Chris Lugo

Thanks for Your Support

2008-11-07T07:50:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends,

Thanks so much for your support this campaign season. Thanks to your efforts I was able to gather 9,067 votes for peace in the US Senate race. When I began in October of 2007 I did not realize how many friends I would make on the trail and how many people in Tennessee are in support of peace and real human priorities for Tennessee.

It has been a tremendous honor to travel this beautiful state. My campaign began last year in Jonesborough, Tennessee where hundreds of us gathered to call for an end to the production of depleted uranium weapons at the Aerojet facility in Irwin. We learned about the role that Aerojet plays in the production of depleted uranium and how it has caused long- term health problems for our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Since then I have been to all corners of this state - to Oak Ridge for the Stop the Bombs annual action to call for an end to the remanufacturing of nuclear bombs. We were also in Oak Ridge this year for the Department of Energy Hearings and spoke out in support of putting hundreds of people to work cleaning up the toxic legacy of sixty years of DOE activity in the area. Many of us closed out the year at a conference sponsored by S.E.A.C. at Middle Tennessee State University in Murfreesboro where we learned about the interconnectedness of the nuclear issues in this state, where foreign countries ship waste into Tennessee to incinerate, landfill and put into permanent temporary storage facilities.

Thanks also to the support I received this year from Democracy for East Tennessee and the Knoxville Greens as well as students at Heritage High School in Maryville, Tennessee and Kevin Rowland for his efforts. I would also like to recognize the work that so many people are doing in East Tennessee to promote peace and support a progressive agenda, especially members of the GLBT community.

There are so many wonderful people to thank who have offered their support and encouragement for the past thirteen months. I would like to thank the NAACP for hosting the only US Senate debate this season at Austin Peay State University, the Green Party of Middle Tennessee, the Green Party of Tennessee, the Chattanooga Area Greens, Democracy for Tennessee, Scott Banbury for personally securing a visit of Cynthia McKinney to Tennessee to submit her nominations to be on the ballot in as our presidential candidate. I would like to thank John Miglietta who ran a fantastic campaign as the Green Party candidate for the 5th District US House seat and was my constant companion in middle Tennessee as we traveled to neighborhood meetings, festivals, fairs, public events and campaign meetings.

I would like to thank my partner, Nini Thomas, who traveled with me across the state from Memphis to Chattanooga to Jonesborough and all points in between. Nini listened to my speeches, proofread my letters, designed my buttons and brochures and was a constant source of encouragement. I would like to thank the peace activists in Memphis at the Mid-South Peace and Justice Center and the Gandhi-King conference, especially Allison Glass and Jacob Flowers for promoting peace through a fantastic conference that brought together hundreds of peace activists from around the world to talk to each other and hear Amy Goodman.

I would like to thank the Nashville Peace and Justice Center for all the good work they do to promote peace and offer a center for community groups to gather and hosting numerous events this year all while fighting a lawsuit and undergoing an audit. I would like to thank the Nashville Movement for letting me flyer at their events this summer to seek justice for taxicab workers, HUD houses for the homeless and a living wage for everyone. These groups did not endorse me and they did not take a position on any candidate because of their non-profit status, but their work for social justice has made Tennessee stronger and I believe in what they are doing.

I would like to thank the Poor People's Economic Human Rights Campaign, whose path I crossed many times this campaign season including in Nashville where Sherri Honkala helped lead an occupation of an abandoned HUD house with the Nashville Homeless Power Project, and again at the Republican National Convention protests in St. Paul where I marched with Sherri Honkala and the Green Party of Minnesota and hundreds of protesters demanding economic human rights, and then again in Chattanooga this fall when Sherri came in October and we marched to the doors of the city council with demands to address the needs of the working poor and homeless in Chattanooga.

Thanks also to the folks at Clarksville Online and the activists in the Clarksville area where almost ten percent of all troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan are stationed or shipped through, and their long struggle and transformation from Clarksville Freethinkers for Peace and Civil Liberties into their work with Clarksville Online and the Unitarian Church and their collective struggles for peace in the heart of a military town.

I would also like to recognize the work that the Cumberland County Center for Peace and Justice are doing with communities in the plateau region around Monteagle, Sewanee, Tracy City and points beyond as well as the Farm in Summertown, Tennessee. I am so impressed with the efforts of the Peace Roots Alliance and their work, especially Liz Barger and Alan Graf and Judy Meeker and Albert Bates and so many others at the Farm, which has held its space for the past thirty years as a home for peaceful, community seeking individuals. This campaign season I crossed paths with so many different people all of who had a collective vision of peace, social justice, the environment, a living wage, economic justice, the need to address the deep wounds of racism, disarmament, education, alternative energy and more.

I have seen a shift in Tennessee. In 2006 I think that there was much less tolerance for the message of peace and the environment. People seem to be more tolerant and more interested in the message. I think that perhaps this is the beginning of a real shift. I think it will be a long time coming, and perhaps it won't come at all, but I definitely noticed a change. Everyone in Tennessee seemed to be more open minded, more willing to hear differing perspectives this year, more willing to consider alternatives.

Thanks to the Tennessee Alliance for Progress for all the work they are doing to promote a common message in Tennessee and Radio Free Nashville for promoting democracy on the airwaves. Thanks to Middle Tennessee Students for a Democratic Society for all their fantastic work at MTSU and thanks to the folks in Dyersberg, Lexington, Lebanon, Jackson, Hohenwald, Shelbyville, Cookeville, Crossville and other places in rural Tennessee who expressed support this campaign season, especially to Howard & Katey for all the work they do for the Green Party of Tennessee and Catherine Austin Fitts for all the work she does to reclaim our democracy and thanks to the Reverend Larry Fagre of Vetsburg for all his work to support housing for homeless veterans.

Thanks to Cathy Danielson and to Kathi Gregory for her blog Streetalker and Dan and Beverly Sweeton for all their support this year, especially at the Wilson County Fair. I would be remiss if I didn’t also say thanks to my parents for their support as well as Marylin and Ray Williams, Eric Schecter, Glenn Christman, Sandy Hepler, Courtney Meeker, Richard Aberdeen, Ricky Nickolson, Beth Dachowski, Ken and Fle Frasure, Martin Holsinger, Bill Humble, Free Land, Gigi Gaskin, Rhonda Fergus, Joe Shedlock and Sizwe Herring for all of his fantastic work at the Carver Food Park and being an anchor of the community in so many ways.

But I would especially like to thank the Nashville Peace Coalition for all of their support and fantastic work for peace this year, especially organizing the fifth anniversary peace rally and the alternative presidential debate. It was so exciting meeting eight presidential candidates this year and having six of them attend our alternative debate. I can't believe how much work everyone I have met across the state of Tennessee is doing on peace, the environment and other areas of social justice.

I would also like to thank my opponents, the Libertarians, for their spirit of cooperation on many issues including tolerating my many posts on their message boards and for the cooperative work they did with the Greens this year on the ballot access lawsuit as well as coming out for protests against the war, against FISA and turning out for the alternative debate. Daniel Lewis is a man of integrity and it was a pleasure to run against him for the US Senate seat. I would also like to thank the Democrats for their support this campaign season.

Many progressive Democrats were supportive of my running and I wanted to personally thank them, even if I didn’t receive their vote - especially the folks at the L-Club and Democracy for Tennessee who have been so nice and respectful all this campaign season. I would also like to congratulate Bob Tuke on a good run. I was always impressed with his professional approach and happy to see his support on environmental issues in Tennessee.

I don't think I have mentioned all of the people I wanted to thank for their support this campaign season nor all of the national contacts that we have made. If I have omitted someone please forgive me. I just wanted to thank everyone who was supportive this campaign season. The reason that I ran is because it is my hope that we can build a progressive majority in Tennessee

I think the most important thing we need to do is talk to each other. As a candidate I have had an opportunity to meet a lot of communities, and I think one of the principal needs we still have is to get together and network more and let each other know what we are doing. The other need I really see is for us all to come together under one big tent on issues we can all agree on. I think this is possible in Tennessee, but we need to talk more. Really I think more than anything we need to talk to each other and learn who we all are. There are actually a lot of progressive in Tennessee and if we get to know each other then I think we can build a strong movement in this state..

To end I would like to leave you with a letter for your consideration, written by Tom Hayden of Progressive Democrats for America and co-founder of Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960's. I met Tom this summer at the Democratic National Convention protests in Denver, and he talked about pushing the Democrats from within.

Now is the time to push the incoming administration to bring the troops home and it is the time to push hard. Maybe they will give us what we have been working for six years to end, or maybe they won't. The jury is out. But I will leave you with this letter to consider for our President Elect.

Thanks for your support and best wishes.

Sincerely,

Chris Lugo

9 Music Sq So #164

Nashville, TN 37203

615-593-0304

chris4senate@gmail.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear President-Elect Obama,

We are deeply moved to address you as our nation’s first African-American president and, we proudly note, the first president whose campaign began with a pledge to an anti-war rally. Your courageous speech in October 2002, provided the rationale momentum that led to victory in Iowa and other Democratic primaries, and we still applaud you for that stand.

We write amidst this exciting week to urge your immediate attention and opposition to the so-called Status of Forces Agreement on Iraq being prepared in secret negotiations by the outgoing Bush Administration. The current United Nations authorization ends December 31st, making it imperative that you take leadership even before being sworn in.

The proposed agreement is a transparent attempt to circumvent Congress and formally bind your Administration to a war and occupation that far exceeds your stated commitment to a 16 month withdrawal of our combat troops. As your own website specifically states, any agreement should include a commitment to begin withdrawing our troops and avoiding any permanent bases. We also believe that thousands of Iraqi detainees should be treated according to human rights norms, or released in the absence of charges or evidence. You also have committed to a role for Congress in affirming any agreement.

Already the Bush administration and Pentagon are threatening “consequences” if the Iraqi parliament fails to endorse this pact.

We believe instead that you should signal your intention to abide by your pledge and work with the Congress immediately to formulate an agreement consistent with your pledge to end this war as rapidly as possible. We propose that you include the withdrawal of all American forces, including trainers and advisers caught in a sectarian crossfire, as recommended by all peace and justice organizations as well as such Washington think tanks as the Center for American Progress.

In place of this counterinsurgency war. we recommend an immediate diplomatic surge, including talks with Iran, as the only alternative to the continuing quagmire in Iraq which now costs our taxpayers some ten billion dollars per month, puts lives needlessly at risk, and stains our national honor.

We realize you will be hearing from all sorts of advocates for prolonging the occupation by one means or another. We urge you to keep the faith with the voices of those who put you on the road to the presidency, by implementing your pledge to end the war in 2009.

Tom Hayden, Progressive Democrats for America

In Support of a Negotiated Peace

2008-10-27T16:28:00.000-07:00

The United States has been at war with Afghanistan for six years. The original intention of the war with Afghanistan was to find and capture Osama Bin Laden. In the years since the original occupation of Afghanistan, the war with Iraq has eclipsed both national and international attention, leaving Afghanistan as America's forgotten war. Much like Korea was in the 1950's, the United States is engaged in a war it cannot win against an enemy it cannot defeat. Recently, rhetoric by both the Democratic and Republican Presidential campaigns has been actively calling for a troop surge in Afghanistan. In addition to costing the United States more money that we cannot afford to pay, this foreign policy decision ignores the obvious repercussions of an extended and increased war with Afghanistan.

These factors, which seem obvious to the average resident of Afghanistan, a country that has been bombed into the stone age, seems to escape the leaders of the free world, the policy wonks at the pentagon, and most of the corporate media. The simple equation goes something like this, more bombs and more military equals more resistance and hence more enemies to be defeated. In this case the enemy is the Taliban, a right wing fundamentalist reaction to Soviet occupation and failed US foreign policy. Here in the United States of America, the Taliban has been labeled public enemy number one, and for the past six years we have been pouring tens of billions of dollars annually into defeating an enemy that was created out of our own failed international policy under the Reagan administration.

Today the Taliban numbers in the thousands or perhaps tens of thousands and is perceived as a real threat to both the United States and the occupying administration in Afghanistan. Although the US death toll remains relatively low in relationship to the war in Iraq, the death toll could mount significantly if US forces are redirected to that area or even brought in from further depletion of US reserves based stateside or in other parts of the world. In addition, the people of Afghanistan are tired of US occupation. They have been occupied continuously by one or another occupying foreign power since 1979. Afghanistan is a country that has not known peace in almost two generations.

The specter of fear and nationalism lives on in the long tried US war on the Taliban. It is now 2008 and the United States still hasn't caught Osama Bin Laden, but we have managed to an entire country. The international community is calling on the United States leadership to step back from its rhetoric about increasing the troops in Afghanistan. They are calling for a negotiated peace, led by the United Nations, between the United States and the powers that be in Afghanistan. For every day that we stay in Afghanistan, for every bomb we drop, for every gun we fire, for every civilian we torture and for every innocent villager we accidentally kill we create yet another recruit for the Taliban and make the resistance to US occupation that much stronger.

It is time for the United States to remove its forces from Afghanistan and bring the troops home now from the Middle East. The failure of US leadership for the past eight years has been obvious to the entire international community. We are behaving as an occupying power and have not succeeded in our missions. We never found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we never found Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan and yet somehow US foreign policy continues to occupy these two zones, taking hundreds of billions of dollars from our national budget at a time of looming economic recession when Americans need jobs at home and investment in America. Now is the time for a negotiated peace and an immediate withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan.

LaOnf - The Iraqi Nonviolence Movement

2008-10-22T05:39:00.000-07:00

There is a growing movement of resistance in Iraq, a movement of nonviolence, and I believe that this approach of non-violent resistance is the solution to the dilemma of how to win in Iraq. I learned about LaOnf (pronounced La-oonf) recently at the Gandhi-King nonviolence conference in Memphis, Tennessee. The conference is an annual gathering of activists and non-violence advocates who present papers and network on the subject of non-violence on an international level. The conference is held annually in Memphis, Tennessee on the campus of Christian Brothers University because this was where Arun Gandhi chose to call home. The conference is also held in Memphis in honor of the Revered Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. who was murdered in Memphis while working to organize sanitation workers in 1968.

LaOnf is translated as non-violence in Arabic and is reflective of a growing ideological framework in Iraq that is neither pro-occupation nor pro-militia but rather is pro-peace and anti-violence. This movement is composed of organizations and individuals with different ideological and political backgrounds, gathering around the idea that non-violence is the most effective way to struggle for an independent, democratic and peaceful Iraq. This movement is not a political party nor is it an organization. It is a free gathering of people and any Iraqi who shares the same ideology is welcome to join it.

Nonviolence is a relatively old concept in international relations and world history whose roots go deep into human history. The most prominent movements for non-violence in recent history include the liberation of India from the British through non-violence led by Gandhi and the desegregation of the American South through the leadership of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Iraq is ripe for a practical non-violence movement. It is clear that American leadership in Iraq has failed and that Iraqis want the United States out of Iraq. The United States is the visible symbol of occupation in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. As the global purveyors of imperialism and militarism, the United States is not in a position to provide leadership in the formation of a new Iraqi state. LaOnf recognizes the need for resistance to occupation but provides a unique avenue to democratic self-determination through the rejection of violence.

LaOnf is a growing movement in Iraq. This movement believes that the correct solution to Iraqi self-determination is non-violent struggle, which is made real through supporting a peaceful movement of activists from throughout the nation with the support of the international community. LaOnf rejects occupation and war as a means of building democracy. As a peaceful movement of non-violent resistance, LaOnf celebrates the historical culture of non-violence in human history with a special focus on non-violence as a traditional movement within the Islamic world and the Middle East. LaOnf looks forward to becoming a major focal point in Iraq to defend the right of citizens to use non-violence as a means to struggle for democracy, equality and respect for human rights. LaOnf works to promote the widespread culture of non violence as an effective means of resistance to the occupation of Iraq.

In the waning years of the US occupation and with a new administration on the horizon in Washington D.C. it is critical at this point in history for Americans to become aware of the non-violent movement within Iraq. The current administration presses for continued US leadership in Iraq. This leadership has failed and the Iraqi experiment in democratic leadership has failed under US guidance. It is not even clear whether there is widespread support within Iraq for the current representative government. The next administration has a unique opportunity to support an indigenous movement that has the best intention for the Iraqi people at the heart of its organization. By supporting LaOnf while at the same time withdrawing US military forces from Iraq, the United States could show that it supports in principle the idea of Iraqi self-determination. By making amends and providing economic aid for reconstruction and infrastructure development, the United States could once again show that it has the best intentions of the global community at heart. LaOnf is an idea whose time has come. Non-violence and peaceful resistance to warfare and occupation is the solution to the social and humanitarian dilemma that has become the nightmare that is Iraq, and by supporting this movement the United States has an opportunity to redeem itself in the eyes of the international community.

For more information on LaOnf and the growing community of non-violent peace activists within Iraq who reject both US Occupation and Militia Rule please visit: www.laonf.net

Greens Hold Fund Raiser in Nashville

2008-10-20T20:02:00.000-07:00

Enjoy live Jazz with Bill Humble and Dave Trevins; and a special appearance by Ken Frasure.

October 25, 7-10PM

Revive Cafe
1707 Church Street
Nashville

Fundraiser for:

John Miglietta candidate for US Congress
Chris Lugo candidate for US Senate

Just Say No to Corporate Bailouts

2008-09-23T20:17:00.000-07:00

The world financial markets were rocked to their foundation this week by the news of the collapse of one of the oldest Wall Street Investment firms in American history, preceded by two of the largest bailouts in American history. If that was not news enough, the market was then knocked around again in round two when American Insurance Group (AIG) was given a 24 hours notice to raise $85 billion dollars to cover debt tied to the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Once again the federal treasury decided to bail out another corporation in the name of the American people and the stability of the marketplace. Then the mother of all bailouts was announced just before the close of business Thursday when Secretary of the Treasury announced a $700 billion dollar bailout of all remaining investment firms, banks and insurance groups. President Bush proudly proclaimed that the American people had been saved by the quick thinking and decisive actions of the US Treasury and anticipated quick passage of the trillion-dollar bailout by the House and Senate this week.

The reality of the situation is that the American taxpayers are being held responsible for the irresponsible investment decisions and speculative actions of private corporations and private investors. When the economy was booming and Wall Street was raking in record profits on fraudulent business dealings taxpayers saw none of the benefits, but when it is time to save those same corporations and their investors from the brink of irrelevance then the taxpayers are expected to foot the bill. The end result is that the investors reap all of the profits when times are good but when times are bad the American taxpayers pay the bills. This time the price tag is too high. In addition to the $650 billion dollars the federal treasury is paying annually for the defense budget plus the costs of the war in Iraq, the general public is now expected to foot a trillion dollar bill based on speculation.

Americans do not understand what the cost of the proposed bailout is in real terms, and many Americans do not realize the amount of debt that the federal government has already accrued, which is a burden to be passed on to our future generations. In real dollars, the proposal by the treasury department will cost the average taxpayer five thousand dollars and ten thousands dollars for a household of four. That is ten thousand dollars of debt that President Bush and his cabinet will leave as a legacy to compete with the shared cost of the war in Iraq, which will cost the average household nearly an additional ten thousand dollars in debt. That is a total of twenty thousand dollars in debt per household multiplied by millions of Americans equals nearly two trillion dollars that we are deeper in debt as a result of the war in Iraq and the recent proposed bailout which will in all likelihood sail through Congress this week.

It is time to say no to more corporate bailouts. The United States is already almost nine trillion dollars in debt as a result of decades of over spending on the US military combined with twenty-five years of Reagan era tax cuts for the wealthy and private corporations. Now is the time to invest in real priorities for the future by fully funding health care and education. By saying no to corporate bailouts for Wall Street we will ensure real economic opportunity for Main Street. As a candidate for federal office I oppose further corporate bailouts and I support strict regulation of Wall Street and a federal investigation into fraud and abuse of the trading system, which led to the current financial crisis. The results of decades deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy and privileged has led to the decimation of the middle class and brought us to the edge of ruin for future generations.

There is hope for the future, and it involves electing candidates who will look out for the interest of working people and the middle class, rather than selling out every federal office to the highest bidder. By supporting campaign finance reform, progressive taxation, universal health care, a drastically reduced military budget and by placing the highest priority on funding education we can begin to move this country in the right direction. Through strict regulation of markets and a tough but conservative approach to finance and investment we can begin to regain the trust of both investors and the general public. By withdrawing our troops from the Middle East and reducing the military budget we will gain the trust and good faith of people around the world. It is time for us to invest in the people and we must begin by saying to to any further bailouts for private corporations and Wall Street and insure that our tax dollars go to real human needs and domestic priorities that benefit everyone

Chris Lugo for US Senate
9 Music Sq So #164

Nashville, TN 37203
615-593-0304
chris4senate@gmail.com
www.voteforpeace.info

Upcoming Events:

Meet the Candidates at Vanderbilt University Sept 25th Olin Lawn
US Senate Candidate's Debate September 26th Austin Peay State University
Presidential Candidates Alternative Debate: October 6th - Nashville, Tennessee
Yard Signs Available - Please send an email to chris4senate@gmail.com for a yard sign

The Right to Protest

2008-09-08T06:21:00.000-07:00

There is a long and venerable tradition in our culture which has helped to shape the character of this nation. The right to protest and peacefully address grievances to our elected officials, the media, and the general public is a fundamental aspect of American citizenship. The right to peacefully assemble to express concern about all matters of public policy is older than the formation of this country and is the foundation of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. When colonists felt the burden of excessive taxation during English rule, their first step as subjects of the rule of law of England was to address their concerns to the magistrates and officials of their day. The very act of expressing dissent is a hallmark of an engaged community.

I have just returned from two weeks of expressing dissent to the leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties. My activities, along with those of thousands of other peaceful protesters was aimed at the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado and the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota. As a candidate who is committed to peace and ending war, I hold both major parties accountable for the hundreds of billions of our taxpayer dollars which have been wasted on war and the senseless killing which has taken place in the name of my alleged freedom. As a citizen, I am outraged at the continuation of policies which have taken the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqis and I hold the leadership of both major parties responsible for this state of affairs.

What I encountered in Denver and especially in St. Paul has shaken the faith of my belief in government. I have always believed that the role of protest was crucial to the American dialogue, and that dissent was tolerated in this country, although not always supported. I understand the resistance to change and the fear that dissenters create in the general public. We have always been only marginally tolerated, from the times of the American revolution to the abolitionists to the suffragists to the unionists, dissenters have always taken risks, but the rewards of their efforts have been to the benefit of all Americans, whether it be the right to vote, the forty hour work week, the end of slavery or the very creation of this country, dissent has always played a fundamental role in the creation of those rights.

In St. Paul, Minnesota, during the week of September 1st-4th the right to protest and peacefully assemble was greatly impinged upon by local, state and federal officials. It was also greatly diminished in Denver, Colorado but to a lesser extent. At the Republican National Convention protests I personally witnessed peaceful protesters demonstrating against war being beaten by police, nearly trampled by horses, dispersed with tear gas and concussion grenades, and everywhere treated as dangerous criminals and as a threat to the government. I participated in a march led by mothers with children in strollers that was blockaded on several occasions by national guard troops in full paramilitary gear. I witnessed homeless people marching for the right to housing being dispersed by security police in riot gear wearing gas masks and carrying beating sticks that were in excess of two feet long. I witnessed journalists and legal observers rounded up by the police and detained prior to mass arrests of hundreds.

A government that cannot tolerate the dissent of its citizens is a terrible burden upon freedom and democracy. The right to dissent plays a healthy, vital role in the national dialogue. It is only through dissent that we can often see the ugly face of actions which the wealthy and powerful would prefer to remain hidden. The victims of war deserve to be heard and the rights of the people should not be infringed upon by any force to express their dissent from policies which are morally abhorrent. It is my sincere hope that I never again witness state, local and federal police and security officials engaging in violent and intimidating gestures against the citizens they are suppose to be protecting and whose rights it is their responsibility to protect.

As a candidate for federal office I do not and will not support such excessive use of force and the wasteful spending of tens of millions of dollars in order to intimidate and suppress dissent. I will support the active and engaged expression of the concerns of citizens which is the hallmark of the democratic process.

for more information and archival coverage of
the DNC and RNC protests please visit:

http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2008/9
http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2008/8
http://mobilebroadcastnews.com/
http://www.youtube.com/chris4senate

No More Drilling on Public Lands

2008-08-12T19:09:00.000-07:00

President Bush and the McCain campaign are beating a dead horse these days and it is called the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. They want you to believe that we must squeeze the last bits of oil out of the earth, wherever we can find it, and we need to start right here at home by destroying our last remaining wild refuge and devastating our coastal wetlands in the name of boosting corporate oil profits. The right wing echo chamber has taken up the cause celeb, and candidates across the country can be heard ringing the bells of freedom for the global oil market.

Developing our remaining public lands for oil and natural gas is a waste of time and resources. The industry already leases 44 million acres of land for oil and gas development, and to date they have not used almost 30 million acres of public land. In addition, drilling in our most fragile wild spaces is a slap in the face to the environment and future generations who will judge us on the basis of how we cared for and exercised responsible stewardship of the natural resources of the planet.

The time will come when there will be no more oil to drill and we have already reached far beyond the point where we must begin to invest in sustainable alternatives to oil, such as biofuels, solar and wind power as our primary sources of energy production. Drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge is like using a garden hose to put out the forest fire. Clearly we need to develop new strategies and begin to invest in a sustainable energy infrastructure not dependent on the burning of fossil fuels. The scientific evidence has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that global warming is real and we are the source of the problem. It is time to become part of the solution.

The oil and gas industry already has plenty of access to public lands in the United States. It is up to us to protect our coastal beaches and marshlands from environmental devastation. It is up to us to lock up ecologically sensitive regions in Alaska, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico and Colorado before they are destroyed forever. There is no clear evidence that drilling on our remaining public lands will lead to a decrease in oil prices. In fact, oil prices are going to continue to rise regardless because global demand is far outstripping supply. The only real solution is to begin to invest in our alternative energy infrastructure and develop green solutions to the global energy crisis. We face a real challenge in the years ahead, but we can begin to make the right choices now by saying no to continued drilling in environmentally sensitive regions.

for more information on this issue please visit: http://action.wilderness.org/campaign/oildrill/

Living in a World Without Fear

2008-08-08T05:20:00.000-07:00

This week marks the 63rd anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on the civilian populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On August 9th, 1945 at 11:01am the United States of America dropped a nuclear bomb on a pre-designated city in Japan killing 80,000 people in the second of two nuclear attacks. This attack was the only time that nuclear weapons have been used as an instrument of war, and it could be the last, if we generate the political will to dismantle our weapons of mass destruction, abide by the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and create a federal level department of peace. At the time of the bombing the United States only had two nuclear weapons in its arsenal but since that time our stockpile of nuclear weapons has mushroomed to nearly six thousand weapons. Fortunately we have not used these weapons since then, but the only guarantee that they will never be used is if they do not exist. As tempting as it is to believe that we are a moral nation that would never use such terrible instruments of destruction, the fact is that we have used them and we can use them again if our military or elected leaders believe the situation justifies it. That is why it is more important than ever to dismantle weapons of mass destruction.

Nuclear weapons are dirty, dangerous, immoral weapons that continue to do damage long after the bombs have been used. In addition to the nearly 200,000 people who died as a result of the nuclear attacks, many more victims continue to suffer to this day as a result of the radiation released that day. Birth defects and mutations continue to affect the children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki to this day. With literally thousands of nuclear weapons in the possession of nearly two dozen nations, the risk of one of these bombs being used in a conflict has increased exponentially since it was first used in 1945. In the past six decades the United States alone has gone to critical levels of preparedness for nuclear attack on more than thirty occasions in response to international conflicts. Having initiated a first use policy, we cannot claim to have the higher ground on the issue of nuclear proliferation and possession. By using the bomb first and then building the biggest arsenal, our national policy makers have set a precedent and sent a clear message to the world that we are not a country which is truly interested in peace and international security.

There is nothing more threatening to global peace than our own nuclear weapons stockpiles. These weapons are also a threat to the environment both short term and long term. Uranium mining involves milling, production and environmental and ecological devastation. After the uranium ore is extracted and processed no one seems to want the nuclear waste, which is left like an orphan without a home. There is no comprehensive plan for the long term storage of radioactive nuclear waste which stays radioactive for up to 250,000 years and scientists haven't figured out how to safely contain such materials. For the people of the world to even begin to have a chance at peace and a healthy environment we need to begin to dismantle our nuclear weapons stockpiles now and clean up the mess we have made. In Tennessee there is enough work for all of the hundreds of employees of the Oak Ridge nuclear complex just cleaning up the contaminated facilities and the environment to keep them employed for many years to come. The same is true of all of our nuclear weapons production and storage facilities. Additionally we need more investment in research and development to study how to more safely contain the nuclear waste that has already been produced.

It has become clear to the people of this world that the future does not include nuclear war or proliferation of nuclear weapons. After the cold war the United States and the former Soviet Union took a big step back from the precipice by dismantling some warheads. Since that time international will has resolved and grown stronger to continue the progress that was made nearly twenty years ago. Right now, while our world is at relative peace regarding global threats to security is a good time to dismantle our weapons of mass destruction. It is up to the people of the United States to develop the will and the leadership to live up to the vision of a nation which is dedicated to peace and social justice rather than violence and warfare. We can live in a world of peace, if we take concrete steps now by abiding by dismantling our weapons of mass destruction, abide by the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and support a federal level department of peace. It is possible to resolve international conflicts without threatening to completely destroy other cultures. We have the collective intelligence to create a more meaningful future for ourselves and the generations to come.

No Permanent Military Bases in Iraq

2008-08-04T18:05:00.000-07:00

The Iraqi Parliament wants the US out of Iraq, and they have made it clear in a recent letter which called for US troops to be removed. The United States doesn't seem quite so inclined to oblige. Recently we learned that the Bush administration was engaged in secret negotiations to establish fifty military bases, control of Iraqi airspace and legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors for an indefinite period of time. The congress must remain engaged and not give in to pressure from the military industrial complex or current administration officials from both sides of the aisle. If we are ever to step out of this quagmire there must be broad resolve by the American people to bring the troops home and close down the military bases.

As part of long term security negotiations in Iraq, Massoud Barzani, the head of northern Iraq's regional Kurdish administration suggested that military forces be permanently redeployed to northern Iraq. Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama has indicated that he believes it would be appropriate to deploy troops there in the near future. Permanent military bases of any sort will act as an anchor to keep us locked into Iraq for decades to come. The United States clearly intends to remain in Iraq and Afghanistan into the indefinite future. Pentagon officials have indicated as much in their long term and short term planning for the region.

The Iraqis have a different idea about what we should do. There is consensus in the Iraqi parliament that the United States needs to leave now and take our military bases with us. As a candidate for federal office, I do not support the permanent establishment of any military bases in Iraq or Afghanistan. I believe that it is essential that the anti-war movement in this country continue to pressure elected officials and run candidates who will remove the military presence from the Middle East. It is clear that political instability in the region is being fueled by a continued US military presence in the region. This in turn is creating uncertainty on the global oil markets and pushing up prices, weakening the US dollar and contributing to a global recession.

The current thinking on the part of military strategists and international policy experts is that the situation in Iraq is analogous to Korea or Germany, and that permanent military bases are a fundamental aspect of Iraqi and Afghan reconstruction. The problem is that the Iraqi people do not agree. The people of Iraq consider us to be agents of occupation, and fundamentally anti-democratic. They do not see the invasion of Iraq as being worth the hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed or injured. They do not like the long term economic, infrastructure and environmental devastation which was been visited upon their country.

The Iraqi people have spoken and it is time to honor our agreements. In a recent statement to the press, Nouri al-Maliki said that the US was making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq. If the US remains in the region, we will eventually use our presence in Iraq as a base for further military exploits in the region, especially into Iran. That is why it is time to withdraw all of our military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, to close down our military bases and to bring our troops home now.

In Support of a UN Arms Embargo of Sudan

2008-08-01T08:18:00.000-07:00

It is widely known in the international community that the United Nations ban on weapons to Darfur is ineffective. The various factions are still receiving shipments of heavy weapons, small arms, ammunition, and other military equipment into Sudan, where they are transported to Darfur. That is why it is essential that the Congress act now to extend the embargo to all of Sudan. It is essential that we exercise our strength as a country to do everything we can to stop the genocide.

A recent report by Amnesty International stated that a total arms embargo on Darfur will add diplomatic pressure for the embargo to be applied to Sudan as a whole. At the moment there is a limited ban which is intended to stop the supply of weapons from reaching various factions in Darfur, but this ban has been considered ineffective. After four years of warfare, the people of Sudan are suffering terribly from the affects of widespread civilian dislocation, famine and genocide. If the United States redirected even a small percentage of budgetary allocation they are spending on the war in Iraq, we could unilaterally prevent genocide.

As a world leader, the Congress of the United States and the Executive Branch have a responsibility to do their part to help prevent genocide. As signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the US has promised to respond with a concerted will to ensure that our planet never again witnesses the horror of genocide and that people everywhere have basic rights including the right to food, housing, clean water, an education and the right to live free of violence and intimidation.

Clearly the people of Sudan have been abandoned for the most part by the current administration. While Sudan is not considered to be important in terms of military strategy for empire building and control of global oil resources, the USA does claim to engage in military adventures overseas for the purpose of building democracy and ensuring the people living in the bondage of fear and terror deserve the opportunity to be free and make choices about their government. Sudan is clearly an international crisis, more so than Iraq but perhaps equal to the gravitas given to Afghanistan.

As a country which preaches democracy and human rights, it is time for the United States to take positive actions to ensure that genocide does not continue in Sudan. We have a responsibility to support international peace keeping efforts to end the war in Sudan and feed, clothe and house the hundreds of thousands of refugees which have been created by the ongoing crisis the region. The first step is to support a total embargo of Sudan to ensure that arms do not continue to fuel the ongoing violence between various factions in the region.

Now is the Time for Comprehensive Gun Control

2008-07-28T05:53:00.001-07:00

Many Tennesseans were stunned to hear the news that yesterday morning at 10:18am a lone gunman walked into a welcoming congregation in Knoxville and opened fire on the congregants who were gathered in anticipation of watching their children perform a scene from the musical "Annie" as part of the morning services, killing two people and shooting several more in the head before being tackled to the ground. That church, the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church, is a beacon of joy and hope in East Tennessee. Its congregation is made up of some of the most loving, kind and gentle people in the fine city of Knoxville, and the horrific tragedy which was visited upon that church is a wakeup call to good people throughout Tennessee to re-examine our approach to gun control in Tennessee and throughout this nation.

Sadly this is not the first nor the last example of guns in churches, schools and public spaces being used to kill innocent men, women and children. In the past decade alone, dozens of people have been killed in our nations schools, churches and public gathering places by people who had obtained guns legally and illegally with the sole intention of killing unarmed civilians. The public school shooting rampage phenomenon started here in the South only a decade ago when two students in Jonesboro, Arkansas opened fire on their fellow middle school students killing five and wounding eleven. Since that time our nation has witnessed school shootings in over a dozen states with victims numbering in the hundreds. There have also been shootings at shopping malls and church shootings in the past year in Texas, Colorado and now Tennessee.

Unfortunately, in many of these cases, the guns that were used in the commission of felony first degree homicides were obtained legally. Either the guns were in possession of parents who were not able to keep the guns from the access of their children, or in some cases rifles were used. In many states there are no laws regarding the use of these weapons by minors. In other cases guns were obtained illegally. No matter how the gun was obtained, it was used in the commission of a crime against men, women and children who lost their parents, children or grandchildren as was the case today in Knoxville.

I cannot imagine the horror of the children yesterday watching as their parents were shot in front of them, but this incident further illustrates to me the need for effective gun control regulations at the federal level. The fact is that guns kill people and in the United States they kill a lot of people. The United States has the highest per capita murder rate in the developed world, with 14 people per 100,000dying of gun violence each year. This adds up to nearly 10,000 people a year who die at the hands of a gun, not including the additional 16,000 suicides that happen each year with the use of a gun. This is nearly thirty three times the number of Americans who have been killed in Iraq since the beginning of the war.

The recent Supreme Court ruling on the second amendment by the Bush and Reagan stacked court insures that our nation's cities can continue to live in perpetual fear of similar incidents happening around the nation as what happened in Knoxville on Sunday. Cities are already scrambling to deal with the chilling new reality handed down by the Supreme Court this summer, which seems to mean that it is open season for every crazy person who can get their hands on a gun in our nation’s urban centers.

There is a solution though, and it is up to Congress to exercise the political will to make a decision to pass laws which place strict limits on gun ownership and to hold gun sellers strictly accountable for who they sell their products to. We have a responsibility to protect our children and our nation’s citizens have a right to live free of the fear of being visited with violence as they go about their daily lives of working, shopping and worshiping as they choose. As a candidate for federal office I believe that federal government has the responsibility to place strict limits on gun ownership in this country. Gun rights advocates argue that guns make us safe, but I believe that a heavily armed nation is a dangerous place to live. It is time to make our country safe for our children. Now is the time for comprehensive gun control for a safer America.

Support the Gulf Coast Works Act of 2008

2008-07-21T17:36:00.000-07:00

It has been nearly three years since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita devastated the gulf coast region, leaving behind a wake of suffering and human misery unmatched in recent American history. Sadly, the victims of this crisis are still suffering and residents of the Gulf Coast region are still waiting for the government to do the right thing by investing in the region, cleaning up and rebuilding New Orleans and surrounding communities. The scale of this crisis is unimaginable for a modern, developed nation with the industrial strength and collective will we have to remedy the situation. As a country, it is time for us to come together and call for justice for the victims of Katrina and Rita with a comprehensive, public works program designed to address the real needs of people who are still suffering from this natural disaster.

In New Orleans and surrounding regions, people continue to suffer from unhealthy living conditions. Many areas lack basic social services and there always remains the looming threat of Mother Nature once again taking more. We have the means to address this crisis. Recently Congress introduced the Gulf Coast Works Act, which is designed to restore the region. The Gulf Coast Works Act will ensure that real progress is made toward restoring the environment, rebuilding infrastructure, and revitalizing the workforce of the area. The Act will provide 100,000 job opportunities for residents to rebuild their communities and it will create incentives for local and national business to participate in the redevelopment of the Gulf Coast region.

If this bill is introduced into the Senate I will work to support this companion legislation as a candidate and work to ensure that all victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita have the opportunity to rebuild their lives and make New Orleans the city it truly deserves to be. Real solutions to the problems of jobs, infrastructure development and environmental restoration are possible with the collective participation of our entire society. Unfortunately, at a time when the people of New Orleans really needed our support our President was too busy waging war halfway around the world. Instead of dealing with the real crisis at home, the Bush administration and FEMA largely neglected the disaster which had struck the gulf region, betraying a fundamental trust that the people have in government that it will be there at times of national crisis.

Thankfully, some people still believe that when disaster strikes, we the people will respond. In addition to the numerous private efforts which have accomplished many good works since 2005, the federal government has finally woken up to the reality of the situation and is finally going to do something right. The Gulf Coast Works Act will create a federal authority with the ability to implement and coordinate the necessary federal response in the event of a future natural disaster in the region. It will put people to work rebuilding vital infrastructure and restoring the environment and it will spur sustainable development in the community, giving people a sense of dignity and justice.

By working to rebuild the roads, levees, police stations, schools, firehouses and public utilities in the gulf region we are rebuilding America. By cleaning up the marshes, wetlands and restoring the natural ecology of the region we are protecting the planet. By serving as a national model for disaster recovery and infrastructure development we are protecting the future.

for more information on the Gulf Coast Civic Works Act please visit:
http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/2749/t/3071/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2252

Common Law Family Support Act

2008-07-14T05:44:00.000-07:00

Americans believe they have one of the best, if not the best, standard of living in the world. Indeed, some Americans have a fantastic standard of living, while millions of others live in near third world conditions. Many people who are poor, infirm, elderly or sick will turn to their family or community for aid and support in times of need. When that is not available they will turn to the government for help. The public welfare tradition of government support is a relatively new tradition, started in full force during the great depression of the 1930's through the recognition of government as a positive force for social change. Since that time, there has been a continuous dialectic between supporters of government as a basic safety net and detractors of government who feel that family is the basic social unit of society, and that government interference weakens the family and diminishes America.

What does family mean to you? On June 15th, 2008 California became the second state in the nation to grant gays and lesbians the right to legally marry. After nearly thirty years of struggle some fundamental rights are finally being granted to same sex couples who are committed to loving and caring for each other in every way similar to those of us who have always taken those rights for granted. For some, this is a step backwards, towards a dissolution of the traditional family unit and the basic moral framework of this country. For others, it is a step forward towards a more liberal and open minded society, throwing off the shackles of an oppressive framework and moving towards a more humanistic and egalitarian vision of community.

Regardless of what family means to you, the law still places strong limitations on what a family is and can do. That is why I propose we take a step further, even beyond gay marriage and beyond traditional welfare standards in our consideration of what family means. In recent history, a family meant a mother and a father, living in a house, with dependent minor children. This basic family unit was the classic definition of postwar American culture. The reality is that this is a very new definition of family and a recent cultural construction. This definition, however, has permeated all aspects of law and public policy and has become the framework of political dialogue.

A more historical, and therefore more traditional definition of family is people who live together in a 'household.' What that means practically is that a 'household' is a group of people living together and taking care of each other. Sometimes that is a heterosexual couple and their children. Sometimes it is a grandmother and her grandchildren. Sometimes it is two men or two women and their natural or adopted children. Sometimes it is a man and his mother and her nieces. Sometimes it is a group of people who have chosen to live together intentionally. The point is that love makes a family. Whoever lives in a household together and takes care of each other out of mutual love, respect and desire is a family.

This means that public welfare policy and law need to catch up with the times. The cost to the American taxpayers and the loss of productivity and income due to the limitation of benefits is enormous and a real burden on the public treasury. Take the following case as an example of how the current framework of social policy limits who can receive benefits and the burdens that it places on individuals: A man is living with his wife and they find it is time to bring home his mother to take care of her. At the same time, his sister is caught up in a lifestyle of drug addiction and is living on the streets so she gives her daughter to that same family to take care of. The working man and his wife cannot put either the niece or mother on their insurance. In order to do so they will need to file mountains of legal paperwork as guardians, power of attorney and adoption just to be able to participate in their medical care and help them.

In this hypothetical example everyone is related and still they cannot claim these persons as dependents for matters of insurance and other public policy issues. So the only institution to turn to is the government. That is what government is for, but in this case is it really necessary? If we have universal health care and other universal social care policies then perhaps this point would not need to be made. But currently the reality is that we live in a mixed tradition of public and private institutional support with regard to matters of insurance and medical care, not to mention issues of legal responsibility, social visitation and other public policy issues which are part of the current dialogue concerning definitions of family.

A family consists of people who love each other and have made a commitment to caring for each other. I believe it is time for our legislators and public policy administrators to acknowledge this simple truth. Families helping each other out is the most responsible agenda our society can promote. Narrowing the definition of family and excluding some means that the government must then bear the burden or even worse it means that some family members will not get any support or aid in their times of need. This is especially ironic at a time when we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on a war in Iraq which is using public dollars to destroy an entire infrastructure and government. Our actions in that country have resulted in the dissolution and separation of hundreds of thousands of families, some temporarily and some permanently through death.

That is why I believe it is time to reframe our definition of what a family means. A 'household' should be redefined to mean any individual who lives in a common dwelling or property and is actively participating in the caregiving of one or more individuals in that dwelling or property or is the recipient of such care, living in said dwelling or property. This reframework should permeate all levels of public policy from the granting of insurance to the bestowing of rights of visitation to the administration of the ceremony of marriage. We must mandate that employers and insurers offer all family members coverage, and that hospitals and legal authorities recognize the rights of family members to participate in all aspects of their common lives.

Common law family support should be the expectation and the societal norm. Regardless of what our religious tradition may be or lack thereof, the expectation of society should be kindness, charity, love and support. Giving to one another and nurturing is the normal, human thing to do. That is why it is time for our legislators in Washington DC to catch up with the reality of how people are living now and enact laws and public policy recommendations to relieve the burden on families who are already overburdened. As a candidate for federal office, I support the framework and intention of expanding the definition of what it means to be a family and will work to see that such legislation is brought into the public dialogue and made visible to the American people.

Independence Day

2008-07-05T13:44:00.000-07:00

July 4th marks the anniversary of the birth of this nation. On that day, the Declaration of Independence was signed by a cadre of men, who wrote the words ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’ That declaration was a living promise to future generations of certain fundamental, inalienable rights such as the right to privacy.

On this fourth of July let us never forget that the rights we have secured were won by the hard fought efforts of generations of tireless activists and that the Constitution of the United States is a living document, shaped and formed by the collective participation of millions of people in a constant dialogue.

Our country is not perfect. Far from it, our history is one of terrible oppression and thoughtless, inconsiderate discrimination. Too many a man has been sent unnecessarily to die in war. Too many died without freedom, without rights. The stain of our neglect and terror scars the Constitution and the legers of history.

In spite of this truth, the human spirit has prevailed more often than not in this country and people have continued to believe in the fundamental goodness of the national project we call our Constitution. That belief in the security and equality of the individual and the guarantee of rights is perhaps the greatest contributor to the slow victory of justice in America.

That guarantee of our rights ensures that no man or woman, no matter how powerful and influential, is permitted to permanently or decisively interfere with the fundamental rights and freedoms of any other. These are the rights we celebrate on Independence Day and the freedoms that have been won in the generations since our nation's birth.

These victories include the extension of the right to vote and the rights of citizenship to all members of our society. The articulation of individual rights and freedoms is the fruit of their efforts. These freedoms offer proof that our Constitution is a living document and that the will of the people can be expressed in the language of the nation, articulated as law and common practice.

These freedoms, which we hold so dear, were brought to realization through the spirit of individual liberty and collective responsibility. Through an acknowledgement of the humanity of each person, the fundamental value of humankind is acknowledged. By recognizing this value in the individual we have crafted a body of law to protect the rights of everyone.

The threats to the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and our fundamental rights and liberties is always present, both from without and from within. On this day of celebration of collective freedom, let us never hand over our rights and responsibilities to any executive or any legislator who will seek to compromise those rights in the name of security.

The generations before us have worked too hard and labored too long to hand over the right to privacy and the responsibility of the national defense to rogue administrators and legislators who would betray our trust as a country. We must ensure that the freedoms and rights that have been secured for us remain so for future generations.

So on this Independence Day let us remember that the articulation of rights does not secure those rights. Only a vigilant citizenry can ensure the security of those rights guaranteed on paper. Our Constitution is a living document, which is given meaning through our participation. Through our direct engagement in the experiment of democracy we truly give meaning to the freedoms we celebrate.

The Case for Impeachment

2008-07-02T06:12:00.000-07:00

George W Bush is perhaps the worst American president who has ever served. To this day it is a mystery to me how the man was able to gain the Republican nomination, steal the election, start two wars, get re-elected and then drag on a failed war for five years and drive the economy into the ground without getting impeached. Although the light is fading on the Presidency of Bush, it is not too late to impeach the man who lied to us about weapons of mass destruction. As of result of the President's deception, over four thousand American soldiers have died in Iraq and tens of thousands have been wounded, not to mention the one million or so Iraqis who have died directly or indirectly due to Bush's interference in their country.

The case for impeachment is strong, so strong that it has been supported by numerous Congressional representatives, most notably by Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio who introduced articles of impeachment in early June. Kucinich had the courage and the tenacity to say what needs to be said and to do what needs to be done. President Bush has violated the will of the people, but more importantly, he has violated the Constitution of the United States of America, a document that he was sworn to uphold and defend, and for this indiscretion President Bush deserves to be impeached.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made it clear when she was elected Speaker of the House that impeachment was not on the table, and she has been true to her word since that date, betraying the trust of the American people and showing her true colors as well as those of the Democratic party generally, except for a few brave individuals such as Kucinich. The irony is that the Democratic Party and the left would be stronger if they called the President to account for his actions. In any event, there are numerous candidates outside of the two party duopoly who support impeachment because we believe this should be a campaign issue. We feel strongly about our rights as Americans and do not believe that a corrupt administration can compromise those rights. When they try, we believe that it is time to call them to account.

Bush must be called to account for the lies he has made in order to manipulate the general public. Bush claimed that Saddam Hussein was an immediate threat to America but the truth is that we were a real threat to Iraq. His administration lied about the issue of significant quantities of uranium being brought into Iraq from Africa. He lied about the connections between 9/11 and Iraq, continuously misleading the American people into believing there was a relationship. Bush lied about Iraq and Al Qaeda, misleading the American people into believing there was a collaborative relationship between the two. The President lied about weapons of mass destruction, insisting that there was evidence which consisted mostly of forged documents. The United Nations found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction and intelligence services produced no credible information to support Bush's claim. As a result of these lies and misleading statements the United States was led into a war it could not win, spending hundreds of billions of dollars and causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

By supporting impeachment Kucinich has set in motion a process which calls to public light the terrible misdeeds of this administration. The tide of public opinion has turned against Bush and across the nation people are calling for impeachment. President Bush has condoned the use of torture on men, women and even boys in Iraq and at secret prisons around the world in the name of national security. He violated the constitution by denying habeas corpus and has called for domestic spying on Americans.

We can wait for the elections to remove Bush from office, but why wait until November? Indeed, although it is not a crime to be the worst President in the history of the United States, it is a crime to lie, mislead, deny constitutional rights, torture, spy and violate international law. There has never been a better case to impeach a sitting President than now. The people of Iraq, our soldiers abroad and ordinary Americans everywhere will all be better off once this criminal has been removed from office, and I say the sooner the better.

Just Say No to Domestic Spying

2008-06-28T11:44:00.000-07:00

Big brother is watching you and his name is AT&T. Sometimes he goes by the name of BellSouth and at other times he is known as AOL-Time-Warner. Big brother goes by a lot of names. He is listening to you while you talk and watching you while you type and everything you say could be recorded so he can look at it somewhere down the line. Now everyone knows that it is not polite to intrude on people in their private moments. The problem is that big brother doesn't seem to know that peeking into people's private communication is wrong and it should be illegal. Unfortunately President Bush wants to continue to grant immunity to telecommunications companies in the name of the so called 'war on terror' which in actuality is a war on the American people and the telecommunications infrastructure is the front line in the gradual diminishment of civil rights that Congress has permitted in recent years.

We need representatives in Washington DC who support protecting Americans instead of distrusting us. As a candidate for federal office I support legislation to abolish the Department of Homeland security, that Orwellian agency constructed in the days after 9-11, which has crafted the war on the American people and their rights since. I support the elimination of FISA loopholes and the closing of Guantanamo Bay and the return of all detainees to their countries of origin. I believe that the American people deserve full and open disclosure on all activities related to government spying conducted against her citizens. Finally, I support the elimination of discreet, undocumented funding of the Central Intelligence agency.

Our rights are not negotiable. Telecommunication companies have violated those rights and have broken the law in order to appease a corrupt and power hungry administration that is willing to throw out habeus corpus, the right to privacy and international law in a reckless drive down the road to never-never land. Corporations must be held accountable and the President and his cronies must be called to account for violating our basic constitutional rights. Unfortunately, Senator Obama has been a disappointment on this issue and has refused to honor his commitment to filibuster this legislation. As a result, we are once again adrift without a rudder, a captain, a ship or an engine, being dragged along by the tides of fear.

It is time to reject the efforts of George Bush and anyone else who wants to grant retroactive immunity to corporations that spy on Americans. Congress has proven itself to be too weak-kneed to stand up to the fear mongers, but there is a new line of candidates running for office who are not so willing to roll over and play dumb. Treason is not patriotic. We all know that the government spying on us is wrong, and that any agency or corporation that assists in breaking into our most intimate communications is not behaving in a democratic fashion. The new reality is that our privacy is being compromised until we roll back FISA protections and strip immunity for corporations that spy on Americans.

For more information on this issue please visit: http://www.usalone.com/no_following_orders.php

Now is the Time to Extend Unemployment Benefits

2008-06-23T20:38:00.000-07:00

America is in the midst of a recession largely attributable to the economic policies of the Bush administration and the Republican party. As a result of this recession, millions of hard working Americans have been put out of work. Almost every family in this country has been touched by the current recession. On top of this consumers are being forced to pay record high gas prices and hundreds of thousands of people have lost their homes due to foreclosure. Now is not the time to cut tax paying American citizens off of their unemployment benefits.

Since the beginning of this year nearly 325,000 people have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate is rising. As of May the unemployment rate stands at 5.5%, up nine percent just since April. With the cost of gas, food and medicine many families are suffering. As a candidate for federal office I support House Resolution 5749, the Emergency Extended Unemployment Compensation Act, which will provide an additional thirteen weeks of extended unemployment benefits in most states. This means that 3.8 million citizens will continue to receive benefits through March of 2009.

I fully support the intentions of this legislation and would support companion legislation in the US Senate if elected to public office. It is only the first step towards a clear path out of the current economic recession, but it is a sign to the American people that our representatives and those candidates who are running for office believe that the government is there to serve the people. We know that families are suffering right now under the high cost of food, medicine, fuel, housing and other basic goods.

The reason that we are in this economic crisis is clear. The Bush tax cuts which provided tax breaks for billionaires and Wall Street bailouts have broken the back of the American treasury. Hundreds of billions of dollars thrown down a hole in Iraq has not helped the situation any further and the mushrooming federal deficit, which currently stands at nine trillion dollars, have all played their role in the current situation. It is clear that what is needed are policies and legislation which supports working families and puts Americans to work.

Now is not the time to take away unemployment benefits for people who have worked hard and contributed. The cost of extended these benefits is just a sliver of the billions we are wasting on death and destruction in Iraq. Let's reinvest in America and let's start by investing in the American people. By doing so we will ensure a more secure and prosperous future for everyone.

For more information on HR 5749 please visit: http://acorn.org/?12383

Abstinence Only is Government Censorship

2008-06-18T05:47:00.000-07:00

According to a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at least one in four teenage girls nationwide have a sexually transmitted disease. Clearly abstinence only school programs do not deter young people from sexual activity, but in fact this direction actually deters young adults from access to information that they need to make responsible and safe choices. We must act immediately to withdraw funding for this program and allow teachers to present sensible sexual education curriculum.

As a candidate for federal office I believe that young people must be presented with all the facts available to them. Instead of relying on religious rhetoric and the value system of a fundamentalist minority, I believe that we must look clearly at human behavior as biological fact. The school system is not an avenue for proselytizing about various belief systems. Sexual activity is a fact of life, much like any other human activity and young people need to know the facts before it is too late.

Abstinence only until marriage curricula is censorship, pure and simple. Any school program that withholds scientifically valid information does not present young people with the full range of options they will actually face in life. This is a betrayal to the trust of our students who will carry the scars of misinformation with them their entire lives, both physically and psychologically. We must present them with all the information that they need to know at an appropriate age when they need to know it.

Seven years after abstinence only education was introduced into the school curriculum, many people are still not aware of the damaging affects that it is having on our young adults. The legislation uses the federal government to teach that abstinence is the only definite way to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy. Additionally the curriculum teaches that monogamous relationships within the context of marriage are the standard value system and anything else could be damaging, both psychologically and physically. School systems that have agreed to teach abstinence receive significant grants from the federal government via their state.

The problem with abstinence only education is that it isn't real. It isn't grounded in science or in fact. What we know is that the average teenager will become sexually active before they leave high school regardless of what the government tells them they should do. Educators who teach abstinence only know that it doesn't work but they teach it anyway. So what they are really teaching is morality, which is the whole point of the legislation.

Withholding information from young people can be harmful. What our high school and junior high students need is comprehensive sexual education classes that are presented the way that they were intended to be taught. Our young people are worth the investment and telling them the truth about sex is the best bet to minimize the impact of the choices they are going to make. By fully educating our students about the risks of STD's including HIV and the risk of pregnancy, and by presenting them with the range of contraception choices available to them along with the basic facts about human sexuality we are giving them the best tools to go into the world prepared.

By investing in comprehensive sexual education we can redirect the federal budget toward sensible priorities. The cost to taxpayers of abstinence only has been estimated to be as high as $500 million dollars when considering matching state funds. By eliminating abstinence only curricula we will also save public health dollars by providing reliable information which can help prevent costly misinformed decisions among sexually active teenagers. If elected to office I will work to see that Congressional appropriations regarding abstinence only education is brought before the public for hearings and debate and that the appropriations process does not automatically qualify for funding each year without review. It is the best decision for students and their future.

Let’s Keep Space for Peace

2008-06-12T07:24:00.000-07:00

In 1989 the world stood still as the Berlin Wall fell and massive protests erupted in the Soviet Union. The whole world was watching as ordinary Russian people lay down in front of tanks, risking their lives in the name of freedom. In the resulting months, dramatic changes redrew maps throughout Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. The new hopes of an entire generation were born and the US had won the cold war.

A generation later the United States is still fighting the cold war, drawing Europe into a dangerous new arms race. The National Missile Defense Program is quietly making its way through Congress generating funding, research and development dollars in order to ensure that Ronald Reagan's vision of the ultimate deterrent remains a fixed goal of national defense objectives. The NMD is a pork barrel project for defense contractors who just can't seem to find anything useful to do with their research facilities and our billions of taxpayer dollars. It seems the old axiom is true, cold warriors never die, they just fade away into the background and keep on making policy.

The NMD, otherwise known as Star Wars, involves the production of a new generation of weapons designed to shoot down nuclear weapons in outer space. As the thinking goes, this ‘defense shield’ would provide a deterrent to nuclear weapons and thus give the United States a strategic advantage against any enemy. There are several problems with the NMD, and the US Senate should not allocate one dollar in research and development for Star Wars. As a candidate for federal office I will vigorously fight any attempt to bring weapons into space or develop at Strategic Defense Initiative.

My reasons for opposing the NMD are as follows: First of all, the program violates international law. A key component of NMD involves deploying weapons in space in violation of international treaties signed by the United States and ratified by the United Nations banning weapons of mass destruction in space, the development of space for military purposes and the promotion of space for strategic national objectives. My second reason for objecting to military funding for NMD is that the project will further erode relationships between the United States and Europe and will force Russia and China to respond in kind with counter development and spark a new global arms race.

The plan for NMD also involves the installation of military bases across the planet and the development of an entire new generation of weapons. One of the first steps would be the creation of radar systems and bases for interceptor missiles in Eastern Europe. The people of Europe have spoken loudly and clearly and they do not want new US military bases on their soil. They do not want NMD technology or facilities and have protested against the involvement of their parliaments or the ratification of treaties of agreement between the US and various countries in Eastern Europe, notably the Czech Republic and Poland.

The gift of peace was ours for the taking. At the end of the cold war the it seemed like United States had won the peace. In spite of the extreme costs of detente and weapons development and massive military budgets, there was a possibility for a new vision for US foreign policy. Unfortunately our leaders have betrayed us and after eighteen years the pressure is building. The reality is that we won the war but lost the peace as our cold warrior administrators continued to push the buttons of foreign policy throughout successive presidential administrations.

It has been a long time coming, but it is still possible to win the peace we could have claimed nearly a generation ago. Defunding the National Missile Defense project would send a clear message to Eastern Europe, Russia and China that the United States does not intend to draw the world into another nuclear arms race. Instead of investing in war, let us invest in peace. We do not have any more nuclear superpowers threatening our imminent destruction. After eighteen years we are the only threat remaining to global security. It is time to take a step away from the nuclear precipice and toward real steps for peace by dismantling our weapons of mass destruction and honor our obligations as signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Close the School of the Americas

2008-06-06T05:08:00.000-07:00

The School of the Americas is a military training facility in Columbus, Georgia that trains military forces from Latin America in techniques of torture and counterinsurgency. This facility is taxpayer funded and has hosted more than sixty thousand soldiers since it was opened in 1946. The SOA, which was renamed a few years ago to the Western Hemispheric Institute for Security and Cooperation, is known around the world for the role that it has played as an institution for training soldiers in techniques of torture.

Soldiers who have attended the School of the Americas have been indicted and identified with brutal military repressions, targeted violence across Central America and South America. As a candidate for federal office, I support legislation to close the School of the Americas because graduates of the SOA have been involved in the violation of human rights.

There have been several efforts to raise awareness regarding the SOA over the past years, including the recently passed House Resolution 5658. The House Resolution, which was part of the National Defense Re-Authorization Act for 2009, requires that the names, rank, country of origin and dates of attendance be made public for graduates and instructors of the school.

Graduates of the SOA have been involved in crimes and atrocities across Latin America. Many of these individuals have been identified and we are about to learn the identities of hundreds of graduates who went on to rape, torture and even kill the thousands of people who were disappeared in Central America in the 1980's and beyond. The Pentagon is afraid when the leaders of these death squads and human rights abusers are made public, then the public may turn against the SOA/WHINSEC.

The fact of the matter is that the general public has been against the School of the Americas for years, ever since it was revealed that six Jesuit priests and their housekeeper and her daughter were brutally murdered by graduates of the SOA. Then we learned that several nuns who were working in Central America were brutally raped and murdered by graduates of the SOA. Then the public learned that an entire village of 900 civilians was massacred by death squads trained in Columbus, Georgia. The public was outraged, and every year now, more than 20,000 people come to the gates of Fort Benning in November to call for Congress to close the School of the Assassins.

At a time when the United States is having serious problems with credibility in the eyes of the international community, closing the SOA/WHINSEC would go a long way toward restoring trust, security and cooperation around the world. The army, elected officials and the general public know that graduates of the SOA have included some of the worst human rights abusers in the global South. Closing this institution would send a clear message to Latin America and to our critics around the world that we are serious about restoring our international reputation.

Cuba Libre

2008-06-03T07:59:00.001-07:00

There is a country just ninety miles from the shores of the United States that I have never been to. The Republic of Cuba is the home of my grandmother and countless uncles, aunts and cousins scattered throughout Florida and points north. I am not allowed to travel to Cuba because there is an economic embargo on that country which has been in place for almost fifty years. If I do travel to Cuba I risk being fined $7,500 by my government for stepping feet on the native soil of my relations.

Cuba is about the size of my own state of Tennessee and at eleven million people it is close in terms of population. Originally a Spanish colony, Cuba declared its independence in 1868. In 1959 there was a popular revolution that put Fidel Castro into power and Cuba has been a socialist country since that date. The people of Cuba come from a melting pot of cultures and traditions. My own family was typical of many European immigrants who came to this area in the nineteenth century. Looking for opportunities and better living conditions abroad, they immigrated to the new world with hopes and dreams.

In the United States, there is a policy that governs the behavior of our country toward all matters hemispheric. It is called the Monroe Doctrine and what it means is that the US is the supreme power, the law of the land, and anyone in this hemisphere who thinks otherwise will learn to behave. This is the essence of the current embargo on Cuba, which began last century during the Kennedy administration. Cuba has always been subject to the Monroe Doctrine and has always suffered the impact of neo-colonial expressions of power by the US and corporate interests, along with most of the Caribbean and Latin America,.

Although the US assisted Cuba in gaining its freedom from Spain in 1902, the reality was that Cuba was trading Spain for America which invested heavily in Cuban production, especially in the raw products of sugar and tobacco. US companies owned most of the Cuban sugar industry and held majority control in most Cuban industries. By 1959, Cuba was known as a playground for the rich, where the mob could operate without interference and women were for sale to the highest bidders. Drugs flowed freely through Cuba and most of the population lived in poverty and ignorance.

The Cuban revolution was a small miracle in Western history. A band of twenty or so revolutionaries taking on an entire army, building resistance and popular support through a guerilla movement in the jungle mountains and eventually taking the entire country and pushing out the corporate and military interests of the most powerful nation on earth. They instituted a series of land reforms, housing reforms, education reforms and health reforms. Today the Cuban people are definitely better educated than they were before the revolution. They have universal health care in Cuba today and the tools of industry are in the hands of the government and not in the hands of foreign investment firms.

Although the revolution did eventually raise the standard of living of the entire population, Cuba is a mixed success and the people have paid a heavy price. I have met many people who have fled from Cuba. My own extended family left Cuba in the 1960's when conditions were clearly on the way downhill. Cubans have been imprisoned for crimes against the revolution such as practicing religious beliefs, criticizing the government or attempting to leave the country. The bitter truth of a communist revolution is that it is a boring dictatorship. The claims of revolutionary politics are fantastical and the denial of individual liberty is too great a price to pay. Clipping the wings of freedom in the name of the people is just an abuse of state power and the record of history shows the results.

It is time to lift the economic embargo on Cuba. The United States has no business imposing its collective will on an entire country. The embargo has created victims of two generations of Cubans and has only served to reinforce the power of the dictatorship and consolidation of a failing government. What is needed is fair and open trade between the United States and Cuba and retention of the positive aspects of the revolution such as universal health care, education and land reform. We can learn a lot from the people of Cuba such as how to live with less and how to give our people more, and the Cuban people can benefit from trade relations with the United States.

The US embargo of Cuba is a relic of the cold war era, but it is in place because of the deeper history of US relations to Latin America and the Caribbean. The Cuban people have been defiant in the face of a fifty year embargo and have struggled to survive but they have persisted. The embargo has been condemned by leaders as diverse as George P. Shultz, Pope John Paul II and the United Nations, which has declared that the embargo is a violation of international law. As a candidate for federal office, I believe that it is time to allow Americans to travel freely to Cuba without the threat civil penalties and fines and I believe that it is time to end the economic and trade embargo on Cuba. It's the right thing to do, for us and for them.

Not One More Child Killed

2008-05-30T06:37:00.000-07:00

There is a bill in the US Senate right now that deserves our support. Senate Bill 594, the Cluster Munitions Civilian Protection Act, currently has twenty-one sponsors in the Senate. This bill would ban the use of cluster bombs, which injure thousands of innocent people each year. Unfortunately the Pentagon and Department of Defense officials have fought the effort to outlaw these weapons. Their reasoning is difficult to understand given the sobering reality that almost thirty percent of the bomblets released in each bomb fail to explode initially, leaving a deadly legacy for future generations of children to discover. The Middle East is filled with children who have lost arms and legs to unexploded cluster bombs. This is not the legacy of freedom and democracy we wish to leave the people of Iraq.

As a candidate for federal office, I support passage of Senate Bill 594 and would make this a priority if elected to office. In the meantime, it is important to pressure the US Senate to pass this bill now, before one more innocent child is killed or maimed for life due to our reckless foreign policy. On the international level, some eighty-two nations have supported resolutions to ban the use of cluster bombs. The United States still insists on the effectiveness of these weapons and refuses to join the international movement to ban this weapon, in spite of the fact that cluster bombs are one of the most deadly weapons facing our own troops. Unexploded bomblets remain a real threat to US troops long after they have been dropped on their intended targets.

Although they are a threat to our soldiers serving overseas, the biggest threat that cluster bombs pose is to civilians who remain in the areas of conflict long after the fighting has subsided. Unexploded cluster bombs scatter across large tracts of land, turning the areas bombed into defacto land mine zones. According to the American Friends Service Committee, ninety eight percent of the casualties of cluster bombs have been civilians. The United States manufactures these weapons and private manufacturing companies profit from the use of these weapons, which are largely inaccurate and indiscriminate in whom they kill. The time has come for the United States to join the international community in banning these inhumane weapons.

Senate Bill 594 would prevent the US military from using cluster bombs on civilian populations and it would prevent the export of cluster bombs for use in residential areas. Finally the bill would restrict all use and export of cluster bombs by the government. This bill would go a long way toward preventing unintended deaths and injuries to children and adults. The reality of cluster bombs is that long after the war is over, non-combatants are still being killed because of our current policies. In Lebanon, for instance, US produced cluster bombs were used by Israel in 2006. These bombs killed 285 people during the conflict, which ended that same year. In the two years since that time an additional 250 people have been killed in Lebanon by unexploded cluster bombs, nearly as many as were killed during the conflict itself. Additionally, there remains an estimated one million unexploded US produced cluster bombs, which continue to pose a threat to civilians in Lebanon.

Now is the time for he United States to begin to work to restore the trust of the international community. We must withdraw our troops from areas of occupation, and we need to remove our military forces from Iraq. We should clean up the mess that we have made of that country, including clearing landmines and civilian neighborhoods, which have been contaminated with unexploded cluster bombs and depleted uranium. Passage of Senate Bill 594 will send a clear message to the people of Iraq and the surrounding region that we really do care about international human rights and the well being of their children.

to learn more about the campaign to stop cluster bombs visit:

http://www.fcnl.org/weapons/clusterlanding/clusters_landing9.htm

http://www.clusterprocess.org/

In Memory of One Million Iraqi Dead

2008-05-26T11:57:00.001-07:00

By: Chris Lugo
In 2006, the Lancet did a scientific study in which they estimated that the number of Iraqis who have died since the beginning of the US occupation in 2003 was greater than 600,000 people. This figure included the results of sectarian violence, revenge killings, suicide bombings and deaths at the hands of soldiers and occupying forces. That number alone is a staggering figure, but now, only two years later the estimate of dead has increased to almost one million. On this Memorial Day, as we gather to remember our loved ones who have died in war let us include the men, women and children who have died in Iraq.

In a recent survey conducted in Iraq by Opinion Research Business it was found that twenty percent of Iraqi households had at least one family member who had died in their family as a result of the conflict, rather than due to natural occurrences. In addition to the grief and loss caused by these deaths, many Iraqi households have also lost their primary source of support as men have been killed, recruited into militias, imprisoned or have fled Iraq. Now is the time to call for an international war crimes tribunal against the Bush administration for crimes against humanity.

The West does not receive much information about real conditions on the ground in Iraq. Ever since the beginning of the occupation, news and information has been heavily censored and as a result the actual conditions of the Iraqi people is difficult to gauge. The Pentagon has stopped counting the numbers of civilians killed in battle operations and does not keep track of individuals killed as a result of sectarian violence, suicide bombings, revenge killings or disappearances.

What we do know about Iraq is terrifying. Iraq is a country that is occupied by nearly three hundred thousands soldiers and private contractors. Two million Iraqis have fled the country, seeking asylum in neighboring countries since the war began. At least 42,000 Iraqi men have been detained in military prisons operated by the United States under suspicion of being insurgents. We do not know how many of those men have been release, how many have been tortured and how many have died. Normal law does not exist in Iraq. The military can enter any household at any time for any reason. Men can be detained on the street and held in custody without notice to extended family. Private security contractors are given a license to kill with immunity.

One million Iraqi civilians have died as a result of this occupation. On this Memorial Day, let us remember the dead. Regardless of whether they were killed in the line of duty or are victims of war, each one has a name, a mother, a history, and an identity. These men, women and children did not deserve what was done in the name of freedom and democracy. Only we have the power to stop this senseless violence. We must call on Congress to bring the troops home now, and in November we must sweep out the Bush administration and every member of the House and Senate who voted for war.

Saddam Hussein was brought before a court and tried for the massacres that he committed, yet there has been no such human rights tribunal to try President Bush for crimes against humanity. Bush continues to insist on the righteousness of his cause, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. The President be must called to account for his reckless decision which has destroyed an entire nation and resulted in so much death and suffering. On this Memorial Day, let us learn from the lessons of the past and make choices that will insure peace and justice for future generations.

to learn more about Iraqi civilian deaths please visit:

www.iraqbodycount.org
www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/19/iraq

What Has He Done For You Lately?

2008-05-23T05:18:00.000-07:00

We all know that Lamar Alexander is a fixture in Washington DC politics, but what has he done for you lately? In a recent interview with the Cookeville Herald Citizen, Senator Lamar Alexander said that we are not in a recession in Tennessee. He said that recession is "a technical word" and that technically we are not in a recession. Speaking to the graduating class of Tennessee Tech Alexander said that there are some big challenges ahead but that we are currently only in an "economic slowdown." Alexander said that something needs to be done but I am wondering what the good Senator from Tennessee intends to do. If you examine his voting record, it is clear that the policy decisions that Alexander has favored are part of the reason we are in this recession in the first place.

For starters, let's look at the Senator's record on the war in Iraq. The war, which has cost us some $700 billion dollars and has cost the state of Tennessee directly some ten billion dollars in taxpayer expenditures for the war effort, means that there are less dollars available in the federal budget for education and alternative energy development and it means that there is more federal debt. Alexander voted for the original war and since then he has voted for every expenditure that has come before the Senate to extend funding for the war. He has voted against pulling troops out of Iraq when the opportunity has arisen.

Lamar has voted for the most destabilizing foreign policy expenditure in recent memory. Experts agree that the biggest reason for high oil prices in the global market is because of instability and uncertainty in the Middle East. Investor confidence has been greatly shaken by US activities in the Middle East and has driven down the value of the dollar in relation to other major international currencies. As a candidate for federal office, I support an immediate withdrawal of US armed forces from Iraq. I have spoken out clearly and directly on the issue of the war and my opposition to the current misadventure. If we had not invaded Iraq, the international marketplace would have greater confidence in the American economy and the global markets would not be reacting with so much fear and uncertainty to current market conditions.

Now let's look at taxes. Senator Alexander supports a flat income tax. He supports reducing the tax rates that wealthy people pay to 15% while at the same time he supports expensive, taxpayer funded military ventures. A flat income tax means that rich people will pay less and poor people will pay more. Flat taxes are already inherently unequal in terms of revenue and the response of a flat tax by state and local municipalities will be to simply increase sales taxes and other income generating revenues which will disproportionately affect the poor. Lamar also voted to cut taxes on capital gains and dividends. Lamar has made it clear where his interests lay, and it isn't with the working people of this country.

The record of Senator Alexander’s votes means we have a higher federal deficit because Lamar doesn't believe that rich people should pay their fair share. It also means less opportunity for working class people to get ahead which only drives them further into poverty. As a candidate for federal office, I believe that we need to roll back the Bush tax cuts. Corporations and the wealthy need to pay their fair share. They are members of this country, the same as everyone else. It is time to restore progressive taxation as a national policy.

Now let's look at Alexander's record with regard to working people. I've already talked about how a flat tax will end up costing working people more money in the long run. Less federal revenue means more toll roads, privatization of public services and higher local, municipal and state taxes to pick up the extra needed revenue. These aspects alone will reduce the standard of living for the middle class, but if we continue to support the policies of Alexander, we will find that standard of living even further eroded.

Alexander has supported fundamental dismantling of one of the most important social safety nets our country has created, the Social Security System. Now why Alexander would be against a federal program that provides support and resources to our senior citizens is beyond me, but if it is any indication of where he stands, Lamar was given a big fat zero by the Alliance for Retired Americans for his anti-senior voting record. Social Security works, and in spite of the Republican scare tactics, the program isn't going broke. If we were to privatize social security, then there is a guarantee that the poorest Americans will have nothing when they retire and the whole purpose of the program will have been rendered meaningless. As a candidate for federal office I fully support the Social Security program and commend it as one of the most successful government programs of the twentieth century for ensuring quality of life into old age.

There are so many other ways that we could look at Alexander's record which show that he votes against the interests of working people and for the interests of the wealthy and corporations. Since Tennessee is mostly made up of working people, I wonder who Alexander's decisions are going to work for. It is time for progressive leadership in Tennessee. Time to restore the minimum wage to a living wage with annual increases to adjust for cost of living. It is time to support universal single payer health care to ensure that all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care and it is time to use the federal government as an agency for lifting up working people rather than letting the market drag them down.

We can make it out of this recession and make this country into a nation that works for everyone, but we have to follow sound federal policies in order to make this a reality. It is time to restore progressive taxation as a national policy and ask the wealthy and corporations to pay their fair share. It is time to strike down anti-union legislation that increases profits for investors by reducing labor costs, shipping jobs overseas and turning our manufacturing base into a Walmart service economy. It is time to make sure that education is funded as a priority and defense is secondary in terms of budget allocation to the health and well-being of children and families. As a candidate for the US Senate in Tennessee I believe that these are the policies that will insure a modest national prosperity for all.

Now Is the Time to Stop Funding the War

2008-05-20T01:00:00.000-07:00

This year, the United States government is scheduled to spend more than $622 billion dollars on the military budget, which includes an additional $171 billion dollars for the occupation of Iraq. In comparison, the US will only spend $56 billion dollars this year on education and only $3.4 billion on energy development. At the current rate of spending it will take 183 years of alternative energy development to match one year of spending on the war in Iraq, and eleven years of funding education for our children will still not match even one year of spending on this war. We have seriously misplaced our priorities, and it driving us further into debt, an estimated $9.357 trillion dollars this year.

The US Senate has an opportunity to begin to turn the clock backwards this week, in the name of our children and the future of our country. Last week the House passed a bill which would create a timetable for withdrawing US troops from Iraq, limit the ability of the CIA to torture prisoners and increase domestic spending on budgetary priorities that need our attention here at home such as universal health care, which would cost an estimated $169 billion dollars to provide coverage to the remaining 47 million Americans who currently lack health care coverage. For an additional $58 billion dollars we could provide access to universal higher education for all students who want to go to college.

The Democrats are on a swing, and that is better than having the Republicans at bat, but the truth is that they are just more graceful at striking out. The Senate is considering legislation that would add an additional $168 billion dollars to the US federal debt to fund an additional year of bombers, tanks, military bases, cluster bombs, hummers, and blackhawk helicopters for the military in Iraq. What we need to do in the US Senate is stop funding for the war in Iraq right now. As a candidate for federal office I would make it my first priority to stop all military funding for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Right now ever American in this country holds a liability of $30,777 which we owe to various banks, investment firms and foreign governments who have bought the promisory notes which our government has issued with the promise of payback at some future date. Over fifty percent of that debt is owed specifically on military spending for the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, the first war in Iraq, military expenditures in over 140 countries and even debt that is owed on the wars in Vietnam and Korea that have not yet been fully paid. Our debt load is enormous and it is the symbolic albatross around the neck of our children.

As long as we continue to vote for Democrats and Republicans who are bought and paid for by lobbyists, corporations and country clubs we will continue to get what they pay for which is more war, more military spending, higher gas prices and declining competitiveness in the global market place. I urge you to write to your Senator and tell them to vote no on more money for war and in November to vote for candidates who care more about education and health care than Halliburton and warfare. In Tennessee, the choice is clear. You can vote for the Republican, Senator Lamar Alexander who will spend another $168 billion dollars of your children's future, or you can vote for the Democrats, who have funded the war to the tune of some $700 billion dollars to date, or you can vote for peace by supporting candidates who will stop funding the war and bring the troops home now.

Restoring Credibility Through International Cooperation

2008-05-19T01:00:00.000-07:00

When I was a senior in high school I participated in the model united nations program. As thousands of students do each year, I chose a country to represent as part of the student program. In my case I chose Norway, the home of my mother's ancestors. I was very excited to receive mailings from the Norwegian embassy, which I diligently researched in order to accurately represent my country of choice. Sitting in our high school library we passed resolutions to abide by strategic arms control and non-proliferation issues.

It has been more than twenty years since I participated in that program as a high school student, and in that time a lot has changed in the world. The cold war ended with the fall of communism in eastern Europe, the economic engines of southeast Asia and China have changed the playing field in global politics, free trade agreements have devastated the American economy and global awareness has become focused on the dangers of greenhouse gas warming of the planet.

Some things stay the same though, from one decade to the next. Men and women still fall in love, the birds sing and the bees buzz, the rain falls and the wind blows, and the United States fails to pay its dues to the United Nations, year after year, to the tune of some $2.8 billion dollars. According to the United Nation Association of the USA, the U.S. owed $633 million in arrears to UN peacekeeping alone and this number is estimated to increase by between $250 million to $1 billion over the course of 2008.

The right wing yak machine loves to discuss the ineffectiveness of the United Nations on talk radio. Day after day, week after week, the public is bombarded by arguments against international cooperation and peacemaking. In the meantime, the Bush administration follows a unilateral approach with regards to foreign policy. As a result of these twin towers of ignorance and power, the United States is now perceived internationally as a rogue superpower, willing and able to ignore international agreements and national sovereignty in the name of fanatical patriotism and war profiteering.

The United States still has a role to play in the United Nations, but only if we elect representatives who will respect the historic role that the UN plays as an agency of first resort for all agreements international. Whether it is peacekeeping, refugee assistance, development, food aide, nutrition, global health, disarmament, weapons inspection, disease prevention, global education or family planning, there is a UN program available to deal with that situation. The United Nations is an integral element of global peacemaking and development.

As a candidate for federal office I support full funding of the United Nations and associated programs. I believe this is the right thing to do, not just for the international community, but also for the United States. I firmly believe that the way to restore US credibility in the international community is by fully paying our dues and supporting the UN in their role as an agency of international cooperation.

Click Here for New Campaign Video

Workers Rights Are Human Rights

2008-05-13T01:00:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

We use them all the time - our firefighters, police offices and emergency medical service personnel. Hardly a day goes by that we don't come into contact either directly or indirectly with these hard working public servants. When we have traffic accidents or emergencies at home or at work these public servants are the first on the scene in our communities. Often risking their own safety in order to serve the public good, these employees of our cities, states and municipalities deserve to have collective bargaining rights.

The problem is that tens of thousands of these public safety officers do not have the right to negotiate with their employers, often leaving our firefighters, police officers and emergency medical personnel without a voice at work. There is a remedy to this situation - it is called the Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act, or Senate Bill 2123. This bill would go a long way toward remedying a situation that has become unacceptable. It would allow public safety officers the collective bargaining rights they deserve, including the right of public safety officers to bargain over wages, hours and working conditions.

The bill would also provide a dispute resolution mechanism for when there is not agreement between management and labor and it would provide the enforcement of contracts through state courts. The problem is that there are many states that do not offer our public safety personnel minimum bargaining rights. In these states it is very difficult for public servants to organize and ultimately we pay the price. A workforce that does not have the right to organize is less productive and has lower self-esteem on the job.

Our public safety is worth the investment. As a candidate for the US Senate I do not believe we should cut corners when it comes to the needs of our public servants. That is why I support Senate Bill 2123 and would work to pass it into law if elected to the US Senate. This bill already has broad bipartisan support and its companion bill was passed in the US House recently. We owe it to our public safety employees to ensure that they have collective bargaining rights. So let's give them the voice that they deserve.

for more information please visit www.AmericanRightsatWork.org

Americans Need Real Solutions to the Housing Crisis

2008-05-12T01:00:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

America faces a housing crisis that it has not seen the likes of since the great depression. Hundreds of thousands of families have lost their homes due to the mortgage crisis in the past year and more are at risk if we don't act now. That is why the US Senate must support some version of the Foreclosure Prevention Act, which passed this past week in the US House. This legislation, which is on its way to the Senate next week, has been threatened with veto by President Bush.

As usual, the President is wrong. The President has said that he would veto the legislation if it comes to his desk because he doesn't believe that certain types of people should be rewarded for their bad decisions. What the President means is that poor people shouldn't be protected from predatory lenders and that the government shouldn't have any regulatory responsibilities when it comes to mortgage lenders.

The fact is that this housing crisis could have been avoided. It is the result of twenty-five years of federal deregulation across the board combined with a speculative investment industry gone haywire. A rational person would conclude that after seeing so many foreclosures, maybe there is something wrong with the system. But when it comes to the role of the free market and the responsibilities of the government to legislate for the common good, the Republicans just don't get it. Their belief is that the free market is always the best solution to every problem. Just this week, House Representative Marcia Blackburn of Tennessee said that the foreclosure legislation would "provide a safety net for irresponsibility."

Tennessee's Republican constituency wants to live in the good old days when the poor people knew their place and didn't try to do anything irresponsible like own a home or expect a living wage. Their response to this legislation clearly shows the misdirection of the Bush administration and his Republican supporters. In contrast to that is the message of the progressive left in this country, which has real solutions to the housing crisis, some of which are contained in the legislation currently making its way to the US Senate and some of which is not included. As Americans on the verge of a grave financial crisis, it is important to get a grip on why we are in this situation. It is in large part due to the deregulatory nature of federal policy, which has been encouraged by twenty-five years of conservative and neoliberal administrations.

In a deregulated free market without proper government oversight, poor people are victimized by predatory lenders and cannot count on the government to provide regulatory oversight. This is at the root of the mortgage crisis and the federal government has an ethical responsibility to step in now and attempt to remedy the damage that it could have avoided by placing stricter limits on what lenders can and cannot do in order to get a poor person to sign on to a mortgage.

But in order to really address the root of the housing crisis, the federal government must take steps to address the root causes of poverty, unemployment, low wages and homeless in America. We must take steps now to raise the federal minimum wage to a living wage, which is about $10.50 an hour plus benefits. We must invest in job training and invest in our education system to ensure that all Americans have a chance to attend college. We must invest in affordable housing for all Americans. Finally, we need to invest in quality, affordable, single payer health care.

I believe that we can build a community where all Americans can live with hope. If we stop investing hundreds of billions of dollars on war and violence and invest in our domestic infrastructure, we can begin to rebuild this country. We must begin by paying Americans a wage that a family can reasonably expect to live on. We must ask those who have received the most benefit from our system to give the most by rolling back the Bush tax cuts. We must use the government as an agency of good and regulate the more ruthless elements of a free market. If we fail then we must ensure that the government is there, as a safety net, to make sure that no one falls through the cracks.

Green Party of Tennessee Nominates Lugo for Senate

2008-05-07T04:33:00.000-07:00

Nashville, TN: The Green Party of Tennessee has nominated Chris Lugo as their candidate for US Senate in Tennessee this year at their state nominating convention in Nashville held Saturday. Lugo said that he was excited to be representing the most progressive political party in the state of Tennessee, "The Green Party is the most progressive party in the state, and I am glad to be representing them as a candidate for federal office. My views about the environment, the war, health care and education are highly compatible with the ten key values of the Green Party. I hope to represent them well as a candidate and to promote the cause of peace through my campaign."

Lugo had originally been seeking the Democratic nomination in January and was the first to register with the state, but then dropped out of the Democratic nominating process in March, citing strong differences in basic values, "Originally I had considered running as a Democrat. There was no one running because the Governor had scared off all of the front-runners and I felt like this was a good opportunity to promote the peace issue, which I have been advocating for since the spring of 2002. But after actively campaigning as a Democrat for several months I got the sense that the Democrats and myself were not on the same page. I wish the Democrats well and I hope that they come up with a clear anti-war policy this year."

The Green Party has had a long history as an advocate for peace and justice and has issued numerous releases opposing the war in Iraq as well as US intervention in Afghanistan and has condemned the detention of prisoners of war at Guantanamo Bay and has spoken out clearly against torture, "The Green Party is really the conscience of this country. They have been working for peace and against war for a long time now. The Democrats voted for the war in Iraq and have voted for every funding appropriation that has come to the Senate since that day."

The US Senate is currently considering extending funding for the war in Iraq with another appropriation of $178 billion dollars for the ongoing occupation of Iraq, "The democrats are dragging their feet on this one and they have been so disappointing since they came to power in 2006. I am glad that they are calling for a troop withdrawal as part of their proposal, but the fact is they are going to vote for spending for billions more for the war. This is the Democrats bait and switch and it isn't the first time they have called for troop withdrawals sometime down the road while voting to spend billions more for war right now."

The Green Party has also been the strong party on environmental issues for over twenty five years, having brought the issues of global warming, public transportation, alternative energy, the oil crisis, the food crisis, corporate agribusiness and species extinction to the public's attention long before being Green was considered fashionable. "Nowadays we have Green Drinks and Green commerce and Carbon credits and people are taking global warming seriously. It looks like everyone is going Green and we have been doing it for over twenty-five years. We are the Green Party and the public is going to need the collective wisdom that this party has developed from its twenty five year commitment to environmental sustainability."

Lugo favors weaning the public off of oil and moving toward a sustainable energy infrastructure. "If you look at my platform you will see that I have been talking about alternatives to oil since I began this campaign. It is clear that the current oil crisis is being driven by tensions in the Middle east and investment speculation in energy commodities. I support legislation to require that big oil begin to invest in sustainable energy. The billions of dollars that are currently being driven into the pockets of investors needs to go into research and development to find alternatives to oil and coal."

The Green Party of Tennessee, which held its nominating convention in Nashville on Saturday, also endorsed John Miglietta, an Associate Professor of Political Science at Tennessee State University, as their candidate for the Fifth Congressional District. Miglietta, who is an officer with the Green Party of Middle Tennessee, will be challenging Jim Cooper for the House Seat, which covers most of Davidson County and the surrounding area. "I am happy to have John as a running mate and will be actively campaigning with him when I am in the middle Tennessee area. I also hope to debate the candidates for US Senate who are running this year, including Libertarian candidate Daniel Lewis, Republican incumbent Lamar Alexander and other candidates on the ballot. I believe the voters deserve the opportunity to hear from all the voices in the US Senate race this year and hope the press and civic organizations will allow the opportunity for democracy to be practiced as it was intended."

Chris Lugo will be on the ballot on November 4th, 2008 in the US Senate general election in Tennessee. For more information please visit www.chris4senate.us

There Is Power in a Union

2008-05-03T01:00:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

May 1st marks the international worker's holiday known as May Day, which commemorates the fight for the eight-hour work day. The day was chosen in memory of the Haymarket incident in Chicago in 1886 to honor the struggles of striking workers and the very real threats to their health, safety and even lives that workers have undertake when choosing to exercise the right to organize and form unions.

The right to organize and join a union is a fundamental right, which must be preserved and maintained if we are to keep our nation strong. Unions built this nation and built the standard of living that all Americans today enjoy. With the help of trade unions in the United States, workers were able to gain new rights such as the forty-hour work week, worker's pensions, compensation for injury obtained on the job, and living wages.

Without unions we would look more like the developing world, where workers have few rights, face hazardous job conditions and receive little compensation for their employment. We would not have the strength and innovation that our economy has without the contribution of our workers and we would not have a healthy and inspired workforce without our unions.

Unfortunately union membership rests at 18% of the current labor force, making unions seemingly irrelevant to a vast majority of the workforce. The reasons for this trend, which is historical and long term, are complex. Union membership has declined from its historical highs during the middle of the twentieth century. As workers transitioned out of factory blue collar jobs into the corporate work force union membership was seen as a product of a bygone era, not useful in the corporate culture most middle class workers found themselves in during the post-war era.

In addition to the worker transition from the factory to the boardroom, union-busting strategies became more sophisticated and more pressing. Unions have been painted with a broad brush by the right wing propaganda mill as corrupt, a danger to the business climate, a threat to corporate profits, and a danger to international competitiveness. The trend in the free trade era has been a race to the bottom for wages, labor costs and worker health and safety conditions.

The free trade agreements of the 1980's and 1990's have ensured that an entire generation of Americans will once again have to fight for their rights if they want to have decent working conditions. The same is true of the working class of the developing world, who have been impacted by the same development trends which have affected American workers.

That is why unions matter. They matter because the fundamental reality of the working class is that corporations will always seek to maximize profits. The investing class will always seek the highest profit possible for their investors, and they will always seek to reduce labor costs, which are usually their biggest expenditure. Whether it is exporting hi-tech jobs to India or importing sub-standard goods from sweatshops in China or encouraging low wage immigrant workers to compete with trade jobs in the construction industry, the strategy is the same around the globe.

Unions represent working class solidarity. Regardless of whether you work in a corporate office or a factory or on a farm, there is a union for you. Unions are good not just for workers but they are also good for investors. Unions build strength and pride in a workplace and ensure that workers have a sense of safety and security in their occupation.

As a candidate for federal office I support the right of workers to organize in all occupations. I support the increase of the minimum wage to at least $10.50 an hour plus benefits. I support universal single payer health care for all Americans. I support the withdrawal of the United States from Treaties of Obligation such as NAFTA, CAFTA and the FTAA, which have driven down wages around the world while boosting corporate profits. I support full funding for government agencies designed to protect worker's health and safety.

It has been a long time since those workers stood in the streets of Chicago organizing for basic rights. History has shown us that the right to organize and form unions lifts the boat of all Americans. Unions are a win-win strategy for workers and managers. With unions we have better working conditions, better health and safety conditions, better wages for our workers and increased profits for investors. So let's make America strong and support the right to organize for all Americans.

Global Ghost Town: Oil Crisis Requires New Vision

2008-04-30T01:00:00.000-07:00

There is a crisis happening on a global scale, and we here in the United States of America have a moral responsibility to take action to help alleviate global food prices and ensure that millions of people do not suffer the ill effects of hunger and possibly even starvation. We are all complaining about the high cost of oil these days and how it is impinging on our budget, but in the developing world this is having extreme consequences. The stark reality is that three billion people on the planet earth live on less than $2 a day, and a good portion of that money goes specifically to the purchase of basic food grains to survive. As a result of the skyrocketing price of oil, the price of food grains has risen due to commercial production costs and transportation to as much as $800 a ton for rice which has led to food riots in the developing world.

The reasons for high oil prices are complex, and due to many factors, but we can take steps now to deal with the global oil crisis and help people in the developing world avoid a worsening food crisis. One of the principal factors in the current oil crisis is directly related to the US invasion of Iraq. The war in Iraq, which administration officials believed would lead to democracy and stability has instead resulted in civil war and prolonged military expenditures. The financial uncertainty in the marketplace regarding the instability in the middle east has driven oil prices even higher and the worsening Federal debt, greatly impacted by the hundreds of billions of unpaid dollars committed to the war effort has made the dollar less attractive to global investors, driving down the value of the dollar in relation to global currencies and discouraging investment.

With President Bush refusing to reduce troop commitments below 140,000 and Congress seemingly unable to limit the power of the executive branch to spend money we do not have on a war we do not need, the global markets are losing faith in the security of the dollar and the American economy generally. This situation has been further complicated by the credit crisis which has resulted in hundreds of thousands of foreclosures and displaced as many Americans who are having to scramble for someplace to live. The credit crisis, which was permitted to go on for far too long due to the lack of oversight and failure to enact basic regulatory responsibilities, is another factor contributing to the weakening American dollar globally and lack of faith in the American economy generally.

Then there is the lack of any long-term vision or reasonable central planning in regard to domestic infrastructure and planning for the utilization of limited resources. This is a long-term problem, which is fundamentally an aspect of free trade policies and decades of deregulation and faith in a free market policy to solve all problems. In order to get a grip on the reality of an entire domestic economy that has been oriented toward free market economics imagine the situation of a western gold mining town in the nineteenth century. Many of these boom and bust economies were based on the immediate availability of a limited resource which brought immediate corporate investment, short term economic gain and left long term environmental disasters. In addition, when the gold ran out, almost every gold mining town became a ghost town.

This is the reality of the current oil economy. Regardless of how you look at it is that we are investing in a short-term resource which took millions of years to develop and which we are now burning through in less than a century. If we would like to avoid looking like a global ghost town we must begin to take realistic steps now. The federal government is the only collective entity, which has the infrastructure and collective wisdom to deal with this looming crisis for which we have not to this date made any effective steps toward resolving.

As a candidate for federal office I support investment in the alternative energy infrastructure. We have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in a war we cannot win and in the meantime oil corporations are making record profits at the expense of the working people in this country. I say let's take away their profits by investing in something they cannot profit from. The sun is an unlimited source of energy and the wind is always blowing. Why are we letting the oil companies and their investors get rich while at the same time we are warming the earth with devastating consequences? It is because we have continued to let the powers that be make decisions in Washington which are always in the interest of free market profits without consequences. What we need is to reign in the free market ideology which has driven us to this precipice and begin to use the long term wisdom of a federal government that is looking out for the basic needs of working class people, the environment and the health and well being of everyone on this planet.

When we begin to treat the oil crisis like the problem that it really is and begin to take realistic steps to find ways to power our automobiles, heat our homes, produce our food and generate our electricity the people of the developing world will thank us. We have had one of the strongest economies in the world and we are resourceful and ingenious nation, always up for the challenges that face us. I have faith that we can make the right decisions, but we must take the right steps. We must move away from a free market ideology with respect to energy and specifically oil and look toward government investment in the alternative energy infrastructure. We need to end the war in Iraq and stop acting like there are no consequences for spending hundreds of billions of dollars that we don't actually have. We need to balance the federal budget and restore faith in the economy for the global investment class. We need to address the housing crisis in this country with stronger regulation and no corporate bailouts for Wall Street investment firms that have profited at the expense of the poor. We need to take a second look at how we do our cities and ask if unlimited sprawl is really the best idea for urban development. But most of all, we need to elect representatives to Washington DC and to all levels of government who are going to have a long-term vision and will vote for policies that are in the best interest of our country.

No Draft. No Way

2008-04-19T08:59:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

No Draft. No way.

My father is a Vietnam Veteran. He was an officer in ROTC in 1968 while he was in college and went to Vietnam as a Lieutenant the year I was born. My father felt an obligation to his country and a duty to serve when called. I was born in a snowstorm in rural Minnesota while my father was halfway around the world in the jungles of Vietnam. I am proud of my father and his service to my country. When I was a teenager, going to private Catholic school, I was approached by military recruiters. I was encouraged to join the military and to enlist in the ROTC program, much like my father had been. For whatever reason, I declined. I was not yet a peace activist like I became after the first gulf war, but something in my instincts told me that I could not serve in the military the way my father had served.

In 1990, while I was enrolled at the University of Minnesota, George Bush Sr. began beating the drums of war. I was enrolled in the selective service program at that time in order to get student loans to go to college. I remember clearly the night the bombs began to drop in Iraq for the first time. I was living in the student district of Minneapolis and there had been anti-war activity on campus leading up to the invasion. Students were busy organizing against the campus military center, sometimes called the stockade, holding demonstrations and putting anti-war material in front of the recruiting and training center.

The night of the first bombing and initial invasion in 1991 I witnessed something I had never seen before, a spontaneous anti-war demonstration. Demonstrators began marching from the University district and marched, without a permit, into downtown Minneapolis and over to the uptown district, several thousand people marching a distance of five or six miles. Something about that demonstration vitalized me and helped me to commit to a path of peace. I knew at the time, based on my religious convictions, that I could not kill another human being in the name of my country, no matter what the reason. Although I am no longer a person of faith, I still retain the same conviction to this day and remain a pacifist and committed to the path of non-violence.

I joined the Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors at that time and met with a Quaker counselor from the American Friends Service Committee. I decided at that point in my life to begin to serve the path of peace.

My story is only one story of many paths to adulthood. Besides having deep respect for my father and his choices in life, we have something in common, we both had the opportunity to choose how to serve our country. This choice, which has been a mainstay of American life since shortly after the Vietnam war, has never been under greater threat than it is right now. Our military forces are taxed to exhaustion, and a backdoor draft of sort already exists with our national guard reserve. President Bush has chosen to keep one hundred forty thousand troops in Iraq in addition to the thousands already serving in Afghanistan and the hundreds of thousands serving in over one hundred and twenty countries around the world.

Nearly every person in the military today is there because they were able to choose to serve. Regardless of how one feels about the process of military recruitment, the targeting of poor and minority communities, even recruiting persons who are not yet citizens of this country in order to serve, the alternative to this is far worse. I do believe that we need to scale down the size of our military. We cannot afford the extreme financial burden that this military is costing us, both in current expenditures and obligations we have on past expenditures such as debt from previous military expenses which is as yet unpaid and the financial obligations that we have to the health and welfare of our nation's veterans.

There has been talk in the military of reintroducing the draft. It is argued that we cannot afford to keep going the way we are. There has even been speculation that the very reason that our national reserve forces are being taxed to their limits is to reintroduce the draft as a socially acceptable resolution to the current crisis in Iraq. Our military forces are broken. They are being taxed to their limits, but the solution is not the reintroduction of a draft. This war in Iraq was based on lies and manipulation. There is nothing honorable about recruiting unwitting young men in order to support the lies and misdeeds of the current administration.

The solution to the crisis in Iraq is to bring the troops home now. Our national guard has served the country well. They have answered the call to serve, in spite of the betrayals of the current administration, and it is time to bring them home. Then it is time to let our military heal from the current round of conflict. We need a peacetime administration that is focused on using alternatives to violence and warfare in order to solve international conflicts. We need elected representatives who are committed to the path of peace and who are more concerned about the economic crisis at home.

I am still proud of my father and everything he has done. I am also proud of my friends who have chosen not to serve in the military. I am proud of the peace activists I know who have chosen to serve their country and the world to promote the cause of peace. I believe that there can be reconciliation and understanding between these two very different communities, each choosing to serve in the way they believe is best. The act of choosing is one of the most important rites of transitioning into adult life. Don't our children deserve the opportunity to explore all the alternatives that life has to offer them, in education, in job training, in community service? We don't need another draft. What we need is a new outlook on our government.

We need a government that is dedicated to the idea that serving the people is the highest priority. A draft will only reinforce the idea that Americans are cannon fodder for greedy warmongers who can't make good foreign policy decisions and then need to sacrifice American lives in order to cover for their terrible decisions. Instead of investing more money in war let's invest it in peace. Let's make sure that every American graduates from high school. Let's take the money that we would spend on guns and spend that money on health care. Let's take the money that we would spend on military bases halfway around the world and spend that money on our own domestic infrastructure. Let's take the money that we would spend on bombs and spend that money on social security. Finally, let's take the money that we would spend on training our young men and women to be soldiers and instead spend that money on training them to be teachers, doctors and engineers.

We can lift this nation out of poverty. We can find alternatives to warfare and violence. We can solve our international problems without invading foreign countries and occupying them. We can have peace and security at home without resorting to a draft. It is time for us to take the steps towards peace that we have been waiting to take. It is time to look at real solutions to the economic crisis facing this country. It is time to restore the honor and dignity that is the soul of this nation. I believe we can do this. All we need is the leadership and the representation to make the right decisions in Washington DC. Let's take the first steps toward becoming the people that we deserve to be by resisting talk of a draft and instead let’s bring the troops home now.

Fair Elections Now

2008-04-17T05:54:00.000-07:00

There is a scar on the constitution that is deep and growing. That scar is bleeding money and the bigger the wound gets the more the money flows out. Our society is fundamentally rooted in the concept of representational government, but the simple reality of current election financing ensures that those being represented are the wealthy and powerful, excluding the vast majority of Americans from a seat at the table. What is needed to stitch the wounds of the constitution is a medical kit complete with the surgical tools that will remove the abscess of 'government to the highest bidder'. The Fair Elections Now Act, which is currently under consideration in the Senate, will help to restore a sense of balance and propriety to an election process that has been sold out to the private interests of a privileged minority of the electorate.

In March 2007, Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) introduced the Fair Elections Now Act (S. 1285), legislation that would bring full public financing of elections to the Senate. According to the website, Fair Elections Now, this legislation is modeled on the successful public financing systems in place in seven states and two cities. Under these programs, candidates who give up all private donations receive full public funding for their campaigns once they reach a threshold amount in small contributions, and when Fair Elections candidates are outspent by their privately financed opponents or attacked by independent expenditures, they receive additional funds to maintain a level playing field.

The need for fair elections has never been greater. This act would help to build confidence in a process which has been losing public confidence in recent years by allowing qualified candidates to receive public financing instead of receiving money from lobbyists. Americans growing distrust of Washington politics is in large part due to the influence of special interests on the decision making process. The Fair Elections Now Act would provide a voluntary alternative for candidates to free them from a system of campaign fundraising that forces candidates to pay more attention to country club fundraisers and corporate lobbyists than any other group. This has skewed the process of representation in Washington DC and undermined public confidence in our elected leaders.

By providing a voluntary system for candidates to opt out of the dirty money rat race, the Fair Elections Act will ensure that public dollars go to work for ordinary, everyday Americans. Because the process is voluntary, those candidates who are addicted to private, big money dollars can continue to feed their never ending appetite without pushing other candidates out of the running. Those who choose to participate would qualify by showing they can raise small contributions from a set number of state residents based on the population of the state. Once they have demonstrated their viability as a candidate they would be eligible for Fair Elections funds. During the course of the campaign season candidates would receive higher funding if non-participating opponents receive funds in excess of the allocations provided by the Fair Election system. Participants would also receive vouchers for purchasing airtime and would receive a 20 percent discount below the lowest unit cost on all advertising purchased near the end of the primary and during the general election campaign.

The Fair Elections Act is an idea whose time has come. With Senate candidates needing to earn an average of $13,000 a day from the day they are elected until the day of the next election, six years later, it is no surprise that a majority of those in the Senate today are millionaires. You practically have to be a millionaire in today's political climate in order to get to Washington DC. Is it no surprise that at a time when hundreds of thousands of Americans are risking foreclosure and homelessness, politicians seem to be more concerned with bailing out Wall Street investment firms with taxpayer dollars? It is time to protect our constitution from the undue influence of a wealthy minority who have compromised and weakened our democratic process. It is time to restore dignity and trust to the Congress by ensuring that the most qualified candidates are elected to public office rather than those with the most private money. We can heal the scars which have been created by decades of abuse and restore confidence and fair play to our representative government. Together we can renew the sense that our constitution is of the people, by the people and for the people.

Imagining a World Without Nuclear Weapons

2008-04-12T01:00:00.000-07:00

By:Chris Lugo

It has been almost forty years since the United States signed on to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty and now is the time to begin to live up to the spirit of that treaty. The NPT has been signed by 189 nations and was intended as a framework to move the world toward both the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and the eventual dismantlement of weapons of mass destruction. In our time, these instruments of genocide and apocalypse have hung over our heads like an angel of death, haunting the vast majority of our foreign policy decisions and at times pushing the planet to the edge of nuclear war.

It has been a long time since anyone felt the conscious threat of global thermonuclear war like the kind of visions of destruction that seemed to capture popular consciousness in the 1980's, but the reality of those weapons and their threat still looms large over foreign policy decisions, and now is the time to begin to take concrete steps toward dismantlement and destruction, before it is too late. Right now, while our world is at relative peace regarding global threats to security, right now, while the United States has the will and the leadership, right now, while the generation which dedicated itself to peace and social justice has the vision and the determination, right now is the time to dismantle our own weapons of mass destruction.

This may seem like a dangerous idea to some. Many Americans cannot imagine a world without nuclear weapons. I myself know that many people feel that our only real security lies in this superior construction of Armageddon, but the fact is that we are the greatest threat to world security right now. In spite of our ideals, in spite of the spirit of our democratic tradition, there is nothing democratic, there is no message of freedom in our collection of weapons of mass destruction. Just like a drug addict who needs his fix, we still crave the power that comes from the threat and fear that these weapons generate.

There are no words to honestly describe our condition. We stand at a moment in history that is generally unique. We have never before faced a time when our cleverness and our own skills as a society can lead to our complete undoing. This is the reality that these weapons generate. They are instruments not of democracy, but of tyranny. They are not agents of peace, but rather agents of total destruction and we have a moral obligation to dismantle these weapons of destruction and live up to the spirit of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that we signed almost forty years ago.

We can live in a world of peace, if we take concrete steps now to live up to our better selves. It is possible to resolve international conflicts without threatening to completely destroy other cultures, other peoples. We have the collective intelligence to create a more meaningful future for ourselves and our future generations. By investing in our domestic infrastructure, by supporting fair trade policies, by creating universal health care, by offering meaningful access to education at all levels in our society, by investing in alternative energy and moving away from our addiction to oil, by supporting the international community, by investing in programs to support the global south, by divesting in war and violence as the only solution to international conflict and by dismantling our weapons of mass destruction we can move toward the kind of world that Martin Luther King Jr. imagined nearly forty years ago.

Forty years after the NPT is only two generations. Let's not wait even one more before we rid ourselves of these instruments of global genocide. If you care about peace and want to make a statement that will be heard by people around the world then I would like to encourage you to come to Oak Ridge, Tennessee this Sunday, April 13th for the twentieth anniversary of the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance public demonstration for peace. Oak Ridge is the home of the only atomic bombs ever used on a human population. Constructed between 1942-45, the bombs manufactured in Eastern Tennessee were used to killed tens of thousands of civilians in 1945. Since that time Oak Ridge has continued to play an instrumental role in the production and maintenance of America's nuclear weapons complex.

On April 13th hundreds of people will gather in Oak Ridge to march to the gates of the Y-12 facility and call for an end to the manufacturing of weapons of mass destruction. They will also call for a plan to clean up the oak ridge environment, which has been polluted by decades of abuse and a plan for dismantling our nuclear weapons infrastructure. Some people may feel so strongly about this event that they will engage in non-violent civil disobedience to express their concern for humanity and our children's future. Others will protest in a law abiding fashion but with no less intent and concern for the future generations of this planet. I hope you can join us. For more information please visit the website www.stopthebombs.org.

Upcoming Events: If you are in the Oak Ridge area on Saturday night, April 12th at 8 PM you are invited to 447 East Drive, Oak Ridge for a meet the candidate event. I will be on hand to answer questions on various issues and meet voters and supporters. Food and refreshments will be provided. I will also be at the Oak Ridge Earth Day Celebration, which takes place between 12 and 5 PM on Saturday.

Veterans Deserve Quality Health Care

2008-04-08T01:00:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

Our military veterans have served the nation honorably, and deserve the best treatment we can give them. Regardless of how one feels about the current policy of the Bush administration regarding the war in Iraq, our veterans deserve our respect and gratitude for their service to the country. They chose to serve out of a sense of obligation, duty and often times a desire to improve their circumstances in life. The current war in Iraq has produced a high rate of disabled veterans who have been injured and wounded in the line of duty. This is in large part due to the advancement in treating combat related injuries in the field and the speed at which the wounded are moved out of the field of service to hospitals and critical care units.

In the United States, of our nation's 25 million veterans, about ten percent are currently considered disabled. That is about 2.5 million people who have served the country, been wounded either in combat or in the the line of duty and are currently dependent on the care of the TRICARE system for their health care benefits. In addition there are almost ten million retired veterans in this country receiving retirement benefits. We are currently spending about sixty billion dollars a year on veteran's benefits for all of our nation's veterans and twenty billion for our nation's wounded and disabled veterans.

When our service members are recruited to join the military, they are made the promise of health care for life, and benefits for themselves and their families in exchange for answering the call to serve our country. These health care benefits are earned not only through the promise that we have made them as a nation, but also through the suppression in their pay and the intangibles represented by "total military compensation" which is the promise of retirement benefits being available to the military and their families.

Last year, a task force on the future of military health care began looking at the situation of military retirees, who are increasingly being called upon to pay for more of their benefits. These benefits have been earned through their tours of duty and their service to our country, and it is up to us, as taxpayers, to honor that promise that has been made to our service members. This trust has been broken and veterans are concerned. Perhaps the most outrageous request coming from the Pentagon has been the call for increasing the enrollment fees in both TRICARE and TRICARE FOR LIFE, which is the primary system by which veteran’s receives their military health benefits.

This situation needs to be addressed. We cannot leave our nation's veterans hanging on the edge. Many of our veterans are homeless and living in the streets. Others are living on marginal incomes and in poverty. This is not the promise we made our young men and women made when they answered the call to serve our country. These increases in the cost of health care are a burden that many cannot afford to pay, and we cannot afford to betray the trust of those who have served. It is time to bring the troops home from Iraq and stop funneling hundreds of billions of dollars into an illegal war that is draining our nation's treasury. It is time to remember the promises that were made to those who came to the defense of our country and to give the military health system the funding priority that it needs.

No More Secret Governments

2008-04-03T01:00:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

I am proud to be an American, but I am ashamed of what the government is doing in my name. We are living in a country that openly discusses torture as acceptable government policy, which debates whether or not to grant immunity to corporations that spy on Americans, that invades foreign countries in violation of international law and that grants huge profits to private corporations which hire mercenaries to kill innocent women and children with immunity in foreign countries. How did we end up on this path of secrecy, torture, foreign invasion and war profiteering?

I believe that we took the first steps towards a secret government in 2001 with the passage of Executive Order 13233 which allows current and previous presidents to withhold documents and records without explanation indefinitely. This unprecedented expansion of power stands in direct opposition to the Freedom of Information Act and the U.S. Constitution. Presidential records should be the property of the public and our right to know should be fundamental right of the people and not the president.

Executive Order 13233 states that presidential records may be withheld from the general public, including Freedom of Information Act requests, for decisions that are related to war, diplomacy, national security, legal advice, presidential communications, and the deliberative process of a president and his advisors. These types of communications are considered to be "presidential privileges" and not subject to open public scrutiny or public disclosure. This means that unless Congress acts, we may never know exactly how this administration decided to torture innocent civilians, how they decided it was acceptable to spy on Americans, or how they decided to give billions of dollars to war profiteering corporations.

This means we cannot decide if the President violated the law or if members of his administration knowingly violated the law. It is important, if we are to be a dignified nation, an honorable nation, to know how our elected representatives and their advisors came to make decisions which reflect the body politic. We live in an open society, and the decisions that our representatives make reflect upon us all. This is why it is vital to know what our representatives are thinking and what they are doing. If we don't, then we might as well admit that there is a secret government, unaccountable, acting without our consent.

In America, the government belongs to the people. Inherent in our system of self-government is the idea that the People have the right to know what our government and government officials are doing and to hold them accountable for their actions. Americans want to know why the Bush administration thinks it is acceptable to spy on her own citizens. We want to know who fabricated the weapons of mass destruction myth that was the agency of war in Iraq. These decisions have cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars, and more tragically, thousands of American lives. Thomas Jefferson once said that information is the currency of democracy. That is why it is time to overturn Executive Order 13233 and restore dignity and trust to the American people.

Tibetan Crackdown Demands an International Response

2008-03-31T01:00:00.000-07:00

In the United States we take for granted freedoms and privileges which people around the world are struggling to attain for themselves. Among these freedoms is the right of assembly, the right to the exercise of free speech, the freedom of travel and the right to self-determination. These freedoms were hard won through the struggle for equal rights, which is continuing to this day.

These freedoms that we have are not perfect, and the history of our exercise in democracy is not perfect. A simple examination of the legacy of racism and slavery provides a clear example of the denial of these freedoms almost to this day. The treatment of native americans, immigrants, women, people of color and other minorities clearly illustrates that the rights and privileges enshrined in our constitution and body of law are not guaranteed, but must be fought for, often in the face of years or even decades of difficult, painful struggle. In spite of this analysis, the fact is that there is a path to self-determination and human rights. We as a nation are at our best when we are promoting human rights and basic democratic freedoms.

In March, there was an event that happened halfway around the world, which is beginning to awaken international consciousness. High on the plain of the Indian subcontinent on the tallest elevated plateau in the world on some of the most beautiful land on earth a deeply spiritual nation called Tibet asserted its right to freedom, to self determination, to autonomy and to basic democratic rights. Tibet has been an occupied nation for nearly half a century. Annexed by China during the reign of Mao, Tibet has suffered numerous and grievous human rights abuses during the occupation by China. Tens of thousands of Tibetans have been killed. Thousands have been jailed and disappeared. The government of Tibet has been sent into exile and the spiritual center of Tibet, the Dalai Lama, has lived in exile for most of his life.

Here in the United States we benefit to a large extent from our relations with China, and it is time for us to call in some favors. China has benefited from its economic relationship with the west, which is driving its economic rebirth and steps toward modernization and development. This growth is driven by cheap goods, massive industrialization, international trade agreements and economic liberalization. In spite of this economic liberalization, China is still riddled with the contradictions of centralized state control and the basic denial of human rights, which comes out of the framework of centralized state control.

In the United States we have a moral responsibility to speak out for the people who cannot speak for themselves. Right now, the people of Tibet are suffering terribly for wanting their basic human rights. They want to worship in a manner suitable to their culture. They want the freedom of assembly and the right to free speech. They want political autonomy from China. They want to live free from the fear of being tortured and imprisoned for expressing dissent. We have a responsibility to listen to these thousands of monks and ordinary citizens calling for freedom.

As a candidate for federal office, I would like to urge you to take steps to let China know that the people of Tibet deserve basic human rights. If China does not call off its troops, release prisoners who have been imprisoned simply for expressing their desire for freedom, reinstate the Dalai Lama as the cultural and spiritual leader of Tibet, and grant Tibet autonomy within China, then we will not buy products made in China.

I would encourage you to look at where the next cheap product you buy is made, and if it is made in China, then I would encourage you not to buy it, until China grants Tibet basic human rights. Additionally, as a federal candidate I support a boycott of official US participation in the 2008 Olympics. The people of Tibet have spoken, and it is time for us to listen. Through non-violent methods we have the tools and resources to pressure China to move into the twenty first century. China is enthusiastic to show the world her material progress. It is up to us to help nudge China toward democratic progress as well.

If you are in Nashville I would like to encourage you to attend a rally for human rights in Tibet this Sunday, March 30th at 1pm at the Nashville Courthouse. The rally, entitled “One Human Race,” is a response to recent reports of violence in Tibet that began on March 10th – a day known to Tibetans as Uprising Day, when the country revolted in 1959 against the Chinese invasion of 1950. News reports have suggested that the violence in Tibetan and Chinese provinces comes at a time when China is working expeditiously to portray a clean image for the upcoming summer Olympics in Beijing.

But the social unrest paints a different picture, calling the world’s attention to a brutal decades-long history of Chinese rule in Tibet, in which approximately 1.3 million Tibetans (1/5th of the population) have died due to violence and starvation. Nashville’s “One Human Race” rally will emphasize the need for basic human rights in Tibet, and a negotiated settlement between the Dalai Lama and Chinese leaders that will result in a meaningful autonomy for the Tibetan people. The rally will also call for dignity, justice and equality for all people in all lands.

“One Human Race” will gather together Nashville-area artists, activists, and educators to rally for religious and cultural freedom in Tibet and beyond. Speakers from various faith communities will unite together to share stories and poems by Tibetan exiles, and call for social justice. Activities will include meditation, prayer, information-exchange, art for kids and adults, dance and music. Parking will be available on the street and in the Courthouse garage (free on Sundays). This event is supported by Project Giving Justice, Tropic Heat Studios, Blue Moves Modern Dance Company, Homeless Power Project and members of the Nashville Peace Coalition and Peace and Justice Center.

Following the rally, THE CRY OF THE SNOW LION, a film about Tibet, will be shown on Sunday, March 30 at 7PM at Cafe Outloud, 1707 Church St., Nashville. The film will be followed by a discussion led by Ngawang Losel.

For more information:
http://www.myspace.com/onehumanracejustice, onehumanrace.justice@gmail.com, (615) 469-2584 (Office) or (615) 512-0161 (Dan Beck/cell)

Women Deserve the Right to Choose

2008-03-28T01:00:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

The federally protected right for women to choose to have an abortion is facing the greatest threat to its continued existence since it was implemented in 1973. History shows that women's rights to the autonomy of their bodies and their right to privacy is fundamental to women's progress. States are attempting to do an end run around the federal government by passing anti-choice legislation in lieu of expectant Supreme Court decisions regarding federal protections for women. According to the Feminist Majority, nine states may have anti-abortion measures on the ballot this November. These so-called "personhood initiatives" threaten not only abortion, but also certain methods of birth control.

Last year the Freedom of Choice Act was introduced into the US Senate, this act states that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman. This is the type of legislation that is necessary in order to ensure that women's rights are protected in this society. With a politically stacked Supreme Court leaning toward invalidating Roe with decisions such as the abortion ban in Gonzales vs. Carhart, it is clear that the Supreme Court does not care about the health and safety of women.

This is why the federally protected right for women to choose must remain a federal right. This is why it matters who you elect to federal office. The current anti-woman policies have been the direct result of years of ideologically driven legislation dictated by neo-conservative ideology which is rooted in archaic principles regarding the role and status of women as child-bearers and homemakers. The recent anti-abortion ruling in Gonzales vs. Carhart already puts the health and safety of women at risk, and this is only the beginning if we do not elect representatives who will uphold the rights of women. The right to a safe and legal abortion is being chipped away and it is essential to act now to preserve women's rights and women's lives.

I believe that a woman's right to choose is a fundamental right of women, therefore, as a candidate I promise that I will work to do everything in my power to keep abortion safe and legal for all women, not just those in 'safe states' where abortion would be kept legal. Additionally, I will work to ensure that abortion remain a federal right, and that poor women have access to federal dollars in the event of need which is a right many women have not had access to for many years. I will also support affirmative action and equal opportunity for women at all levels of employment, both in government and in the private economy.

Vigil Marking the 4,000th US Soldier Killed in Iraq

2008-03-24T10:30:00.000-07:00

Vigil Marking the 4,000th US Soldier Killed in Iraq

Nashville, TN: On Sunday, March 23rd the grim milestone of 4,000 US soldiers killed in Iraq was reached when four US soldiers were killed by an IED in Baghdad. In memory of this event I will be joining members of the Nashville Peace Coalition in front of the Federal Building on Monday, March 24th from 5:30 pm to 7:00 pm to remember the all those killed in the war, including an estimated 89,000 Iraqis according to the website Iraq Body Count, although the truth is that no one knows exactly how many Iraqis have been killed and some estimates are as are as high as 600,000 to 1.1 million people.

I have participated in vigils to mark the milestone of every 1,000 US soldiers killed on three occasions since the start of the Iraqi occupation and have also helped to organize vigils and demonstrations to call for an end to the war in Iraq and a withdrawal of US armed forces. As a member of the Nashville Peace Coalition I recently participated in three events to mark the five year anniversary of the war in Iraq, including a protest on the visit of President Bush to Opryland on March 11th, a peace rally at Bicentennial Mall on March 15th and a street protest coordinated by Moveon.org on the actual anniversary of the start of the war on March 19th.

It is particularly sad that we have been so busy these past two weeks. I wish that our actions alone could bring an end to this war but it is going to take the concerted will of the Congress to reverse the terrible decision of the Bush administration to lead us to war. We must elect people who will speak out for peace and against war. As a candidate for federal office I support a federal level department of peace and nonviolence. I support a drastic reduction in the military budget and an immediate withdrawal of all US armed forces from Afghanistan and Iraq. It seems particularly sad that we have reached this milestone. I had hoped that it wouldn't come, but it has and I am going to be standing in front of the federal building to memorialize this occasion along with other concerned citizens of middle Tennessee.

I am proud to be a member of the Nashville Peace Coalition which has been working diligently for seven years to promote alternatives to violence, war and occupation. The peace coalition is made of representatives of Veterans for Peace, the Nashville Peace and Justice Center, Peace Roots Alliance as well as supporters of the Democratic party, the Green Party and members of various faith traditions all working together for peace. As a member of the Nashville Peace Coalition I will not be standing on the street on Monday to make a political statement. Instead I will be standing in vigil, remembering those who have been killed, both American and Iraqi and calling for congress to bring the troops home now.

Chris Lugo withdraws from Democratic Primary Race

2008-03-21T09:05:00.000-07:00

Declares Intention to Run Independent or Green Party

Nashville, TN: US Senate candidate Chris Lugo has announced that he is withdrawing his candidacy from the democratic primary race August 7th in Tennessee and will instead run as an independent candidate or seek the Green Party nomination at their convention May 3rd in Nashville. Calling his campaign a referendum on the war, Lugo said that the democrats are sitting on the fence and he didn't think that continuing to run as a democrat would be a good fit for his campaign. "I am running for office because I want to end the war in Iraq. It is time to bring the troops home and acknowledge the terrible injustice that we have caused. It is time to stop rationalizing our wasteful military spending and abuse of the national trust in the name of a war that never should have happened. We have lost too many good people with no clear objective. We are basically repeating the mistakes of Vietnam."

Lugo said that after running as a democrat for three months his sense was that they are not ready to end the war. "Personally I think the democrats are in a better position to do some good than the republicans, but I don't think the democrats are ready yet to do the right thing. I had hoped that by running I might help push the dialogue on the peace issue, but the democrats didn't really seem to be interested. So I am going to go back to my roots as a progressive and seek the nomination of the green party which has a stronger position on the issue of peace and a generally more progressive platform all around."

According to a recent poll, about 47% of Americans say that the we should stay the course in Iraq, citing the need to stay and take care of the situation that has been created by ongoing US occupation. In contrast, Lugo feels that the troops should be withdrawn immediately. "I was listening to General Abizaid speak this week at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. He was talking about our need to protect America by being in Iraq. This is the basic problem. We are not protecting America by occupying Iraq. Iraq did not attack the United States. We attacked them. If anything we have made ourselves more insecure by occupying Iraq. We have created wounds that will take generations to heal. We have made enemies who will not forget us in their lifetime."

Citing a lack of interest in the peace issue within the democratic party, Lugo said that he was going in a different direction. "I am all for dialogue and debate on the issues, but it seems clear to me that the democratic party is not on board regarding this issue. For me the war is a moral issue of profound significance. I don't think that we can remain in Iraq and consider ourselves to be a moral nation or a righteous country. We have already violated international law and basic decency by attacking a country that was significantly weaker than us and occupying it with no clear mandate. I don't think the democratic party in Tennessee sees this issue the same way I do."

Lugo said that he wishes democratic front runner Bob Tuke all the best and looks forward to an opportunity to debate him and Lamar Alexander during the election season. "I have filed my papers as an independent candidate and will seek the Green Party nomination. I look forward to an opportunity to debate Tuke or Alexander on issues like universal single payer health care, bringing the troops home now, reducing the military budget, dismantling weapons of mass destruction or taking significant steps right now to reduce global warming. I think Tennesseans deserve the opportunity to hear from all the candidates and then cast their vote once they have made the most informed decisions possible."

Let's Bring the Troops Home Now

2008-03-18T08:34:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

In a recent poll, a sobering 47% of Americans said that we should stay the course in Iraq, reasoning that now that our troops are there, we need to stay. Most responded by saying that if we pull out it will be a disaster for the Iraqi people. Americans feel this way in spite of the facts regarding the ongoing occupation of Iraq. The truth is that an overwhelming majority of Iraqis want Americans out of Iraq now. The security that we are providing in Iraq is mostly for our own service members. Most of the tax dollars that we spend on Iraqi security goes to protecting convoy lines, building and supplying military bases and paying for resources that we are expending funds on specifically because we are there.

March 19th marks the fifth anniversary of the ongoing occupation of Iraq. It has been nearly as long since president Bush stood on the deck of an aircraft carrier with the words 'mission accomplished' boldly printed on a banner behind him. Since that time nearly 4,000 Americans have died in Iraq and tens of thousands have been injured. No one knows exactly how many Iraqis have been killed. Some estimates are as low as 100,000 and some estimates are as high as 600,000 people. What we do know is that we have turned Iraq into a living hell where people get blown to bits while trying to go shopping, get shot by private contractors while driving down the street, get tortured by American military personnel after being caught up in security sweeps and watch neighbor kill neighbor over sectarian concerns bubbling from below the surface of extreme poverty, suffering and trauma.

The Iraqi war is a shameful war and one of the worst policy decisions of the contemporary era. As the United States teeters on the brink of depression and watches its currency value plummet we continue to waste our national treasury on a war that was based on the pretext of weapons of mass destruction that never existed. It is time for Americans to come to terms with the reality of what we have done. Those who supported the war and voted for it followed the foolish emotionalism generated by the current administration after the traumatic experience of the Sept. 11th attacks. It is time for us to admit that the war was really an act of vengeance, a blind lashing out at some Arab nation as retribution for the lives lost in 2001.

The Bush administration understood the pain and the anger of the American people, and chose to manipulate us for the economic advantage of a few private corporations who have received the lion's share of contracts worth hundreds of billions of dollars. The President has betrayed the trust of the American people, the armed services and the international community. Opposition to the continuation of the war has become a moral issue. Shortly after the American invasion of Iraq, in a rare admission of dissent in the American public, the President said you are either with the ‘us’ or you are with the terrorists. In hindsight, it is clear that Bush and his cronies are the ones who are at odds with the American people and the democratic traditions of this nation.

The Iraqi war will be remembered as the defining international conflict of the first decade of the 21st century. The verdict is already out on this occupation and we are the losers. We have lost our honor. We unilaterally attacked a nation which had not attacked us and had not declared war on us. We imprisoned their citizens and tortured them. We dropped bombs on their houses and murdered their children. We spent hundreds of billions of dollars and accepted the lies of our President and his administration. We have lost our soul as a nation. It is time to restore our fallen honor and reconcile ourselves to the evil that we have done out of fear and a desire for retribution. Only then can we begin to truly live up to the promise of what our nation can be. It is time to bring the troops home and end the occupation of Iraq.

Why Are we Importing European Nuclear Waste to Tennessee?

2008-03-09T09:02:00.000-07:00

By: Chris Lugo

Why is the federal government considering allowing a private corporation to transport and process massive amounts of nuclear waste from Europe into Tennessee? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering allowing the company called 'Energy Solutions' to ship in nuclear waste to burn, melt, transport and dump right here in Tennessee. Since when did Tennessee become a dumping ground for European nuclear waste? I oppose the NRC issuing a permit to this corporation to pollute our state. It is bad enough that we have our own nuclear waste to deal with from years of nuclear weapons production as well as nuclear power generation. The federal government doesn't even know what to do with its own nuclear waste. Taking in nuclear waste from Europe to dump in the United States is simply unacceptable.

According to a release from the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, EnergySolutions runs 2 commercial nuclear waste dumps in the US and incinerators, a metal melter and other "processing" facilities in Memphis and Oak Ridge, Tennessee. EnergySolutions is applying for a federal license to import 20,000 tons of radioactive waste into the US for processing including incineration, "recycling", transport and disposal. This nuclear waste from Italy would be burned, smelted, chopped up and process in Memphis and Oak Ridge, resulting in more radioactive emissions in those regions and creating more radioactive nuclear waste in Tennessee. Some of this waste could even be dumped in solid waste dumps in Tennessee.

Tennessee has a long history of resistance to becoming a nuclear dumping ground for private corporations. In Hartsville, Tennessee an organization called Louisiana Energy Services attempted to dump a uranium processing facility on that community in 2003. A grassroots organization called Citizens for Smart Choices organized a grassroots campaign to keep radioactive waste out of Hartsville and eventually won over the city council of Hartsville with a simple, common sense discussion about the environmental impact a uranium processing facility would have on the ecology of the region. In 2006, an organization coalesced in Johnson City, Tennessee to oppose the depleted uranium processing happening at Aerojet facilities in Irwin, Tennessee. For over twenty years, an organization called the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance has called for the cleaning up of the Oak Ridge bioregion, which has been severely impacted by the nuclear weapons complex facilities in the area.

I am opposed to any further nuclear waste processing in Tennessee. Tennesseans don't want nuclear waste polluting their water, air and soil. We want a healthy environment in which we can safely raise our families, grow our food, and enjoy the outdoors. We need to tell the federal government that Tennessee is not a dumping ground for European nuclear waste. Tennessee is rich in natural resources, and we need to preserve our bioregion for future generations. Radioactive nuclear waste contaminates everything - the air, the soil, the water, plants, animals and people. Why would anyone think that it is a good idea to import nuclear waste from a foreign country into Tennessee?

I urge Tennesseans to write to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to say NO to License Applications IW023 and XW013 which would permit the Energy Solutions corporation to transport and process nuclear waste in Tennessee, and to vote for candidates this fall that will look out for the long-term interests of environment. We only have one planet, and only one Tennessee. I think it is clear to voters who will support the real interests of the environment.

Mailing Address:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001
Toll free: 1-800-368-5642, From the DC area: 301-415-7000
TTD: 301-415-5575

Sample Letter Text: (Please feel free to copy or write your own)

U.S, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

Dear Chairman Klien, (other commissioners: Gregory B. Jaczko; Peter B. Lyons)

This letter is to request that License Applications IW023 and XW013 be denied. These permits would allow a private corporation; Energy Solutions, Inc. to transport and process nuclear waste in Tennessee.

Tennessee is biologically diverse and rich in natural resources. Radioactive nuclear waste contaminates everything - the air, the soil, the water, plants, animals and people. I see no benefit to the people of Tennessee by allowing European or any other nuclear waste to be brought into our state to be processed and stored here.

Respectfully,

Your Name
Full Address

Families Deserve a Choice in Home Health Care Options

2008-03-06T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

Americans want to be in the company of their loved ones in their final years. When a loved one is sick and in need of long term care in the last years of life, they almost always prefer to be at home and in the company of family. This is sometimes an option for family members, but sometimes it isn't possible because of financial considerations. Medicare covers some aspects of in-home health care through private duty nursing, registered social workers and personal health care attendants, but it generally does not pay for family members to stay home and care for their loved ones.

This is a situation which needs to be resolved as part of comprehensive medical care legislation restructuring. It is time for us to move to a single payer health care system to address the needs of some 47 million Americans without health insurance. It is time for us to move toward preventative medical care rather than urgent need expensive medical care for undiagnosed illness and it is time for us to look at in home health care options for family members who wish to remain home and their loved ones who wish to care for them.

This is an option which can be structured as a win-win situation. If we do this right, family members can stay home to care for their loved ones without the threat of total loss of income. The burden on nursing home and long term care facilities can be reduced, thus passing on the savings in cost to the taxpayers, who are often times supplementing the costs of long term medical care in institutional settings through their tax dollars. Nursing home and institutional long term care is the most expensive and least desirable option for most individuals. All that we need to do is get smart about we pay for health care delivery in this country and think about ways to meet peoples needs where they are, rather than to meet the needs of Health Maintenance Organizations and their investors.

Family members who make the sacrifice to take care of loved ones are already doing most of the work. They are often times doing the cooking, the cleaning, the laundry, as well as providing transportation and much needed emotional support to the infirmed. If they can afford to make this sacrifice for their loved ones they deserve our respect and admiration. If they cannot afford to take care of them then they deserve our support.

In order to get the ball rolling an in home evaluation would be necessary from a nurse or social worker and certified by a doctor or attending physician. After an individual has been certified, monthly in-home reviews and quarterly clinical reviews would add safeguards to assure quality of care. When certification is supplemented by in home attendant care providers and private nursing attendants as needed, quality of care can be assured in most cases. It makes sense for Medicaid to pursue this cost saving option. Most family members prefer to stay at home in their final years of life and they prefer to be cared for by family members. Let's give them this common sense option.

Everyone Deserves the Right to Vote

2008-03-04T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

The right to vote is a fundamental right which belongs to all Americans. Unfortunately the justice system has made it very difficult for some five million Americans who are no longer incarcerated but have previous felony convictions to exercise that right. This is an unreasonable limitation on the rights of those who have served their time and has an enormous impact on the national dialogue, limiting the rights of potential voters and skewing the results of elections.

One example of the impact of felony disenfranchisement is Florida in the 2000 elections. In addition to the thousands of voters who were illegally purged from the rolls, the butterfly ballots and general shenanigans involving the recount, thousands of potential voters were simply not allowed to vote because they had prior felony convictions. If there was ever a historical example of where voting matters, the presidential elections in Florida between Bush and Gore in 2000 are the example.

The issue of felony disenfranchisement is only one part of a corrupt system that is in vital need of overhaul and reform. According to James Austin, the president of the JFA institute and co-author of the report Unlocking America: Why and How to Reduce America's Prison Population, the criminal justice system is in need of "wholesale reform." Austin says that our resources are misspent, our punishments are too severe, and our sentences are too long. He says that the United States is "clearly overusing" the prison system and not using more beneficial alternative forms of correction.

On February 29th the Pew Center released a new report which estimates that one out of every one hundred Americans is currently incarcerated, and that this is the highest rate of incarceration in US history. The report went on to show that five states pay as much or more on jails as they do on schools.

Clearly our priorities are misguided and it is time to change things regarding how we deal with the issue of corrections. Fundamental to restoring civility and dignity to the national dialogue is restoring the right to vote for convicted felons. These men and women have served their time and paid the price that society requires for their infractions, and it is time to give them a second chance.

Limiting the right to vote only further punishes men and women who are working hard to become members of society in good standing; it affects the outcome of national and local elections and is an undue burden on the poor and minorities. It also has a deeper cost that cannot be measured. Restoring the right to vote doesn't just affect our basic democratic expression; it also has profound affects on that individual's sense of self and their sense of identity. It impacts on the sense of fairness and justice of the entire society. Common sense and morality calls us to address this injustice.

Now is the Time for a Department of Peace

2008-03-03T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

America has lost her moral compass in the world. In the face of Hidatha, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, people around the world are calling on the United States to cease and desist in Iraq. We are facing a grave moral crisis in this country. We have lost our way and it is time for us to return to the great democratic principles that are the true spirit of this nation. It is time for us as a nation to face up to the responsibilities we have. We must stop making war on people who have not attacked us. We must apologize to those we have harmed and make restitution and we must work internationally towards peace.

That is why I am supporting legislation to establish a Federal Level Department of Peace and Nonviolence. The primary function of a United States Department of Peace will be to research, articulate and facilitate nonviolent solutions to domestic and international conflict. The Department of Peace will facilitate the most cutting edge ways to wage peace. From nonviolent communication skills, to conflict resolution techniques and cultural relationship building, the Department of Peace will employ proven and effective strategies for diminishing violence in our country and in our world. As a member of the President’s cabinet, the Secretary of Peace will provide the President; the State Department; the Departments of Defense, Education and Justice with greatly expanded problem solving options. The Department of Peace will also provide support for state and local government to address issues of domestic violence.

The Department of Peace would research and analyze foreign policy and recommend to the President ways to address the root causes of war. A Peace Academy, on par with the Military Academies, would train civilian peacekeepers and the military in the latest nonviolent conflict resolution techniques and approaches. The Department would also provide expert advice to the President when diffusing or dealing with international crises.

Domestically, the Department would be responsible for developing new policies that address issues such as child abuse, domestic violence, gang violence, and cultural and racial violence. Statistics reveal that each year, medical expenses from domestic violence alone total at least $3 to $5 billion. Businesses forfeit another $100 million in lost wages, sick leave, absenteeism and non-productivity due to domestic violence. Teaching violence prevention and mediation to America’s school children is just one of the many ways a U.S. Department of Peace would reduce violence in our homes and schools.

The idea of a Department of Peace is not new. In fact it dates back to 1792 and it has been proposed numerous times over the course of this nation's history. Currently, no other federal agency or department looks at the root causes of violence or provides the President with counsel. There is an urgent need for a Department of Peace. Nuclear proliferation creates the critical need to interrupt the current cycles of violence internationally and domestically, criminal and domestic violence places intense financial pressures on the city, county and state government.

We need a Department of Peace in order to provide new, proactive approaches to violence reduction both domestically and internationally. Our traditional political problem solving methods focus primarily on addressing symptoms of violence, such as imprisonment for offenders and engagement in armed conflict. The United States should be as effective in addressing the sources of violence as we are in addressing its symptoms. A Department of Peace will reduce international and domestic violence, it will help to build peace making efforts among conflicting communities both here and abroad and it will support our military with complementary approaches to ending violence. Peace belongs to all of us, so let’s make it part of every aspect of our lives, including how we think, how we act, and how we govern.

Iranian Crisis Requires Diplomacy, Not Force

2008-03-02T01:00:00.001-08:00

By; Chris Lugo

The United States has no justification for a first strike on Iran. With the recent revelations that Iran has not been engaged in active nuclear weapons development in the past four years it is imperative that the United States engage in international diplomacy with respect to the Iranian Government rather than pursuing a US generated international crisis. Our relationship with Iran is a situation which requires diplomacy and international cooperation, and not, as the Bush administration and the Republican Party seems to be speculating on, the use of unilateral force.

The international landscape has changed dramatically in the past five years, since September 11th of 2001. At the time, the United States had the empathy and compassion of the world. People around the world grieved with us as they saw our own innocent civilians die in the face of tragedy and unspeakable evil acts of aggression. Now the world community scowls as they see innocent Iraqi women and children die in the face of tragedy and acts of aggression. The global community has shifted its perspective and the United States has walked itself to the edge with the current foreign policy, rooted in unilateral aggression.

We have our own heroes and fallen dead to honor as thousands of Americans have died in service to this country in Iraq, but it is time to bring the remaining soldiers home and to refuse to take one step further down the myopic and misguided path that the war on terrorism has taken. The international community has spoken clearly on the subject of Iran, and the message is diplomacy. This is a message the current administration should heed. Americans are not ready for yet another Middle East war, especially with a country that will fight back with ten times the aggression that the Iraqi insurgency has displayed.

The United Nations is the best institution to monitor and implement the Safeguards Agreement with Iran, unilateral force will not work in this situation. It has not worked in Iraq and it will not work in Iran. Whether Iran does have a more extensive centrifuge enrichment than it currently admits is a matter for international diplomacy to resolve. The United States is on the edge, once again, and international opinion says to stay the course. Whether the current administration will allow international bodies to work as they are intended, remains to be seen. Americans have learned from Iraq, where there were no weapons of mass destruction and there was no support for Osama Bin Laden. Americans are tired of war, and talk of war; Americans want peace and security and the current administration's policies offer none.

Indian Health Care Improvement Act Deserves Reauthorization

2008-02-29T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

This month the Senate is considering the Indian Health Care Improvement Reauthorization Bill, SB 1200. This bill, which is designed to address the health care needs of some two million residents of the United States who can claim American Indian ancestry, is an important step toward honoring the obligations that we as Americans have toward the health and welfare of Native Americans. This bill will make up-to-date amendments to the health care available to 1.9 million rural and urban indigenous people in the United States, and will restore honor to the federal government's trust and obligation to native tribes.

Congress passed the Indian Health Care Improvement Act in 1976 to address health disparities between Native Americans and the rest of the populace. Since 1992, when the act was last reauthorized, the U.S. health care delivery system has been revolutionized, while the Indian health care system has not.

This bill lays the foundation for program change, including shifts from acute care to prevention and the provision of mental health services for children. It addresses health crises such as diabetes, youth suicide, and drug addiction that have escalated among native peoples in the past 15 years. It facilitates greater input to program operation from the local tribal level and enhances recruitment and retention of health professionals in facilities serving native populations.

As a candidate for the US Senate I believe it is vitally important that the United States consider major health care initiatives to improve the quality of life for all Americans. I also believe it is important that the Senate take steps to honor the health care needs of the first Americans by passing the Indian Health Care Improvement Reauthorization Bill.

Lets Make Tennessee Nuclear Free

2008-02-25T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

In August of 1945 the United States embarked on a new chapter in world history with the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Since that time the United States has built up an arsenal of thousands of deadly nuclear warhead, ready to strike at a moment's notice anywhere in the world delivering their deadly, destructive power. Regardless of how we feel about the decision to use the atomic bomb in 1945, now we can take a step toward insuring that they are never used again on innocent civilians and non-combatants.

Tennessee has a unique role in the development of the nuclear bomb with the Oak Ridge National Laboratories. At the beginning of World War II President Roosevelt ordered the construction of the Oak Ridge National Laboratories and the Y-12 Complex for the processing of uranium and other components vital to the construction of the nuclear bomb. Oak Ridge employed thousands of people during the construction of these bombs and the processing all done in a top secret security environment.

In the 1980's the world stood on the verge of thermonuclear war during the extended global conflict between the United States and the former Soviet Union. Since that time, the issue has faded from the national spotlight, but the United States remains the greatest threat to international stability with its 5000 plus arsenal of nuclear weapons still ready at a moment's notice to wreak havoc on the planet. Oak Ridge has continues to play an instrumental role in the maintenance of weapons of mass destruction. Recently, the National Nuclear Security Administration has announced its plans to build a new nuclear weapons production plant in violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Oak Ridge is being targeted for new bomb production facilities. The United States committed in 1970 to pursue complete nuclear disarmament “at an early date” in the Nonproliferation Treaty. It is time for us to keep our word.

If we remain silent, we are giving our approval to a new nuclear arms race, an enduring nuclear arsenal, and a nuclear shadow over generations to come. The threat of nuclear weapons remains the greatest threat to global peace and security. As a world leader the United States plays a fundamental role in the direction of global security. It is time for us to take steps toward peace and disarmament.

I encourage citizens to attend a public hearing in Oak Ridge on February 26th to speak out against continued nuclear weapons production in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. As a candidate for federal office I support full and open disclosure regarding our nuclear arsenal, the dismantling of all weapons of mass destruction, elimination of the nuclear weapons maintenance and production facilities still in existence including Tennessee's Y-12 and Oak Ridge National Laboratories. I support redirection of DOE and EPA dollars to cleanup and restoration where possible of environments devastated by our nuclear legacy, including the Oak Ridge bioregion, Savannah River, Hanford Complex, Nevada Test Site and Rocky Flats. I do not support the long term storage of radioactive nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

Together we can make a difference. We can spend our money on warfare and the apocalypse or we can spend billions on building a stronger society, where everyone has food, shelter, health care, and the prospect of a living wage job. It is time to lead the world to true security and keep the promise we made in the Nonproliferation Treaty in 1970 to pursue complete disarmament.

PUBLIC HEARING on the Future of Nuclear Weapons Tuesday Feb 26 2008 11:00 AM-3:00 PM & 6:00 PM-10 PM (eastern time) New Hope Center *Scarboro Road* Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Gustavus Puryear Nomination Raises Conflict of Interest Issues

2008-02-22T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

In his State of the Union address on February 5th, President Bush said, " Because courts must always deliver impartial justice, judges have a duty to faithfully interpret the law, not legislate from the bench ... the Constitution also gives the Senate a responsibility: Every judicial nominee deserves an up or down vote." The reality of federal appointments is that they are often political in nature, as is the case with Gus Puryear, who is currently under consideration for nomination to the federal judgeship for the U.S. District Court in the Middle District of Tennessee. Puryear is a dedicated Republican supporter, having previously worked under Republican Senators Bill Frist and Fred Thompson. In addition he has served as Dick Cheney's advisor prior to the 2000 election. Federal judges, who are supposed to be impartial, should not be as partisan as reflected by Puryear's record.

Although technically qualified for the job, the US Senate should vote thumbs down on Puryear's nomination. Puryear would have a conflict of interest in regard to all litigation involving the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), his former employer. CCA has made Puryear a multi-millionaire which would seriously compromise Puryear's ability to make fair decisions regarding CCA, which is based in Nashville. CCA has been involved in hundreds of cases naming CCA or CCA employees in federal court, including cases involving deaths or abuse of prisoners while in CCA custody.

Fundamental to the expansion of the prison industrial complex in America is the role that private prisons have played in the growth that industry. At the heart of the prison privatization movement is Tennessee's home grown Corrections Corporation of America, CCA, the nation's largest private prison company. In a criminal justice system in which millions of Americans are incarcerated, on parole or on probation, the profits of privatization are tempting to many investors. The danger of excessive privatization is a fundamental conflict of interest between the investor and the government.

The current nomination of Gustavus A. Puryear to the federal judgeship for U.S. District Court in the Middle District of Tennessee presents a clear conflict of interest. Puryear was CCA's general counsel and would hold a judgeship in the same district where CCA's corporate office is located, where numerous lawsuits against CCA are filed. The top lawyer for the nation's largest private prison company is ill suited to serve as a federal judge. In an ideal world, there would be no prisons. The role that prisons play in segregating those who have violated the laws of the society is a path of last resort for the state and for society. In the real world, investments and profits drive the economy, thus setting up a fundamental conflict between the role of private industry and the interests of the state.

As a federal candidate I support ending all federal funding for Tennessee based Corrections Corporation of America, the nation's largest private prison corporation, whose multiple failures to properly house, feed, and care for prisoners is well documented. I support the re-introduction of programs eliminated by previous administrations such as education, job training, general education equivalency programs and college level educational access. Instead of supporting partisan federal judges who will only contribute to the growing privatization of the prison economy, it is time for us as a society to invest in social programs which improve the quality of life for everyone and offer those incarcerated a real opportunity at a successful re-integration into mainstream society.

The Fair Pay Restoration Act Will Restore Work Place Dignity

2008-02-21T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

Working women deserve equal opportunity in the workplace. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court dealt a huge blow to the rights of working women and civil rights protection recently when they voted by a decision of 5-4 to overturn basic worker's protection. It has been nearly forty years since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which was supposed to help level the playing field in the workplace, but the sobering reality is that women still only make 68 cents for every dollar that a man earns. One of the reasons that this gap continues to persist is because of discriminatory pay practices.

There is a remedy to this deep social inequity which the Congress is considering that would give working women a break. It is called the Fair Pay Restoration Act, Senate Bill 1843. This act would remedy the recent decision of a conservative Supreme Court by reinstating the long standing wage discrimination protections which have been fundamental to women's progress in the workplace. The bill was passed by the House along party lines but is still being stalled in the Senate. I find this situation unacceptable. It is time for the Senate to vote for the Fair Pay Restoration Act (S. 1843) so that women will be able to earn equal pay in the workplace.

The reality of the workplace is that it is difficult for employees to discover the salaries and raises of other employees. Unfortunately this means that it is also difficult for an employee to discover if they are being paid a comparable wage, or if they are being discriminated against in terms of their salary. The Supreme Court ruled that employees must discover pay discrimination within 180 days of when the pay discrepancy occurred. This is a bad decision for employees and especially for women and minorities. It means that if an employer can get away with hiding the fact of their discrimination for six months, then after that time there is nothing an employee can do to challenge this decision or demand equal pay.

The Fair Pay Restoration Act will remove these unreasonable time limits which will allow victims of discrimination to seek back pay and damages when they become aware of this injustice. Women deserve fair pay in the workplace and this bill is an important component of ensuring they get it. I promise to take every step I can to reduce the pay gap and utilize the tools of federal law to insure that all Americans are paid fairly for their work.

Tennessee Proposed Cuts Highlight the Need for National Health Care

2008-02-19T01:00:00.000-08:00

By: Chris Lugo

The time has come for national health care. Tennesseans are waking up to the reality of the health care crisis in America and politicians are hearing their concerns. On the democratic side of the isle, Senators Clinton and Obama have been making health care a core item of their speeches and making promises to do something about an issue that is affecting 47 million Americans, including an estimated 700,000 in Tennessee. That number is about to rise unless the federal government acts now.

On Monday, in Tennessee, Governor Bredesen addressed the General Assembly in his annual State of the State affair. The Governor presented a fiscally conservative budget, the sign of an economic recession that is hitting Tennessee hard with the mortgage crisis, low productivity and high costs of basic domestic goods dragging Tennessee down and revenue expectations as well. The Governor proposed further Tenncare cuts, which are on top of the cuts of almost 300,000 Tennesseans in 2005 from the health care rolls.

The discussion in the health care community has revolved around the proposed 56,000 Tennesseans to be cut in the next year, which is a carryover from the Tenncare cuts of 2005 as well as an additional 140,000 Tennesseans who will most likely be cut in the next year who will lose their Tenncare but retain their Medicare or other benefit. These people are being affected during the worst of times economically being denied one of the most basic of human needs - quality preventative health care.

We know that many people died after the 2005 Tenncare cuts in addition to hundreds if not thousands are being made destitute due to the lack of health insurance coverage. Most of these people are hard working Tennesseans, who do not have health insurance coverage through their low paying jobs or have lost their health insurance because they have existing conditions such as cancer or heart disease. Who knows how many more people will have their quality of life reduced or even ended as a result of this latest round of Tenncare cuts.

Tennesseans cannot afford to let almost twenty percent of her citizens go without health care. The costs of not having quality preventative care are too high. It is much more affordable in the long term to diagnose and treat illness in its preventable stages rather than wait until someone without health insurance shows up in the emergency room.

Still, we must lay the blame not on the Governor instead we should look at the federal government for its failure to address the basic human right of quality health care. Every industrialized country in the world except the United States extends this basic right to all of its citizens. The irony is that we already pay more per capita of our public dollars on health care than most western nations but we still have a system that fails to insure everyone, but this is not an agenda that we can leave up to the states. Tennessee should not share the burden alone of trying to insure everyone. This is part of what led to the Tenncare debacle in the first place.

Tennessee generates a large portion of its revenue from sales tax, which is an up and down stream of revenue, which disproportionately affects the poor and working classes. The only way Tennessee could have insured the preservation of Tenncare was through a state income tax, which does not yet have the political will to pass in the general assembly. In the meantime, a universal health care program could be easily implemented to provide basic, quality health care to an additional 47 million Americans for about $120 billion dollars, which is only 1/5 of the budget expenditure for the military. If we simply pulled our troops out of Iraq we could easily redirect the cost of an expensive, failed war to provide health care for all of our citizens.

Although it is easy to blame the current leadership in Tennessee for the health care crisis that is affecting hundreds of thousands, let us instead direct our attention to a solution which will really meet our needs - a universal single payer health care system. This is truly the best way to address not only the Tenncare crisis and the current round of health care cuts, by doing so we can also address the health care needs of the citizens of an entire nation.

The momentum is building in America for universal health care, now it is time to elect leaders to Washington who will accomplish the job of insuring all Americans.