voicebox

Citizen Bill: February 2010

2010-02-12T18:12:27Z

Legalize marijuana

2010-02-12T18:00:03Z

Why drive people to drink or use prescription drugs when there is a safe alternative?

by Joe Uehlein

We know that Marijuana has been used for both medicinal and recreational purposes for 5,000 years. It's only been illegal for 73 years. We know that it's far safer than alcohol. We know that it's far less damaging to society than alcohol. We know that it has many medicinal applications. And we know that legalization will boost the economy. We also know that one in ten of us are inclined toward addiction, and any substance can be abused. This is serious and we need better programs to deal with this hidden disease. The answer lies in legalization.

So why is it illegal? Fear-mongering and the politics of hate. First in the 1930's directed at African Americans, jazz musicians and Latin American immigrants, and then later the same politics of hate directed at the cultural revolution taking place in the 1960's. The right wing attack on the 60's counter culture led to the ill-conceived and failed war on drugs, and was so pervasive that it created a cultural stigma that made it difficult to talk about marijuana, and the counter culture for many years. Yet the power of "peace, love, and understanding" at the core of that counter culture endured.

]]> Safer than alcohol: Marijuana has no death threshold--you can't overdose on it. Alcohol does. Smoking marijuana is far less dangerous than cigarettes. And today, the preferred method for many is the Vaporizer--you heat the herb only to the point of releasing active ingredients, not to the point of combustion--so there's no smoke--much healthier. Visit the SAFER website for the full scoop: www.saferchoice.org.

Less damaging to society: Alcohol has been linked to many violent crimes, both inside and outside the home. This is not the case with Cannabis. Marijuana brings out the better spirit within. But let's be clear, substance abuse is a major problem, and especially troubling as it relates to children. We should deal with this problem with education, love, and understanding--not with arrests and jail time. As substances go, marijuana is safer than any other substance that might be abused, including the legal prescription drugs that are far scarier than marijuana. Visit the National Organization for the Normalization of Marijuana Laws (NORML) website for great info on all aspects of marijuana: http://norml.org

Revenue Generator: As a nation we waste billions of dollars on the war on drugs. Marijuana is the largest cash crop in several states, and a multi-billion dollar industry. We should legalize it, regulate it, tax it, create jobs, and build a more just and human society. There are many billions of dollars to be recouped by ending the war on drugs and legalizing Cannabis. Visit the website of the Marijuana Policy Project for more info: http://www.mpp.org/
Go to a good news stand and peruse the thick, glossy, fancy magazines dedicated to Cannabis: High Times, Cannabis Culture, Weed World, Grow, and more. Page after colorful page filled with ads for seeds, plants, growing equipment, vaporizers, bongs, pipes, shirts, clothing, storage products, other hemp products from skin cream to bags, of course along with great articles about the herb and the vibrant and growing industry. California and Colorado have booming industries springing up as a result of the medical marijuana laws there.

Medicinal uses: 14 States have approved medical marijuana and several more are set to do so this year. So many people are finding relief for a variety of ailments by using this herb, yet we brand them as criminals, preferring to feed them with far more damaging pharmaceuticals --check out the long list of side effects on most pharmaceutical products. Marijuana has no negative side effects. Denver has issued 300 licenses for medical marijuana dispensaries. There are 1400 dispensaries in Los Angeles County alone.

Strength & quality: Opponents of marijuana legalization often point out that today's herb is far stronger than what we knew back in the day, as though that was somehow a bad thing. Today's herb is far better. Yes, it is more potent, which means you smoke far less of it. But it's the vastly improved quality that's important. The mixing of the two primary strains, Sativa and Indica, has produced hundreds of top quality strains designed for a variety of different medicinal and recreational uses. Sativa produces a more uplifting, ethereal effect while Indica is more relaxing.

Not a "gateway" drug: Cannabis has been proven over and over again to not be a gateway drug, and is not addictive, while alcohol, caffeine, sugar, and many legal prescription drugs are. Funding for research into addiction treatment is very low, and treatment options are very limited. Let's use some of the money raised to fund addiction treatment research and education/programs. Arrests and jail-time is not the answer. Any substance can be abused and we must guard against this.
We allow the Cheech & Chong, Dazed & Confused depiction of those who enjoy Marijuana to stand unchallenged. Although perhaps humorous, it is an entirely inaccurate caricature. Marijuana is enjoyed today by doctors, lawyers, teachers, factory workers, public servants, office workers, artists, and yes, Presidents of the United States along with Members of Congress. These people are not "stoners." They are productive citizens who choose the safer path to recreation--marijuana.

Will Rogers was right

2010-02-12T17:52:19Z

Democrats continue to bumble

by Gordon Clark

"I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

It's close to a hundred years since legendary American humorist Will Rogers uttered his famous remark, but it has never been more true.

The shining pinnacle of the Democrats' disorganization was the loss, last month, of the late, great Ted Kennedy's Senate seat in Massachusetts. In terms of competence, losing a filibuster proof majority in the Senate in less than one year, and doing it in Massachusetts, one of the most liberal and consistently Democratic states in the union, is the political equivalent of not being able to hit the broad side of a barn with a basketball.

True to form, the Democratic leadership didn't even see this one coming until a few weeks before the election, since their candidate at one point held a 30 point lead in the polls. How do you lose a 30 point lead? In Massachusetts??
Well, adding to the bitter irony was the fact that the loss was to a large degree the result of the Democratic party's handling of health care, the issue nearest and dearest to Sen. Kennedy's heart. Republican Scott Brown campaigned vigorously as the "the 41st vote" needed to successfully filibuster ( i.e. - kill) any health care bill in the Senate. ]]>
This is nothing against the many, many Democrats out there in the Voice readership. I've voted for plenty of 'em as you have, and most of my friends are Democrats - more than a couple of them elected officials. But there is something about national level politics that turns Democrats into the Keystone Cops, just as it has turned the Republicans into a party of rabid anti-government global warming deniers who would rather see the country collapse than concede an inch of ground to the (supposedly) governing party. (Again, no offense to my Republican friends.)

Remarkably, George W. Bush never had the Congressional majorities that Democrats now hold during his eight year reign of terror - er, I mean presidency - but that didn't stop him from getting virtually everything he wanted, whether it was wars, Supreme Court justices or tax cuts for the wealthy. Why is it that the Republicans can now thwart anything President Obama wants (or claims to want) with only 41 votes in the Senate?

Could it have anything to do with the fact that many national Democrats have more in common with Republicans than they let on? (Was health care reform really advanced by having Democratic committee chairmen who take millions from the insurance industry?) Or could it be that Republicans have spent years purging members who didn't follow the party line, while Democrats have spent the same time diluting their platform by moving to a mythical center, running any candidate they thought could win regardless of what they believed? Indeed, many of them, including the President, are already toning down or shifting their legislative agenda in the face of this "national" referendum delivered in Massachusetts.

The President's mild State of the Union urging notwithstanding, national health care reform is dead. Everyone understands that. If the Democrats couldn't pass a heavily watered-down, thoroughly compromised health care bill with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, what is the chance they will do it without one, and in the face of a highly disciplined Republican party that has made clear its intentions to scuttle any major Democratic initiative?

What are the chances now for a real jobs bill, or for any semblance of a bill to address climate change? Could it get any worse?
Well, actually, it could. And it did, when just a few days after the Massachusetts debacle the Supreme Court made its worst decision since the Dred Scott case. In Citizens United vs. FEC, the court summarily dismissed decades of precedent on campaign finance, not to mention all common sense, and followed the delirious fiction that corporations have the same rights as actual human beings in ruling as unconstitutional most restrictions on corporations' ability to spend money on political campaigns.

This is great news for Goldman Sachs, Monsanto, the oil and coal companies, the health insurance industry, pharmaceuticals or any other wealthy corporations that wish to further bend federal policy for their profit. For the majority of Americans who believed wealthy corporate interests already had too much influence in our government, it's an unmitigated disaster.
Personally, I had long since grown tired of being dunned by MoveOn each time a new issue came up and they wanted my money to do battle with corporate lobbyists. Apparently asking Democrats to pass a public financing bill for federal elections, or to simply stop inviting lobbyists into their offices, was too much.

Like everyone else, MoveOn and the Democrats understand this new court decision will open the floodgates of corporate money in the 2010 election, and most of that money will flow to Republicans. So only now, a day late and quite a few dollars short, they are ginning up some response to reign in corporate contributions. Ironically, the Democrats have put some of their own fundraisers in charge of the effort. Anyone want to bet this will turn out any different than health care?

It's hard to know what to do with the reality of a massively dysfunctional national government. On some issues, at least, we can do for ourselves locally what the federal government will not. For example, we can invest in local credit unions if Congress cannot control the Wall St. banks. We can grow much of our own food if there is no federal alternative to the health-and-environment-destroying practices of industrial agriculture. In fact, as "Small Mart Revolutionary" Michael Shuman noted in last month's Voice, we could and should be producing many of our own commodities locally, including energy.

Which is all to the good, because when it comes to depending on our national government to solve our problems, well, it's probably best to keep your sense of humor. To quote Will Rogers again, "There's no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you." Let's just hope we can all still laugh this time next year.

Gordon Clark is the former national Executive Director of Peace Action, and the Project Director of Montgomery Victory Gardens (www.montgomeryvictorygardens.org).

Time for citizens to unite

2010-02-12T17:43:33Z

Excessive corporate influence in politics threatens both our democracy and our economy

by Jamie Raskin

Ten years ago, in Bush v. Gore, the Rehnquist Court, in a bitterly divided 5-4 decision, intervened to hand the presidential election to the political party favored by major corporations like Haliburton, Exxon-Mobil, Blackwater and Enron. The result was two wars paid for by three tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and eight years of growing inequality, decaying infrastructure, soaring deficits, stock market collapse, and accelerating environmental peril.

In 2010, in Citizens United v. FEC, the Roberts Court, in a bitterly divided 5-4 decision, gave big corporations the keys to the whole democracy, sweeping aside four Supreme Court decisions and decades of campaign regulation to elevate business corporations to the level of citizens armed with political rights.
]]>
Or, as another conservative on the Court, Justice Byron White, once put it: "The state need not permit its own creation to consume it."

Indeed, the Roberts' Court's judgment was so unthinkable a few months ago that the right-wing plaintiffs in the case--the Citizens United group which made the anti-Hillary pay-per-view movie--did not even ask the Court for this relief. They sought the perfectly reasonable judgment that a pay-per-view movie should not be treated like a television commercial under the McCain-Feingold corporate electioneering provisions. But the corporate-minded Justices on the Court told the parties to go back and re-brief and reargue the case so the original design of the Framers could be trashed and it could finally be proclaimed that "We the People" really means "We the Corporations and People."

The implications of this outburst of right-wing judicial activism are staggering. Take Exxon-Mobil, whose political action committee (PAC) raised just under $1 million in 2008 from executives and members of its board, a not insignificant sum of money that the PAC was able to invest in races across America. (Of course, the company also has thick contingents of lobbyists and publicists to work in Washington.) To my mind, this is perfectly fair--the individuals who run the company have a right to give and participate in politics by putting their own money into it.

But in the same year, Exxon-Mobil had profits of $85 billion.

Imagine that the company had the right to dip into the corporate treasury the way that it now does and had spent a modest 10% of its profits in 2008--$8.5 billion--to elect its friends and defeat its enemies. This would have been more than was spent by the Obama campaign, the McCain campaign, every U.S. House and Senate candidate and every state legislative candidate in the country combined.

That's one corporation. Imagine what the Fortune 500 could do.

Would we have a prayer to win political or legislative battles on behalf of the public interest over the opposition of the pharmaceuticals, the insurance companies, Big Oil, or what President Eisenhower called the "military-industrial complex"?
In the Maryland General Assembly, I have worked over the last few weeks with outraged colleagues to design a package of bills to contain the damage inflicted by the Citizens United decision. Our legislation would:

Require CEOs that seek to make political campaign expenditures in Maryland to first obtain a two-thirds vote of the shareholders to approve the expenditure.
Ban "pay to play" corruption by preventing corporations with state contracts from spending money in state elections.
Require complete disclosure of all corporate campaign expenditures and contributions alongside statements by CEOs affirming that they "approve of this message" for any corporate communication broadcast in a campaign.

I am also introducing a bill to ban all corporate contributions to candidates in our state and local campaigns, a proposal I have advanced for many years.

I believe that this package can become a national model for trying to rebuild the wall of separation between corporate money and public elections, the wall that the Supreme Court just bulldozed.

In my 2006 campaign, I took no corporate, partnership or special-interest lobbyist money (not that they wanted to give me any!). I depended on the contributions of living, breathing human beings--neighbors, friends, supporters, and my brother-in-law.

My resulting independence from special interests has given me the freedom to fight for the people of Silver Spring and Takoma Park, for the public interest--and for our small businesses, which (unlike AIG and Goldman Sachs) are struggling to survive the recession. What will it mean when politicians have to fear crossing any corporation that could spend its money to bury us in the next election?

I want all American businesses, small and large, to compete and thrive and prosper. But I don't want them to govern. Indeed, Adam Smith, the great theorist of the free market, said that while business competition would be the great engine of economic growth, business collusion in politics would pose a great danger to both democracy and the market. Didn't we see with banking deregulation, the mortgage crisis and the Wall Street collapse how excessive corporate influence in politics threatens both our democracy and our economy?

Ultimately, we should amend the Constitution to clarify that democracy is for people and to put the citizenry back in the driver's seat. We should defend our democracy with the same passion as Thomas Jefferson, who wrote in 1816: "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

Jamie Raskin is the State Senator representing Silver Spring and Takoma Park. He is also a constitutional law professor at American University and author of the 2003 Washington Post bestseller Overruling Democracy: the Supreme Court versus the American People. His proposal for a constitutional amendment can be found at freespeechforpeople.org. He can be reached at Jamie.Raskin@Senate.State.MD.US.

VoiceMail: Revoke TP "Sanctuary City" status

2010-02-12T15:18:40Z

The recent Latino gang brawl in Ward 2 of the City should serve as a wake-up call for the entire Takoma community that all is not well on the public safety front. According to a police department crime alert email:

"On January 22, 2010, at approximately 2:53 p.m., Takoma Park Police were dispatched to the 6900 block of New Hampshire Avenue for reports of a large fight involving knives and bats. When units arrived on the scene, they observed approximately 10-20 subjects involved in multiple altercations in the parking lot in the 6900 block of New Hampshire Avenue adjacent to the residential property in the 600 block of East-West Highway. A group of seven to eight subjects continued to struggle in the area while three subjects broke away and fled towards the rear of 630 East West Highway running towards Auburn Avenue, Takoma Park, Maryland. Two individuals were rendered aid who were determined to be victims of the fight .... Multiple knives were obtained on the scene and from various subjects who were involved in the incident."

]]>
It is fortunate that the three fleeing gang brawlers did not encounter any homeowners while pursuing their backyard escape route. It is also fortunate for me, personally, that I was not at home when this incident took place. Since I enter and exit my basement door repeatedly during the course of the day I typically do not keep it locked when I am at home (a practice that will now change). Had I been home and the door been unlocked I would have been a victim of a home invasion with unknown, but clearly dangerous, consequences.

The realization that City residents are not safe on their own property and run the risk of encountering knife-wielding, home invading, gang members in broad daylight is startling and unacceptable, and a clear signal that something is amiss in the City's approach to public safety, particularly related to violent Latino gang activity. A starting point for discussion should be the City's Sanctuary Law. Under this law, which violates federal law, the police department is prohibited from inquiring about a suspect's citizenship status or from contacting federal immigration authorities to ascertain whether a suspect is in the country illegally or has been identified as a violent illegal alien. Consequently, when violent suspects are detained, such as the participants in this gang brawl, City police are deprived of an important tool for removing them from our streets. Instead of facing possible deportation for their crimes these violent criminals often are returned to our streets to perpetuate their criminal activity. This misguided sanctuary policy creates dangerous conditions for our police officers and citizens alike.

The Takoma Park police department is by all accounts a well-trained and effective unit, and Chief Ricucci arguably may be the most competent head the department has known. In the past Chief Ricucci requested from the City Council permission to consult federal immigration authorities when a violent suspect is detained. The City Council denied the Chief's request. Let's allow the police department use of all possible tools at their disposal to combat crime in this City, by demanding that the City's dangerous and illegal Sanctuary Law be stricken from the books. The alternative is more incidents of violent criminal activity by gangs in the City.

Revoking the City's Sanctuary Law isn't the complete answer to the City's gang-related crime problems, but it is a start. Choose to do nothing and it could be your turn soon to have knife and/or gun wielding gang members come knocking on your door.

--Jack Carson
Takoma Park, Maryland

VoiceMail: Another voice for civility

2010-02-12T15:15:22Z

Nelson Marans' letter, "Debate the Issues, not the people" was good to read. It struck a receptive chord that Health Reform debaters should shun personal attacks.

Citizens should demand that all Tea Party, Democrats, and Republicans treat their opponents with respect.

I talked with many Tea Party demonstrators who arrived in Washington, DC last summer. They were average citizens, like myself, open and candid. To a person, they told me the Republican Party had organized their Tea Party group. Some volunteered that GOP officials handed out pre-printed signs that said, "Bury Obama Care with Kennedy." Demonstrators were given materials, and suggested slogans for home-made signs. Slogans called the President either a Nazi, or a Communist--they could take their pick.
Worst of all, they were encouraged to yell, "We don't trust you!" at elected officials at Town Hall Meetings. This practice continues. This organized disrespect for honest people who serve with same nobility of motivation that Tea Party candidates possess, do not deserve this.

For myself, I cannot trust people, even average citizens, who choose to be uncivil and disrespectful to their opponents.
Rejection of their issues, and their candidacies will teach a lesson.

--Neil Scott
Washington, DC

VoiceMail: Fight for your right to bear arms

2010-02-12T15:13:13Z

Hello Maryland. Can we talk about guns for a minute?

There, I said it. I feel almost like I need to apologize before I've written anything.

Why do I have the opinion that Maryland's anti-gun sentiment is so strong? I've lived in Europe, the Far East the Middle East and many of the United States, so it's significant to me that I have this opinion of Maryland. But there it is. I feel like someone from my East Silver Spring neighborhood is watching and taking notes as I enter Atlantic Guns on Bonifant St. Do they picture me skulking towards the back of the shop, entering a booth, closing the curtain and depositing a quarter to view the latest handgun?
]]>
The main differences, they explained, in the laws of the two States seems to be that in Virginia, a private citizen has the right to openly carry a firearm and the ability to obtain a concealed carry firearm permit. In Maryland, open carry is illegal for private citizens and obtaining a concealed carry permit is very rare (the advice I received was that one should not even try unless politically connected, because denial is almost certain and it will go on the record that the applicant has been denied a permit, which could, I'm told affect one's ability to obtain a permit from another State...). So, why the difference between Maryland, Virginia and her other contiguous states? Why is it that if you live in Maryland that you are effectively disarmed?

What philosophy in and of Maryland politics drives this policy? It might be worth exploring.

I already know that disarming the public is a standard tactic of repressive governments.

I have also recently begun to recognize and advocate a principle--that as Americans, we should grow the kind of people that will take responsibility for their actions, regardless of the consequences, motives, or lack of full information. These individuals tend to think before acting, and act decisively from a sound set of ethical principles when necessary.

Disarming Americans infantilizes them by making them dependent on the Government to solve their problems. Disarming them invites them to find salvation in ever-growing government power and prevents them from developing into aware, responsible adults. Adults that can make decisions and solve problems on their own, that don't feel scared and helpless in the face adversity. Adults that will not be satisfied with regulatory agencies running over their lives and rights, and a government that grows more repressive every day.

We live in Maryland, where the common people are disarmed. I read and hear every day the results of this policy: things like "the government ought to do something about (fill in problem/peeve)" or "we should get help from (fill in elected official)" or, "what does X politician think we should do?" and "there is nothing we can do!" Maryland's clear and principled commitment to keeping her citizenry unarmed has helped me understand the issue of individual rights at a much more fundamental level than ever before. There are significant costs associated with an increasing role of government in our lives--Marylanders should strive to understand those costs.

We should keep to our principles and continue to demand our right to self-defense, which I believe plays a role in our sound personal and political development as Americans.

--Paul Fink
Silver Spring, Maryland

School Scene: Better Schools, in a Bad Budget

2010-01-13T16:07:51Z

Seven Resolutions for the New Decade

by Sue Katz Miller

The end of a decade provides a crucial opportunity to "stop and think," in the immortal words of one school anti-bullying program. Every year at this time, Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) Superintendent Jerry Weast asks for half of the county budget for our schools. This year, huge shortfalls are predicted in the wake of the recession, and Weast has, as he does each year, threatened painful cuts designed to stimulate parent demands for full funding of his proposed schools budget.

But some of us have lost patience with what appears to be emotional manipulation in order to fund a budget heavy on central office expenses. In addition to the new decade, we have substantive reasons to step back now and take a look at where our schools are heading. First of all, Weast plans to retire in 2011, and the opportunity to choose a new direction inspires reflection. Worrisome recent indicators (our high schools have dropped off a prestigious "best" list, and the achievement gap is stubbornly persistent) cast doubt on the greatness of MCPS. Meanwhile, the Obama administration is overdue to begin scrutinizing No Child Left Behind, and presumably listening to parents who decry the pernicious side effects of federally-mandated high-stakes testing.

]]>

Increase class size by one student per class, reduce the number of counselors, psychologists, and social workers, reduce the extra staff in high-poverty schools and for academic strugglers, and reduce afterschool programs.
Reduce staff for language immersion, magnet, International Baccalaureate (IB), signature, and other special programs. Also, eliminate buses to these programs for out-of-zone students, and for high school and middle school consortia programs.

The immediate result of this list of cuts is panic in the "red zone": the denser, lower-income, immigrant-rich area of the county, including Takoma Park and downtown Silver Spring. Cutting academic support, social services, and afterschool programs all reduce the system's capacity to support struggling students. At the same time, many teachers in the red zone, under increasing pressure to meet the NCLB benchmarks, no longer feel they have time to pay attention to the students who come to them already literate and functional in math.

For decades, red zone schools have added signature programs--an extra emphasis on science or arts in certain elementary schools, centers and magnets for the gifted, language immersion programs, and consortia "choice" schools--in order to reassure parents that the system will challenge students who are academically able, even in an era when NCLB forces a relentless focus on basic reading and math. As social studies, science, arts integration, creative writing, field trips, and creativity have been forced into a corner of the classroom by NCLB, "boutique programs" (as Weast sneeringly called them) have kept parents in red zone schools who would otherwise struggle to move to the green zone, homeschool, or scrape together money for private schools.

So as the new decade dawns, I am rolling out my seven suggested resolutions for our school system. Honoring most of these resolutions would not require big bucks. What is required: political will, and the will to truly listen to teachers, parents and students.

1. Think Playtime. Bring back imaginative and outdoor play in kindergarten, and outdoor field trips for every grade level. Little bodies and growing brains need the exercise and immersion in nature, to counteract the constant testing.

2. Think Content. Bring back all the academic subjects squeezed out by the blunt instrument that is NCLB: arts, social studies, science, creative writing. Otherwise, children across the academic spectrum risk losing all taste for learning.

3. Think Basics. Bring back the nuts and bolts that will help all children: multiplication tables, long division, spelling, grammar, vocabulary including Latin and Greek roots. Use audio and video and kinesthetic learning to teach these--the drill does not have to kill. Then, require a set number of essays and research papers starting in sixth grade: these essentials are tragically missing.

4. Think Green. Overturn the mysterious "policy" (no one has been able to show it to me) that forbids vegetable gardens. Allow Piney Branch Elementary to conduct their dishwasher pilot, and get rid of styrofoam trays. Commit to purchase local produce from local farmers (not just one week out of the year). Bring back functional school kitchens to cook healthier meals.

5. Think Substance. Spend the budget on the kids. Stop putting millions into deluxe technology (Promethean boards), public relations, and hiring deep ranks of administrators so they can all fly around to conferences. The rabble-rousing Parents Coalition does an outstanding job tracking these expenses, and their findings are shocking.

6. Think Support. The idea (perpetuated by consultants hired by MCPS) that the entire achievement gap can be explained by racism is patently absurd in a county where many kids come to school hungry, homeless, not speaking English. Socioeconomics must be addressed, and cutting school psychologists, afterschool activities, and academic support teachers is not the way to do this.

7. Think Individuals. "Equity" does not mean one size fits all, or a guarantee of equal outcomes. Most teachers cannot do justice to the full academic spectrum of kids in a red zone classroom. Stop dismantling special education programs--not all families want mainstreaming. Stop dismantling the programs for students who need more challenge (immersion, magnets) unless and until you make these programs available in local schools. Deliver "highly gifted" reading and writing content in every local elementary school through regrouped reading classes so that all "rigor" is not concentrated in math: there are students in every school, students of every color and class and from every country of the world, ready to read great books and write essays. In the new decade, give them a chance.

Killer Robots

2009-07-01T17:14:16Z

by Gordon S. Clark •

At the risk of dating myself, when I reflect on the Predator drone aircraft now being used by our government to hunt and kill "suspected extremists" in Pakistan, an episode of the original Star Trek TV series comes to mind.

In the episode, entitled "Mirror, Mirror," Captain Kirk accidently transports into a parallel, evil universe run on fear and violence. The mission of his ship the U.S.S. Enterprise is no longer to seek and explore new civilizations, but to conquer them. And the evil "mirror" Kirk maintains his hold on power with a secret device that allows him to spy on anyone in the ship - and to assassinate them with the press of a button.

Sound familiar?

]]> As a largely peace-loving community in Takoma Park and Silver Spring that voted overwhelmingly this past fall for a change from the militarism of the Bush Administration, we have lots of reasons to be disappointed. The military budget has gone up - again. Our occupation of Iraq will go on, for at least another three years. No one, apparently, will be held to account for torture. More troops are being sent to Afghanistan, and Bagram Air Force base has turned into Obama's Guantanamo, a legal black hole in which the imprisoned have no rights.

Perhaps more disturbing than all of this, though, is our new President's increasing reliance on drone warfare.

Unmanned drones are literally that - pilotless planes operated by remote control, often from thousands of miles away. Equipped with both cameras and weapons, in the last two years the drones have been used increasingly to launch attacks rather than gather intelligence - a fact that has quietly and without significant protest slipped into the narrative of the U.S. war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Yet there is every reason to vehemently oppose the drones' use and existence. Consider:

* While our military operations in Afghanistan have already been killing significant numbers of civilians, unmanned drones are by their nature incapable of distinguishing between combatants and civilians. David Kilcullen, an adviser to General David Petraeus, (former commander of coalition troops in Iraq), testified to Congress earlier this year that 14 Al-Qaeda leaders have been killed in Pakistan by drone attacks since 2006--along with 700 civilians. Even if the information about the Al-Qaeda leaders is accurate - and there's reason to question it - that's still an astounding ratio of 50 innocent victims killed for each targeted individual.

* Drone attacks fundamentally subvert our core legal foundation of innocent until proven guilty, and those targeted are usually reported only as "suspected" extremists or militants. Drones turn suspicion into an automatic death sentence, for those targeted and for everyone unlucky enough to be near them. The attacks are, as nonviolent anti-war activist Kathy Kelly notes, nothing more than extra-judicial executions. Haven't we had enough examples of faulty intelligence to understand how wrong such attacks are?

* It is a violation of international law to attack a country with which we are not at war. There has never been a declaration to extend the Afghan war in Pakistan, which is where the drones are primarily used. Moreover, drone attacks are considered "covert" and are not officially discussed by President Obama or Congress. This absurd artifice may help suppress domestic criticism, but it does nothing to diminish the illegality or moral turpitude of the attacks.

* The drone attacks are by all accounts solidifying Pakistani public outrage against the U.S. This will inevitably drive more into the ranks of the militants, thereby perpetuating and increasing the violence.

At the end of the Star Trek episode, the good Captain Kirk tries to persuade the "mirror" Mr. Spock (his evil but still logical Vulcan first officer) of the wisdom of cooperation over war and violence - and yet gives him the assassination device as a way to take hold of power.

President Obama seems to be following the same script. Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced this spring that his proposed defense budget will call for "a major increase in unmanned aircraft," specifically the Predator drones now being used for the attacks. Far from changing the Bush policy in Pakistan, Obama is expanding it.

There is little doubt that to a U.S. President drone attacks may seem to offer a quick, inexpensive and "clean" alternative to deal with a troublesome adversary. But how is it possible for us to create peace in a shattered region or rebuild our nation's image and role in the world while relying increasingly on an assassination device that kills more innocents then enemies, and makes a mockery of both our laws and values?

Unlike a TV show which ends in an hour, we will have to live with the repercussions of these actions for years to come.

The farmer and consumer as food activist

2009-07-01T17:05:45Z

by Michael Tabor •

Every so often I'm asked to speak to a college or high school class. It's an opportunity for me to voice my thoughts - most of which come to me when I'm working in the field.

Because I'm a relic of the 1960's, my main message is that young people have the power to make change happen. Many of their parents, teachers and elders have bought into some unholy concepts - and I attempt to offer different - perhaps heretical - thoughts they should think about.

]]> So here are a few:

1. I offer them a choice of a red or blue pill (referring to the Matrix films) and suggest they are living in a false corporate dominated mindset reality. They are programmed by TV, the movies, video games, schools and advertising in how to eat, dress (I ask how many are wearing corporate logos on their clothing), consume and think. The alternatives they now have are cynicism and anger. I offer activism - community, electoral and spiritual activist involvement.

2. I also advocate involvement in local and state politics. National politics are sexy and alluring - but change can more readily happen at the local level - school boards, county and city councils, state electoral politics. The right wingers recognized that and began organizing locally in the '70's and succeeded in motivating a large portion of the electorate. Name recognition in politics and the financing advantage of incumbents is central, so once elected, even dog catcher, any elected official has a better chance of re-election and moving up than an unknown. To test out my assumptions, I ask students to ask their parents what state electoral district they live in. In Maryland, parents should at least know the name of one of their 3 delegates and their state (not federal) senator. They most likely won't. I encourage students to read metro sections and local newspapers and become more aware of local issues.

3. I suggest the food they're consuming in their school and community is killing them. I tell them (especially inner-city students) they're eating rat poison! A diet of foods laden with high fat, fried, high fructose corn syrup will encourage type 2 diabetes. Every inner-city classroom is filled with children whose parents, aunts, uncles and other relatives who have "sugar" (diabetes). And our culture of capitalism-gone-amok with few watchdogs or whistle blowers, enables and encourages us to make poor food choices. The USDA and FDA have failed us miserably when it comes to providing creative and imaginative leadership.

4. I tell them that their supermarkets are filled with food that cause them more harm than good. Red meat, white flour and candy, all should be eaten in moderation if at all. Our bodies sometimes crave these often, addictive, foods. But children should be encouraged to eat a diet of greens, whole grains, locally-grown vegetables fruits and juices. In many schools I visit, I've been told and shown that teachers reward their students with candy, McDonald's coupons, donuts and cola products! There must be a more consistent message if we're to be credible.

5. I advocate the complete elimination of vending machines in public schools. It's been a way corporations have brought their products into our classrooms in an effort to "brand" and addict children. Principals, parents and school boards have compromised their ethics and values by allowing these machines in schools. And plastic bottles filled with water have become their own source of pollution. The reality is that we are all accomplices and enablers. (Charitably speaking, it's also about a lack of sufficient funding.)

So, extending some of these heretical thoughts to you I'd add:

1. We need to offer school children the best, not the cheapest food. In the long term, we'll cut down the hospital, insurance and societal costs that affect all of us.

2. We need to make sure our farmers and super markets are not solely geared to the wealthiest among us. Good quality, affordably-priced, nurturing and healthy foods should be available to all the public. Your local farmers market should be reaching out to minorities and ethnicities.

3. Plastics (particularly bags), have become a primary pollution source. They should be eliminated from our market place - the UK, France and countries like Rwanda recognize this and have started to ban their use. Whenever we have an opportunity, we should advocate their elimination - by voicing our concerns to elected officials, supermarket managers, farmers, etc.

4. Become more aware of what we eat. I subscribe to Nutrition Action. One of my farmworkers gets Life Extension . I believe we have evolved to eat a relatively modest diet based on famine, flight and fight, and a very active life. Sugar and transfat were not part of that diet. 1200 - 1500 calories was consumed in a whole day! Today, we might eat that in one meal - and then sit and watch TV or work at a computer most of the day. It's no accident that so many cancers (particular breast and prostate) are located in fatty tissues. Or that type 2 diabetes is seemingly out of control. That all has to change if we're truly interested in the health of our families, communities and societal obesity.

5. There is a new movement referred to as "Transition Cities". It started in the United Kingdom and has spread throughout the world. It is centered on community response to the peak oil crisis and climate change. Over 900 cities and towns are exploring the concept of reconnecting communities with farms, gardens, healthy food, local energy sources and family-owned businesses. It's worth exploring and connecting with others interested in reinvigorating communities. For more information go to: www.transitionsmaryland.ning.com.

I'm interested and open to your reactions and suggestions. Thank you for reading this.

Mike Tabor started farming in 1972. Licking Creek Bend Farm is located in near Berkeley Springs, West VA and Hancock, MD. He advocates making healthily-grown foods available to a wider variety of the public and has been a strong advocate of eliminating vending machines and junk goods from schools. In 2008 he helped get Farm-to-Cafeteria legislation passed in the Maryland General Assembly. His largest direct market is in Adams Morgan, Washington, DC where at least 50% of his business comes from WIC farmers market food coupons.

I Love to Travel

2009-07-01T15:00:46Z

by Gordon Clark •

I love to travel.

While the destinations have not been as exotic as for some of my friends, I have nonetheless been pretty lucky, and seen some amazing places on this beautiful planet. From the Canadian Rockies to the Swiss Alps, from the Burgundy valley of France to the Piedmont region of Italy, from Venice, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Paris to the Caribbean, the American Southwest and the Pacific Northwest, my adventures traveling with my wife and friends have provided some of the greatest times of my life.

]]> And yet, as I contemplate stepping on to a plane again for some future trip, I am haunted by Dr. Faustus.

Faustus, you might recall, is a classic morality tale. First published by a theologian in Germany, it was translated into English and became the source of Christopher Marlowe's play The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus. It is the story of a brilliant scholar who, after reaching the limits of human knowledge and experience, makes a deal with the devil: if he is allowed to live "in all voluptuousness" for twenty four years, he will deliver his soul to hell.

The deal struck, the first thing Faustus does is take a sightseeing tour of Europe, courtesy of a flying chariot "burning bright." He performs miracles, and demands "pleasant fruits" from "all corners of the new-found world," such as summoning fresh grapes from the southern hemisphere in the middle of winter.

Sound familiar?

Although written four hundred years before our current predicament, Dr. Faustus is an apt metaphor for climate change. (With a nod to radical English thinker and writer George Monbiot for the concept.) Fossil fuels are humanity's deal with the devil: the power in them allows us to do all sorts of miraculous things, including travel overnight to distant lands, and to live "in all voluptuousness" in our consumer society. We have built our civilization upon the burning of fossil fuels, and right now that's looking very much like a Faustian bargain.

As you'd expect of any deal with the devil, it's a damn hard one to get out of, and nowhere is that more true than when it comes to our love affair with travel - and especially travel by airplane. Good folks who install the right light bulbs, recycle, bike whenever they can and own a fuel-efficient car usually don't think twice about their carbon footprint as they step on to a plane.

Which is probably a kind of selective denial, because when you do think about it, you realize that airplanes put out a staggering amount of exhaust (including not only carbon dioxide but also nitrous and sulfur oxides) at a time when our civilization's goal must be to dramatically reduce such emissions. Air travel in the U.S. accounts for 12 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. transportation and almost half of worldwide emissions from aircraft, and it's on the rise. Moreover, emissions at 30,000 feet, directly into the stratosphere, have a much graver impact than those generated at ground level.

Yet what a guilty pleasure to try to give up. Even organizations that vigorously advocate walking and biking and hybrid cars won't suggest you stop or cut back on flying. Maybe for the same reason that Al Gore didn't mention the huge climate impact of the global meat industry in his otherwise comprehensive film, The Inconvenient Truth. I figure the guy just really loves his steak.

Of course one can still get to these far-flung places in far less environmentally destructive ways. Trains and ships use a fraction of the fossil fuel planes do. You just have to be prepared to take longer, and to enjoy the journey as much as the destination.

Which suggests that changing our mindset is as important as changing our mode of transportation - and this includes realizing that what we want is often right here at home.

The American writer Ralph Waldo Emerson once famously asked how people would respond if the stars came out only one night every thousand years. Why should they be any less wondrous for their regular appearance? His contemporary and friend Henry David Thoreau noted that "men talk about Bible miracles because there is no miracle in their lives."

But it doesn't have to be that way. "There is ripe fruit over your head," Thoreau added, before going into full rhapsody. "Talk of mysteries! Think of our life in nature... rocks, trees, wind on our cheeks! the solid earth! the actual world! the common sense!" Experiencing the very real beauty and profound wonder in our immediate surroundings is not as difficult as we might imagine, once we start practicing.

For instance, I'm told the bioluminescence of some bays in the Caribbean is magical, but it can't be any more magical than the firefly display that appears outside my front door on cool June evenings. The Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay and surrounding waterways provide endless opportunities for relaxation and recreation, and while the local Appalachian mountains may not have dramatic snowcaps, there are hikes as beautiful and fulfilling as any I have ever taken. And then come the colors of fall - a miracle which doesn't happen for our friends on the west coast.

Once you don this set of eyes, entirely new and fascinating worlds can appear in the most unlikely places, such as the one thriving under the tomato and zucchini plants in your garden. There's even something there for the action hero fans among us: I've discovered that ripping through a bed with a garden claw is a deeply-satisfying Wolverine (of the X-Men)-like experience - with the added benefit that weeds are a real world evil that must be destroyed!

And for those with more cultural interests, we live in the middle of some of the richest diversity on the planet, from world-class museums to the sweetest local fairs, most raucous festivals and yes, even shopping. This "Staycation" issue of the Voice is filled with a multitude of opportunities for your summer pleasure - take full advantage.

For as it becomes increasingly clear that the appropriate response to the crisis of climate change (and peak oil) is to go local, from renewable energy sources to growing our food, we also need to become the traveler equivalent of the "locavore," and discover the bounty at our feet. Staycations may be cast by some as an unpleasant economic necessity, but in reality they embody the truest spirit of connection with the world around us, and enjoyment derived from it.

Which is good, because I do so love to travel. Thank goodness I don't have to go far to do it.

Carbon: friend or foe?

2009-06-01T17:05:14Z

Is carbon being held hostage by politician? It would certainly seem so given the ground swell of popular political action in favor of reducing human activity that produces carbon dioxide. However, there is an ever growing number of reputable and heavily credentialed scientists who take issue with the popular pronouncements of doom from carbon.

I am not a scientist and therefore, not qualified to pass judgment on the conclusions of qualified scientists. But as a fairly intelligent person, a taxpayer, and a voter, I have to ask questions about expensive public policy based on less than agreed upon science.

We are witnessing a time of ecopolitics where human emotions and political preferences are trumping the scientific method. Consider the following:

The famous "hockey stick" graph that launched this global warming panic and was largely the underpinning of Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" has since been totally discredited and subsequently removed from the proceedings of the U.N.'s International Panel on Climate Change" (IPCC). Noted Scientists such as Dr. Edward Wegman, former chairman of the Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of Science, have proven that the "hockey stick graph" is the result of incorrect statistical analysis.

A British Court has ruled that if Al Gore's book, "An Inconvenient Truth", is used in public schools then they must be informed of "11 troubling inaccuracies.";

According to Dr. William Happer's U.S. Senate testimony on February 25, 2009, there has been no increase in global temperatures during the last 10 years and the global warming cycle started in 1800, long before any appreciable carbon increases in the atmosphere due to human activity. There are many more incidents by credible sources of serious disagreement with IPCC conclusions that are used to justify enormous public outlays of the people's money to attempt to influence the world's "carbon footprint"

What troubles me most with this issue is the almost total willingness of communities and their elected officials to accept the need to reduce our carbon output regardless of the cost and the cadre of scientists who disagree with the "supporting" science. The "green movement" transcends the need for truth. Indeed, it is a religious crusade that invades our lives with proselytization in lieu of settled science.

-- Charles J. Hayes

Takoma Park, Md.

Kudos to Compassion Over Killing

2009-06-01T17:03:28Z

Kudos to Compassion Over Killing and Takoma Park for creating Takoma Veg Week. Whether we're concerned about animals or the environment, we can make a difference simply by eating a plant-based diet--and making the switch has never been easier.

Vegetarianism is growing in popularity as more people learn of the environmental degradation and inherent cruelty in modern farming. Restaurants, grocery stores, and dining halls across the country are meeting the demand for vegetarian foods. Even in our own community, there is a plethora of choices--from the TPSS Co-op to the newly opened Roscoe's. It's no surprise that a month later Senator Raskin is still a vegetarian!

Even though Takoma's VegWeek is over, you can keep protecting animals and the environment by eating vegetarian foods. Compassion Over Killing offers a free vegetarian restaurant guide to DC on VegDC.com.

-- Veronica Valente

Takoma Park, Md.

Veg out

2009-06-01T17:01:04Z

Thank you for the May 2009 article, "Takoma Park Veg Week." It is encouraging to see our town's rich history of advocating non-violence being represented by so many levels of government. With earlier declarations opposing the force-feeding of birds, and the confining of egg-laying hens to wire cages, Mayor Bruce Williams' signing of the proclamation establishing a week of vegetarian awareness, typifies Takoma Park's spirit of compassion. Senator Jamie Raskin's and Delegate Tom Hucker's pledge to go veg for the week of April 24-30 is another positive step towards raising awareness of the negative impacts animal agriculture has on our health, the environment, and the animals.

-- Rose Nealon

Takoma Park, Md.

Nuclear Free Zone is no joke

2009-06-01T16:57:41Z

While I almost always enjoy the message in Citizen Bill each month, the implication of the cartoon a couple of issues back on our Nuclear Free Zone was off base. The cartoon's commentary states that the free zone was "enacted as a protest against the bellicose Reagan administration."

This is absolutely untrue. I helped spearhead the local free zone movement and personally wrote the ordinance language back in l983. The motive behind the effort was to alert the public to the possibility of nuclear annihilation with the growing number of nuclear weapons worldwide and at no time was there ever discussion or even mention of our effort being directed at the Reagan administration.

The cartoon further states "Some now question the zone's relevance." Well, not only isn't our law a throwback to the l980s, it represents instead an ongoing mission with an ever changing dynamic. To wit, two years ago the Free Zone ordinance was expanded to give us, the Nuclear Free Zone Committee, the task of monitoring and reporting to the City Council the threat to Takoma Park of the transport of high-level nuclear waste.

And just this year, the Council has asked us to investigate the possibility of making our city nuclear power-free.

-- Jay Levy, chair

Nuclear Free Takoma Park Committee.