Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio

December 3, 2016

The planet’s PREMIER Soul, RnB and talk radio station. Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio returns Tuesday, December 6. We will pay tribute to Black Panther Party Chairman Fred Hampton, who was assassinated by the Chicago Police Department and the FBI December 4, 1969.  Gabriela Ella will talk about how you can support Native American water protectors in North Dakota. Mary L. Sanders and I will discuss the Community Party’s 2017 legislative package, including the Trayvon Martin and Meagan Hockaday Acts. 8:00 PM Eastern Time 7:00 PM Central 5:00 PM Pacific. Check out http://www.sometroradio.com/ for info on replays, and podcasts.
#NoDAPL #racialprofiling #policebrutality #immigration #workplacebullying #workersrights

 

David Samuels Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/david.samuels.948

 

Laurie Valdez Facebook page:

 

https://www.facebook.com/laurie.valdez1?lst=542674272%3A100001968642701%3A1480746410

 

Democracy Now!:    Dakota Access pipeline standoff:

 

https://www.democracynow.org/topics/dakota_access

 

Divest from the Dakota Access pipeline:

#InvestInStandingRock and #DivestFromDAPL Due to pressure from people like you, two major banks in Norway have already withdrawn their funding from the Dakota Access Pipeline. In order to shut down this pipeline for good, we need to go for its arteries and create a movement of people divesting from the banks embedded within Dakota Access’ mother company. These banks are using YOUR money to invest in the pipeline – join us and tell them you won’t stand for it! You can take a stand and #DivestFromDAPL by closing any accounts you have in financial institutions that bankroll the Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Partners. Click link in bio to find out whether your bank is invested in the Dakota Access Pipeline. Tag us and we'll share your pictures & Videos!

A photo posted by #RezpectOurWater (@rezpectourwater) on

 

Flashback: Rep. Bruce Morris Urges Police to Support Community Party Racial Profiling Bill:

 

https://hendu39.wordpress.com/2016/11/23/flashback-rep-bruce-morris-urges-police-to-support-community-party-racial-profiling-bill/

 

Meagan Hockaday Act:

 

https://hendu39.wordpress.com/meagan-hockaday-act/

 

Driving While Black:

 

Trump Presidency Culminates Republicans’ Consolidation of Power

December 1, 2016

by David Samuels

This column appears in the December 1 – 8 edition of the Hartford News. http://www.hartfordnews.org/

Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio
Commentary on urban issues from a grassroots perspective. First, third and fifth Tuesday of each month. 8:00 PM Eastern Time 7:00 PM Central 5:00 PM Pacific. Tune in! http://www.sometroradio.com/ Next show: December 6. Check out our No Sellout blog for info on the rest of our Community Party Media lineup, including False Choice: the Bipartisan Attack on the Working Class, the Poor and Communities of Color. https://hendu39.wordpress.com/2015/12/20/community-party-media-3/
Community Party Radio Podcasts
Corporate Media = Fake News

The coporate media’s biggest lies come in the form of the stories they don’t cover. While CNN provided wall-to-wall coverage Monday of the Ohio State attack, the trial of domestic terrorist Dylann Roof, who fatally shot nine Black people including South Carolina State Senator Clementa Pinckney, wasn’t mentioned. The incredible twist of US District Judge Richard Mark Gergel allowing Roof to act as his own lawyer wasn’t enough to get CNN to put aside their obvious bias, and report on the trial.  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/28/us/dylann-roof-charleston-massacre.html  63% of mass shootings since 1982 were committed by white males.  http://www.vice.com/read/why-are-so-many-mass-shootings-committed-by-young-white-men-623
Interview with Josh Elliott
Coming in January: A Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio interview with Representative-elect Josh Elliott, who will serve in Connecticut’s 88th District (Hamden). As the Donald Trump presidency looms and a civil war has erupted between establishment and progressive Democrats in Washington, Elliott will be a much needed voice at the State Capitol in 2017. Elliott supports taxing the rich and closing corporate tax loopholes, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour, and legalizing marijuana. Elliott also spoke out in opposition to state employee layoffs.
Safe Work Environment Act Report: Give Me a Break
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8_idM7tKKQ
Connecticut Valley Hospital continues to infringe on workers’ contractual right to three breaks per shift, by not providing break rooms. Employees have to eat lunch at their desks. Co-workers have complained to me that it often takes them over an hour to eat, due to constant interruptions. That’s not a break. 15 minute breaks in my building are often taken in the lobby of the campus buildings. Last week I was harassed by an officious nursing supervisor, who claimed that I could not use my cellphone in the lobby. Myself and others have only been doing this for years. Stay tuned for updates. Coming in 2017: the Community Party’s Safe Work Environment Act would empower workers who are targets of workplace bullying.
Policy Watch: Red Alert
All year, Gov. Dan Malloy and his henchman, budget chief Ben Barnes, have used the slogan “new economic reality” to describe their neoliberal attack on the Democratic Party’s voter base: the working class, including the public sector (largest employer of Blacks and women), the poor and communities of color. Neoliberalism has resulted in a new political reality for the Democrats: Donald Trump will become the 45th President of the United States in January, bolstered by a Republican controlled Congress. Thirty one states currently have Republican governors. Thirty two state legislatures are controlled by the GOP; if that number reaches thirty eight, the party will be able to ratify constitutional amendments. Malloy has a 24% approval rating, as the CT Republicans are launching an offensive to take the Governor’s Mansion, the Senate and the House of Representatives in 2018. The GOP won three Senate seats on Election Day to tie the Democrats, 18-18, and gained eight House seats. The Dems’ 79-72 majority is their smallest in thirty years. Last week Republican Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton announced that he is considering another run for governor, and has formed an exploratory committee. Boughton is notoriously anti-immigrant; certainly he will enthusiastically support Trump’s deportation plan. GOP Senator Rob Kane is also exploring the possibility of entering the gubernatorial race.
“Democrats now control only 13 state legislatures (26%). If they lose 1 more they fall below the percentage needed to stop constitutional amendments. And it doesn’t have to be proposed by Congress. It just takes two-thirds of states. Democrats now hold ‘the trifecta’ (governorship, Senate and House) in just five states: California, Delaware, Oregon, Hawaii, and Rhode Island. The weakest Democrat showing ever. The last big fight over amending the constitution was the Equal Rights Amendment, which fell 3 states short.” ~ education advocate Marc Porter Magee https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment
“Nobody talking about the fact Republicans now hold both chambers in Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Virginia, Iowa. Only swing state chambers Democrats have: Colorado House of Representatives and Nevada.” ~ political blogger Brad Todd
“Dems weakness in states makes them want to get rid of the Electoral College, which can’t happen because they are weak in most states.” ~ Marc Porter Magee http://www.vox.com/…/electoral-college-explained-presidenti…
“At the sub-presidential level, the Obama years have created a Democratic Party that’s … a smoking pile of rubble.” ~ Matthew Yglesias, vox.com
http://www.vox.com/…/1…/democratic-party-smoking-pile-rubble
As their party craters, Malloy and Barnes show no indication that they plan to alter the Democrats’ course of self-destruction. A $1.5 billion budget deficit looms in 2017. Malloy and Barnes plan more funding cuts for human services providers, and there is talk that state employees (I’m a state worker), the core of the Democrats’ voter base and the difference in Malloy’s narrow 2010 victory over Republican Tom Foley, will be approached again for wage/benefit concessions for the third time since 2009. Meanwhile Malloy continues to maintain a regressive tax structure, where the working class and the poor in this state pay more than the rich. Corporate tax loopholes cost CT $7 billion a year in revenue. Malloy refuses to change his policy of coddling the wealthy and corporations. Last year the Democratic controlled General Assembly killed a public bank bill. The Bank of North Dakota, the nation’s only publicly owned bank, has been a cash machine for that state since 1919: BND generated $70 million in revenue in 2011.  http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/why-socialism-doing-so-darn-well-deep-red-north-Dakota
The neoliberal agenda of Malloy and the CT Democrats is modeled after the New Democrats ideology, introduced by the Clintons during the 90’s.
Michelle Alexander, author of The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, summarized the objective of the New Democrats in April, following Bill Clinton’s heated exchange with Black Lives Matter protesters during a Hillary Clinton campaign rally in Philadelphia.

“Bill Clinton says that he ‘almost’ wants to apologize for his remarkable episode yesterday — you know, when he embraced long-debunked, racially coded ‘super-predator’ rhetoric, compared Black Lives Matter protestors to Republicans and insisted that they support murderers, and blamed his crime bill on black politicians. Personally, I am not demanding an apology from Bill Clinton. Instead, I would like to say thank you. Thank you, Bill, for giving the nation a ten-minute tutorial on everything that was wrong (and apparently remains wrong) with the ‘New Democrats’ and their approach to racial politics.
Unfortunately much of the mainstream media seems to be buying (yet again) much of what Bill was selling yesterday. So to recap what should be obvious by now: Black politicians and activists were not asking for ‘get tough’ measures and nothing else back in the 1990s. Some black politicians opposed the Clinton crime bill, and those who supported it weren’t seeking punishment and nothing more; they desperately wanted massive investment in jobs and schools so the young people trapped in communities where work had suddenly disappeared would have some hope of survival. It is a gross distortion to suggest that black people wanted billions of dollars slashed from child welfare, housing and other public benefits in order to fund an unprecedented prison building boom. It was Bill Clinton’s deliberate political strategy — one he championed along with the ‘New Democrats’ — to appeal to white swing voters by being tougher on struggling black communities than the Republicans had been, ramping up the drug war and gutting welfare. That strategy of ‘getting tough’ while at the same time eviscerating the federal social safety net was NOT supported by many of the black politicians he seeks to use as cover. Rep. John Lewis (who Clinton referred to yesterday as the ‘last remaining hero of the civil rights movement’) fiercely opposed welfare reform, accurately predicting that it would thrust more than a million more kids into severe poverty.
John Lewis said back then: ‘How can any person of faith, of conscience, vote for a bill that puts a million more kids into poverty? What does it profit a great nation to conquer the world, only to lose its soul?’
The young people challenging Bill Clinton yesterday were asking these very same questions. You may not agree with their tactics, but they were, in their own way, fighting for the soul of the Democratic party and American democracy itself. Whether our nation can be redeemed in the long run remains to be seen.”
Racism and corporatism has reduced the Democrats to a failed, minority party. Their only hope of pushing back against the GOP tidal wave is to implement egalitarian policies. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen. The Democrats are swimming in corporate money; businesses and the wealthy are their constituents. It will take a politically independent, grassroots movement to push the city and state Democrats to the left, and create a firewall against the Trump administration.
Follow CP on Twitter for state, national and world news headlines. https://twitter.com/CommunityParty1 Check out my Facebook page for daily news commentary. https://www.facebook.com/david.samuels.948   Listen to WQTQ 89.9 FM for CP’s public service announcements on our racial justice initiatives https://www.facebook.com/wqtqfm and So-Metro Radio the first, third and fifth Tuesday of each month at 8:00 PM for commentary on urban issues http://www.sometroradio.com/  Check out our No Sellout blog (https://hendu39.wordpress.com/) for the complete archive of CP columns and Northend Agent’s archive for selected columns (http://www.northendagents.com/). Contact us at 860-206-8879 or info.community.party@gmail.com

 

Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio

November 26, 2016

The planet’s PREMIER Soul, RnB and talk radio station. Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio returns Tuesday, November 29. California activists Laurie Valdez and Theresa Smith will join us to discuss police violence and criminal justice reform. Laurie’s retreat for families of police violence victims was the first recipient of San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s $1 million in donations to social justice organizations. 8:00 PM Eastern Time 7:00 PM Central 5:00 PM Pacific. Check out http://www.sometroradio.com/ for info on replays, and podcasts.

 

David Samuels Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/david.samuels.948

 
Kaepernick Keeps Word On Donating Cash To Causes

Kaepernick Keeps Word On Donating Cash To Causes

 

Colin Kaepernick donations website:

CK7 October Donations

 

Laurie Valdez Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/laurie.valdez1

 

Justice for Josiah Facebook page:

 

Theresa Smith:

https://www.facebook.com/theresa.smith.92

 

Law Enforcement  Accountability Network:

 

Colin Kaepernick’s first post-game press conference on his national anthem protest:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REAL Protection Against Workplace Bullying: Safe Work Environment Act

November 25, 2016

The Safe Work Environment Act would provide workers with more protection than the Healthy Workplace Bill, while eliminating legal barriers that people currently face when they file a lawsuit against their employer. Our legislation eliminates the HWB requirement that an employee must prove malice and intent by an employer, which is basically impossible. Our language would also remove the HWB stipulation that an employee must provide proof of damage to their physical / psychological health. The federal employment discrimination law does not include either of the HWB provisions, which provide massive loopholes for abusive employers. We will also incorporate language from the Nevada workplace bullying bill (see below), which eliminates the burden of having to prove workplace bullying based on race or gender discrimination. We also want lawmakers to create a workplace bullying advisory board, which would solicit and implement input from public employees when they recommend future legislation. One bill will not stop workplace bullying, which is a constantly evolving issue. Legislation must evolve with it! The creation of a workplace bullying advisory board will ensure that this issue remains active at the State Capitol EVERY YEAR.

 Nevada State Sen. Richard Segerblom has proposed amending a Nevada law patterned after Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., as     amended, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.
Sen. Segerblom wants to provide individuals who can prove they are the victims of a hostile work environment the right to a remedy under the law whether or not they can show illegal discrimination. In other words, he has proposed making the hostile workplace  remedy status-blind.
 Segerblom’s proposed bill defines “abusive conduct” as:
  • Repeated verbal abuse in the form of derogatory  remarks, insults and epithets;
  •  Verbal or physical conduct which is threatening, intimidating, and humiliating; and
  •  The gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work product.
Unless the abuse is particularly egregious, abusive conduct must be directed at the employee target on more than one occasion.
It is not difficult for employers to avoid liability under the proposed bill. The bill states that it is an affirmative defense to an action for abusive conduct in a work environment if the employer:
  • Exercised reasonable care to prevent the abusive conduct; and
  •  Promptly corrected the abusive conduct.
If an employer is found to be liable, the employer could be assessed damages, back pay, costs, and attorney’s fees.
Segerblom’s proposed bill provides significantly more protection  to targets of workplace bullying  than the  Healthy Workplace Bill proposed by the Workplace Bullying Institute.

we’ll share posts from the When the Abuser Goes to Work employment blog. http://abusergoestowork.com/  The Workplace Bullying Institute has introduced various versions of the Healthy Workplace Bill in over 20 states, including Connecticut. The Community Party agrees with workplace bullying activists who believe that HWB in its current form would be ineffective in curbing abusive workplace conduct.

                                                                                            ***

                                         Nevada’s Proposed Anti-Bully Law

 Nevada State Sen. Richard Segerblom has proposed amending a Nevada law patterned after Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., as     amended, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.
Sen. Segerblom wants to provide individuals who can prove they are the victims of a hostile work environment the right to a remedy under the law whether or not they can show illegal discrimination. In other words, he has proposed making the hostile workplace  remedy status-blind.
 Segerblom’s proposed bill defines “abusive conduct” as:
  • Repeated verbal abuse in the form of derogatory  remarks, insults and epithets;
  •  Verbal or physical conduct which is threatening, intimidating, and humiliating; and
  •  The gratuitous sabotage or undermining of a person’s work product.
Unless the abuse is particularly egregious, abusive conduct must be directed at the employee target on more than one occasion.
It is not difficult for employers to avoid liability under the proposed bill. The bill states that it is an affirmative defense to an action for abusive conduct in a work environment if the employer:
  • Exercised reasonable care to prevent the abusive conduct; and
  •  Promptly corrected the abusive conduct.
If an employer is found to be liable, the employer could be assessed damages, back pay, costs, and attorney’s fees.
Segerblom’s proposed bill provides significantly more protection  to targets of workpladce bullying  than the  Healthy Workplace Bill proposed by the Workplace Bullying Institute.

Original “Healthy Workplace Bill”

SkinnyThis is the original  proposed Healthy Workplace Bill (HWB)  that was drafted by the Professor David C. Yamada of  Suffolk University Law School in Boston, MA, and supported by the Workplace Bullying Institute for almost a decade  at a web site called, The Healthy Workplace Bill.  
A new and much better version of the bill was introduced for consideration by  the Massachusetts legislature in 2013. 
Any state that is considering workplace anti-bully legislation should look to Massachusetts or to Nevada, where Nevada State Senator Richard “Tick” Segerblom  proposed a bill that would give workplace bully targets the same protection and rights as any other victim of a hostile work environment. Nevada’s bill was patterned after Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., as amended, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin and would essentially provide a status-blind remedy for a hostile work environment.
The original HWB is anemic when compared to  legislation  and regulations adopted in other countries  to address workplace bullying.
For one thing, it  would require a victim to provide evidence of malicious intent to bully.  Malice is defined in the proposed bill as “the desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another.”  Part of the “art” of  workplace bullying is subtlety. The target may be the victim of a thousand pin pricks that add up to a mortal wound.  Bullies are notorious for showing one face to the target and another to his/her supervisor. It would be very difficult to prove malice in these situations, and this is not a requirement for “hostile workplace” claims under federal discrimination laws unless the plaintiff is seeking the additional remedy of punitive damages. 
It also would require the target to provide proof of tangible  psychological or physical harm to the plaintiff.  This is not required for other victims of a hostile workplace environment.  In fact, the requirement was expressly rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 1993 sexual harassment case.
The U. S. Supreme Court said in 1993 that the protection of federal law “comes into play before the harassing conduct leads to a nervous breakdown.”  The Court also said:  “Certainly Title VII bars conduct that would seriously affect a reasonable person’s psychological well-being, but the statute is not limited to such conduct. So long as the environment would reasonably be perceived, and is perceived, as hostile or abusive … there is no need for it also to be psychologically injurious.” (Harris v. Forklift System,  510 U.S. 17 (1993)).
Any requirement to prove psychological harm would pose a burden for targets who don’t have health care coverage,  the funds to see a therapist or the cultural disposition to seek psychiatric care. According to the Office of Minority Health, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, 19.5 percent of African-Americans in comparison to 10.4 percent of non-Hispanic whites were uninsured in 2007.  
An international authority on workplace abuse, Katherine Lippel, says laws in other countries do not have the above restrictions, which would make it far more difficult for a plaintiff  in to prevail in litigation. She says the authors should rethink the bill. Dr. Lippel is the Canada Research Chair in Occupational Health and Safety Law, University of Ottawa, Canada. 
According to Dr. Lippel:  “It is understandable that the difficult context applicable in the United States with regard to rights of workers may favor a more restrictive legislative approach for purposes of political expediency, yet even some authors from the United States have expressed concern with the restrictive conditions proposed in the Healthy Workplace Bill … The actual content of the legislation on workplace bullying, if there is to be legislation, requires reflection.”
Perhaps most troubling about the HWB is the wording of Section 7(b), which limits damages for emotional distress to $25,000 (with no punitive damages)  in  cases where an employer is found to be liable but the target does not suffer an adverse employment action. This  affects targets of bullying who are not demoted or fired. But why?  There is at least one highly publicized case where an alleged target of workplace bullying committed suicide because he thought that he was  going to be demoted or fired. This cap is so low that it would  fail to adequately compensate a target of severe bullying and would not serve as a useful deterrent to employers to halt workplace bullying.
Possibly the above limiting language  reflects a concern by its drafter that employers will fight workplace anti-bullying legislation unless it is sufficiently weak. That hardly seems like a suitable foundation for a bill to address a problem as serious as workplace bullying.
WBI Director Gary Namie and Prof. Yamada declined to comment when asked to explain the reasons for the restrictive provisions of the bill.
 American workers deserve at least the same level of protection as other workers around the world.  The original HWB would leave many targets of workplace bullying with no legal recourse. Advocates should begin from a starting point that all workers have a right to be treated with dignity and respect.
– PGB
_______________

THE HEALTHY WORKPLACE BILL

Section 1 – Preamble
(a) Findings
The Legislature finds that:
(1) The social and economic well-being of the State is dependent upon healthy and productive employees;
(2) Between 37 and 59 percent of employees directly experience health-endangering workplace bullying, abuse, and harassment, and this mistreatment is approximately four times more prevalent than sexual harassment alone;
(3) Workplace bullying, mobbing, and harassment can inflict serious harm upon targeted employees, including feelings of shame and humiliation, severe anxiety, depression, suicidal tendencies, impaired immune systems, hypertension, increased risk of cardiovascular disease, and symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder.
(4) Abusive work environments can have serious consequences for employers, including reduced employee productivity and morale, higher turnover and absenteeism rates, and increases in medical and workers’ compensation claims;
(5) If mistreated employees who have been subjected to abusive treatment at work cannot establish that the behavior was motivated by race, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, or age, they are unlikely to be protected by the law against such mistreatment;
(6) Legal protection from abusive work environments should not be limited to behavior grounded in protected class status as that provided for under employment discrimination statutes;
and,
(7) Existing workers’ compensation plans and common-law tort actions are inadequate to discourage this behavior or to provide adequate relief to employees who have been harmed by abusive work environments.
(b) Purpose
It is the purpose of this Chapter:
(1) To provide legal relief for employees who have been harmed, psychologically, physically, or economically, by being deliberately subjected to abusive work environments;  (2) To provide legal incentive for employers to prevent and respond to abusive mistreatment of employees at work.
Section 2 – Definitions
(a) Abusive work environment. An abusive work environment exists when the defendant, acting with malice, subjects an employee to abusive conduct so severe that it causes tangible harm to the employee.
(1) Abusive conduct. Abusive conduct is conduct, including acts, omissions, or both, that a reasonable person would find hostile, based on the severity, nature, and frequency of the defendant’s conduct. Abusive conduct may include, but is not limited to: repeated infliction of verbal abuse such as the use of derogatory remarks, insults, and epithets; verbal or physical conduct of a threatening, intimidating, or humiliating nature; the sabotage or undermining of an employee’s work performance; or attempts to exploit a employee’s known psychological or physical vulnerability. A single act normally will not constitute abusive conduct, but an especially severe and egregious act may meet this standard.
(2) Malice. Malice is defined as the desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another.
(b) Tangible harm. Tangible harm is defined as psychological harm or physical harm.
(1) Psychological harm. Psychological harm is the material impairment of a person’s mental health, as established by competent evidence.
(2) Physical harm. Physical harm is the material impairment of a person’s physical health or bodily integrity, as established by competent evidence.
(c) Adverse employment action. An adverse employment action includes, but is not limited to, a termination, demotion, unfavorable reassignment, failure to promote, disciplinary action, or reduction in compensation.
(d) Constructive discharge. A constructive discharge shall be considered a termination, and, therefore, an adverse employment action within the meaning of this Chapter. A constructive discharge exists where: (1) the employee reasonably believed he or she was subjected to abusive conduct; (2) the employee resigned because of that abusive conduct; and, (3) prior to resigning, the  employee brought to the employer’s attention the existence of the abusive conduct and the employer failed to take reasonable steps to correct the situation.
Section 3 – Unlawful Employment Practices
(a) Abusive Work Environment. It shall be an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter to subject an employee to an abusive work environment as defined by this Chapter.
(b) Retaliation. It shall be an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter to retaliate inany manner against an employee who has opposed any unlawful employment practice under this Chapter, or who has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation or proceeding under this Chapter, including, but not limited to, internal complaints and proceedings, arbitration and mediation proceedings, and legal actions.
Section 4 – Employer Liability and Defense
(a) An employer shall be vicariously liable for an unlawful employment practice, as defined by this Chapter, committed by its employee.
(b) Where the alleged unlawful employment practice does not include an adverse employment action, it shall be an affirmative defense for an employer only that:
(1) the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any actionable behavior; and,
(2) the complainant employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of appropriate preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer.
Section 5 – Employee Liability and Defense
(a) An employee may be individually liable for an unlawful employment practice as defined by this Chapter.
(b) It shall be an affirmative defense for an employee only that the employee committed an unlawful employment practice as defined in this Chapter at the direction of the employer, under threat of an adverse employment action.
Section 6 – Affirmative Defenses
It shall be an affirmative defense that:
(a) The complaint is based on an adverse employment action reasonably made for poor performance, misconduct, or economic necessity;
(b) The complaint is based on a reasonable performance evaluation; or,
(c) The complaint is based on a defendant’s reasonable investigation about potentially illegal or unethical activity.
Section 7 – Relief
(a) Relief generally. Where a defendant has been found to have committed an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter, the court may enjoin the defendant from engaging in the unlawful employment practice and may order any other relief that is deemed appropriate, including, but not limited to, reinstatement, removal of the offending party from the complainant’s work environment, back pay, front pay, medical expenses, compensation for emotional distress, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees.
(b) Employer liability. Where an employer has been found to have committed an unlawful employment practice under this Chapter that did not culminate in an adverse employment action, its liability for damages for emotional distress shall not exceed $25,000, and it shall not be subject to punitive damages. This provision does not apply to individually named employee defendants.
Section 8 – Procedures
(a) Private right of action. This Chapter shall be enforced solely by a private right of action.
(b) Time limitations. An action commenced under this Chapter must be commenced no later than one year after the last act that constitutes the alleged unlawful employment practice.
Section 9 – Effect on Other Legal Relationships
The remedies provided for in this Chapter shall be in addition to any remedies provided under any other law, and nothing in this Chapter shall relieve any person from any liability, duty, penalty or punishment provided by any other law, except that if an employee receives workers’ compensation for medical costs for the same injury or illness pursuant to both this Chapter and the workers’ compensation law, or compensation under both this Chapter and that law in cash payments for the same period of time not working as a result of the compensable injury or illness or the unlawful employment practice, the payments of workers’ compensation shall be reimbursed from compensation paid under this Chapter.

 

source: When the Abuser Goes to Work    http://abusergoestowork.com/

Flashback: Rep. Bruce Morris Urges Police to Support Community Party Racial Profiling Bill

November 23, 2016

by David Samuels

No Community Party Hartford News column this week, due to a special edition of the newspaper. This week we’ll share the Connecticut Network video of the March 20, 2015 Connecticut General Assembly Judiciary Committee public hearing. The Community Party’s  amendment, which calls for patrol officers to give out a traffic stop receipt to motorists, regardless of whether or not they write a ticket, was one of the bills that was debated during the hearing. The receipt was passed by the legislature in 2012 but was repealed in 2013 before going into effect, due to political pressure by the police. Committee member Rep. Bruce Morris revealed that he had recently been racially profiled.  Morris urged  the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, who opposed our amendment, to support the bill. This resulted in an at times heated exchange between urban lawmakers, and the police. Morris makes his comments at about the 4 hour, 30 minute mark of the video.  Mary Sanders, who drafted CP’s Trayvon Martin Act bill language, which includes the receipt provision, testifies at approximately 8 hours, 24 minutes. We will introduce the Trayvon Act again during the 2017 legislative session, which runs from January 4 to June 7.

http://www.ctn.state.ct.us/ctnplayer.asp?odID=11330

 

Resources

Trayvon Martin Act bill language:

https://hendu39.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/community-party-trayvon-martin-act-bill-language-4/

 

Hillary, Malloy & Neoliberalism Cost Democrats the White House, Senate Majority in CT

November 17, 2016
by David Samuels
This column appears in the November 17 – 23 edition of the Hartford News. http://www.hartfordnews.com/
                       
Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio
Commentary on urban issues from a grassroots perspective. First, third and fifth Tuesday of each month. 8:00 PM Eastern Time 7:00 PM Central 5:00 PM Pacific. Tune in! Next show: November 29. Check out our No Sellout blog for info on the rest of our Community Party Media lineup, including False Choice: the Bipartisan Attack on the Working Class, the Poor and Communities of Color. https://hendu39.wordpress.com/2015/12/20/community-party-media-3/
Community Party Radio Podcasts
Community Update
Ranked Choice Voting Passes in Maine
                                             Maine Passes Revolutionary Voting System That Could Help Third Parties
Maine voters have passed a statewide measure that could benefit third parties and prevent candidates who don’t truly have majority support from gaining office. On Tuesday, Maine became the first state to pass ranked-choice voting, sometimes also called “instant-runoff voting,” Maine Public Radio reports. Several U.S. cities have implemented ranked-choice voting, but Maine would be the first place to do it statewide, according to Reason. With traditional voting in the U.S., whichever candidate gets the most votes in a given race wins ― period. That means that if there are more than two candidates, someone can win office without getting a majority of more than 50 percent of voters. In some cases, a candidate might win even though more than half of voters strongly oppose that person, if their support is split among the candidate’s opponents.
Ranked-choice voting, on the other hand, allows voters to rank their candidates. To win, a candidate must earn a majority of the votes cast. If, after the first round of counting, no candidate has a majority of votes, the ballots get counted again with one exception: for voters who selected the last-place candidate as their top pick, their votes get counted with their second-choice candidate as their first choice. This continues until someone gets a majority. The new voting style will apply to elections for governor, U.S. Senate, U.S. representative, state senate and state representative, according to Maine Public Radio.
Proponents of ranked-choice voting say it empowers voters to support the candidate they genuinely like best, instead of feeling obligated to support whoever they feel is “lesser of two evils.”
You can read the full Huffington Post article here. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/maine-ranked-choice-voting_us_581e49bee4b0aac62484dfb8  Ranked choice voting also passed in Benton County, Oregon. Check out our Resources section for more info on this voting system, which is real democracy. Mary Sanders and Gabriela Ella are coordinating the Community Party’s ranked choice voting initiative in Connecticut.
Josh Elliott Wins House Seat
Congratulations to Josh Elliott, who defeated Republican Marjorie Bonadies to win the 88th District (Hamden) seat in the House of Representatives. Elliott supports taxing the rich, closing corporate tax loopholes, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour and legalization of marijuana. Elliott also voiced his opposition to state employee layoffs. You can read more about Elliott here.  http://www.nhregister.com/government-and-politics/20160425/sharkey-to-face-re-election-challenge-in-connecticut-house
Policy Watch: Democrats’ Chickens Come Home to Roost
49.6% of voters sat out the 2016 election.
 
I think what we’re seeing, in the aftermath of this, is an attempt by Democrats, who nominated a candidate, Hillary Clinton, despite knowing how weak and how vulnerable and how deeply unpopular she was across many sectors in the country, who nonetheless insisted on nominating her in the face of all sorts of empirical evidence that she would not only lose but could literally lose to anyone, that those very same people who insisted on marching behind her are now attempting to blame everyone they can find—except, of course, themselves—for this debacle. And I think that if we’re going to have any kind of constructive discussion in the aftermath of Trump’s victory, it has to include, first and foremost, a discussion about why the Democratic Party has become such a small minority party, a minority in the House, a minority in the Senate, lost control of the White House to someone like Donald Trump, is obliterated on the state and local levels. What is it about the Democratic Party that has caused huge portions of the American voting population to turn their back to it and to reject it? And I think we’re seeing Democrats scrambling around, trying to avoid that discussion by casting the blame on everybody else. And I think that will only ensure that this kind of event will continue to replicate itself in the future.” ~ Journalist Glenn Greewald (Democracy Now! interview with host Amy Goodman)
The Connecticut Democrats were indeed wiped out on Election Day: the Republicans picked up three seats in the Senate. Currently the Senate is tied 18-18 (including two conservative Democrats), with Lt. Governor Nancy Wyman holding the tiebreaking vote. The GOP gained eight seats in the House of Representatives. The Democrats’ House majority has shrunk to 79-72, the smallest Democratic majority in 30 years. This isn’t hard to figure out. Gov. Dan Malloy has viciously attacked the public sector, the largest employer of Black people and women, in addition to being the core of the party’s voter base, and Dem legislators supported his neoliberal agenda. This year the working class was soaked with taxes and thousands of state employees (I’m a state worker) were laid off, because they refused to agree to concessions for the third time since 2009. Meanwhile Malloy continued to coddle the rich and corporations, refusing to implement a progressive tax structure or end corporate welfare. This state loses $7 billion in revenue each year, due to corporate tax breaks. Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin also went after city workers’ wages and benefits, and attempted to get legislation passed on the state level that would eliminate employees’ collective bargaining rights. Malloy just knew he was going to be out of here on the first thing smoking, to join Hillary’s administration. Malloy raised money for Hillary all over the country. Now he will have to stay in Connecticut and govern, saddled with a 24% approval rating that shows he’s as popular as a root canal or tax audit.

Black Agenda Report commentator Glen Ford summarized the Democrats’ history of exploiting the working class, the poor and people of color. “Rather than gradually strengthening the political hand of the working and oppressed classes, bit by bit, year by year — which is the purported justification for incrementalism — progressive slavishness to the Democratic Party has facilitated the deepening dictatorship of capital. The net economic loss to the people — especially the masses of Black folks, who have been stripped of much of the gains of the Sixties and Seventies, and nearly all of their household wealth – has been staggering and unrelenting.

For the past 40 years and more, Democrats have been perfect partners in the Dance of the Duopolists. It’s a simple two-step. The basic move is: the Democrats hug as closely as possible to the left flank of the Republican Party, thus staying within dog-whistle range of the White Man’s Party’s core base, rooted in white supremacy, while claiming everything to the left of Robert E. Lee as Democratic turf, including the huge, heavily Black social democratic electorate whose progressive agenda the Democrats have no intention of substantively addressing.
The Clintons turned this two-step into a disciplined tango with their GOP partners. In 1994, the Republicans threatened to launch a social justice Armageddon through their Contract with America — legislation they were incapable of fully enacting, however, without some level of Democratic consent. The Clintons vowed to defend Black, brown and poor people from the GOP barbarians at the gate – and wound up ramming through Congress corporate-crafted measures that the Republicans could not have passed on their own. Bill and Hillary cut a rug to that tune for eight years in the White House, stomping out welfare as we knew it, eviscerating Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal banking regulations, presiding over the largest surge in mass Black incarceration in modern history, and delivering the broadcast spectrum to monopoly media, all the while pretending to defend a ‘progressive agenda.’ ”
AOL.com reported that Hillary’s defeat has triggered a civil war between establishment Democrats, and progressives. http://www.aol.com/article/news/2016/11/12/the-democratic-party-descends-into-civil-war-after-clintons-l/21604579/
When the WikiLeaks email dump on the Democratic National Committee revealed that the DNC sabotaged Bernie Sanders’ campaign, Hillary supporters didn’t give a damn. Now that she lost the general election, they’re turning over cars in the street. Pure comedy. Yes, the Electoral College needs to go. We also need ranked choice voting. Liberals are fine with third-party candidates being marginalized. Hillary supporters are showing they’re just as irrational as Trump supporters, as they try to blame Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein for Hillary’s loss. Vote totals show that claim is absolute rubbish, as Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson drew more votes from Trump.  http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/where-the-third-party-candidates-were-st  First of all, the Democrats aren’t entitled to a single vote. They have to earn votes. This will be hard for liberals to accept, but candidates in other parties have a right to run for public office. Your candidate lost because she sucks, and people who the Democrats have been abusing forever (working class, the poor, people of color) sat out the election. Dr. Stein rejected the notion that Hillary is a hero for women. She pointed out that Hillary supported President Bill Clinton’s racist 1996 welfare bill, which to this day has a catastrophic effect on all single mothers, especially women of color.
What is even more disturbing to me than the terror people are rightfully feeling about the looming Trump presidency, is the bliss liberals have experienced during Barack Obama’s tenure, and would currently feel if Hillary had won the election. Obama has deported more immigrants than any other president, signed the National Defense Authorization Act, a law that allows the government to jail ANY OF US indefinitely without being criminally charged, refused a 2009 demand from members of the Congressional Black Caucus, that Obama implement targeted job creation in Black communities with the highest poverty and unemployment rates, is currently bombing seven predominantly Muslim countries, presides over a Justice Department that has prosecuted ZERO police officers for extrajudicial killings of Black people, nominated Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who was endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police and has strong ties to police unions, has funneled trillions of dollars to Wall Street, and launched a sustained attack on public schools. Trump hasn’t laid a glove on us yet. Obama has been knocking Black, Brown and Indigenous people around the ring for the past eight years, like the Clintons (Bill’s racist crime/welfare bills, Hillary’s bombing Iraq/Libya, their looting of Haiti) have also done. An attack isn’t coming, it’s ongoing. As Dr. Stein said, what people fear from Trump, the Democrats have already done. Hillary and Malloy personify the cause of the party’s epic implosion.
Resources
Community Party Radio podcast on Gov. Dan Malloy, Mayor Luke Bronin and neoliberalism:
http://www.spreaker.com/user/thebwegroup/community-party-radio-hosted-by-david-sa_2
Fair Vote website:
 http://www.fairvote.org/
Follow CP on Twitter for state, national and world news headlines. https://twitter.com/CommunityParty1 Check out my Facebook page for daily news commentary. https://www.facebook.com/david.samuels.948   Listen to WQTQ 89.9 FM for CP’s public service announcements on our racial justice initiatives https://www.facebook.com/wqtqfm and So-Metro Radio the first, third and fifth Tuesday of each month at 8:00 PM for commentary on urban issues http://www.sometroradio.com/  Check out our No Sellout blog (https://hendu39.wordpress.com/) for the complete archive of CP columns and Northend Agent’s archive for selected columns (http://www.northendagents.com/). Contact us at 860-206-8879 or info.community.party@gmail.com
                                             

Community Party Trayvon Martin Act Bill Language

November 17, 2016

Written by Mary Sanders.

Introduction ~ It’s time to take action to stop racial profiling and police containment in Black and Brown communities here in Connecticut.  Every 28 hours a Black person is killed somewhere by police, security guards and self-appointed vigilantes like George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn, according to a Malcolm X Grassroots Movement report . http://www.operationghettostorm.org/ . The veracity of the MXGM report has been disputed. See the Resources section below for a Washington Post editorial on the report, including a rebuttal by the report’s author. Trayvon was shot and killed after being approached on the street by Zimmerman, an armed neighborhood watch leader. Dunn shot Jordan Davis during an argument about loud music.  Former Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer Johannes Mehserle murdered Oscar Grant in 2009 with no provocation or reason. See: http://sfbayview.com/2009/oscar-grant-young-father-and-peacemaker-executed-by-bart-police. We’ve had many unnecessary deaths right here in CT as well.  CP’s Trayvon Martin Act is aimed at addressing this public safety crisis.

The Trayvon Martin Act calls for the creation of a legislative task force on police misconduct and includes some of CP’s original racial profiling bill language. The CT legislature passed some of our provisions in 2012 and they were scheduled to go in effect July 1, 2013. Last year our traffic stop receipt language was repealed in favor of a version emphasizing electronic data collection and analysis, instead of a copy of the mandated “Traffic Stop Report” going to the motorist.  We believe this copy is the only way for motorists to know how their race is being represented and is a proven factor in undetected biased policing.  We sat in on testimony of dozens of motorists of color from around the state who were stopped, harassed, given tickets with race recorded as White, and heard of many other biased law enforcement actions.

Problem: Drivers do not get a copy of the Stop Report which has allowed some officers to lie about the race of the people they stop.  Some victims of profiling may not complain because they don’t know officers are covering up the profiled stops. As we mentioned previously our traffic stop language was passed by lawmakers in 2012 but was repealed due to pressure by the police before it was scheduled to become law in 2013.

Add to current law:  1) “Traffic Stop Reports are to be filled out in duplicate so that each motorist receives a copy of the completed form from the officer, in addition to any ticket or summons if one is issued.  2) The copy of the report should be given to the driver as well as the information on filing complaints if motorists believe they have been profiled.  3) If the reports are entered into an electronic data collection system a copy will be immediately available to the detained driver.”

Problem:  Drivers and their passengers are being asked for I.D’s. and questioned about their immigration status even when they are clearly not involved in criminal activity.

Add to current law: “ 1) The driver shall only be asked for a: Driver’s License, the Vehicle Registration and Proof of Insurance and no other identification or questions about immigration status;  2) Passengers shall not be asked for any identification or questions about their immigration status unless they are being arrested for criminal activity.”

Problem:   Men of color are stopped and frisked or worse in every corner of our state; community residents have reported to us that if they dare challenge police officers in their neighborhood, they are often thrown to the ground, cuffed and arrested, then charged with resisting arrest. This happens to our teenagers in schools as well as on our streets.  Many have been beaten or shot by police or others with “authority”, often fatally as the MXGM report shows.

Add to current law:  “1)  Create a Legislative Task Force which would serve in the following capacities: a) investigate complaints of misconduct of state or local police officials,  b) provide training and oversight to public school guards, university and transportation police,  c) provide training and oversight of neighborhood watch organizations and properly screen and monitor persons functioning in these roles;  2) the Task Force will reserve spots for urban lawmakers whose constituents are disproportionately affected by these issues;  3) the Task Force will conduct monthly public hearings around the state, days and evenings, which would also be broadcast by the Connecticut Network for television or online viewing;  4) the Task Force will create a process whereby people could file formal complaints about profiling and harassment by police or other law enforcement authorities through their legislators’ offices or CHRO.”  

The Community Party supports the demands of the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, which are listed in their racial justice plan.

National Demands for Racial Justice

Preliminary Demands
  1. We call for the elimination of the Police Bill of Rights and the numerous civil service rules and judicial policies and procedures that give the police anonymity, freedom from having their behavior recorded and virtual immunity from accountability and prosecution.
  2. End to the various polices of containment such as racial profiling, stop and frisk, gang injunctions, secure communities, etc.
  3. End the “War on Drugs” and all of its related laws, policies and programs
  4. Enact democratically elected “Police Control Boards”, with the power to fire, subpoena, and indict police officers for human rights violations
  5. Demilitarization of domestic law enforcement, including eliminating the use of Drones and various surveillance operations and institutions.
  6. The redirection of military funding to social programs, such as public education, housing, health care, public transportation, and grassroots-controlled programs to prevent domestic and intra-communal violence.
  7. Legislate and enact a National Plan of Action for Racial Justice that will make the United States government compliant with all the norms and standards of the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on all levels
Suggested Strategies, Tactics, and Targets.
Boycott
  1. Boycott Black Friday and all Major Commercial Stores and Outlets until the government meets the aforementioned demands on a municipal, state, and federal level.
  2. Boycott various Missouri based businesses.
Divestment
We call on all unions, churches, investment groups, and all the various forces of civil society to divest from any Missouri state bond holdings until the aforementioned demands are meet.
Proposed Demands and Campaigns in Depth (from Let Your Motto Be Resistance found at http://mxgm.org/let-your-motto-be-resistance-a-handbook-on-organizing-new-afrikan-and-oppressed-communities-for-self-defense/)
  • Police Control Boards – Grassroots Police Control Board’s are intended to serve as directly elected oversight and disciplinary committees on a city or municipal level. They have the power to monitor and reform policies and to discipline, fire, subpoena and prosecute police or other law enforcement agencies operating within their jurisdiction. Campaigns to institute Police Control Boards are designed to avoid the pitfalls of Citizen Review Boards. Over the last 50 years various movements and communities have demanded Citizen Review Boards that have been taken over by Mayors and other local officials. Mayors have appointed their own political cronies to protect the police and the status quo. We propose that our movement organize electoral campaigns or referendums that transform the Charters of Cities and Counties to establish Police Control Boards via the limited democratic means that presently exist. Electoral campaigns for Police Control Boards become vehicles for extensive outreach and education to move our base and shape public opinion. Campaigns of this nature will require grassroots fundraising to retain the integrity of the initiative and pay for media ads, etc.  They will also require forming alliances with various forces in the city or region that share similar interests and the development of a comprehensive strategy that builds enough power to institute this structural reform.
  • Anti-Containment Campaigns – These campaigns focus on stopping local, statewide, and national policies and programs that repress and displace our communities like racial profiling, check points, stop and frisk, weed and seed, gang injunctions, drug war policies, three strikes and zero-tolerance policies, etc. In addition to stopping these reactionary policies, we should also engage in proactive campaigns, like those that seek to abolish prisons.
  • Anti-Surveillance Campaigns – These campaigns should focus on forcing the state to become transparent about its extensive surveillance infrastructure and operations, and organizing campaigns that demand that they be wholly dismantled. These campaigns can start with initiatives that publically expose the methods and tactics used by various government agencies to monitor our social activities. We must also develop and effectively utilize a national database that exposes the undercover agents and provocateurs used by the government to infiltrate, disrupt, and discredit our social movements (this must be done through extensive factual documentation and not innuendo which can be and is very destructive to our movements).
  • Demilitarization Campaigns – These campaigns should focus on ending the military weapons and tactics used by domestic law enforcement.  Law enforcement agencies throughout the US empire have enhanced their military capacities since the 1960’s, primarily focused on containing and repressing the national liberation and progressive social movements. For their arsenals they have acquired and incorporated military assault rifles, tanks, combat ready helicopters, grenades, hollow point bullets, camera and satellite integrate surveillance systems, infrared equipment, and sonic and microwave crowd control equipment, etc. Tactically, they incorporated various strategies of counterinsurgency and pacification, including envelopment tactics that surround communities, check-points that control traffic in and out of a community, “weed and seed” programs that deliberately divide communities, gang injunctions that criminalize social relationships and customs (youth fashions, informal associations, etc.), “stop and frisk” tactics that allow for illegal searches and seizures on a massive scale, and initiatives like “Operation Ghetto Storm” intentionally designed to terrorize oppressed communities.  These campaigns are intended to heighten the contradictions between the people and the state (i.e. the government) and put the questions of institutional racism, national oppression, and US imperialism at the center of public debate within the empire.
  • Anti-Drone Campaigns – The introduction of surveillance and military drones over US held territories marks a critical new phase in the development of the repressive capacities of the US government. In order to preserve any notion of democratic space, we must launch local campaigns to resist the use of drones at the local and municipal levels and join or start campaigns that challenge their legitimacy and utilization throughout the empire.
  • Prisoner Defense Campaigns – These campaigns should focus on defending a) our political prisoners, prisoners of war, and political exiles from ongoing prosecution and violations of international law, b) our prisoners from unjust prosecution and human rights abuses, and c) community members from entrapment, false imprisonment, and false prosecution. These campaigns should employ every means of struggle we have available to us, but should rely first and foremost on methods of mass struggle, rather than legalistic methods that appeal to the enemy’s courts rather than the people.
  • Truth and Reconciliation Initiatives – Dr. Mutulu Shakur and other New Afrikan political prisoners, prisoners of war, and political exiles are demanding that the US government commit to a process of Truth and Reconciliation similar to that employed in post-Apartheid Azania (South Africa) to address the governments human rights violations during the COINTELPRO era and provide amnesty for the political prisoners, prisoners of war, and political exiles whom the US government transgressed against during this era. These Truth and Reconciliation campaigns can and should be launched on a local and regional level, following the model of organizers in Omaha, Nebraska regarding the Defense of the Omaha 2, which have targeted the role of local police forces in collaboration with the FBI in infiltrating organizations like the Black Panther Party and the Revolutionary Action Movement, and setting these organizations up via provocateur actions. These campaigns are essential to holding the US government accountable and fortifying the will and confidence of the people in their right and ability to successfully resist. On the Federal level people should link with and support the Truth and Commission organizing process being driven by Dr. Mutulu Shakur.
  • National Plan of Action for Racial Justice and Self-Determination – This campaign should be focused on building a movement with enough strength and power to force the Federal government to implement broad social reform program based on international law to combat institutional racism and it various manifestations and legacies in the US empire. The National Plan of Action for Racial Justice and Self-Determination is an outgrowth of the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) in Durban, South Africa and the Durban Declaration and Program of Action (DDPA), and calls on the Federal government to commit to a transformative program of action to combat inequality caused by the legacies of colonialism, genocide, enslavement, and economic exploitation.  In addition to campaigning for this demand on Federal level, we should also demand that city, county and state governments pass similar measures that respect, protect, and fulfill the full human rights of oppressed and exploited peoples.

Resources

Washington Post editorial on MXGM Operation Ghetto Storm Report. Includes a rebuttal by the report’s author:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/12/24/the-viral-claim-that-a-black-person-is-killed-by-police-every-28-hours/?tid=pm_politics_pop

Political Roundup: Housing Code Awareness Forum / Democrats’ Neoliberal Policies Lead to Trump Victory

November 11, 2016
by David Samuels
This column appears in the November 10 – 17 edition of the Hartford News. http://www.hartfordnews.com/
Community Party Radio on So-Metro Radio
Commentary on urban issues from a grassroots perspective. First, third and fifth Tuesday of each month. 8:00 PM Eastern Time 7:00 PM Central 5:00 PM Pacific. Tune in! Our November 1 show was cancelled due to an injury to co-host Mary Sanders. Get well soon, Mary! Next show: November 15. Our Policy Watch series continues with an Election Day Report. We will also discuss the plight of the Hartford Civilian Police Review Board. Check out our No Sellout blog for info on the rest of our Community Party Media lineup, including False Choice: the Bipartisan Attack on the Working Class, the Poor and Communities of Color. https://hendu39.wordpress.com/2015/12/20/community-party-media-3/
Community Party Radio Podcasts
Hartford Housing Code Awareness Forum 
Big shout out to Mary L. Sanders, who made the October 26 Hartford Housing Code Awareness Forum a success. The room at the Hartford Public Library Albany Branch was packed. Mary was a fantastic host, community residents raised important issues, and the panel provided tremendous insight. Meetings will continue on housing codes/tenants rights, police reform, knowing your rights during police encounters, ranked choice voting, economic justice and much more. Thanks to Daughters and Sons of Eve, Vecinos Unidos, Debra Cohen, Ramon Espinoza and others who supported this event.
Stay tuned.
Policy Watch: Election Analysis
Donald Trump has won the 2016 presidential election. The Republicans also totally control Congress.  The Democratic Party has been headed for this iceberg for a long time, which I have done my best to point out in this space. The party has continuously moved to the right on the city, state and national level, abusing their voter base. Gov. Dan Malloy and Hartford Mayor Luke Bronin both launched neoliberal attacks on the poor, human services providers and public sector workers (the largest employer of Black people and women).
Poor people of color, who sat out this election because they have been ignored for years, could have made a huge difference. The Democrats cannot blame this loss on Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein, like they falsely blamed Ralph Nader for Al Gore’s defeat in 2000. The arrogance of Hillary Clinton supporters and liberal media personalities such as WNPR host/Courant columnist Colin McEnroe, who thought they could push Clinton to victory through fear, is emblematic of a party that is so out of touch with the people, it’s pathetic. This problem is not new. Malcolm X talked about the hypocrisy of the Democrats. Martin Luther King split with President Lyndon Johnson over his escalation of the Vietnam War, as money was pumped into the military that was needed to take care of the needs of the poor at home.
It’s time for the Democrats and their supporters to look in the mirror. As Dr. Stein pointed out, it was the neoliberal policies of President Bill Clinton, specifically his repeal of the Glass-Stegall Act that led to the 2008 economic crash, which led to the rise of Trump. The party now has two choices: continue their self-destruction by moving to the right, or make the radical policy reforms that will be necessary on the city and state level to become a firewall against the Trump presidency, and form a connection with the people they have abused for so long.
Last week McEnroe was on social media doing his best to demonize Dr. Stein, and scare voters into supporting Clinton. McEnroe is truly the personification of liberal media corruption. What this propaganda tool won’t mention is that the Democratic controlled Massachusetts General Assembly has annually killed the ranked choice voting bill Dr. Stein has introduced for the past 16 years, and that she challenged Gore, President Barack Obama and the Democrats to implement RCV before Election Day. This system would have allowed people to vote for Dr. Stein AND Hillary, without splitting the vote. The Democrats don’t want RCV, because they don’t want competition from third party candidates. Then they use shills like McEnroe to influence voters during elections. Politics as usual. Mary and Ella Gabriella are coordinating the Community Party’s RCV initiative here in Connecticut.
If President Hillary is inevitable, why are her media goons still attacking Jill Stein?
by Caitlin Johnstone
” ‘Methinks the lady doth protest too much.’
This phrase has become very useful in our current political environment. It’s a line from one of those Shakespeare plays where everyone dies in the end, and its use has become a way of pointing out when someone’s frantic resistance to something reveals a lot more about their true agendas than they intended to let on. When you know that your government is lying to you and the media is helping them, such things can often be a useful way of figuring out exactly what’s going on.
Take for example the way corporate media, proven by WikiLeaks to be pervasively controlled by the Clintons and their allies far more than we ever knew, has continued to run smear pieces on Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein, even while they assure everyone that Hillary has an insurmountable lead over Donald Trump.
Attack editorials and smear pieces about Stein have been churned out by Clinton-allied media like cheap t-shirts at a Bangladeshi sweat shop since well before the Green Party convention, but lately, the frenzied attacks are getting even louder and more desperate. Last week John Oliver, whose employer HBO is owned by heavyweight Clinton contributor Time Warner, dedicated an entire rant to punching down on third parties and their supporters. Yesterday the Daily Beast, whose owner IAC is co-directed by Chelsea Clinton herself, ran a hit piece on the good doctor hilariously accusing her of having a “conflict of interest” because she has a standard investment portfolio.
I’m just going to type that out again because it makes my smug parts light up with glee: a publication, controlled by Hillary Clinton’s daughter, ran a hit piece on Jill Stein, for having a conflict of interest.
My God that’s good. I need a cigarette.
Jill Stein, if you haven’t been following, is the only candidate on the ballot who has never been a Republican, the only candidate on the ballot who doesn’t hate progressives, and the only candidate on the ballot pushing an actual progressive agenda. That means she’s going to be pulling votes from people who would otherwise support Hillary ‘candidates must have a public position and a private position’ Clinton, who is currently pretending to care about progressives so they’ll give her the power to privatize social security and start a war with Russia.” You can read the full article here.
In politics, perception eclipses reality. Liberals rail about Trump’s racism, while President Obama himself has openly dissed Black people, perpetuating the racist lie that the economic conditions in low income urban neighborhoods are a result of cultural issues (telling his Black critics to take off their slippers and put on their walking shoes). While Trump is blasted as a racist who will get us into World War 3, Obama is bombing seven countries (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Syria), has deported more immigrants than any other president, his Justice Department has prosecuted ZERO police officers for extrajudicial killings of Blacks, and he refused a 2009 demand from members of the Congressional Black Caucus, that he implement targeted job creation in communities of color with the highest poverty/unemployment rates. If a Republican president had that kind of record, liberals would call him a racist. Because Obama is a Democrat, articulate, handsome, and has a good sense of humor, his horrific policies are ignored by liberals who talk about how classy he is.
While it’s great that Native American water protectors in North Dakota are getting nationwide support, it seems to me like their plight is just the latest trendy cause for some liberals. I haven’t seen them call out Obama and Hillary for their silence on this issue, due to their biggest donors being oil companies. Sen. Bernie Sanders called on Obama to halt pipeline construction, but didn’t demand that Hillary, who he endorsed for president, take a stand on stopping the pipeline. It appears that the Dakota Access pipeline standoff has become another political football, like the movement against police violence.
Trump’s victory is obviously a horrific event. The fact that Hillary could not defeat this psychopath is a sad commentary on her as a candidate,  the neoliberal policies of the Democrats and the stupidity of the voters. Like Black people who celebrated Obama’s election 8 years ago, Trump supporters will eventually see that other than the vicarious feeling of power they are experiencing from being able to say ‘President Trump’, their day to day conditions will not change. Neither Trump nor Hillary care about their supporters. They were necessary pawns to get elected. Trump’s policies will benefit the ruling class and screw everybody else, like every other president before him.
Follow CP on Twitter for state, national and world news headlines. https://twitter.com/CommunityParty1 Check out my Facebook page for daily news commentary. https://www.facebook.com/david.samuels.948   Listen to WQTQ 89.9 FM for CP’s public service announcements on our racial justice initiatives https://www.facebook.com/wqtqfm and So-Metro Radio the first, third and fifth Tuesday of each month at 8:00 PM for commentary on urban issues http://www.sometroradio.com/  Check out our No Sellout blog (https://hendu39.wordpress.com/) for the complete archive of CP columns and Northend Agent’s archive for selected columns (http://www.northendagents.com/). Contact us at 860-206-8879 or info.community.party@gmail.com

 

Community Party Radio Election Day Eve Marathon

November 5, 2016

Monday, November 7: Community Party Radio Election Day Eve Marathon, featuring Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein. 6:00 AM to 10:15 PM Eastern Time. This event will air on So-Metro Radio affiliate station So-Metro Talk. http://www.sometroradio.com/
#SteinBaraka #JillNotHill

Resources

Jill Stein Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/drjillstein/

Presidential Debate: Jill Stein & Gov. Gary Johnson

November 3, 2016

No Community Party Hartford News column this week, due to a special edition of the newspaper… Tavis Smiley hosted a presidential debate between Green Party  nominee Jill Stein, and Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson.

Part 1:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/interviews/presidential-candidates-dr-jill-stein-gary-johnson-pt-1/

Part 2: