This summer will see if we get a public option health care program and an anti-global warming bill. The active organizations working on our behalf include Move On and Democrats for America (and probably others). I suggest helping them.

Gary Goss

---

by Norman Solomon

Days ago, a warning shot from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue landed with a thud on Capitol Hill, near some recent arrivals in the House. The political salvo was carefully aimed and expertly fired. But in the long run it could boomerang.

As a close vote neared on a supplemental funding bill for more war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that "the White House has threatened to pull support from Democratic freshmen who vote no." In effect, it was so important to President Obama to get the war funds that he was willing to paint a political target on the backs of some of the gutsiest new progressives in Congress.

But why would a president choose to single out fellow Democrats in their first congressional term? Because, according to conventional wisdom, they're the most politically vulnerable and the easiest to intimidate.

Well, a number of House Democrats in their first full terms were not intimidated. Despite the presidential threat, they stuck to principle. Donna Edwards of Maryland voted no on the war funding when it really counted. So did Alan Grayson of Florida, Eric Massa of New York, Chellie Pingree of Maine, Jared Polis of Colorado and Jackie Speier of California.

Now what?

Well, for one thing, progressives across the country should plan on giving special support to Edwards, Grayson, Massa, Pingree, Polis and Speier in 2010. If we take the White House at its word, they may find themselves running for re-election while President Obama withholds his support -- in retaliation for their anti-war votes.

But it's not enough to just play defense. We also need to be supporting -- or initiating -- grassroots campaigns to unseat pro-war members of Congress.

In the Los Angeles area, the military-crazed and ultra-corporate Congresswoman Jane Harman will face the progressive dynamo Marcy Winograd in the Democratic primary next year.

Harman's vote for the latest war funding was predictable. But dozens of Democrats with longtime anti-war reputations also voted yes. Among the most notable examples are Oregon's Peter DeFazio and Washington's Jim McDermott, who apparently found their antiwar constituencies in Eugene and Seattle to be less persuasive than the White House chief of staff.

"White House aides worked the halls during the hours before the vote, and chief of staff Rahm Emanuel called some lawmakers personally," McClatchy news service reports. "DeFazio, who was undecided and wound up voting yes, said he talked to Emanuel by phone for about five minutes as Obama's top aide explained the administration's strategy in the war on terror."

This is a crucial time for anti-war activists and other progressive advocates to get more serious about congressional politics. It's not enough to lobby for or against specific bills -- and it's not enough to just get involved at election time. Officeholders must learn that there will be campaign consequences.

When progressives challenge a Democratic incumbent in a primary race, some party loyalists claim that such an intra-party contest is too divisive. But desperately needed change won't come to this country until a lot of progressive candidates replace mainline Democrats in office.

On behalf of his war agenda, the president has signaled that he's willing to undermine the political futures of some anti-war Democrats in Congress. We should do all we can to support those Democrats -- and defeat pro-war incumbents on behalf of an anti-war agenda.

 

Norman Solomon is a journalist, historian, and progressive activist. His book "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death" has been adapted into a documentary film of the same name. His most recent book is "Made Love, Got War." He is a national co-chair of the Healthcare NOT Warfare campaign. In California, he is co-chair of the Commission on a Green New Deal for the North Bay; www.GreenNewDeal.info.

---

I strongly believe that you should stand strong and be an active supporter of HR 676 and S703, the single-payer healthcare bills. What Americans need is healthcare, not insurance. Insurance is a private for profit industry the goals of which are in contradiction to the needs of American's access to healthcare.

I know many professionals that are recently laid off of their employment, moving back into group family homes. These are mortgage brokers, contractors, doctors, and bio-scientists, amongst others. Only a universal single-payer system will cover these folks without breaks in healthcare for them and their families. Single-payer that passed by my state legislature twice now, California, would have saved the State over $5 Billion a year. Additionally each of the counties, cities, and school districts would have saved taxpayer's dollars at a rate of approximately $2,000 per employee, had our governor not vetoed these bills.

Bernie Sanders claims that his S703, a single payer system, will save more than $450 Billion each year. This is a $450 billion economic stimulus that it not matched by any other proposal except for Conyers similar HR 676.

Public option plans are being offered so that the details can make these bills non-competitive with for profit insurance. Let’s be clear, for profit insurance is not healthcare!

To me this is an issue that all progressives, including the Democratic Party, must stand strong on. If single-payer passes then we will be forever in the people’s gratitude. If we fail, well why would anyone want to be a Democrat?

Dan Monte

---

Nonbelievers: Out of the Closet

In his inaugural address, President Obama said: "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers." That was the first time I had heard nonbelievers mentioned by a major American political leader. In this country religious doubt is usually relegated out of politics and into more authentic realms: Homer Simpson admitting to Marge, his wife, "I know our marriage is based on lies, but so are a lot of good things like religion and American history."

There are more nonbelievers in America (16%) than there are Blacks or Jews or gays, but most nonbelievers remain hidden, silent in the closet. As Harvey Milk used to say, if you want your rights, you have to come out.

***

While I don't believe in the supernatural, the American I have admired most in my lifetime is Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. Religious people have contributed greatly to the peace movement. We'd be in bad shape without them.

That does not excuse the religious distortions promoted in our failing newspapers and public media. An example is a recent newspaper piece in which the writer claimed that what is best about America came mostly from the efforts of Christian reformers.

I know of no way to measure what is best about America or whose efforts mattered most. I do know that many Founding Fathers of this country (Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin) did not consider Christ divine. They were not, in an orthodox sense, Christians. They worked hard--and succeeded--in keeping the supernatural out of the Constitution. They would have opposed the contradiction embodied in, say, a moment of religious silence at the start of meetings of elected political bodies.

Our Founding Fathers were, in many cases, Deists. They rejected supernaturalism but thought it logical to believe that some totally unknowable force had created the universe.

In separating Church and State the Founding Fathers had the support of the Baptists. In those days the robust religions in America did not need or want government support. Instead religions relied on faith to fill collection plates.

***

One difficulty that fundamentalist religions have today is that what was believable 3,000 years ago--a talking snake in the Garden of Eden, for example--seems unlikely in contemporary California. To cope with such doubts, mainstream religions have reinterpreted the Bible's folk tales, turning them into metaphors. Respectable mainstream religions search for compatibility between religion and reason or science.

Meanwhile, membership grows in American sects that denounce science. For me, at least, the most frightening divide in America today is not the differences between progressives and conservatives; it is the split between those who do and do not believe in science. As Wittgenstein once remarked, if someone said to him that he did not believe in science, the conversation would end (there would be no way to go on). In America today, Wittgenstein would encounter a lot of silence.

Americans muddle along as best we can with the conflict between religion and rational thought. Meanwhile, discussion of the matter in the old media--in the newspapers, for instance--is suppressed, much as talk about gays was suppressed by news editors 50 years ago. I suppose editors, not in general a logical or thoughtful bunch, figure that orthodox religions are today too intellectually fragile for debate. They crumble if you touch them.

Yet religious doubt isn't new. It goes back to our first Western philosopher, Anaximander. (The Chinese, I suspect, were doubtful from the start.) Anaximander, credited by some with inventing the sun dial, declared all of the Greek Gods to be fictions. And so on up until today.

***

I understand that organized religion and theology are hard to give up. I understand friends who don't want to lose a sustaining system of rites, symbols and beliefs that express and contain a safe psychic life. At the same time, no one actually lives--or could live--the life that this system promotes. Kierkegaard compared Christianity to a giant house built by a man who lives in a crummy shed in his own back yard.

Obviously much of what we think of as religion is made up. In my favorite hymn, "O, Mary, Don't You Weep," the singer proclaims that Mary wore three links of chain, and every link bore Jesus' name. I probably don't need to add that there is no historical evidence that Mary wore links. Most of what Christians tell us about Jesus is fiction. Most people don't care.

Thomas Jefferson cared. Twice he attempted to rewrite the Bible while leaving out the supernatural elements. That's an inconvenient fact you will not see printed in your town's local paper. It's safer and more conventional to promote the talking snake story, while denouncing Darwin and climate change.

Gary Goss

---

The next meeting of the North Sonoma County Democratic & Progressive Club will be held at the Healdsburg Senior Center 133 Matheson St. at 7:30 PM on April 21, Tuesday. (This might change.)
________________________________________
Petaluma Approves A Community Impact Report For New Commercial Development

by Martin J. Bennett

Historically the City of Petaluma has been a model in Sonoma County for implementing innovative public policy that encourages smart, responsible, and equitable growth.

In 2006 Greenbelt Alliance released a "Bay Area Smart Growth Scorecard" that ranked Petaluma the #1 city in the region for developing policy to prevent sprawl, to provide affordable housing and to promote high density mixed-use development.

Petaluma again provided leadership by approving last fall the first 'Community Impact Report' (CIR) requirement for new commercial developments of more than 25,000 square feet, including retail and grocery stores and hotels. The legislation was proposed by labor, environmental, business, and community organizations. A CIR is a comprehensive analysis of the fiscal and economic impacts of a proposed major development project.

All too often, particularly during a recession and decline of city and county revenues, there is a rush to provide a new development 'quick fix' which might boost sales tax revenue. The CIR is a 'balance sheet' that will give policy makers and the public complete and objective data with regard to the benefits and costs of a proposed project.

The report is much shorter and simpler than the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the developer pays for it, and a city-designated consultant does the work.

A CIR will, for example, assess the contribution of a proposed project to the local tax base. Will a project generate new revenue such as sales tax, property tax, or the bed tax? Will a project increase city revenue or simply move around part of the tax base from one project to another?

A CIR will evaluate the economic viability of a project by analyzing market conditions and projected sales or occupancy rates. The report will also examine the impacts of a proposed development on local business. Will a project fill a market niche or will loss of sales due to increased competition hurt existing businesses?

The report will assess the employment characteristics of new jobs created, including the number of full- and part-time jobs and wage levels and benefits. A CIR will ask: What types of jobs will the project bring to the city?

A CIR will also examine costs of the proposed project to the taxpayer, including necessary infrastructure improvements and increased demand for public services such as police, fire, and road maintenance. Finally, the report will identify hidden costs such as public subsidies for Food Stamps, Medi-Cal, and uncompensated medical care for workers filling new jobs that may not pay a living wage or provide health insurance.

A project, for example, may bring a significant number of new jobs to the community, but if most of these jobs are without medical benefits, what will be the impact on local hospitals and public clinics? According to a 2006 study by the New American Foundation, California counties spend $1.8 billion annually to provide health care for 1.3 million uninsured adults. A CIR will enable policymakers and the public to evaluate the trade-offs and public costs of a project.

CIRs can help avoid delays and costly lawsuits that hurt both the developer and the public. A CIR is completed early in the development process, and prior to the completion of the EIR. Residents are encouraged to participate in the process, providing comment and submitting additional information at a public hearing when city officials and staff review the CIR.

Unlike the required EIR, a CIR does not mandate changes to mitigate negative impacts. However, the CIR can facilitate a public dialogue between residents, the city council, and the developer at an early stage, resulting in changes to the project and the devising of 'win-win' solutions in response to concerns both policymakers and residents raise

Moreover, developers will no longer have to deal with community concerns in an ad-hoc or piecemeal way. The CIR will showcase the community benefits of a proposed project and facilitate the development of a community consensus. This should enable a project to move forward expeditiously to obtain permit approvals and thus shorten the time line for the developer.

The experience in cities that have adopted a CIR requirement, such as San Jose, Los Angeles, and San Diego, indicates that this policy tool can begin to reorient the development process to yield positive and timely outcomes for all.

Petaluma has just adopted a revised twenty-year General Plan that emphasizes city-centered infill development and mixed-use projects. Petaluma hopes to attract employers who provide good jobs with a living wage and benefits, and to enhance the diversity of retail outlets while ensuring that existing local businesses will thrive. The council will use the information collected for a CIR to evaluate if a project conforms to the new General Plan and is a "net positive" for the community.

Martin J. Bennett teaches American history at Santa Rosa Junior College and serves as Co-Chair of the Living Wage Coalition of Sonoma County. Please go to http://wwwlivingwagesonoma to view the legislation implemented in Petaluma and to download model CIRs for projects in Los Angeles and San Diego.


Dept. of Social Science
Santa Rosa Junior College
1501 Mendocino Ave.
Santa Rosa, Ca.
95401

(707) 527-4873 Office
(707) 522-2755 Fax
(707) 939-8933 Home Office

---

Much of the support for progressive candidates comes from members of peace projects, including the Healdsburg Peace Project, which holds a peace vigil each Thursday from 6 to 7 on the town plaza. All are welcome to join the vigil, which began before the war against Iraq and has met once a week for more than five years.

---

Penny Chambers coordinates the Healdsburg Obama club. You can reach her at "pennychambers@comcast.net"

There are also Obama clubs in Cloverdale and Windsor.

---