January, 28 2010, 01:15pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Joia Jefferson Nuri, TransAfrica Forum, 202.223.1960 x 131
Dan Beeton, 202-239-1460
Jesse Jackson, Danny Glover, Harry Belafonte, Haiti-Based Aid Groups, and Haiti Experts Call for U.S. to Prioritize Aid Delivery Over Military Deployment
WASHINGTON
A letter signed by the Reverend Jesse Jackson, actor Danny Glover,
Harry Belafonte, Haiti-based aid organizations, and a number of other
NGO's and academic experts was sent to House Democratic majority
leaders and the Congressional Black Caucus today, urging for the U.S.
to prioritize and improve coordination of aid delivery over military
deployment in Haiti. The letter notes that an over-emphasis on security
has meant costly delays in distributing aid that have cost lives and
led to otherwise unnecessary amputations in some cases.
The letter, which is also signed by Haiti-based aid groups including
Haiti Konpay, Sustainable Organic Integrated Livelihoods (SOIL), and
the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti, calls for an
accounting of supplies and personnel passing through U.S.-controlled
ports and airports, and commitments to deliver aid to under served
areas and persons and to work with all governments and NGO's in doing
so, as reports continue to describe communities in parts of Haiti that
still await much-needed aid.
The letter follows:
January 27, 2010
Dear Members of Congress,
The outpouring of aid from U.S. citizens and their government to Haiti
in the wake of this immense catastrophe has been important and welcome.
However, it is also clear that there have been serious mistakes that
have unnecessarily delayed the delivery of medical supplies, water, and
other life-saving materials.
Currently, there are major shortages reported of food, tents, and water.
The most costly unnecessary delays had until recently been in the area
of medical supplies.
A team of volunteer surgeons including the incoming president of the
New York State Chapter of the American College of Surgeons, whose
deployment was delayed for days by the U.S. military, reported that "untold
numbers are dying of untreated, preventable infections."
Doctors Without Borders (MSF), the world-renowned humanitarian group is
one of the organizations who had tons of medical supplies re-routed
because of decisions made by the U.S. government.
"We
lost three days," Francoise Saulnier, the head of MSF's legal
department told Reuters Television in an interview. "And these three
days have created a massive problem with infection, with gangrene, with
amputations that are needed now, while we could have really spared this
to those people."
Jarry Emmanuel, air logistics officer for the UN's World Food
Programme, noted on January 16 that "most
flights are for the US military."
Perhaps the biggest mistake has been an overemphasis on security, and
the deployment of 20,000 troops, to the detriment of delivery of
life-saving supplies. This was especially true during the first 10-12
days after the earthquake hit.
Although the situation with regard to medical supplies has recently
improved, there are now other shortages, including food, water, and
tents.
To avoid more unnecessary loss of life in the coming weeks, we call
upon the Administration to guarantee the following:
- A daily public accounting of the shipments of materials and
personnel that pass through the Port-au-Prince airport or any other
ports under control of the U.S. military
- A public commitment to prioritize the distribution of vital aid
and supplies and personnel, including water, medical supplies, food,
medical personnel, and shelter. This means that these supplies and
personnel must be given priority over the deployment of any more
military personnel or equipment.
- A public announcement as to what measures our government will
take going forward to make sure that the mistakes of the first two
weeks are not repeated.
- A public commitment to deliver, water, food, and other urgently
needed supplies to rural areas and other population centers that have
seen little, no, or greatly delayed aid
- A public commitment to ensuring that all survivors in Haiti
receive the necessities: clean water, food, shelter, and medical care,
and that all resources received will be immediately deployed for this
purpose
- A public commitment to work with all governments and Civil
Society Organizations that are delivering these needed goods and
services
While security can help to ensure a better distribution of aid, the
actual distribution of aid is most important. While it is true that
there have been some supplies lost to looting, this is not nearly so
terrible as the loss of life and limb that has occurred due to
unnecessary delays. The over-emphasis on security has been costly, and
must not be repeated - from now on the top priority must be the
delivery and distribution of the basic survival needs of the
population. The Administration must publicly reassure the world that
this will indeed be the priority going forward.
Sincere regards,
Harry Belafonte, Board of Directors
Emeritus, TransAfrica Forum
Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr.
Founder and President, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition
Danny Glover
Chair of the Board, TransAfrica Forum
Brian Concannon Jr., Esq.
Director, Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti
Mark Weisbrot
Co-Director, Center for Economic and Policy Research
Rachelle Lyndaker Schlabach
Director, Mennonite Central Committee, U.S. Washington Office
Melinda Miles
Founder and Director, Konbit pou Ayiti (Haiti)
Fritz Gutwein
Co-Director and Haiti Reborn Coordinator
The Quixote Center
Sasha Kramer
Co-founder, Sustainable Organic Integrated Livelihoods (Haiti)
Veerle Opgenhaffen
Sr. Program Director
Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at NYU School of Law
Anne McConnell-Wisskirchen
Co-ordinator, Haiti Advocacy Platform-UK
Briggs Bomba, Michael Stulman and Gerald LeMelle
Africa Action
Larry Birns
Director, Council on Hemispheric Affairs
Mark C. Johnson,
Executive Director, Fellowship of Reconciliation
John Feffer
Co-Director, Foreign Policy In Focus
Institute for Policy Studies
Emira Woods
Co-Director, Foreign Policy in Focus
Institute for Policy Studies
Jane Hamsher
Publisher, Firedoglake.com
Kevin Martin
Executive Director, Peace Action
Blase Bonpane
Director, Office of the Americas
Chuck Kaufman
National Co-Coordinator, Alliance for Global Justice
Doug Henwood
Editor, Left Business Observer
James Jordan
National Coordinator, Campaign for Labor Rights
James G. Devine
Professor of Economics
Loyola Marymount University
Greg Grandin
Professor of History
New York University
Hope Lewis
Professor of Law
Northeastern University School of Law
Carl G. Estabrook
Professor Emeritus
University of Illinois
A. Belden Fields
Professor Emeritus, Political Science
University of Illinois
T. M. Scruggs
Professor of Anthropology
University of Iowa
Amy H. Gardner
Professor of Medical Anthropology
University of California, Berkeley
Rosario Aguilar-Pariente
Visiting Fellow, Center for US-Mexican Studies
University of California, San Diego
Hasan Johnson
Assistant Professor
California State University, Fresno
Peter Hallward
Professor of Modern European Philosophy
Middlesex University
Rosaura Sanchez
Professor, Latin American Literature and Chicano Literature
University of California, San Diego
Millie Thayer
Assistant Professor of Sociology
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Kent Norsworthy
Content Director, Latin American Network Information Center
University of Texas, Austin
Sheila R. Tully
California State University, San Francisco
Chris Chiappari
Associate Professor
Saint Olaf College
Susanne Jonas
Lecturer, Latin American and Latino Studies
University of California, Santa Cruz
Laura Enriquez
Professor of Sociology
University of California, Berkeley
Edgar Ivan Gutierrez
History Instructor
Riverside City College
Dana Frank
Professor, Department of History
University of California, Santa Cruz
Vijay Prashad
George and Martha Kellner Chair in South Asian History and Professor of
International Studies
Trinity College
Martin Luis Cabrera
Assistant Professor, Peninsular and Latin American Literature and
Culture
University of California, San Diego
Steve Ellner
Professor of History
University of Oriente, Venezuela
Miguel Tinker Salas
Professor of Chicano and Latin American Studies
Pomona College
Sidney Lemelle
Professor of History
Pomona College
Victor Silverman
Associate Professor of History
Pomona College
Victor Rodriguez
Professor of sociology of race and ethnicity, Department of Chicano and
Latino Studies
California State University, Long Beach
Susana Chavez Silverman
Professor of Romance Languages and Literature
Pomona College
Forrest Hylton
Universidad de los Andes
Sujatha Fernandes
Assistant Professor of Sociology
City University of New York
Jose Vadi
Professor Eeritus, Political Science
California State University, Pomona
Sonja Wolf
Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM)
Tanalis Padilla
Associate Professor of History
Dartmouth College
Gilbert Gonzalez
Professor
University of California, Irvine
Alma Martinez
Associate Professor of Theater Arts
Pomona College
Ronald Chilcote
Professor Emeritus
University of California, Riverside
Thomas W. Walker,
Professor Emeritus, Political Science, Ohio University
Eric Bindler
Department of Folklore and Ethnomusicology
Indiana University
Dr. Clifford Andrew Welch
UNIFESP - Universidade Federal do Estado de Sao Paulo
Dr. Daniel Faber
Director, Northeastern Environmental Justice Research Collaborative
Jacob Rekedal
University of California, Riverside
Donald Bray
California State University, Los Angeles
Marjorie Bray
California State University, Los Angeles
Mayo C. Toruno
Professor of Economics
California State University, San Bernardino
Carol Hendrickson
Professor of Anthropology
Marlboro College
Michael Brun
Department of Economics
Illinois State University
Estevan Azcona
UH Center for Mexican American Studies (CMAS) Visiting Scholar
University of Houston
William I. Robinson
Professor of Sociology, University of California-Santa Barbara
Sydney Hutchinson, Ph.D.
Humboldt Fellow
Berlin Phonogram Archive
Ethnological Museum, Berlin
Royce Hutson, Ph.D
Associate Professor
School of Social Work
Wayne State University, Detroit, MI
Griselda Rodriguez,
Syracuse University
Gilbert Joseph, Ph.D
Farnam Professor of History & International Studies
Yale University
Marc Becker
Associate Professor of History
Truman State University
Linda Carty, Ph.D.
Director of Graduate Studies
Department of African American Studies
Syracuse University
Lynn Stephen
Distinguished Professor of Anthropology and Ethnic Studies
University of Oregon
Sylvia Tesh, Ph.D
Lecturer
University of Arizona
Alejandra Marchevsky
Associate Professor of Liberal Studies
Department of Liberal Studies
California State University, Los Angeles
Hector Perla
Assistant Professor
University of California, Santa Cruz
Gilberto M.A.Rodrigues, Ph.D,
Brazilian Professor Fulbright Visiting Scholar, Law School
University of Notre Dame
Ester Hernandez
Dept. of Chicano Studies
California State University, Los Angeles
Leisy Abrego, Ph.D
University of California President's Postdoctoral Fellow
University of California, Irvine
Lee Furey
Instructor of General Education
Art Institute of Atlanta
Nicole Weeks
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Pomona College
Lauren Derby
Associate Professor of History
University of California, Los Angeles
Jeanne M. Woods
Henry F. Bonura, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola University College of Law
Keep reading...Show less
LATEST NEWS
Critics Blast 'Reckless and Impossible' Bid to Start Operating Mountain Valley Pipeline
"The time to build more dirty and dangerous pipelines is over," said one environmental campaigner.
Apr 23, 2024
Environmental defenders on Tuesday ripped the company behind the Mountain Valley Pipeline for asking the federal government—on Earth Day—for permission to start sending methane gas through the 303-mile conduit despite a worsening climate emergency caused largely by burning fossil fuels.
Mountain Valley Pipeline LLC sent a letter Monday to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Acting Secretary Debbie-Anne Reese seeking final permission to begin operation on the MVP next month, even while acknowledging that much of the Virginia portion of the pipeline route remains unfinished and developers have yet to fully comply with safety requirements.
"In a manner typical of its ongoing disrespect for the environment, Mountain Valley Pipeline marked Earth Day by asking FERC for authorization to place its dangerous, unnecessary pipeline into service in late May," said Jessica Sims, the Virginia field coordinator for Appalachian Voices.
"MVP brazenly asks for this authorization while simultaneously notifying FERC that the company has completed less than two-thirds of the project to final restoration and with the mere promise that it will notify the commission when it fully complies with the requirements of a consent decree it entered into with the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration last fall," she continued.
"Requesting an in-service decision by May 23 leaves the company very little time to implement the safety measures required by its agreement with PHMSA," Sims added. "There is no rush, other than to satisfy MVP's capacity customers' contracts—a situation of the company's own making. We remain deeply concerned about the construction methods and the safety of communities along the route of MVP."
Russell Chisholm, co-director of the Protect Our Water, Heritage, Rights (POWHR) Coalition—which called MVP's request "reckless and impossible"—said in a statement that "we are watching our worst nightmare unfold in real-time: The reckless MVP is barreling towards completion."
"During construction, MVP has contaminated our water sources, destroyed our streams, and split the earth beneath our homes. Now they want to run methane gas through their degraded pipes and shoddy work," Chisholm added. "The MVP is a glaring human rights violation that is indicative of the widespread failures of our government to act on the climate crisis in service of the fossil fuel industry."
POWHR and activists representing frontline communities affected by the pipeline are set to take part in a May 8 demonstration outside project financier Bank of America's headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Appalachian Voices noted that MVP's request comes days before pipeline developer Equitrans Midstream is set to release its 2024 first-quarter earnings information on April 30.
MVP is set to traverse much of Virginia and West Virginia, with the Southgate extension running into North Carolina. Outgoing U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and other pipeline proponents fought to include expedited construction of the project in the debt ceiling deal negotiated between President Joe Biden and congressional Republicans last year.
On Monday, climate and environmental defenders also petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, challenging FERC's approval of the MVP's planned Southgate extension, contending that the project is so different from original plans that the government's previous assent is now irrelevant.
"Federal, state, and local elected officials have spoken out against this unneeded proposal to ship more methane gas into North Carolina," said Sierra Club senior field organizer Caroline Hansley. "The time to build more dirty and dangerous pipelines is over. After MVP Southgate requested a time extension for a project that it no longer plans to construct, it should be sent back to the drawing board for this newly proposed project."
David Sligh, conservation director at Wild Virginia, said: "Approving the Southgate project is irresponsible. This project will pose the same kinds of threats of damage to the environment and the people along its path as we have seen caused by the Mountain Valley Pipeline during the last six years."
"FERC has again failed to protect the public interest, instead favoring a profit-making corporation," Sligh added.
Others renewed warnings about the dangers MVP poses to wildlife.
"The endangered bats, fish, mussels, and plants in this boondoggle's path of destruction deserve to be protected from killing and habitat destruction by a project that never received proper approvals in the first place," Center for Biological Diversity attorney Perrin de Jong said. "Our organization will continue fighting this terrible idea to the bitter end."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Seismic Win for Workers': FTC Bans Noncompete Clauses
Advocates praised the FTC "for taking a strong stance against this egregious use of corporate power, thereby empowering workers to switch jobs and launch new ventures, and unlocking billions of dollars in worker earnings."
Apr 23, 2024
U.S. workers' rights advocates and groups celebrated on Tuesday after the Federal Trade Commission voted 3-2 along party lines to approve a ban on most noncompete clauses, which Democratic FTC Chair Lina Khansaid "keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism."
"The FTC's final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market," Khan added, pointing to the commission's estimates that the policy could mean another $524 for the average worker, over 8,500 new startups, and 17,000 to 29,000 more patents each year.
As Economic Policy Institute (EPI) president Heidi Shierholz explained, "Noncompete agreements are employment provisions that ban workers at one company from working for, or starting, a competing business within a certain period of time after leaving a job."
"These agreements are ubiquitous," she noted, applauding the ban. "EPI research finds that more than 1 out of every 4 private-sector workers—including low-wage workers—are required to enter noncompete agreements as a condition of employment."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has suggested it plans to file a lawsuit that, as The American Prospectdetailed, "could more broadly threaten the rulemaking authority the FTC cited when proposing to ban noncompetes."
Already, the tax services and software provider Ryan has filed a legal challenge in federal court in Texas, arguing that the FTC is unconstitutionally structured.
Still, the Democratic commissioners' vote was still heralded as a "seismic win for workers." Echoing Khan's critiques of such noncompetes, Public Citizen executive vice president Lisa Gilbert declared that such clauses "inflict devastating harms on tens of millions of workers across the economy."
"The pervasive use of noncompete clauses limits worker mobility, drives down wages, keeps Americans from pursuing entrepreneurial dreams and creating new businesses, causes more concentrated markets, and keeps workers stuck in unsafe or hostile workplaces," she said. "Noncompete clauses are both an unfair method of competition and aggressively harmful to regular people. The FTC was right to tackle this issue and to finalize this strong rule."
Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, praised the FTC for "listening to the comments of thousands of entrepreneurs and workers of all income levels across industries" and finalizing a rule that "is a clear-cut win."
Demand Progress' Emily Peterson-Cassin similarly commended the commission "for taking a strong stance against this egregious use of corporate power, thereby empowering workers to switch jobs and launch new ventures, and unlocking billions of dollars in worker earnings."
While such agreements are common across various industries, Teófilo Reyes, chief of staff at the Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, said that "many restaurant workers have been stuck at their job, earning as low as $2.13 per hour, because of the noncompete clause that they agreed to have in their contract."
"They didn't know that it would affect their wages and livelihood," Reyes stressed. "Most workers cannot negotiate their way out of a noncompete clause because noncompetes are buried in the fine print of employment contracts. A full third of noncompete clauses are presented after a worker has accepted a job."
Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) executive director Mike Pierce pointed out that the FTC on Tuesday "recognized the harmful role debt plays in the workplace, including the growing use of training repayment agreement provisions, or TRAPs, and took action to outlaw TRAPs and all other employer-driven debt that serve the same functions as noncompete agreements."
Sandeep Vaheesan, legal director at Open Markets Institute, highlighted that the addition came after his group, SBPC, and others submitted comments on the "significant gap" in the commission's initial January 2023 proposal, and also welcomed that "the final rule prohibits both conventional noncompete clauses and newfangled versions like TRAPs."
Jonathan Harris, a Loyola Marymount University law professor and SBPC senior fellow, said that "by also banning functional noncompetes, the rule stays one step ahead of employers who use 'stay-or-pay' contracts as workarounds to existing restrictions on traditional noncompetes. The FTC has decided to try to avoid a game of whack-a-mole with employers and their creative attorneys, which worker advocates will applaud."
Among those applauding was Jean Ross, president of National Nurses United, who said that "the new FTC rule will limit the ability of employers to use debt to lock nurses into unsafe jobs and will protect their role as patient advocates."
Angela Huffman, president of Farm Action, also cheered the effort to stop corporations from holding employees "hostage," saying that "this rule is a critical step for protecting our nation's workers and making labor markets fairer and more competitive."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Discriminatory' North Carolina Law Criminalizing Felon Voting Struck Down
One plaintiffs' attorney said the ruling "makes our democracy better and ensures that North Carolina is not able to unjustly criminalize innocent individuals with felony convictions who are valued members of our society."
Apr 23, 2024
Democracy defenders on Tuesday hailed a ruling from a U.S. federal judge striking down a 19th-century North Carolina law criminalizing people who vote while on parole, probation, or post-release supervision due to a felony conviction.
In Monday's decision, U.S. District Judge Loretta C. Biggs—an appointee of former Democratic President Barack Obama—sided with the North Carolina A. Philip Randolph Institute and Action NC, who argued that the 1877 law discriminated against Black people.
"The challenged statute was enacted with discriminatory intent, has not been cleansed of its discriminatory taint, and continues to disproportionately impact Black voters," Biggs wrote in her 25-page ruling.
Therefore, according to the judge, the 1877 law violates the U.S. Constitution's equal protection clause.
"We are ecstatic that the court found in our favor and struck down this racially discriminatory law that has been arbitrarily enforced over time," Action NC executive director Pat McCoy said in a statement. "We will now be able to help more people become civically engaged without fear of prosecution for innocent mistakes. Democracy truly won today!"
Voting rights tracker Democracy Docket noted that Monday's ruling "does not have any bearing on North Carolina's strict felony disenfranchisement law, which denies the right to vote for those with felony convictions who remain on probation, parole, or a suspended sentence—often leaving individuals without voting rights for many years after release from incarceration."
However, Mitchell Brown, an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, said that "Judge Biggs' decision will help ensure that voters who mistakenly think they are eligible to cast a ballot will not be criminalized for simply trying to reengage in the political process and perform their civic duty."
"It also makes our democracy better and ensures that North Carolina is not able to unjustly criminalize innocent individuals with felony convictions who are valued members of our society, specifically Black voters who were the target of this law," Brown added.
North Carolina officials have not said whether they will appeal Biggs' ruling. The state Department of Justice said it was reviewing the decision.
According to Forward Justice—a nonpartisan law, policy, and strategy center dedicated to advancing racial, social, and economic justice in the U.S. South, "Although Black people constitute 21% of the voting-age population in North Carolina, they represent 42% of the people disenfranchised while on probation, parole, or post-release supervision."
The group notes that in 44 North Carolina counties, "the disenfranchisement rate for Black people is more than three times the rate of the white population."
"Judge Biggs' decision will help ensure that voters who mistakenly think they are eligible to cast a ballot will not be criminalized for simply trying to re-engage in the political process and perform their civic duty."
In what one civil rights leader called "the largest expansion of voting rights in this state since the 1965 Voting Rights Act," a three-judge state court panel voted 2-1 in 2021 to restore voting rights to approximately 55,000 formerly incarcerated felons. The decision made North Carolina the only Southern state to automatically restore former felons' voting rights.
Republican state legislators appealed that ruling to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which in 2022 granted their request for a stay—but only temporarily, as the court allowed a previous injunction against any felony disenfranchisement based on fees or fines to stand.
However, last April the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed the three-judge panel decision, stripping voting rights from thousands of North Carolinians previously convicted of felonies. Dissenting Justice Anita Earls opined that "the majority's decision in this case will one day be repudiated on two grounds."
"First, because it seeks to justify the denial of a basic human right to citizens and thereby perpetuates a vestige of slavery, and second, because the majority violates a basic tenant of appellate review by ignoring the facts as found by the trial court and substituting its own," she wrote.
As similar battles play out in other states, Democratic U.S. lawmakers led by Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont in December introduced legislation to end former felon disenfranchisement in federal elections and guarantee incarcerated people the right to vote.
Currently, only Maine, Vermont, and the District of Columbia allow all incarcerated people to vote behind bars.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular