It's a case of "kill the messenger"

Guest editorial

            Few people will deny the U.S. faces a serious economic crisis, an economic

Waterloo if you will. Yet I'm astonished where our letter writers and columnists place the blame.  One thing is certain: if the only advice a noted Ph.D. in economics has to offer Congress, the president, and the public is a silly, asinine fairy tale about 10 beer drinkers, then we as a nation are in serious trouble. No less a personage than Warren Buffet -- the oracle of Omaha and the second wealthiest capitalist in the U.S. -- has bluntly told Congress, "The rich should pay more." He used himself and his own employees as an example, clearly showing how he paid a lower percentage rate on his millions of income than his employees do on their monthly salary. If Congress and Ph.D. economic professors ignore Warren Buffett, don't blame beer drinkers.

            In the November 17 issue of Western Ag Reporter, every other letter writer or columnist gave environmentalists or the Occupy Wall Street movement a whack. Why? Was it tree huggers or was it Paul Volker, chairman of the Federal Reserve, who raised interest rates to 21% in the 1980s, resulting in an economic crisis in rural America?  Who was President of the U.S. when the E.P.A. was created and the clean air and clean water acts passed... socialist Adolph Hitler or Republican Richard Nixon?  Was it the Occupiers or the Banksters that created the housing bubble that ultimately crashed, creating a global crisis?

            After the 1929 crash and depression, numerous restrictions were placed on Wall Street to prevent a re-occurrence. Who removed those public safe guards.. the occupiers or Congress? The power of eminent domain to take private property was granted to corporations. Who changed the rules and constitution? Occupiers or Supreme Court?

Who robbed the Social Security trust fund and left only IOUs and a pending crisis? Occupiers or Congress?  Was it the Occupiers or Congress that negotiated the Free Trade agreements that gutted U.S. manufacturing and exported 10 million jobs to third-world slave labor? Was it a tree hugger or a federal judge who voided a billion-dollar jury verdict in favor of U.S. cattlemen? The ceaseless flow of 35 million illegals have overwhelmed our schools, hospitals, and welfare agencies and spawned unprecedented drug violence. Who condones and even encourages and exploits this illegal flow? Corporate hogs, dairy, poultry, meat packers, and fruit and vegetable growers or the Occupy Wall Street protesters?

            I haven't made a personal inspection of the Occupiers so I can't speak with authority on their lack of cleanliness as some have, but I view them as analogous to canaries in the coalmine. I do know that something is vitally wrong with our nation and that neither Congress nor our President is willing to take other than divisive political actions.

            When 30 major corporations can avoid paying taxes for seven years, when innumerable corporate CEOs like Lowell McAdam of Verizon draw pay of $55,000 per day (yes, per day!), when we have thousands of soldiers stationed in Germany and Japan 65 years after the end of WW II, then something is wrong. Turn off your TV and learn what our real problems are and who's causing them. By the way, what book commanded us to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the widows and orphans, and love our neighbor as ourselves? The left wing, socialist Occupiers handbook or the Holy Bible?

                                                                   Stephen Anderson

                                                                   Alma, KS

Naming Rights and Financial Contributions

Some Republicans I know are Republicans because they are loyal to the only political party they have ever been members of.  They can’t conceive of not being Republicans.  A few others have realized that they are disenchanted with the direction of the party and they have made a partial step away from it by claiming to be independents.  The same things can be said for numerous Democrats.  It’s like growing up in a religious denomination and being told that every other denomination is wrong; it’s scary to think that the group you are a member of might not be all that righteous.

In truth, what appears to be happening is that certain factions within groups have ascended to dominance while the other members have languished in their complacency.  The attitudes of society have overtaken the idealism's of the groups we thought we knew because we grew up in them.  One reason for this is that there are professional people who are paid to devise ways to make these groups more effective political tools.  Those professional manipulators have expanded their abilities at an accelerating rate with the assistance of technology and money.  The more willing these individuals are to “sell out” their own group’s core ideology for the sake of other agendas, the more money they can attract.  While you were sleeping, your religion and/or your political party changed into a tool for people with money that want to be powerful.

In western South Dakota, there are lots of good people that have belonged to one political party all of their lives.  They are good neighbors, good citizens, and the kind of people that you would like to have watching your back for you when times get tough.  They sort of shake their heads when they learn that T. Denny Sanford makes another large contribution to help fund some organization and, in appreciation, that organization changes its name to include Mr. Sanford’s name.  It seems harmless enough and it isn’t as though T. Denny invented the practice.

On January 21, 2010, the US Supreme Court assisted the manipulators with the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision.  The Supreme Court decision appears to be confirming what has been happening slowly for a long time and at a much faster rate during the last eleven years.  Money trumps everything else, if you have enough of it.  If things weren’t lopsided enough already, one group is looking to make it more so.  This group wants to eliminate the continuing restriction against direct political contributions by corporations.  Perhaps the Republican and Democrat parties are in for name changes in the near future; judging by their actions they are already sold out to or beholding to their moneyed and corporate contributors.

Occupy Rapid City joins national protest of Citizens United ruling

Guest Post

For immediate release

On Friday January 20, 2012, Occupy Rapid City will participate in a national protest: 
Occupy the Federal Courthouse: 

On the second anniversary of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision allowing unlimited undisclosed amounts of corporate money in political campaigns there will be occupations of Courthouses around the country. This effort is being promoted by the national group Move to Amend, which is organizing for an amendment to the US Constitution denying person hood to corporations. The effect of so-called "Super-PACS" may already be seen in the current election cycle. Our country continues to have the best politicians that money can buy. This is a concern in South Dakota as well as in national elections. We believe that when the voices of the 99% of the American population are ignored in favor of the 1%, then it is past time to implement public financing of elections.

We will meet locally at the Rapid City Federal Courthouse (9th and Main and St. Joe) at 4:30 pm. All are welcome. This is not solely an "Occupy" event. It is an open citizen protest against the Supreme Court Citizens United ruling.

Occupy Rapid City shows no signs of slowing. With weekly consensus-based meetings continuing, the activists are still reaching out for new ways to support the nation-wide effort for the promotion of social, economic and political change. On January 15th a candlelight vigil has held in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. in downtown Rapid City.
The next ORC teach-in will be January 31 at 5:30 pm at the RC Public Library Room B. Lilias Jarding will present on corporate energy–coal, oil, nuclear–with emphasis on uranium mining in and around the Black Hills. Karen Hall will talk about how to lobby the SD Legislature effectively and the online tools available.

Group participants still show enthusiasm for continuing their weekly Saturday demonstrations in downtown Rapid City, in support of the greater movement.

For further information on Occupy Rapid City please see:

http://occupyrapidcity.org/

Contact:
Clay Uptain
605-341-0724
dcu777@rushmore.com

The Future of Occupy Rapid City

            A recent acquaintance of mine gave me an article to read that discussed what drives some corporate decisions to seek profits over more socially responsible alternatives.[1]  This relates directly to what it is that drives the future of the Occupy Rapid City group.  Our group and our society are faced with numerous important issues that merit our attention and activism.  How do we decide which issues we will address?  How do we decide the methods we will use to address the issues?

            Back in October, 2011, Representative Barney Frank was interviewed by Rachel Maddow.  Rep. Frank wanted to know where the members of the Occupy Wall Street movement two years prior when he could have used their energy in fighting for regulations that may have averted the economic crisis.  He implied that the members of the Wall Street Movement had not voted during the previous election.  The following is an excerpt from that interview, Rep. Frank said:

“. . .  I welcome the Wall Street energy. I don’t agree with everything some of the people say. I agree with the general thrust of it. It’s not self-executing. It has to be translated into political activity if it’s going to have the impact. . .”[2]

            It would be very difficult to determine with accuracy whether members of the Occupy Wall Street Movement did or did not vote in the previous election.  However, it quite easy to observe their willingness and ability to engage in civic minded public dissent and the exercise of free speech.   Further, it appears that their dissent and exercise of free speech does have a political impact.

            During general assembly meetings, Occupy Rapid City members discuss issues that are of concern to the members locally and nationally.  How the group will respond to these issues is discussed and plans are made.  The importance and relevance of the issues are considered and focus issues are identified.

            In accordance with decisions made during the general assembly meetings, the Occupiers protested to raise awareness of the negative impact of large banks on society.  The Occupiers urged consumers of banking services to move their money out of the large, corporate institutions and into smaller, local banks and credit unions.  This campaign was followed by protests focusing on buying from local businesses not just during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday period, but through out the year. 

            Teach-ins were held to provide information to movement members.  A variety of articles, videos, and books were circulated among the members to improve the general understanding of the issues.  Discussion groups met and conversations took place among the members help in the self education of the members of the group

            At the January 3, 2011, meeting of the Rapid City Common Council, members of Occupy Rapid City were in attendance.  Twelve members of the group took to the podium to encourage the Council members to consider using locally owned financial institutions for the officially designated depositories for the City’s money.  The council voted unanimously to create a task forced to consider the protocol that is used to select the designated depositories.[3]  Clearly, the activities of the Occupy movement have an impact.

            Other positive actions taken include activities like the Cash Mobs.  Members of the Occupy group gather together to shop as a group at local businesses instead of buying from large corporate chain stores.[4]  During the Bank Transfer Day or Move Your Money Day campaigns the members of the organization and the general public were successfully encouraged to move their money out of the large corporate financial institutions and into local banks and credit unions.[5]

            Currently, the national Occupy Movement is focusing on the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision by the U.S. Supreme Court.[6]  This decision treats corporations the same as individuals allowing them to make unlimited political contributions.  Protests are being organized that will focus public attention on this issue.   Efforts are being made to propose legislation to effectively overcome the Supreme Court’s decision.  There is lots of support for this effort and not just from the Occupy movement.  Move to Amend,[7] Senator Bernie Sanders,[8] and Public Citizen[9] are just three examples of efforts focused on reversing the personhood status of corporations resulting from the Supreme Court’s decision on the Citizen United case.  Society seems to be catching on and picking up some of the energy that invigorates people when they begin to exercise their constitutional rights to free speech and assembly. 

            The National Defense Authorization Act[10] as it relates to the issue of indefinite detention is also a topic of discussion and planning at general assembly meetings.  How the Occupy Movement responds to this legislation has not been decided.  However, the concern over this issue by individual members is already being displayed during public protests.

            There are those within the Occupy Movement that don’t believe that voting does any good, they say the system is broken.  Others in the group hold voting in the very high regard and they cherish the right to vote, while also considering voting a civic duty.  In today’s party politics voting is encouraged and the great campaign battles are fought in the effort to win the most votes.  However, once the votes have been cast the political parties of today would prefer that voters stay home, don’t talk to the opposition, and send money.  In the interest of securing these three objectives, political parties have learned to use fear, decisiveness, and deception to accomplish their goals.

            Education, discourse, and action should be the objectives of the people, voters and non-voters alike.  These are elements of the core principals of the Occupy Movement.  Learning about the issues leads to understanding the issues.  Understanding the issues allows for discussion of the issues.  Discussion can lead to consensus on the issues.  A consensus can lead to a clearer course of action to take to resolve issues.

            Through education, people become knowledgeable regarding issues facing society.  This knowledge helps to overcome fear.  Overcoming fear and ignorance helps to promote more considerate and productive discussion relating to issues.  When the people can discuss the issues they do not have to rely on politicians to tell them what to think.  Therefore, it should be easier to tell which politicians work in the interest of the majority and which work in the interest of the economically powerful minority.

            Two Occupy Wall Street organizers/protesters were interviewed on the new Bill Moyers and Company program.[11]  These two individuals represent their own views and should not be considered to be national leaders.  However, they expressed their views about the movement and what they would like to see.  Whether their views represent consensus remains to be seen.

            In summary of my opinion, the future for the Occupy Movement lies in continuing to build on the core principles of its beginning. 

• Continue to use peaceful methods to express dissent focusing on raising awareness of issues that impact the 99%. 
• Promote broad based non-partisan consensus building. 
• Provide educational opportunities to improve the general understanding of the issues facing society.
• Take action whenever possible to promote the positive impacts upon society.

---

[1] Look Who Demands Profits Above All, by Robert Reich, Los Angeles Times, Friday, September 1, 2000 http://www.wilpf.org/docs/ccp/corp/X-read4%5B1%5D.pdf

[2] Barney Frank To Occupy Wall Street: Where Were You During The Last Midterms? by Colby Hall, 8:17 am, October 18th, 2011 http://www.mediaite.com/tv/barney-frank-unhappy-with-occupy-wall-streeters-who-blame-me-for-consequence-of-their-not-voting/

[3] Council to look at keeping city bank accounts local, Journal staff, Wednesday, January 4, 2012, 5:30 am, 

[4] Occupy Brookings Organizes 'Cash Mob', by Hailey Higgins, Keloland.com, Published: December 3, 2011, 9:56 PM

[5] Move Your Money Day a Success; Over $50 Million Withdrawn From Big Banks, by Sarah Jaffe, AlterNet.org, November 8, 2011

[6] Wikipedia contributors. "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 14 Jan. 2012. Web. 15 Jan. 2012.

[7] MovetoAmend.org

[8] Sanders Files ‘Saving American Democracy Amendment', Senator Bernie Sanders, sanders/senate/gov, December 8, 2011

[9] Democracyisforpeople.org

[10] Wikipedia contributors. "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 15 Jan. 2012. Web. 15 Jan. 2012. 

[11] Two Occupy Leaders on Goals of the Protest, BillMoyers.com, January 13, 2012

Indefinite detention without charges

Dear Friend,

Osama bid Laden may be dead, but the War on Terror is still being used as an excuse to sacrifice our values and our rights.

On New Year's Eve, President Obama signed a bill into law that gives him and future presidents the power to use the U.S. military to pick up and indefinitely detain civilians accused of supporting terrorism -- including American citizens -- anywhere in the world without charges and without a trial.

This represents a further entrenchment of the Guantanamo mindset that jettisons our most cherished values and our constitutional rights all in the name of national security.

I just signed a petition telling President Obama and Congress to close Guantanamo and end indefinite detention. I hope you sign it, too.

You can find out more information and sign the petition at the link below.

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/gitmo/?r_by=33280-3451380-E_TjpKx&rc=confemail

Indefinite detention without charges or trial is fundamentally contrary to the democratic values that our system of government rests upon.

The worst thing we can do in the face of this is remain silent.

Occupy Rapid City Council

Members of the Occupy Rapid City group gathered outside city hall this evening.  The group had an objective that they hope will help to improve the local economy and stimulate local job growth in the future.  The group assembled inside the council chambers after a brief protest gathering on the sidewalk outside.  About ten members of the group registered to speak publicly before the council.  Each speaker approached the topic from their own unique prospective, but the common theme was to encourage the council members to reconsider the makeup of the officially designated depositories for the city’s money.  Occupiers want to see the list limited to locally owned banks, local investment companies, and local credit unions.

The current list includes numerous large national institutions and some foreign companies.   Two additional institutions wanted to be included in the list and this was the reason the resolution was up reconsideration at tonight’s council meeting.  The resolution on tonight’s agenda included the following financial institutions:

A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc.

BankWest Inc.

Black Hills Community Bank

Black Hills Federal Credit Union

Capstone Asset Management Company

Dougherty & Company, LLC

Edward Jones Investment

First Interstate Bank

First National Bank

First Western Federal Savings Bank

Great Western Bank

Investment Center of America, Inc.

KT Investments

Merrill Lynch

Pioneer Bank and Trust

RBC Wealth Management

US Bank

Voyageur Investment Management

            Wells Fargo

The council passed an amended motion to approve the list and create a committee to review the criteria for choosing the institutions on the list.  The issue is to be revisited by the council in sixty days.