Green Party Jill Stein State of the Union Response Feb 2013 .

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

#totn BOLGER, MANSKI: Obama’s misuse of AUMF is unconstitutional, unconscionable

 May 21, 2013
The following is a joint statement of Green Shadow Cabinet officers Leah Bolger, Secretary of Defense, and Ben Manski, Chief of Staff, regarding the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (2001 AUMF):

This past Thursday, Obama administration officials testifying before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee verified what had been unspoken up until now: that the executive branch intends to continue waging war indefinitely, and claims the power and authority to do so.  

The topic for the hearings was the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, or AUMF, which was passed in a rush to reaction mere days after the 9/11 attacks.  Together with the Patriot Act, the 2001 AUMF defied both the U.S. Constitution and international law and dealt a series of blows to the separation of powers, civil liberties, and accepted legal norms. Because most Americans were so stunned and frightened by the attacks of 9/11, they hardly questioned the legality or constitutionality of the AUMF at the time.

In one respect, the 2001 AUMF was written in extremely broad, encompassing language, giving George W. Bush carte blanche to attack any country or any person he suspected of having ties to the 9/11 attacks.  Broadly, the AUMF gave Bush the power to, “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

But in another respect the AUMF had specific boundaries. It defined the enemy specifically as those connected with and responsible for the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Over the past 12 years, this authorization has been redirected into giving the green light for military action, extraordinary rendition, and even assassination of anyone who is considered a significant threat to U.S. foreign policy objectives.  

The testimony last Thursday of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations, Michael Sheehan, and Robert Taylor, the acting General Counsel for the Department of Defense, made clear that the Obama administration has adopted and expanded the Bush doctrine of preemptive and endless war. Assistant Secretary Sheehan stunned some senators while gratifying others when he said that the military currently has the appropriate authority to put “boots on the ground” in Yemen or the Congo, or “any (battlefield) that the enemy chooses to make it,” as suggested by Senator Lindsey Graham.  

The Bush and Obama administrations have relied on the 2001 AUMF to use military force in countries that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks and against people who weren’t even born at the time.  The AUMF is purportedly the authorization being used to justify drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia that have killed thousands of people, 98% of whom were not affiliated with al-Qaeda, according to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.  The Obama administration even believes that the 2001 AUMF authorizes the killing of American citizens, as in the case of Anwar al-Awlaqi and his 16-year old son, who were murdered by Hellfire missiles launched from drones. These actions were never specifically authorized by a vote of Congress, and they were not authorized even under the sweeping terms of the 2001 AUMF.

In its abuse of the directives of the 2001 AUMF, the Obama administration has made a mockery of Congress. Yet the truth remains that that authorization was itself unconstitutional from the beginning.

Congress may not delegate its war powers to the executive branch. The constitutional power to declare war and to authorize military action is that of Congress and Congress alone. To authorize the executive branch to take military action wherever, whenever, and against whomever it chooses is by definition to delegate all war power authority to the executive.

That only one member of Congress - Representative Barbara Lee - stood up in 2001 to vote against the AUMF, says much about the lack of integrity and courage among those sitting in Congress at that time. But it does nothing to change the fact that even with a unanimous vote the AUMF would have been unconstitutional. A Congress of cowards does not constitutionalize an imperial presidency.

Either the AUMF of 2001 was as broad as the Obama administration claims, in which case it was and remains unconstitutional, or that AUMF was limited, in which case the Obama administration has violated it hundreds if not thousands of times already.

In the 12 years since 2001, the federal government has killed hundreds of thousands of people, captured tens of thousands, made refugees out of millions, and injured or otherwise harmed uncountable numbers in the “Global War on Terror.”  

This kind of unending and unchecked war is the very thing the Revolutionaries of 1776 sought to prevent when they limited the power of the presidency and of the U.S. military.
They called standing armies “the bane of liberty” and a threat to the promise of the new American states.

Instead, today, the President pursues a foreign policy that creates enemies through the murder of the innocent, aggressive wars of choice, and the flouting of international law. There seems no other explanation for these policies except that the Global War on Terror by its very design is intended to go on forever.  

It is time for the American people, the courts, and Congress to strike down the 2001 AUMF. And because Congress and the courts have so far failed us, it is time for the people themselves to take up the question of who decides about war. To do so, we must hold accountable President Obama, his administration and Congress for violating their oaths of office. And we must move the war declaring power from Congress to a referendum of the American people, as proposed by Senator Ludlow in the 1930s and Congressman Dellums in the 1970s.

Monday, May 20, 2013

#totn Green Shadow Cabinet Dept. of Education: #Education can and should be free for all


Green Shadow Cabinet
 
The Green Shadow Cabinet's Department of Education expresses our strong support for the students at Cooper Union who have been peacefully occupying their campus President‘s office since Wednesday, May 8, in protest of the college’s recent decision to end the policy of free education for all students.  The new policy was announced by the Board of Trustees on Tuesday, April 23rd, 2013, ending a tradition of over 150 years of free higher education at this private college in New York City.
 
The Cooper Union was founded by Peter Cooper (philanthropist, inventor, and visionary) on the principle that education should be "free as air and water". We agree.
 
High quality education should be available for all people in the United States, starting with early childhood education and continuing through graduate school. It should be the role of our federal government to provide free high quality education for all.  We appreciate U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) bill to reduce student loan interest rates to the same interest rates that banks pay to the federal reserve, which is 0.75 percent for a year.

However, we must go further and state that education can and should be free for all who are interested and able to benefit from it. Student loans and student loan debt (which has now surpassed credit card debt in our country) can and should be a thing of the past. As many college graduates are suffering under massive student debt that threatens to foreclose on their future, the Congressional Budget Office recently announced that the federal government's student loan program is set to turn about $51 billion in profit. It is a moral outrage that the U.S. Department of Education made more than Exxon Mobil, the world's most profitable corporation, by profiting from the debt that our country's young people - our children and grandchildren - as well as returning adult students, have been forced into by a broken system. 
 
The Green Shadow Cabinet Department of Education affirms that high quality education is a human right and therefore should be provided by a caring and responsible federal government. 
 
We call for tuition abolition and debt emancipation from all existing student debt, which sentences millions of current and former students to years of indentured servitude to the financial industry.
 
High quality education can assist people in developing their full potential and in making their maximum contributions to their families, communities, and society.  We can fund free high quality education for all in the United States simply by increasing taxation of the highly profitable banks and other corporations, many of which pay unfairly low taxes because they benefit from tax loopholes that rob our country of valuable resources created by the people of this country. As a percentage of national income, corporate profits stood at 14.2 percent in the third quarter of 2012, the largest share at any time since 1950, while the portion of income that went to employees was 61.7 percent, near its lowest point since 1966. This is unacceptable and can and should be changed. The wealth of society can and should be used to offer free education on the path to creating the country we all deserve.
 
Statement of the Green Shadow Cabinet's Department of Education, a section of the Democracy Branch:
  • Kimberly King, Secretary of Education
  • Roshan Bliss, Assistant Secretary of Education for Higher Education
  • Jack Gerson, Assistant Secreraty of Education for K-12
  • Todd Price, Assistant Secretary of Education for Education Technology

Sunday, May 19, 2013

#totn THORNTON: Obama’s ‘All of the Above’ drug control strategy means more of the same failed strategy


Drug Policy Agency, Administrator 
Green Shadow Cabinet
 
 
On April 24th the Obama administration released its annual National Drug Control Strategy.
 
President Obama has rhetorically stressed that education is central to getting the United States to move forward. He believes that drug use undermines this vision.  The Administration fails to recognize that the War on Drugs has done far more to limit the potential of the country than drug use has.
 
President Obama should know from his own experience that his rhetoric is exaggerated:
“During college, President Obama used marijuana often with his buddies in a group called the "Choom Gang." If his clique was in school today under his own drug policies, he'd be much more likely to get arrested and very likely lose the chance of becoming President, especially given the extraordinary racial disparities in marijuana law enforcement.”
His heavy marijuana use did not prevent him from succeeding in school, going to the best universities and having a very successful career.  The president must realize that if he was one of the 700,000 arrested for marijuana offenses, as people are today, that his successful education and career path would likely have been stopped. As an African American, Barak Obama would be more likely to be arrested and more likely to receive harsh treatment at every stage of the criminal justice process because racial disparity is endemic to drug law enforcement.
 
The Obama administration does say that research and science are of vital importance to developing a successful drug policy. Further, in their rhetoric they emphasize drug use should be a health issue, not a criminal or moral one.  However, research conducted in a ‘War on Drugs’ atmosphere is limited and does not examine the dynamics of how social controls limit drug use, how drug use is affected by law enforcement and how a drug culture develops in the ‘forbidden fruit’ environment of illegality.  As a result they do not know how to effectively deal with drug use and remain stuck in the drug war approach. 
 
Opium, coca, and cannabis have been used by many cultures for thousands of years medicinally and recreationally.  There were, of course, instances of addiction of opiates but in fact, the level of opiate addiction today is about the same as it was when there were no laws against opium use. There were no criminal empires or violence in history until they were declared illegal and trafficking went underground.   The 2005 UN Office of Drug Control’s World Drug Report estimated the worldwide drug trade at $320 billion. The market has grown and steadily become more sophisticated.  
 
Of course, we saw these same phenomena in our experience with alcohol prohibition. When alcohol was made illegal a criminal culture, corruption and underground market developed with it. Those problems no longer exist with alcohol regulation. There are alcohol abuse problems but the crime problems of prohibition have disappeared. When substances are made illegal you make the substance abuse problems worse plus you add problems created by the criminal law.
 
As with President Obama’s “all of the above” energy strategy, which tries to please everyone, in fact it is doing great harm to the environment, bringing us to the tipping point for climate change while slowing the urgent need to transition to a carbon-fee, nuclear-free energy economy. His “all of the above” drug policy of education, treatment and law enforcement, tries to please everyone but does not confront the obvious negative consequences of the War on Drugs. As a result, we cannot applaud the administration’s policies.
 
As long as drugs remain illegal and unregulated, those who profit will use their learned marketing techniques to maintain their profits.  The only way to stop their activity is to put all drugs under a system of regulation and control.  While it seems intuitive that if heroin were legal, more people would use it, the facts are in countries that have put in place heroin maintenance programs, which allow addicts to buy heroin from a clinic, heroin use has gone down.  Once people begin to understand the dynamics of the drug trade, this makes sense. Addicts no longer have to sell heroin to pay for their habit, thus the illegal market shrinks. And, the removal of the profit motive ends marketing practices. Going to a clinic to obtain heroin as medicine is a lot less sexy than being seduced by a pusher into experimentation.  Understanding these realities is where minds begin to change.  If addicts can obtain heroin legally, dealers will go out of business. Every country that has tried heroin maintenance programs has found they reduce crime, reduce addiction, reduce the spread of HIV, prevent overdose deaths and allow addicts to improve their family relations, housing and employment status. The United States needs to develop pilot programs so research can be done to show whether heroin maintenance is more effective than a war on heroin.
 
If marijuana had been considered a medicine rather than a naughty forbidden fruit, it is not likely it would have become the most widely used illegal drug in the United States.   In an upcoming report the Green Shadow Cabinet Justice Council will go into greater detail on the history of marijuana policy and what the Obama administration should be doing in response to Washington and Colorado where voters have voted to legalize marijuana as well as the 18 states and Washington, DC where medical use is legal. The Obama administration has a tremendous opportunity to end the quagmire or the war on marijuana.  We urge him to respect the will of the voters and the rights of states to be “laboratories of democracy.”
 
We hope that the rhetoric of the administration which looks at drug use medically as a health problem rather than morally as a criminal law issue, is followed by policy which makes a public health approach a reality.  However, so far they are still stuck in some old prohibition policies that grow more expensive for tax payers and for the individuals arrested and incarcerated.  It is time for the United States to find a way out of the drug war.  There are evidence-based solutions that show a non-criminal policy would protect the health and safety of Americans more effectively. Both the government and individuals who seek to end the drug war must paint a clear picture of how various drugs would be handled in a legal system, just as caffeine is not treated the same as alcohol or prescription drugs; marijuana would not be treated the same as heroin or cocaine.  Regulatory systems allow flexibility based on the effects of the drugs.
 
Regarding marijuana, a first step in order to increase research on the drug, is to remove marijuana from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.  This is the most restrictive schedule and makes research much more difficult. There is no question that marijuana has an “accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,” 18 states and Washington, DC have policies that allow its’ medical use, numerous professional health associations recognize it. President Obama, without any involvement by Congress, can reschedule marijuana right now. There is so much to learn about possible benefits of cannabis, opiates, cocaine, psychedelics that research on these substances needs to increase.
 
The President's “new paradigm” is really not all that new, even George W. Bush used similar rhetoric. The President’s National Drug Control Strategy still relies on law enforcement and interdiction as the largest budget items when it comes to drug policy. The fact is that a true paradigm shift would recognize that an effective new policy would eliminate most of the drug-related crime and law enforcement would play a very limited role, focused on intoxicated driving and similar issues.
 
Sadly, drug education in the environment of the drug war has often been ineffective, insulting the intelligence of children for generations. Too often, drug education is really drug war propaganda that confuses rather than educates.  Drug education must be replaced by fact-based education.
 
The Obama Administration plans to expand access to treatment. Through the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies will be required to cover treatment for addiction just as they would cover any other chronic disease. Unfortunately, so much of the treatment that exists is not effective.  Treatment for “marijuana addiction” is a waste of resources in most cases.  Patients don't seek it rather most treatment is the result of a court ordering it.  Forced treatment fails. It is time to develop drug treatment programs that people who are having problems with drug use actually want.
 
The Obama administration continues mass random drug testing. Unfortunately, widespread drug testing is bad for society and has very little relevance to work performance. People are denied employment, fired, refused housing, and often incarcerated for failing a forced urine test for marijuana they smoked several days before the test that does not affect their ability to function.  Judgments about abusive use can be seen through behavioral problems, not invasive tests.  Alcohol still causes more problems to individuals and society than any of these drugs would under a legally regulated system.
 
Under the President's plan, we will still spend more than to $4 billion on interdiction and endure related violence on our borders, continue the violence in Mexico as well as our streets.  How much simpler would our border security be if drugs were not part of the problem?   
 
Presidential leadership in the 21st Century requires us to face up to the failure of the 20th Century’s war on drugs.  It is time to transform from a system of mass arrests and incarceration justified by propaganda, to a system of regulation and control, fact-based education, effective treatment and respect and dignity for the individual. 
 
The transition to a sensible and effective drug control strategy should begin now.  While Congress is in dysfunction and unable to consider escaping the quagmire of the war on drugs, President Obama can take steps to begin the process and in so doing build up the evidence that an end to the drug war is the best way to protect the public health and safety of Americans.
  1. Respect democracy and enter into agreements with Washington and Colorado, which just voted to legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, as well as with 18 states and Washington, DC that allow the medical use of marijuana, to make their laws effective and agree not to enforce federal marijuana laws so long as marijuana is use, grown and sold consistent with state or local-government controls and the states take action to prevent marijuana from entering states that have not reformed their laws.
  2. Reschedule marijuana consistent with the scientific and medical evidence.  The Controlled Substances Act lists marijuana in Schedule I this is inappropriate as marijuana clearly has an “accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.” Thousands of patients use marijuana medically, professional associations of doctors and nurses have recommended rescheduling and thousands of doctors have prescribed the drug consistent with state law. Marijuana fits most appropriately in Schedule V.
  3. Use the presidential pardon power to immediately pardon all non-violent drug offenders. Thousands of people languish in prison at great expense to the tax payers whose only offense was a non-violent drug offense.  Every day they spend in prison is a waste of their lives and undermines their potential to have a productive life. These people should be released and the federal government should provide assistance to help them transition into a successful life outside of prison.
  4. Begin research studies in several cities that have had persistent heroin addiction problems that will provide existing addicts with heroin at health clinics. The studies should be modeled on the most successful studies in Europe, e.g. the addicts come to the clinic, purchase heroin at legal prices (a fraction of the cost of the illegal market) and use the heroin at the clinic under the supervision of healthcare workers. In addition, the clinic should provide services to help find housing, employment and education as well as an open door to treatment to end their heroin use.  Studies in Europe have resulted in less crime, no overdose deaths, no spread of HIV/AIDS, reduced heroin trafficking and increases in employment, reduction in homelessness. The most surprising finding was that once they stabilized their lives with housing and employment many addicts decided to stop using heroin even though they had legal access.
These are initial steps that would begin to unwind the failed drug war. 

~ Clifford Thornton is Director of the Drug Policy Agency in the Justice Branch of the Green Shadow Cabinet.

#FITRAKIS: The real #IRS scandal

Bob Fitrakis
Federal Elections Commission, Chair
Green Shadow Cabinet
 
 
No one should be shocked that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is once again using its power to harass grassroots patriot groups and local Tea Party organizations, as reported in the news recently.

The real scandal is that the IRS did not go after Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity, or the pro-Obama propaganda groups Organizing for America and Priorities USA. These are the four major tax-exempt “social welfare” organizations under the IRS code, who are deciding who is running our country.    
 
The Obama administration’s IRS is adopting the same tactics used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Obama’s IRS is auditing and investigating minor fringe players instead of major donors that uphold the two-party system. This is the same tactic the EPA uses to go after small independent gas stations who toss out oil, while ignoring egregious violations of environmental law by oil giants British Petroleum and Exxon.
 
Both major political parties have historically used the IRS to repress and intimidate political foes, minor political parties, and mass movements. The Bill of Impeachment against Richard Nixon included his use of the IRS “in a discriminatory manner.” Legendary liberal President Franklin D. Roosevelt used the IRS to settle scores with his political opponents like newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst, Governor Huey Long of Louisiana, and right-wing radio agitator Father Coughlin.

In the 1960s, the Kennedy administration’s “Ideological Organizations Project” challenged the tax exempt status of various right-wing foundations and sought to intimidate them. LBJ not only harassed the right-wing, most famously Barry Goldwater’s speech writer Karl Hess with the IRS. He also unleashed the FBI on anti-war, environmental and human rights groups under the COINTELPRO operation. The Associated Press reported in 1999 that “Officials in the Democratic White House and members of both parties in Congress have prompted hundreds of audits against political opponents in the 1990s.”
 
Obama’s first election campaign in 2008 ushered in the era of unlimited campaign funds, being the first to raise over a billion dollars. His was also the first presidential campaign in U.S. history to reject public funds so he would not have to limit the amount of money he could spend. When the Citizens United decision came down in 2010, despite the President’s stated opposition to it, he benefited from the 501(c)(4) groups as much as the Republican contender, Romney.  
 
The resignation of acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller does not solve the problem. The vast majority of anonymous money contributed to our top election officials by the 1% in our country, and embraced by both major corporatist political parties, remains intact. Until we defeat U.S. Supreme Court's doctrines that corporations have constitutional rights (corporate personhood) and that money is speech, the corrupt, non-transparent, money-laundering into Democratic and Republican Party political campaigns by multimillionaires and billionaires will continue. And of course in the immediate term, we can't let the Obama administration off the hook; there is plenty the current White House could do that it is not doing to compel disclosure and to crack down on political corruption. 

The Green Shadow Cabinet calls for a new system of public campaign financing that rewards small donations with matching public funds and requires full transparency for all donors.  We support the Move to Amend campaign to end corporate constitutional rights and overturn Citizens United.
 
BOB FITRAKIS is Chair of the Federal Elections Commission of the Green Shadow Cabinet. He has a Ph.D. in Political Science and a J.D. He is co-author of “Will the GOP Steal America's 2012 Election?” and “What Happened in Ohio? A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election.”

#totn PERRY: Too little, too late for #foreclosures

Secretary of Housing 
Green Shadow Cabinet

 
On May 20 the Home Defenders League, a national network of homeowners fighting foreclosure, will descend on Washington and attempt to meet with Attorney General Eric Holder. They will be demanding real restitution for homeowners robbed by predatory banks, prosecution of Wall Street criminals, and resetting all mortgages to current market rates.
 
The groundswell of activity by groups like Home Defenders League is a sure indication that the foreclosure crisis is not over, and administration responses have been ineffective.
 
Some two weeks ago, President Obama finally announced the firing of Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Edward J. DeMarco. Housing activists in New Bottom Line and other organizations had been campaigning for months against De Marco, who refused to allow government lending agency Fannie Mae to give principle reductions to underwater homeowners. 45 members of Congress and nine state attorneys general had also called for his ouster.
 
However, firing DeMarco on May 1 was a case of too little, too late.
 
It was too late because over 5 million American families had already lost their homes.
 
According to Zillow, despite minor improvement in 2012, another 13.8 million families are still underwater with negative equity today.
 
DeMarco announced as long ago as July 2012 that Fannie Mae would refuse to write down principle on the loans of America’s underwater borrowers, even though to do so would save taxpayers up to an estimated $1 billion. Supported by the banks and mortgage insurers, DeMarco instead vowed to continue Fannie Mae’s draconian policy of mass foreclosures.
 
The firing of Ed Demarco was also too little.
 
It was too little because it failed address the enormity of the ongoing housing crisis. Some project that we still face 10 million more foreclosures over the next decade, affecting over a quarter of all US homes with mortgages. Total American homeowner negative equity still adds up to an estimated $1 trillion.
 
As Dean Baker pointed out, the DeMarco - Fannie Mae controversy, while a symbolic focal point, was overblown. By the most optimistic estimates, the total number of homeowners who would be helped by Fannie Mae principle reduction (rejected by DeMarco) is 500,000, or only about 3.7% of underwater homeowners. The economic impact will be negligible.
 
DeMarco (who is Republican) is a convenient political scapegoat for an administration that has effectively blocked any broader principle reduction for four years.
 
Firing Ed DeMarco is also too little because the chief architects of the foreclosure crisis still hold every other key position of authority in the administration. Obama’s appointment of Jacob Lew to succeed Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary was the last straw in placing what Bill Black calls “Wall Street on the Potomac” at the very heart of government power.
 
Incremental Fannie Mae principle reductions are a step but nowhere near sufficient. What is needed is to end the foreclosure crisis by eliminating negative equity altogether. This can be done with principle reduction, the mass resetting of mortgages demanded by the Home Defenders League. This would restore hope to homeowners by reducing their debt obligation to the current value of their home, not the inflated value of their original loan.
 
Banks resist this because it would wipe out investors and force them to list their assets at their real value. Banks would then be forced to seek another bailout or reorganization through a Resolution Trust Corporation type of arrangement – and open the door for genuine bank reform.
 
In their “Green New Deal”, Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala have called for measures that would simultaneously address the housing and banking crises, by creating public banks where necessary to replace failed private ones, and then write down mortgages to affordable levels.
 
We the people have an opportunity to influence the outcome, but only if we get organized. The ones who really need to be fired are the Democratic and Republican parties who created and perpetuate the Washington-Wall Street axis that continues to rule America. Their media outlets would like us all to believe that the financial meltdown of 2008 is over and we are experiencing a return to normalcy. But a normalcy that continues to seize people’s homes and drive us into destitution is unacceptable and unsustainable. The 2012 JP Morgan and HSBC crises prove that the banking industry is still completely out of control, and regulators are helpless to stop it. An economic system that does not feed, clothe, and house its people is in political and moral crisis. It is time for the people to perform an intervention.
 
~ Sandy Perry is an outreach minister at CHAM Deliverance Ministry and organizer at Affordable Housing Network in San Jose, California. He serves as Secretary of Housing in the General Welfare Branch of the Green Shadow Cabinet.

Saturday, May 18, 2013

#totn 11 years of #whistleblower and #civilrights protection


Government Transparency and Accountability, Director
Green Shadow Cabinet 
 
May 15, 2013 marks the 11th anniversary of the signing of the No FEAR Act, the first civil rights and whistleblower law of the 21st century. Thousands of federal employees and allies worked tirelessly to move congress and the White House to pass legislation to protect civil rights victims and courageous whistleblowers. The struggle to pass the No FEAR Act was difficult and fraught with dangers.  Many federal employees who supported the No FEAR Act were terminated from federal service, careers were destroyed and deaths were reported related to unrelenting managerial stress and abuse. However, through valour and courage, federal government employees refused to stop marching and exposing government abuse. After two years of disciplined struggle on May 15th, 2002, the president signed the No FEAR Act.

The No FEAR Act was triggered by a lawsuit brought by Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo  (Coleman-Adebayo v. Carol M Browner) an 18 year employee at the US EPA, who blew the whistle on discrimination inside the Agency as well on a US multinational corporation that endangered South African vanadium mine workers.  Dr. Coleman-Adebayo’s memoir:  No FEAR: A Whistleblower’s Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA provides an account of the passage of the No FEAR Act.

While tens of thousands of workers have benefited from the No FEAR Act much work remains to protect employees in the federal workplace.

In April 2011, Washington Post columnist Joe Davidson reported, "If the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Civil Rights were a chunk of ground, it would be declared a disaster area."  He then cited the Deloitte Consulting firm's highly critical report that "paints a picture of a woefully incompetent and dysfunctional civil rights operation....," and further that, "It appeared to place too much emphasis on minor responsibilities, like executing heritage events, and not enough on the critical discrimination cases affecting employees and disadvantaged communities."

Many human and civil rights groups  are calling for Congress to pass additional legislation to protect employees, such as, No FEAR 2.

~ Dr. Marsha Coleman-Adebayo is the author of No FEAR: A Whistleblowers Triumph over Corruption and Retaliation at the EPA is available through amazon.com. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo heads the Green Shadow Cabinet's Government Transparency and Accountability division within its Democracy Branch. Dr. Coleman-Adebayo worked at the EPA for 18 years and blew the whistle on a US multinational corporation that endangered vanadium mine workers. Marsha's successful lawsuit lead to the introduction and passage of the first civil rights and whistleblower law of the 21st century: the Notification of Federal Employees Anti-discrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002 (No FEAR.

#totn Green Party calls #Monsanto a top risk to #publichealth & the #environment, urges a moratorium on #GMO #food crops #OccupyMonsanto

Green Party of the United States

Contacts:
Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-904-7614,
mclarty@greens.org
Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org


March Against Monsanto planned for May 25 in cities throughout the world

Green Party Speakers Bureau: Greens available to speak on ecological sustainability:
http://www.gp.org/speakers/speakers-ecological.php

Green Shadow Cabinet: http://greenshadowcabinet.us


WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders said today that biotech giant Monsanto and other powerful biotech companies and agribusinesses are wreaking havoc with the environment, exploiting farmers, and endangering the health of plants, animals, and humans throughout the world.

"Monsanto has gained enormous political power in the U.S., with its tentacles wrapped around Congress and the Obama Administration," said Nancy Allen, former co-chair of the Green Party of the United States and Maine Green Independent Party, and organic small farmer for 40 years. "The reckless introduction of GMOs [genetically modified organisms] into agriculture is turning small farmers into serfs under Monsanto's control, damaging biodiversity, and yielding crops that pose health risks to consumers, as well as livestock and plant populations."

Greens said that the biotech industry has grown into a monopolistic cartel, with Monsanto and two other corporations controlling more than half of the world's commercial seed market (http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/seed-diversity-in-trouble-zwfz1303zkin.aspx).

Occupy Monsanto has organized a "March Against Monsanto" to take place on May 25 in capitals and other cities in 41 countries (
http://occupy-monsanto.com / http://occupymonsanto360.org/2013/05/10/march-against-monsanto-may-25-2013 / Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MarchAgainstMonstanto).

"We must hold Monsanto and its executives accountable for the damage they're causing around the world. We must reform campaign finance laws that have given such companies so much influence over Congress and the White House. We also need further research into the effects of GMOs and a moratorium on their use in food crops until these effects are better known. And we demand that GMO products be labeled accurately so that consumers can make informed decisions about what they buy and eat," said Frank Raymond Cetera, Co-Founder and Vice-President of the Alchemical Nursery (
http://www.alchemicalnursery.org) and a New York Green.

The plank on agriculture in the Green Party's national platform reads "Applying the Precautionary Principle to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), we support a moratorium until safety can be demonstrated by independent (non-corporate funded), long-term tests for food safety, genetic drift, resistance, soil health, effects on non-target organisms, and cumulative interactions." (http://www.gp.org/index.php/green-party-platform-table-of-contents/17-platform/40-iii-ecological-sustainability.html#ag)

Green Party leaders listed several ways in which Monsanto and other biotech firms are abusing their power and threatening public health:

GMO crop strains designed to resist Monsanto's RoundUp herbicide (glyphosate) and GMO animal feed have led to new and more virulent plant, animal, and human diseases. See "Ten Ways Monsanto and Big Ag Are Trying to Kill You - And the Planet" by Alexis Baden-Mayer & Ronnie Cummins, Organic Consumers Association, February 1, 2012 (
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24800.cfm).

Monsanto and other companies have benefited from generous government subsidies, promotion by the U.S. State Department, and other political favors. On May 13, the Supreme Court ruled that an Indiana farmer must pay Monsanto $84,000 for using the company's genetically engineered "RoundUp Ready" seeds that were mixed into other seeds he had purchased, even though the GMO seeds were not labeled as such (Bowman v. Monsanto Co.; see
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/05/13-3). See also "Biotech Ambassadors: How the U.S. State Department Promotes the Seed Industry's Global Agenda," Food & Water Watch (http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/doc/Biotech_Report_US.pdf).

Monsanto's lobbyists have persuaded President Obama and Congress to pass the "Farmer Assurance Provision" in the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act (2013), nicknamed the "Monsanto Protection Act" because it blocks the power of federal courts to halt the sale or planting of GMO seeds, regardless of any harmful health effects caused by the seeds. Greens support the repeal of irrelevant sections of this legislation.

Monsanto's influence has resulted in the appointment of the company's former executives to top positions in the FDA's food safety division, including Michael Taylor, Deputy Commissioner for Foods. Greens called these appointments a blatant conflict of interest that inhibits government-funded research on the effects of GMO products. See also "Will Monsanto Ties Influence Nutritionists' Stance on GMOs? Conflicts of interest at the top dieticians' group could undermine its effort to weigh in on genetically modified food" by Tom Philpott, Mother Jones, April 13, 2013 (
http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2013/04/gmo-dieticians-monsanto-california)

Monsanto has extended its power by making small farmers dependent on GMO seeds, through patents and contracts. "Nowhere has the connection between Monsanto's fortunes and farmers' misfortunes been so clear as in India where 200,000 farmers have committed suicide since 1997. For many Indian farmers growing Monsanto's genetically engineered Bt cotton, suicide is their only means of escaping the debt they've accrued to obtain the seeds and pesticides." (
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_24800.cfm)

Scientists have warned about serious environmental effects of GMO products, including reduced biodiversity, contamination of non-GMO farms and natural areas with GMO seeds and pesticides, loss of diverse "heritage seeds" developed over thousands of years through traditional agriculture, and collapse of bee populations around the world because of neonicotinoids in agricultural insecticides.

See also:

"Who Will Control the Green Economy?"
ETC Group, November 1, 2013
http://www.etcgroup.org/content/who-will-control-green-economy-0