUNITIES - The Communities Conference is a networking and learning opportunity for co-operative or communal lifestyles, with workshops, events and entertainment; scheduled for August 30-September 2 at the Twin Oaks Community in Louisa, Virginia.
LABOR DAY - The 29th annual Bread and Roses Festival, a celebration of the ethnic diversity and labor history of Lawrence, MA, will be held September 2, in honor of the 1912 Bread and Roses Strike. There will be music, dance, poetry, drama, ethnic food, historical demonstrations, walking & trolley tours.
Contact: PO Box 1137, Lawrence, MA 01842; 978-794-1655; http://www.breadandrosesheritage.org/.
OCCUPY WALL STREET - September 17 is the two-year anniversary of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Events are planned in New York City and worldwide.
TEACHERS - The 13th Annual Conference, “Teaching for Social Justice: The Politics of Pedagogy,” will be held October 12 in San Francisco, CA. The free event features workshops, resources, and free childcare.
Contact: 415-676-7844; email@example.com; http://www.t4sj.org/.
HAITI - International Action, which brings clean water and chlorinators to Haiti, seeks office space capable of housing up to six people and their office equipment.
Contact: Zach Bremer, Zbrehmer@haitiwater.org; 202-488-0735; http://www.haitiwater.org/.
MEDIA - The Union for Democratic Communications and Project Censored are sponsoring a joint conference on media democracy, media activism and social justice to be held November 1-3 at the University of San Francisco. Proposals for presentations, workshops and panels from activists and critical scholars are invited.