New Yorkers join in taking back May Day

By Gabe Falsetta

Reprinted from People's World

The sun was shinning as 10,000 New Yorkers celebrated International Workers Day last Sunday, May 1. They joined millions around the world who have celebrated that day each year on a holiday made in the USA 125 years ago when Chicago workers rallying for the eight hour day were put to death by a judge in the service of business oligarchs.

The trade unionists, immigrant workers and community groups joined together in Foley Square, downtown Manhattan to send a message to Wall Street that workers are taking back a historic day that for too long was celebrated more around the world than here in the country of its birth.

Kevin Lynch, organizing director of the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Local 338 put it this way, "May Day is our day in every sense of the word."

There was a festive mood as people connected with their brothers and sisters who make this city work. The New York Labor Chorus sang Solidarity Forever.

There is a special ring to it when thousands of working people join in. Diana from Unite Here's Local 100cafeteria workers made her feelings known; "I'm here to support the Teachers and all the unions who work hard for our children. And now the city is making cuts that will hurt all of us. May Day is a day for all of us to come together."

It was clear that the attack by Wisconsin's Gov. Walker on public service workers and their unions was utmost on everyone's mind.

"I'm upset about the attack on labor," said Frank Farcas, a retired member of DC 37's Local 1579. "The epicenter is in Wisconsin but it is happening around the country, threatening collective bargaining rights and setting labor back 50 to 75 years. I'm worried about the future of our children."

About an hour and a half into the rally, the ranks were swelled by a feeder march from Union Square. Many immigrant rights organizations such as Make the Road and The New York Immigration Coalition joined the unions they see as their natural partners in this fight.

Everyone seemed to understand that the fight is not an easy one. They believe the right wing of the Republican Party and the newly elected Tea Party members of Congress are bent on destroying the labor movement and that they are up against the tactics the capitalist class has always used - divide and conquer.

Juan Negron, a union member from Brooklyn, said, "I am here to support American workers and workers around the world. They are taking too much away from us, they woke the sleeping giant and we are fighting back."

A 20-year member of the Laborers, Samuel Araveytha said, "I am here to protest laws against immigrants."

Tim Sheer, a UAW Local 1981 National Writers Union member, seemed to sum up the day: "The rich and powerful are taking more and more out of my pocket and the people I work with. They are taking too much of the pie. New York has the greatest disparity of wealth, and New York is a union town."

A highlight of the day was the speech by Arlene Holt Baker, executive vice president of the AFL-CIO.

"We will build an America our children need, together," she declared. "Together we will demand the passage of the Dream Act so all children can reach their aspirations. As one we will work for a new day when no one, no one remains in the shadows, when the circumstances of birth do not, do not my sisters and brothers determine your fate."

Sonia Ivany, president of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement said, "Together we send a strong and unified message to Albany. The hard fought gains will not be reduced. Together on this May Day we all come together. New York, Wisconsin united! The right for every single worker in this nation to have the right to organize unions. To have the right to collective bargaining and a living wage. United we are moving forward."

Photo: Elena Mora/PW

The bottom line in the debate about public schools

When it comes to New York City's public schools, one thing is not in dispute: there are problems, a lot of them. The city's kids have below average math and reading scores, and very high drop out rates - of 50 large US cities, NY is close to the bottom, at 43rd.

And while there are disagreements about the reasons for these problems, the big dispute these days is about the solutions, and specifically, about the role of charter schools and their relationship to "traditional" public schools.

One skirmish took place recently, in the basement auditorium of the Ralph Bunche Trilingual School on West 123rd Street in Harlem. The room was almost full, as parents and community residents held a tense "town hall meeting" with school Chancellor Joel Klein.

Increasing the number of charter schools has been a major priority of Bloomberg and Klein's Department of Education. Plans are set for fall openings of 24 more, bringing the total to 123, and the mayor is pushing the state legislature to allow him to add another 100. Charter schools would then make up 22% of all schools in the district.

At the meeting, parents' questions focused on the area's charter school explosion (24 of 29 charter schools in Manhattan are located in Harlem). Many expressed anger and frustration with the DOE's policy of placing charter schools in existing school buildings, which most cities do not allow. Existing schools have been forced to cut space usage and programs or move to other less desirable locations.

Even parents who said that they don't oppose charter schools in principle, talked about the "separate and unequal" situation that is developing, the fomenting of divisions within communities, and the negative impact on the children in the regular schools when their learning and recreational space is usurped by a charter school, often without discussion or advance notice.

But some parents were there to support the charters -- the charter school "movement" has relied on the fact that many families are indeed desperate for better schools for their children, and the worst schools are mainly in working-class, especially Black and Latino, communities.

Klein claims that the DOE has only the children's interests at heart, and that charters give parents choices and advance school reform. The idea is that charter schools can do better with less, and can experiment with educational approaches, unfettered by the restrictions (read union rights) within the public school system.

But national research has shown that in fact, many charter schools are falling short, with one study finding that only 17 percent offered students a better education than public schools - and that 37 percent were actually worse.

New York City's charters have had better results, on the other hand. What is different?

One big part of the answer is that they do not, in fact, have "less" resources. Those charter schools that are housed in public school buildings (two-thirds of the total) receive approximately the same amount per pupil as public schools do. And charter schools have access to other resources: high powered (and highly paid) CEOS and governing boards, favored relationships with DOE officials and other connections with Wall Street and the corporate world, and NYC has a lot of that.

Parents are obviously motivated by their children's needs, but Bloomberg and Klein's motivation is another thing entirely.

The Chancellor said at the meeting that the DOE only wants the best for children in neighborhoods like Harlem. But in 2008, the DOE enacted budget cuts that disproportionately hurt the highest poverty schools, and cancelled out the positive effects of increased need-based funding from the state.*

In 2005 and 2006, Bloomberg successfully fought efforts that would have reduced class size, a proven way to enhance learning and reduce the achievement gap. His opposition was undoubtedly due to the proposal to fund this by continuing the city's tax surcharge on personal incomes over $500,000.

And just last month, the mayor's handpicked Panel on Educational Policy voted to close 19 schools despite overwhelming community opposition and expert testimony about available alternatives, including federal funds, for turning these troubled schools around.

The bottom line is that Bloomberg's dream of school reform is a corporate one: weakened union protections for staff and teachers, an expanded role - and profits - for the private sector, and as little public funding and regulation as can be gotten away with. That scenario cannot provide quality education for all children, which is what the growing movement is fighting for, and which like all the issues facing working people, will require unity and mobilization to win.

*"New York City's Contract for Excellent: Closing the Funding Gap or a Funding Shell Game" http://www.aqeny.org/action-information.php, report by the Alliance for Quality Education and the Fiscal Policy Institute found that the DOE cut more from the schools with the highest poverty rates.

City threatens to evict public schools in favor of charter

By Elena Mora

Two weeks ago, parents of children at the Manhattan East School for Arts and Academics, a public middle school in New York City's East Harlem neighborhood, received an alarming letter from the PTA president.

It seems that the PTA and the school's leadership had just heard, quite by accident, that discussions were underway at the city's Department of Education to evict and relocate Manhattan East to provide space for a charter school, the Harlem Success Academy.

While the DOE has an official - and very controversial - policy of moving "underperforming" schools to make way for "smaller, better and more efficient" charter schools," more is at play in the case of Manhattan East.

Manhattan East is a successful school. So what could the reason for the move be, asked parents at the emergency meeting held in the school's auditorium on February 8? Harlem Success Academy's interest in Manhattan East's space may have to do with the many improvements that have been made in the 15 years the school has been there, including a fully equipped science lab, sound-proof music room, rooftop garden and gym.

One parent said, "ME is not an under-performing school in any sense of the words ... it is the pride of its community, and beyond. It's shocking that such a decision could be made about its future by the DOE with no involvement of its administrators, families, students or community."

Rose Jimenez, PTA president of the Mosaic Preparatory Academy, a nearby public K-8 school, described what happened when the Harlem Success Academy moved in to their school.

"First they took over half of one floor, and then the whole floor. Then they installed playground equipment and put a fence around it to separate it from the area where the children from Mosaic have recess."

After a big fight, the fence was taken down. The story is emblematic of the elitism that parents and educators charge characterizes the charter schools. State Senator Bill Perkins points to the concentration of charter schools in Harlem (24 of 29 in Manhattan are located north of 96 Street, traditionally the dividing line), and says that this creates a system that is "separate and unequal."

Manhattan East families are being urged to send letters and make phone calls to the city's 311 help line, the education department, elected officials and the media, and to participate in a demonstration called by the Coalition for Educational Justice on Tuesday, February 23. The theme of the rally is, "Make all schools good schools - No more pitting of schools against schools and parents against parents."

While the eviction of Manhattan East may be averted, the bigger picture of encroachment on the public schools by charter schools is a sobering one. Last month, the DOE decided to close 19 schools, despite protests and a demonstration of 2,000 people outside the meeting. Opponents charge that the closings are part of the city's attempt to abandon the neediest and most at risk students and open the door for more charters.

Coming soon: On charter schools, what exactly does it mean to be "privately run and publicly funded?'

Workers in U.S. most dangerous industry demand protection

From the People's World
By Dan Margolis, Chair
New York State Communist Party

He's had a gun put up to his head during a robbery. He's been assaulted with a crowbar, and had every window in his car broken. He's had a jagged beer bottle shoved into his neck. He was nearly maced.

All of this on the job.

Of colleagues he knows: One was stabbed in the lower neck with a hunting knife. One was choked by a woman. One was shot in the eye after being robbed. Another remains in a four-year coma after a violent assault. Still another, Ndiaye Serigne (pronounced "Jay Serene"), was beaten violently on Halloween by mask-wearing men.

Police officer? Soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan? What sort of job does he, David, as well as his colleagues, hold?

They work, according to the Department of Labor, the most dangerous job in the United States: New York City taxi driver. While New Yorkers tend to take cab drivers for granted, they perform the most dangerous, and one of the most grueling, jobs in the city.

In Serigne's case, the four masked passengers jumped into his cab, one of them taking the front seat. Since it was Halloween, Ndiaye wasn't surprised by the masks. But after crossing the bridge into Staten Island, the man in the front seat switched off the meter, and told Serigne that "now it's a free ride." Serigne, in a move that may have saved his life, ignored his assailants' orders to pull down a narrow street and instead drove to a nearby gas station. It was there that he was beaten and the passengers-turned-attackers fled. Now when he looks at the security camera video, he can't believe what he sees.

"I'm just thankful that I am alive," he said, noting that a childhood friend from his native Senegal was murdered on the job only three years ago. "We are just workers, but some passengers treat us so badly."

According to taxi workers and their representatives, this is a horrible story, but one that is neither an anomaly nor even surprising.

"Drivers are 60 times more likely to be killed on the job and 80 times more likely to be robbed on the job than any other worker in the United States of America," said Bhairavi Desai, Executive Director of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance yesterday.

Taxis move nearly half a million people each day, she added. "The airports, finance, restaurants, Broadway, every single industry in New York City, depend on taxi drivers for their bottom line. Our bottom line is our lives need to be protected."

Now taxi drivers, united into the TWA and well as elected officials are going to do something about it. Standing next to Desai, New York State Assembly member Rory Lancman, D-Queens, announced that he would introduce a bill into the Assembly that would extend protection already won by bus and subway workers to taxi drivers.

"Men and women who drive these taxis are entitled to just as much protection as the people who run our trains, drive our buses," Lancman, who chairs the Assembly Subcommittee on Workplace Safety, said.

Under recently-enacted laws, won after a sustained fight by Transport Workers Union Local 100 and its allies, anyone who assaults a bus driver, or subway or railroad worker, is to be charged with a felony and potentially sentenced to prison time. Lancman, the TWA and some transit workers present, want to see that protection extended to taxi workers. The law would also require a sign in each cab warning would-be assailants that any assault could lead to prison time.

The bill would send a signal, Lancman said, that "we in New York state will not tolerate [violence against drivers], and we will take every measure that we can to make sure that when these men and women get into their cab to start their shift, at the end of it, when they leave that cab to go home to their families, to go home to their children, that they come home safe and sound."

In Thompson's defeat, seeds of future victory

It would be a mistake to classify Bloomberg's November 4 mayoral reelection win as anything but a defeat for the working people of New York City. At the same time, however, there is no reason to despair; on the contrary the election results represent a basis for optimism moving forward.

First, to dispense with the obvious: Although the billionaire representative of Wall Street, big developers and the Republican Party won, New York City elected John Liu comptroller, marking the first time in this city's more than 400 year history any Asian American has held citywide office. Further, a grand people's coalition formed around Liu: his campaign was composed essentially of the city's entire labor movement; the African American, Latino and Asian communities; women; youth; the LGBT community and a large percentage of white liberals.

It is this exact coalition that, if it remains united, can usher in all sorts of progressive changes in New York City.

Further, there was important progress made in the city council elections. For the first time ever, racially and nationally oppressed council members are in the majority. In other words, the council has actually begun to reflect the people of New York City. A prime example would be Margaret Chin, who defeated an incumbent and became the first Chinese American to represent the district that includes Chinatown-ever.

But the results of the mayoral race itself, though it was a defeat, should leave us feeling hopeful. Firstly, the Democratic challenger, lost to Bloomberg by less than five points, about 46 percent to 51. This is an astoundingly low margin of victory for Bloomberg, given that pollsters predicted the incumbent "independent" (read: Republican who supported George W. Bush and thinks Giuliani would be a good governor) would score a margin of victory in the double digits, as he did in 2005. In that election, he beat Fernando Ferrer by nearly 20 percentage points.

Bloomberg also put a lot into this election: officially, he put about $100 million into his campaign, the most any candidate has spent vying for municipal office in the history of the world, literally speaking. (By contrast, Thompson, who abided by the city's campaign finance rules, and therefore spent less than $7 million.) However, in reality, Bloomberg spent even more: if one counts money the Bloomberg campaign spent essentially buying the Republican and Independence Party lines, as well as giving "charitable donations" to agencies that, in turn, endorsed and even put people on the street for Bloomberg, the figure is closer to $200 million.

With his money, Bloomberg was able to send daily fliers to people, targeting recipients by race, gender, party affiliation, neighborhood and so on. He was able to run TV spots attacking Thompson every day for months. And he had the best campaign operation money can buy: hundreds of paid staff and a very highly sophisticated get-out-the-vote apparatus.

But with all of that, and two terms of incumbency, Bloomberg was only able to get ahead of Thompson by five points.

How did Thompson do so well, one might ask. The first thing to be said is that people don't really like Bloomberg that much anymore: he's known to be an out of touch billionaire, and people are especially unhappy with his maneuvers to change city election law to allow himself the opportunity to run for a third term (though New Yorkers had voted twice to limit all city offices to two-terms).

Thompson himself was good on the issues, and generally connected with the working people of New York City. While no campaign is perfect, his hit most of the right notes. He campaigned on a platform of, as he put it, taking the city back from Wall Street and the big developers who have been pushing working New Yorkers further and further out of the city. (In fact, a recent study showed that 1.1 million working New Yorkers had already left.)

Further, he had the backing of the vast majority of the African American, Latino, and Asian American elected leadership, and most of those communities. According to the New York Times, 82 percent of African Americans, and 65 percent of Latinos, voted for Thompson. Large sections of the Asian communities voted for Thompson, especially South Asians, who voted 61 percent for Thompson.

Thompson also had the backing from a number of the city's largest labor unions, including Transport Workers Union Local 100, AFSCME District Council 37, and a host of others. Labor did an impressive job of mobilizing the vote for Thompson. In many areas, DC 37 (which had endorsed Bloomberg in 2005) and TWU Local 100 worked together to bring out voters and drive them to polling places. All of the unions made efforts to contact their members and ask them to vote for Thompson. CWA Local 1180 put $500,000 into advertising, and TWU held several demonstrations and distributed leaflets condemning Bloomberg.

Thompson had the backing of most progressive elected officials as well as dozens of Democratic Party clubs, community organizations and churches.

Essentially, Thompson's campaign had the makings of the sort of all-people's coalition, the type we previously wrote would make it possible to defeat Bloomberg and his millions. As it turns out, we were correct in that assessment. A relatively little-known candidate, with less than $10 million (compared to $200 million), because of a broad coalition, nearly slew Goliath.

The question then arises: was it actually possible to win? The answer is an emphatic "yes." While Thompson had many things in his favor, he had a lot working against him (aside from a lack of money.)

Firstly, we can't ignore racism, which was fanned at the top, i.e. from the Bloomberg campaign itself, as a deciding factor. While it is true that there have been great strides forward in the fight against racism, especially with the election of President Obama, we are nowhere near living in a "post-racial" society. Simply looking at a map of who voted for Thompson and who voted for Bloomberg gives lie to that story: where red denotes an area that supported Bloomberg, the whitest neighborhoods were, on the map, also the reddest. To be sure, thousands of white people voted for Thompson, but there is clear evidence that a large percentage of the city's white population is still under the influence of racist ideology. (This was made shockingly stark in a city council race in Queens, where extreme racist rhetoric was used by a Republican pagan (literally) to defeat Kevin Kim, a Korean American.)

The Bloomberg campaign was almost explicit in its racism: Giuliani, stumped for Bloomberg, telling a crowd that "we don't want to go back to the days of Dinkins." He added, "You know what I mean." We know what he meant.

Another factor was a feeling, promoted by Bloomberg, that the incumbent's victory was inevitable. After the election, campaign leaders said this was an overriding strategy of the campaign: the spending overkill, even though Bloomberg's team knew it would annoy New Yorkers, was aimed at convincing people that he could not be defeated. This helped to suppress the vote for Thompson: If Bloomberg will win anyway, many reasoned, why go and vote at all?

This air of inevitability also played into another huge problem for Thompson: a split labor movement. While some big labor unions supported Thompson, a greater number sat the election out. SEIU 1199 and the United Federation of Teachers both avoided making any endorsement, while SEIU 32BJ and some others endorsed Bloomberg. It's possible to say that any one of these huge unions, with tens or hundreds of thousands of members each, could potentially have pushed Thompson to victory, had they either endorsed Thompson, not endorsed Bloomberg, or, better yet, both.

While we would never actually condone endorsing Bloomberg or sitting out the elections, We can certainly understand why they did: Bloomberg essentially told them, "I'm going to win the election, and you know what will happen to you if you oppose me." Most of these unions were simply concerned what might happen to them if they stood up to Bloomberg and he won: would he attack their contract? Would he go after them and do real damage to their members?

The results of this mayoral race are contradictory. We can look at the elections and see a bitter defeat, given that Bloomberg won. We could look at them and see a victory, given the closeness of the race and all the obstacles that Thompson and the movement around him had to go up against.

Most importantly, we can see opportunity.

What we said before was proven true: If we can build a movement of the labor movement, the African American, Latino and Asian communities, white liberals and other progressive forces drawn around that core, the people can defeat anyone. In this election, this coalition was built, but only partially. But even a partially built coalition was able to put us within a hair of replacing a 17th richest man in the world, who represents, as mayor, Wall Street and big developers with a mayor sympathetic to labor and progressive sectors of New York City.

Next time we go all the way.

New Yorkers protest education cuts

Teachers, students and others are horrified at the prospect of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of mid-year budget cuts to public education as the state faces a $3 billion budget shortfall-and they're fighting back.

The Alliance for Quality Education, a coalition of more than 230 organizations of parents, children's advocates, schools, teachers and others, is organizing people to contact their representatives as well as to attend hearings sponsored by the legislature. Under Governor David Paterson's (D) plans, public schools across the state would be hit with a whopping $686 million mid-year cut.

At an October 23 meeting in Syracuse, AQE members broke pencils during the meeting to symbolize "the state's broken promise" to public schools. Because so many people showed up to speak against the cut, the meeting went on for nearly six hours.

Revenues have been lower than expected, leaving the state with a $3 billion budget shortfall. Paterson has called a special meeting of the State Senate and Assembly to discuss his plans, which include $1.3 billion in cuts to local governments, health and education. The rest is to be made up, mainly, of extraordinary borrowing from the state's rainy day fund.

In higher education, Paterson proposes slashing $53 million in funding to the City University of New York alone. These cuts, as well as proposed cuts to health care, public schools and municipalities, all require legislative approval. However, millions of dollars have already been cut at state agencies, where the Governor doesn't need to seek legislative approval. He has already ordered an eleven percent cut, amounting to $90 million, to the State University of New York.

Mid-year cuts are considered to be the most devastating, because institutions have already made their budget based on projected funding.

Across New York City, protests have erupted at various CUNY campuses, and have included students, professors, city school teachers, labor unionists and others. Organizers of the various campaigns include the United Federation of Teachers and its parent organization, the New York State United Teachers; United University Professionals and the Professional Staff Congress, which represent professors at SUNY and CUNY respectively; the New York Public Interest Research Group; student organizations other labor unions and community residents.

At Hunter College, an October 28 demonstration brought out hundreds of people. "Now is the time we should be supporting schools, now is the time to be building schools," NYSUT Executive Vice President Alan Lubin told the crowd.

Education advocates point out that the proposed cuts are on the heels of tens of millions of dollars in cuts to education in the past year, as well as a tuition hike. They are demanding that there be no cuts to education going forward, and that the legislature roll back Paterson's cuts to SUNY.

"Students are already being squeezed into overcrowded classes, missing out on courses we need, and paying more for school," said Chris McCall, NYPIRG's higher education project leader.

Similar actions are being proposed to fight the proposed health care and municipal cuts.

Others have suggested that there should be no cuts at all. Suggested ways of increased savings include cuts in spending that benefit only the wealthy and big corporations, such as: the ending of subsidies for "industrial development zones," (saving the state $4 billion), reducing the number of governmental units down from the current 10,000 , the ending of subsidies and tax breaks to developers of housing for those above the median income ($3 billion) and other such measures.

Proposals for increased revenues include a one percent surtax on people making over $1 billion yearly (there are 60 such people in New York City alone, meaning a possible billion dollars in revenue), a one percent stock transfer surtax on those with net assets above $500,000 (another billion dollars) and other proposals.

PHOTO: A student at the Borough of Manhattan Community College, where NYPIRG kicked off its campaign against budget cuts, holds a "CUNY withdrawal slip" for $53 billion.

Fight Bloomberg's Cuts!

It's short notice, but anyone who possibly can should come to the rally listed below in support of New York's Department of Education employees. Bloomberg wants to lay off many of them. Doing so will hurt these workers and their families, teachers who will have to pick up the slack, and all schoolchildren who will get a worse education.

MTA: No fare hikes or service cuts!

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority plans draconian service cuts, while raising fares and imposing additional costs on those who commute by car. This is the wrong solution at the wrong time.

It is unacceptable for the MTA to force commuters to pay more—for less—at a time when they are already feeling the pinch in a thousand other ways: the housing crisis, the increased threat of unemployment, mountains of debt, and so on. Higher fares will mean that more people will have to make a choice between medicine or the bus, food or the subway.

Because of the high price of Manhattan real estate, many working families live far away, in the outer boroughs, Long Island, or elsewhere. Many of these areas have no public transportation to speak of, and, consequently, these people, pushed to the outskirts by poverty, have to drive to work. Raising tolls or even creating new tolls on the East River bridges will hurt them directly.

Service cuts will mean that thousands of New Yorkers will shoulder an increased burden, and greater danger when trying to get to and from their jobs or schools.

The current deficit at the MTA must not be resolved on the backs of working people.

The plan to lay off thousands of workers and cut expenses is in stark contrast to President-elect Barack Obama’s policy statements, in which he argues the need to pump money into the real economy in order to maintain necessary services and ensure that the financial crisis isn’t solved on the backs of working people. Obama has called for major public works programs to restore public infrastructure and green the economy. By employing more people who can therefore spend more on necessities, increased government spending can only stimulate the faltering economy.

Conversely, laying off thousands of MTA workers will play a part in deepening the financial local financial crisis.

In keeping with President-elect Obama’s plan to rebuild infrastructure, the MTA, to further stimulate the should employ more people and direct more resources to improve service, keep the rail system up to date, and build certain necessary projects, like the Second Avenue subway line. After all, there is hardly any infrastructure in the region more major than our transportation system. Without it, the city and metropolitan region would fail.

The argument that the proposed extra costs will reduce pollution is, at best, spurious. Though thousands of people would rather take public transit into the city, in many areas, it is simply not available. To reduce pollution, more service, not less, is needed. There are wide swaths of Brooklyn and Queens that are without rail service.

The MTA’s operating and capital investment budgets must not only be funded, but expanded. This is not impossible, even in the current financial environment. First, the MTA must not waste money through sweetheart deals with big developers. A colossal amount of money was wasted when the MTA agreed to sell air rights to the Atlantic Yards to Forest City Ratner for $50 million, though the independently assessed value was as high as $900 million. Even when another firm offered a higher bid, the MTA chose to go with Forest City Ratner. Other projects, like the proposed extension of the 7 subway line, which is essentially a multi-billion dollar gift to the developers, could be postponed.

The state and city should make sure that the MTA can make up its shortfall; where it can’t it they should go into debt if necessary, borrow as much as is needed. Instead of balancing the deficit on the backs of working people, the state could finally impose the millionaires' tax to fund both the MTA and other city and state programs. They must do whatever is needed to ensure that the MTA doesn’t help to further deteriorate the lives of working people in and around New York. It’s likely that money will come from the federal government in the next administration; even if it doesn’t, borrowing and spending are the only responsible way forward.

The people of New York can’t afford anything else.

By Dan Margolis
for the New York State Communist Party

Communist Leader's Testimony on City Council Term Limits Proposal

This written testimony was delivered to the New York City Council on Friday, October 17, 2008 as part of the hearings on the current term limits extension proposed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Speaker Christine Quinn. Hundreds of New Yorkers attended the hearings over two days and thousands more made their voices heard by calling and emailing their representatives in the City Council. I like many others couldn't wait for ten hours to speak in person so I was forced to submit my testimony for the record.

Despite the overwhelming outpouring against extending term limits in this manner, the city's elites and many city council people remain committed to backing the extension for various reasons, some opportunistic, some more principled. If you would like to make our voice heard on this issue, visit the web page of the council and submit your testimony on line or by mail: New York City Council

"My name is Libero Della Piana, I am a resident of East Harlem and the Chairperson of the New York State Communist Party.

I want to declare my opposition to Mayor Bloomberg’s proposed term limit extension.

Don’t get me wrong. I and my organization are against term limits. They take away the right of voters to determine their representatives. But remember that the measure before you does not end term limits, it EXTENDS term limits, primarily as a means to ensure another four years for Michael Bloomberg.

In fact, the Mayor’s plan is aimed at creating a one-time extension of the Mayor’s term. His side deal with another billionaire, Ronald Lauder, to head up a Charter Commission in 2010, almost ensures a return to the existing term limits.

It is clear that this measure is not in the interests of the working people of New York City. It is an end-run around the twice-passed referendum in order to ensure to the financiers and big developers.

The main argument we hear is that we need Bloomberg to save the city from the ongoing financial disaster and the impending economic crisis in our city. We do not agree that a billionaire who is creature of Wall Street is the best one to address the mess that Wall Street financial elites created.

You might believe that term limits are an abstract issue and should not about any one candidate, but we would not be facing this measure if Bloomberg was not the Mayor. This measure is very much about the mayor and his tenure.

At a time when it is harder and harder to New Yorkers to live and thrive in this city because of skyrocketing cost of housing, when cuts in city spending dig into the pocketbook of working New Yorkers, we need to oppose this backdoor move to keep a friend of the developers in the mayor’s office.

We look forward to full and thorough debate of the term limit issue. This is not it. We believe that there should be no term limits on legislative bodies such as the City Council. An argument can be made for term limits on the Executive, the Mayor’s Office, which under Bloomberg has become even more powerful.

We hope you will block the Mayor’s proposal and consider a process that allows for full public debate. Do not allow the billionaire Mayor and his development buddies do and end-run on democratic process for their own interests.

Libero Della Piana
New York State Communist Party"

Bloomberg Tries to Slip in a Third Term

Last week New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced his intention to run for a third term as mayor of the country’s largest city. He called on the City Council to pass legislation that would change the City Charter, which currently bars him (and City Council members) from holding office more than twice. City Council Speaker Christine Quinn has obliged the Mayor and helped introduce a bill extending city offices to three terms instead of two. A competing measure was introduced by City Council members Bill de Blasio and Letitia James calling for a new public referendum on the issue of term limits. Two such referenda in 1993 and 1996 established then reaffirmed term limits.

The long-rumored move by the mayor has thrown city politics for a loop. Whether or not they support term limits, many New Yorkers are outraged at the prospect of the City Council overturning two voter referenda just weeks before the Presidential elections.

The debate over term limits is important. Frankly we are largely against term limits. But the proposal of the mayor does little to facilitate a real discussion of the pros and cons of the issue. It is a last-minute ploy for the mayor to hold power past his 2009 final year. Just as the introduction of term limits 15 years ago through a highly financed publicity campaign, the process largely serves the interests of city’s elites.

Any legislation, and certainly a major decision such as this, must be judged by its impact negative or positive on the working people of New York: all the workers, the racially oppressed people, immigrant, women and youth of the city. This proposal puts the city administration back in the hands of Bloomberg who has been a loyal servant of his fellow billionaires, monopolists and financiers. We need a champion of working people and their issues, not a budget-slashing billionaire who puts private development first and will be quick to tighten belts while he is immune to the suffering.

Bloomberg, who was recently ranked the 8th richest man in the U.S. by Forbes Magazine, has been good to the big developers and his Wall Street buddies over the past seven years. The mayor has championed massive capital developments like Atlantic Yards, various sports stadiums that are receiving huge city subsidies and tax breaks and other private projects that use public financing. City elites are unhappy to see such a friend leave office. A recent New York Times article detailed how developers, financiers and other mega-rich New Yorkers were desperate to find a Bloomberg clone to replace him. With an extension of term limits they don’t need one.

Richard Lauder, another billionaire on Forbes’ list, financed the original campaign to impose term limits. Lauder and other big business elites supported term limits at the time because it suited their interests. They wanted to keep the revolving door on city offices turning to minimize the impact of progressive and even centrist elected officials. Lauder and Bloomberg recently said they were against changing term limits. But now Bloomberg remaining in office serves the billionaires’ interests. Under the pretense of the financial crisis, they claim they were forced into the change. Suddenly Bloomberg has reversed himself and even Lauder is now on board, because “these are extraordinary times.” Of course, the mayor has also promised to make Lauder head of a “Charter Revision Commission” to bring a term limits referendum before voters in 2010. Apparently the mayor believes a unilateral decision to put another billionaire in charge will make the process very transparent and unbiased. We think not.

Of course, Bloomberg’s relative popularity is what makes the move appealing to the mayor and his backers. If he was lagging in the polls, you can bet that none of them would be raising the issue of term limits. Despite the skyrocketing rents, crumbling schools, devastation to communities, corruption and cronyism, erosion of construction regulation and enforcement, police abuse and misconduct and a host of other problems that New Yorkers face, many do not blame Bloomberg. Many of the mayor’s worst policies are invisible to the average New Yorker. And Bloomberg is masterful at the PR game (he is, among other things, a media mogul after all).

Even if term limits are extended, the election for mayor is a year away. It remains to be seen if Bloomberg’s popularity can stand up through the deepening economic mess, several major labor contract negotiations and increasing anger of gentrification.

Some commentators have hinted that New York ”needs” a billionaire like Bloomberg since he understands the Wall Street crisis, which is having disproportionate impact in the city. Of course, they fail to mention that Bloomberg and his friends in the financial district are part of the problem that led us into this mess. Bloomberg is a creature of Wall Street. He worked for Salomon Brothers, did business with Merril Lynch, and cuts deals every day with the very crooks who got rich playing games with the economy. Famously he promised $1.65 billion in tax breaks to Goldman Sachs to lure their headquarters to their Ground Zero site.

Bloomberg despite shedding his GOP membership to become an “independent” is of the same opinion as Bush, McCain and the Republican Party that regulation is bad and that “the market knows best.” The Bloomberg policies have brought cranes crashing down around our ears just as the financial house of cards has come tumbling down. The U.S public has been bombarded with the idea that business can fix what government screwed up. The financial crisis and the $800 billion-plus government bailout of the private banks should put that lie to rest for good. Bloomberg, however, is hoping to use this false logic one more time to get reelected in 2009. He remains the CEO Mayor.

Many people are also upset by the way the mayor wants to make the change. “People—even elected officials—are allowed to change their minds,” The Working Families Party (WFP) stated in a press release. “But doing so on a momentous, constitutional change deserves full deliberation and patience.” WFP has set up a website, www.ItsOurDecision.org which calls for New Yorkers to oppose City Council action whether or not they support term limits. They and others believe the problem is the City Council overriding the will of the people.

But that’s only part of the issue. The imposition of term limits at this time by the mayor is clearly aimed at manipulating the public fears over the financial meltdown and slipping the proposal in during the buildup to the Presidential elections. Bloomberg had time to introduce a referendum on the ballot for November, but he played coy (as he did with running for President) in order to play his advantage. The process should be slowed down and thoroughly debated.

Communists have long believed that term limits are largely undemocratic, taking away the right of the people to elect who they will. Proponents of term limits argue that incumbents have an unfair advantage and can rarely be elected out of office. They believe that term limits ensure new blood in the political arena. It may, but it also ensures that strong representatives for working-class constituencies have to leave office just as they become experienced and effective advocates.

Since term limits became law in 1993 by popular referendum, the rule has also created political seat-hopping which often pits progressives against each other for higher office once their City Council terms are up. This musical chairs scenario is costly and encourages using public office as a stepping-stone instead of encouraging elected officials to be real representatives of the people and their interests.

But the previous referenda should not necessarily the final word on the matter. It has been over a decade since the last public referendum. The vote at the time was heavily influenced by a big money public relations campaign to influence public opinion. And leaving he current matter to referendum faces the same problem. The public may swing the other way due to fear mongering and well-financed campaigning by Bloomberg and Co. Or people will support the change because of the candidate not the principle. The point is not just how term limits changes, but who it changes for and what they stand for.

At the federal level, Members of Congress and Senators face no term limits. Only the Executive Branch, the office of the Presidency is subject to term limits. This is part of the checks and balances that developed over time. The executive branch is perhaps too powerful to go on without limit, while the Congress is the voice of the people and needs stability to stand up for the people.

Perhaps the same should be true at the city level. As the real debate about term limits continues and New Yorkers decide how the city should be governed, why not propose that the Mayor’s office be limited to some number of terms while the City Council—which, of course, is much more susceptible to being voted out if they lose the favor of the people—have no limit.

Of course, the other tragedy of the timing of Bloomberg’s move is that is distracts everyone from the urgent issues facing working-class New Yorkers right now: the financial crisis and its impact on local tax revenues, jobs, etc.; the attempt to renew disastrous mayoral powers over public education; the proposed social service and jobs cuts in Albany and City Hall; negotiating fair contracts with city workers, transit workers and others; the impending crisis in public transit, etc. A decision on term limits will help determine the occupancy of the Mayor’s Office and the City Council for 2010, but working people have urgent concerns still in 2008. Finally, this is a big distraction from the most important election of our time, just weeks away.

Nonetheless, we encourage everyone to come out to the public hearings October 16 & 17 in City Hall and voice their opposition not just to the way these term changes are being introduced but also to the Bloomberg Administration and his policies. This issue is not clear-cut. Progressives, unions and grassroots organizations have ended up on both sides of the question and many others remain neutral or just downright confused. We have to approach it with an eye toward the main problem we face: a possible four more years Bloomberg Administration.

The real criteria for any decision should be, what is good for the working people of the city, the great majority of the people? What gives them the greatest voice and power in a city more and more ruled by a small set of billionaire elites, with Bloomberg as their direct representative?

Judge Orders Police to Release Info on 2003 RNC Protest Arrests

Despite their many attempts to hide the details of their illegal and unethical behavior at the Republican National Convention in 2004, a judge has denied the NYPD's request to keep the information secret.

If you remember, massive protests were organized the week of the RNC here in new York city to protest President Bush and his Party's role in planning and pushing the Iraq War, their anti-immigrant policies, the curtailment of civil liberties, anti-workers policies, etc. The police responded with surveillance, spying, infiltration of peaceable organizations and then "preemptive arrests." On the second day of the Convention, hundreds of activists were rounded up and arrested, not for breaking laws, but to prevent them from breaking some future law. Bystanders who were not protesting were alsso arrested. Protesters were corralled into a makeshift holding area, where they suffered in substandard and downright dangerous conditions before being released, many held as long as 66 hours. A court order forced the police to release hundreds who remained stuck in detention as the Convention droned on.

It is this group of detainees who, together with the New York Civil Liberties Union is suing the police to release the info pursuant to their civil case charging that the arrests were unwarranted.

The police will appeal the court decisions stating against that the reams of police logs and records will expose undercover agents, police techniques, and other sensitive info. What they fail to address is that the police—under the leadership of Mayor Bloomberg who pursued the RNC to come to the Big Apple and guaranteed the GOP smooth sailing in their deliberation—were engaged in political repression not peace keeping or protecting safety and security. Plus, the lawyers for the plaintiffs have agreed to redact any information about undercover agents. They only seek what information was collected about protest groups that justified the arrests.

Like the attempts to hide racial data on New York City policing, the police attempt to hide their behavior at the RNC shows that there is something afoul at the NYPD. If there is nothing to hide, why are you hiding it? Time to come out into the light.

NYCLU Sues NYPD Over Racial Data

The New York Civil Liberties Union filed suit yesterday against the New York City Police Department (NYPD), which refused to provide data on race related to police shootings.

An article in New York Newsday reported that the department's annual report on police shootings contained racial data up until the 1999 shooting of Amadou Diallo, when then-Police Chief Louis Anemone was ordered to remove the data by then-Commissioner Howard Safir.

Perhaps the thinking is that if there is no evidence of racial disparities, there are no racial disparities. Or moreover, that if there is no race data, then people of color can't get angry about the department's institutional racism. The strategy hasn't worked so far.

The shooting of Sean Bell last year and the huge community response to the no guilty verdict for the police involved with the shooting show that the NYPD maintains racially tinged police practices and reenforce the experience in communities of color that the police are more likely to shoot someone who is Black or Latino than someone who is not.

The NYPD should open its books and show everyone the data. The only way to get control of the out-of-control police in the city is to begin with full information. As Anemone told Newsday,

"'Sunshine is the best disinfectant,' Anemone said, repeating a lesson he learned under a previous commissioner, Bill Bratton. 'Open the place up. We have nothing to hide.'

'This is how you get the trust of the public -- I believe in this 110 percent.'"

Whether or not the police have something to hide, revealing the full impact and racial significance of their policing is the key to addressing community concerns for real safety and fairness.

Fast-Buck Construction Behind Crane Disaster

By Gabe Falsetta

NEW YORK — A crane collapse here May 30, killing two construction workers, brought the total of construction-related deaths in the city since January to 19. There have been 31 deaths of construction workers on the job here in the last seven months, a big increase over previous years.

This latest dramatic accident, on Manhattan’s Upper East Side, has drawn the attention and conversation of New Yorkers to the crisis brought about by out-of-control for-profit development in the city.

A previous crane collapse on Manhattan’s East Side in April killed seven people and injured several more, leading to the forced resignation of New York City Building Commissioner Patricia Lancaster. But sacrificing Lancaster as a scapegoat has not freed Mayor Michael Bloomberg from blame.

Bloomberg has been the architect of the construction boom in the city, which has emphasized for-profit residential and commercial development through tax and other incentives, rezoning and public financing of massive building projects.

High-rise building construction in particular has been growing exponentially, but not without problems. High-rise buildings require special cranes and equipment that are dangerous and require specialized training and safety measures. But city oversight offices may not be up to the challenge.

According to the Department of Buildings, the number of complaints has increased to 140,000 a year from 38,000 in 2002.

Bloomberg and acting Building Commissioner Robert Li Mandri planned to hire 63 additional inspectors for building sites, bringing the number of inspectors to 461. It was too little too late for the workers who died May 30.

Hundreds of worksites and dozens of cranes are in operation in the city. The Department of Buildings is evaluating conditions at sites across the city.

Louis Coletti, president of the Building Trades Employer’s Association, a trade organization of unionized construction contractors, who was on a taskforce created by Lancaster earlier this year, said many small firms that use non-union labor openly flout laws and regulations. “They don’t file building permits,” said Coletti. “They don’t care about their workers. They don’t care about public safety. They want to get in, get the job done, go to the next one and put the money in their pocket.”

Of course, the contractors are not the only ones to blame. The various city agencies mandated with oversight of construction and buildings often look the other way or aid in substandard, unsafe or overtly illegal construction. After the crane collapse in April, Lancaster revealed that the high-rise being built was erroneously granted a building permit in violation of zoning laws. A complaint at the site went uninvestigated. The inspector admitted to signing off on the crane without actually visiting the site.

The site where the crane fell last week had a slew of violations and complaints against it, some related to the crane’s use. It appears that workers, nearby residents and passers-by were at risk long before the crane fell.

Local construction workers marked Workers Memorial Day (April 28) this year by mourning the loss of the many coworkers who have died in the past few months. At a service at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Edward Malloy, president of the New York Building and Construction Trades Council, said, “No one will forget the fallen workers because the legacy of all construction workers ... is the skyline of New York.”

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) called for an investigation by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and Gov. David Paterson announced a state investigation into the latest accident. Bloomberg was angered by both initiatives, insisting that the Department of Buildings was not at fault and arguing that “construction is a dangerous business and you will always have fatalities.”

Many fear that until major changes are made to slow and regulate the building boom in New York City, we are likely to have more construction workers — and perhaps bystanders — die from the construction crisis.

Libero Della Piana contributed to this article.

Reprinted from the People's Weekly World.

Critical Mass Bikers Ride for Sean Bell

This evening hundreds of bicyclists and commuters gathered in Union Square to call for justice in the Sean Bell police shooting case. Many of the crowd were gathered for the monthly Critical Mass Bike Ride in Manhattan that highlights transportation alternatives and and bike riding in the city.

Sean Bell's widowed fiancé, Nicole Paultre Bell, his father, William Bell, and Rev. Al Sharpton spoke to the rally from a portable loudspeaker.

A National Action Network (NAN) press release billed the action as a "'slowdown'... to protest the verdict in the Sean Bell case."

"We thank Critical Mass for inviting us here today," said Sharpton. "Because when you demand the right to ride, that is all Sean Bell was trying to do that night, was ride."

Critical Mass bicyclists have faced harassment and persecution at the hands police over the years while trying to simply ride the streets of New York.

Sharpton also mentioned his support of marriage equality for all regardless of sexual orientation during the rally. New York Governor David Patterson recently advised State offices to honor gay marriages performed in other states in keeping with current state law.

More demonstrations and acts of civil disobedience are being planned to bring justice for Sean Bell and his family, as well as making structural changes to the New York Police Department to ensure such a tragedy never happens again. "Let's ride together, so we can live together," said Sharpton.

Sharpton also called for a citywide town hall meeting against violence 10:30 am tomorrow, Saturday May 31, in light of recent shootings in Harlem. The mass meeting will be at NAN headquarters (106 West 145th Street at Malcolm X Blvd.) and will be followed by a march to Mount Morris park at 11:30 am.

The Critical Mass rally ended with a unique image: Rev. Al Sharpton got on a bicycle and rode across 14th Street on the south end of the park through the intersection, being chased all the way by a crowd of news photographers, gawkers and passers by. Other bicyclists mounted up and headed to the streets.

Gabcast! CPNY Blog Audio #2 - Rev. Al Sharpton speech at Critical Mass

Rev. Al Sharpton speaks to gathered supporters and bicyclists at the Critical Mass Bike Ride, Friday, may 30 in Manhattan. Riders then too to the streets to bring attention to police accountability issues and too demand justice for Sean Bell who was killed by police in 2006.

We Are All Sean Bell

I was arrested last Wednesday.

It was one of the most rewarding experiences I have ever had.

I was not alone.

That afternoon at six locations around New York City, thousands of people of all races gathered to protest the innocent verdict in the police killing of Sean Bell and to call attention to the larger issue of reforming the New York Police Department.

Dozens of us then peacefully moved to block key transportation hubs in a well-orchestrated “pray-in,” to force the city to listen to community demands.

The Rev. Al Sharpton and Bell’s family and friends led a group to the nearby entrance to the Brooklyn Bridge.

Police blocked our way. News trucks swarmed. Commuters stopped to watch. A young white office worker in a necktie and button-down shirt approached me and asked if it was too late to get arrested.

We knelt in prayer, were warned several times of our impending arrest, and were eventually segregated by gender and carted off in buses to Central Booking.

We were Muslim, Christian, Jewish, atheist, union members, mothers, grandparents, students, clergy, veterans, journalists, business people, professionals. Members of SEIU Local 32BJ, Transport Workers Union Local 100 and other trade unions were in our number, as were members of the NAACP, Sharpton’s National Action League and United for Peace & Justice and City Councilman Charles Barron of Brooklyn.

Hours ticked off as we were photographed and cataloged. We greeted each other as long-lost friends. The men around me began chanting: “We are all Sean Bell!” The women somewhere distant chanted back: “We are all Sean Bell!”

Someone would begin: “Count it off!” and we screamed: “1, 2, 3, 4, 5 …” up to 50, the number of shots fired into Bell and his friends Joseph Guzman and Trent Benefield, all unarmed. Bell died just hours from his planned wedding. “50 shots means murder!”

My name was called. I was brought to a large room, circled in bulletproof glass. Inside, nearly 100 men were holding a spontaneous rally. The crowd welcomed me like a hero.

As an African American man, there is something counter-intuitive to voluntarily risking arrest. So it was powerful that, among the interracial crowd, African American men made up a majority. Many talked of their experiences in prison, their negative interactions with the police and their identification with Bell. One brave man said he was an ex-con, currently on parole, but was so angered by the Bell case that he asked permission from his parole officer to participate in the civil disobedience. While police violence affects everyone, Black men face a particular threat.

Even Benefield and Guzman, who had everything to fear from the police, were in the cell that day, both bearing bullet wounds that may never heal. Guzman addressed the men around him, saying, “I want to shake every one of your hands before I leave.”

Racist policing is so pervasive that it is hard to find an African American man who has not encountered the criminal justice system. But instead of fearing jail, dozens of Black men made a statement by getting arrested that day.

Numbers the NYPD released the week of our arrest prove the racial bias in city policing. Of the sobering half-million arrests made in the city in 2006, an indefensible 50.8 percent were of Blacks. Stops in the first quarter of 2008, in fact, were the highest ever. The police claim that their stop-and-frisk policies are based on actual complaints or suspect descriptions, but very few of those stopped were even arrested, let alone charged.

Just last week, police officers harassed and detained an African American who happened to be an off-duty police chief.

Yet almost everyone who spoke in the holding cell noted that the police killing of Bell, and all police violence, is a universal human rights issue. It is everyone’s business to solve.

One young man said, “This room looks like New York. We have Black and white, Latino and Asian.” He pointed out that everyone is at risk when the police can act with impunity — any New Yorker could have been killed that night, shot on the nearby train platform or in a neighboring apartment.

One by one we began being released. I was issued a ticket for disorderly conduct. But we had won the day. We had become galvanized, unified and dedicated to making the city fulfill the demand of justice for Sean Bell and real changeshttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif to policing.

We pledged to spread the word, to ensure that there is never another crime like those experienced by Sean Bell, Amadou Diallo or Abner Louima. We are all Sean Bell.

Libero Della Piana (ldellapiana @ cpusa.org) is a resident of Harlem, N.Y., and chairperson of the New York State Communist Party.

Reprinted from the People's Weekly World.

Sean Bell Protests Rock New York City

By Dan Margolis

Nothing can bring Sean Bell, an African American man murdered by police officers on the eve of his wedding, back. But tens of thousands of New Yorkers and others are demanding that something be done to redress what most see as a travesty of justice: Not only was Sean Bell killed, and two of his friends wounded, when cops, unprovoked, fired fifty bullets at him, but of the five officers involved, only three were indicted—and each was acquitted on all counts.

New Yorkers and others, led by the Rev. Al Sharpton's National Action Network and a host of labor and community organizations, are demanding a federal civil rights suit be brought against the police officers involved, a special state prosecutor to review and prosecute claims of police brutality, and a police civilian review board with teeth.

On May 7, coordinated civil disobedience actions around Manhattan and Brooklyn brought out thousands of people to support these demands, and justice for Sean Bell. Overall, more than 200 people were arrested at the different sites, including Bell's wife Nicole Paultre Bell, the other shooting victims, Rev. Sharpton, N.Y. NAACP leader Hazel Dukes, leaders of United for Peace and Justice and of the Communist Party USA.

Sharpton said that this is just the beginning, and vowed further civil disobedience that would "shut this city down" if justice is not served.

Stephen Armstrong, Samuel Delgado, and others contributed to the multimedia in this article.

Sean Bell Judge Issues License to Kill

This morning judge Arthur J. Cooperman issued not guilty verdicts in the Sean Bell shooting case on all counts for all officers. This is a huge travesty of justice and amounts to giving police everywhere a license to kill.

The judge's ruling emphasized that the police defendants are innocent until proven guilty, but ignored the fact that the police treated Sean Bell and his friends as guilty from the very start and went on to execute him and severely injure the others.

Justice Cooperman goes on to say that the people didn't make their case. While it is clear the Queens District Attorney made many errors in prosecuting the case (the first and foremost was allowing the case to be tried only by a judge instead of by a jury), the main argument the judge makes is that the witnesses were not up to par.

In essence, he claims that inaccuracies and contradictions in witness testimony was the basis for the acquittal. Furthermore the judge questioned the quality of the witnesses, pointing out prior criminal convictions and "demeanor on the witness stand," perhaps code for "Black". He points out that thee defense case had inaccuracies as well, but believes they carry less importance.

Most shocking perhaps is the acquittal on charges of reckless endangerment. While assault charges required proof of intent, reckless endangerment is a matter of fact. Police bullets sprayed the car more than 40 times and pierced a wall in a nearby apartment and even landed on the AirTrain platform a football field away. If this isn't reckless endangerment, we don't know what is. What if another innocent bystander had been hit with a bullet or died? Would this have been reckless enough for the judge?

The judge wrote, "Questions of carelessness and incompetence must be left to other forums." But the extreme carelessness towards use of deadly force is in fact, criminal.

The ruling sends a clear message whether or not the police follow procedures, or have been drinking, endanger the public at large, or fire on a unarmed person, the police are justified in using deadly force if they "feel" that they are under threat.

Some commentators have stated that the police have a lower standard of proof when it comes to self-defense. But the police standards must be much higher than the average person exactly because they have access to deadly force. Police officers are in a potentially dangerous job and are supposed to be trained and prepared to deal with potential hazards. But it is the general public safety and not their own which they are pledged to protect.

Racist police violence plagues New York City and has for years. The sad fact is that Sean Bell’s killing is far from unique: Amadou Diallo’s murder, the torture of Abner Louima, the rooftop shooting of Timothy Stansbury, the list goes on and on. The police have made New York City a dangerous place to be African American or Latino.

Some say the Bell case cannot be one of racism because of the race of the police involved. But it is the recurring pattern of policing and police violence, which shows the targeting of low-income communities of color. Racism is not isolated to bigotry by individuals. It includes systematic policies that result in disparate outcomes whatever the intention. In fact, New York City Police Department routinely treats black lives as dispensable regardless who is wearing the uniform.

The police that night never tried to intervene in the altercation that occurred outside the club. They never tried to deescalate the situation that they themselves testified as potentially dangerous. Their plan was never to prevent a crime from happening that night, but to assume that one would. Sean Bell was just another criminal in their minds.

Once again we, along with the entire community, mourn the loss of Sean Bell's life and the devastation to his family and young bride-to-be. We also fear for the safety of Black and Latino residents of the city in a climate created by this ruling. Without a major change in police policies and practices and without establishing serious consequences for killing young people of color in the city, police killing will definitely continue, despite Mayor Bloomberg's promise of "never again".

Keep the Promises Rally March 19, 2008

All photos: Ken Besaw, PWW

NY Cabbies Strike Over GPS Tracking Scheme

By Libero Della Piana
NEW YORK — New York cabbies held a successful 24-hour strike here Oct. 22 in protest of the new global positioning system devices being mandated by the city’s Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC). The strike, which comes just six weeks after a previous 48-hour strike on the same issue, was called by the New York Taxi Workers Alliance, a member of the New York City Central Labor Council.

Subways were clogged during the morning commute and passengers at airport taxi lines stretched along the curb, as few cabs broke ranks with the strike. Mayor Michael Bloomberg initiated a contingency plan that included zone fares and multiple fares per taxi, amounting to a big bribe to scabbing cab drivers.

A noon rally outside of the lower Manhattan offices of the TLC drew over 1,000 cab drivers and their allies. Ed Ott, executive director of the Central Labor Council, spoke to the crowd, saying, “You represent a new era of the labor movement in this city. Your fight is our fight.”

Other speakers included Randi Weingarten, president of the United Federation of Teachers, City Councilmember Robert Jackson, Rabbi Michael Feinberg of the Greater New York Labor-Religion Coalition, representatives of Local 32BJ of the Service Employees International Union and the Professional Staff Congress at the City University of New York.

Bhairavi Desai, executive director of the taxi workers alliance, claimed the strike as a victory, stating that 75 percent of the 44,000 city cab drivers stayed off the road. “We have to believe in our unity, because in the long run, we will win,” she said.

Unity among the racially and nationally diverse taxi workforce is running high, according to union organizers. The mayor’s office and the TLC have tried sowing disunity through public statements, bribes and backing a puppet union led by Republican Party activist and multimillionaire Fernando Mateo.

Cabbie Billy Acquaire rallied the crowd by reminding drivers of the corruption and cronyism behind the GPS deal. “Everybody knows about the ‘GPS insider’s club,’” said Acquaire. “Ron Sherman, president of the Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade, is also a GPS vendor.” Drivers in the crowd went wild when Acquaire challenged TLC Chairman Matthew Daus to come down from his office to explain the insider contract.

The Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade is the association of the large taxi garages that dominate the industry. Sherman also owns Midtown Garage. Sherman’s company Creative Mobile Technologies received the largest of the five contracts to put GPS into cabs. A number of TLC officials bagged jobs with Creative Mobile Technologies after the contracts were secured, including Jed Applebaum, who previously was assistant commissioner of safety and emissions.

Not only was the process corrupt, but cabdrivers also feel that the GPS equals a cut in pay for drivers and invades their privacy. A 5 percent service charge is deducted from every transaction, and drivers cannot earn fares when the machine doesn’t work.

Drivers plan to continue their fight through continued public pressure and a federal lawsuit, and by seeking solidarity from labor allies and passengers.

This article originally appeared in the People's Weekly World newspaper.

Final Preparations for Oct 27 Peace March in NYC

After months of preparation, the October 27 regional demonstrations called by United for Peace & Justice are just days away.

The New York State Communist Party has been actively involved at all levels. Almost every club has been involved in local mobilization and preparations. We have been working closely with our coalition partners and new friends. Party members have helped garner some of the large number of labor endorsements of the event as well as the mobilization of working-class organizations, churches, etc.

Now we are in the home stretch and we should do what we can in the next few days to help make the march and demonstration a big success, and build the Party and our press while we are at it.

Here are some things you and your club members and allies can do to help:

1) March with the Communist Party. Come join the Communist Party contingent in the march. We know many of you will be marching with your local unions or peace organizations, but we need a sizable and diverse group to march with our banner together with the New Jersey Communist Party.

Our contingent will be gathering on 22nd St between Broadway and Park Ave. at 12:00 Noon. Look for the red dove peace signs and the Party banner.

2) Help distribute the People’s Weekly World. We want to get out many copies of the PWW to marchers on Saturday and we need your help to do it. You can come to the paper drop sites on Saturday morning or bring papers to the feeder marches. Be sure and call Bill Davis at our office (212-924-0550) right away and let us know if you can help with the paper.

3) Make reminder calls to friends and family between now and Saturday. Remind everyone of the demonstration and the importance of having a big presence that represents the 70% of the public that is against the ongoing occupation of Iraq. You can also do some last minute leafleting at subway stops or help distribute posters. Send emails to friends and family too!

4) Help staff the Communist Party table at the Peace Fair. If you or someone in your club cannot walk the length of the march Saturday, consider helping us staff the Party’s table at the Peace Fair held in Foley Square. We need 2 or 3 volunteers. The table will be in operation from 1:00-5:30pm.

Saturday will be a very exciting event and it couldn’t be timelier. The urgency of ending the war in Iraq grows every day. The negative impact of the war on Iraqi civilians, U.S. soldiers and their families, and U.S cities is climbing daily. It is time for us to show the will of the majority.

Remember to check Oct27.org for last minute updates and information or to download the latest leaflet.