2013-08-09 "Take Action: Stand Up for Striking First Responders in El Centro"
from "California Labor Federation Spotlight" newsletter:
Dozens of ambulance drivers, paramedics and EMTs employed by Gold Cross in El Centro have been on strike for more than a week and a half, and are still fighting for decent wages, working conditions and equipment. The first responders are often forced to work with substandard emergency transport vehicles that break down and don't have adequate functioning air conditioning, despite El Centro’s extreme desert-like conditions. Additionally, many of the Gold Cross workers earn less than $9/hour, and have little or no health care benefits.
Show your support for these dedicated first responders by sending a message to their employer, and let the management know that these emergency medical service professionals, who devote their lives to saving others, deserve a fair contract with decent wages, benefits and working conditions.
"Support LU 542 Members on Strike for Higher Wages at Gold Cross"
[http://salsa4.salsalabs.com/o/50740/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=8868]:
Teamsters Local 542 members in El Centro, who are employed by Gold Cross Ambulance Company, have been on strike for over a week and a half.
We all know that an emergency medical services system needs to be safe and secure for patients and the professionals who serve the public day in and day out.
It is unfortunate that Gold Cross Ambulance Company has implemented a corporate business plan that puts Imperial County at risk with substandard emergency transport vehicles that break down and don't have adequate functioning air conditioning in the extreme desert-like conditions.
Gold Cross' treatment of its dedicated workforce of paramedics, emergency medical technicians and dispatchers is unfair with wages set at near-poverty levels and reduced health care benefits.
Our Teamster sisters and brothers in El Centro need your help to let Gold Cross know that wages, benefits and working conditions must change for the better. Send a message to the company letting them know that these emergency medical service professionals, who devote their lives to saving others, deserve A CONTRACT NOW with fair wages and adequate health care for members and their families.
Gold Cross, and its parent Schaefer Ambulance Company, must put public safety and fairness ahead of profits for the executives.
---
"EMTs and Paramedics at Gold Cross Deserve Better than Near-Poverty Wages"
message to Schaeffer Ambulance Company, Fax:(323) 463-0433
Dear Gold Cross and Schaefer Ambulance Executives:
Dependable service to the public is a legal commitment you made by entering into a contract with Imperial County. The fact that the company has exhibited a “take it or leave it” attitude in contract negotiations with the workers’ union, Teamsters Local 542, puts citizens and visitors at risk, and undermines the confidence the public relies on, especially during emergencies.
It is time to put public safety and fairness above personal profit. Life-savers who work for Gold Cross deserve much better than near-poverty wages and a diminished health care plan. On behalf of the citizens of Imperial County--and the dedicated paramedics, emergency medical technicians and dispatchers who have worked for many years without adequate wages and working conditions—you must reach a fair and just contract with Teamsters Local 542, today!
In Solidarity with Our First Responders,
Friday, August 9, 2013
"OCCUPY SACRAMENTO WILL PROJECT BRADLEY MANNING WAR CRIME VIDEOS ON SIDES OF SACRAMENTO DOWNTOWN BUILDINGS FRIDAY NIGHT"
2013-08-09 from "Occupy Sacramento!":
Occupy Sacramento and social justice activists - Tonight/Friday/Aug. 9 at 9 p.m.at 15th & J St - will project on downtown Sacramento buildings the controversial war crime videos that were released to the public by Pfc Bradley Manning.
"We will be showing WHAT Pfc. Bradley Manning revealed. He leaked this so we would be able to know how our government is committing war crimes. There will also be a candle light vigil for Bradley Manning while we share what he leaked.
Don't forget to bring some popcorn, candles and signs!" said Occupy Sacramento!
More info:
* link to wikileaks [http://wikileaks.org/cablegate.html]
* leaked audio court statement [http://www.buzzfeed.com/jtes/hear-bradley-mannings-leaked-court-statement]
* [http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/lost-in-the-bradley-manning-narrative-what-he-actually-leaked]
* [http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/michaelmoore-com-exclusive]
* [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/11/cablegate-one-year-later-how-wikileaks-has-influenced-foreign-policy-journalism]
Occupy Sacramento and social justice activists - Tonight/Friday/Aug. 9 at 9 p.m.at 15th & J St - will project on downtown Sacramento buildings the controversial war crime videos that were released to the public by Pfc Bradley Manning.
"We will be showing WHAT Pfc. Bradley Manning revealed. He leaked this so we would be able to know how our government is committing war crimes. There will also be a candle light vigil for Bradley Manning while we share what he leaked.
Don't forget to bring some popcorn, candles and signs!" said Occupy Sacramento!
More info:
* link to wikileaks [http://wikileaks.org/cablegate.html]
* leaked audio court statement [http://www.buzzfeed.com/jtes/hear-bradley-mannings-leaked-court-statement]
* [http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/lost-in-the-bradley-manning-narrative-what-he-actually-leaked]
* [http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/must-read/michaelmoore-com-exclusive]
* [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/11/cablegate-one-year-later-how-wikileaks-has-influenced-foreign-policy-journalism]
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Justice for Oscar Grant
Justice campaigns against Police Murder and Systematic Cover-Up [link]
Oscar Grant Foundation [www.oscargrantfoundation.com/]
Rachel Jackson’s summation of the Oscar Grant truggle for justice, delivered at the 2011-02-19/20 People’s Tribunal [http://peopleshearing.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/rachel-jacksons-summation-of-the-oscar-grant-truggle-for-justice-delivered-feb-11-at-the-peoples-tribunal/]:
More information about the "People's Tribunal" [bayareasolidarity.blogspot.com/2013/01/peoples-hearing-on-racism-police.html]
The Grant Station Project: [northbayuprising.blogspot.com/2010/11/the-grant-station-project.html]
2013-08-07 "Blame in Oscar Grant BART death may shift"
by Bob Egelko from "San Francisco Chronicle" [sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Blame-in-Oscar-Grant-BART-death-may-shift-4713100.php]:
Until now, the courts and the public have placed the responsibility for Oscar Grant's death entirely on the BART police officer who shot the unarmed passenger on an Oakland train platform. But a federal appeals court ruling could shift some of the blame to the officer's supervisor and perhaps the transit system itself.
Former Officer Johannes Mehserle, who fired the shot that killed Grant on Jan. 1, 2009, served 11 months in prison for involuntary manslaughter, and is also a defendant in the damage suit by Grant's father and four of his friends. While allowing claims against Mehserle to go to trial, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a ruling last week stressed the role of the lead officer at the scene, Anthony Pirone.
Based on a plausible view of the evidence, the court said July 30, Pirone had no legal justification for forcing Grant and a friend off of a train and onto the platform, where the fatal encounter occurred.
Detention called unlawful -
Attorney John Burris, who has represented Grant's family in earlier proceedings and represents his friends in the current case, said the ruling confirms what he has maintained all along: "But for (Pirone's) unlawful detention at the outset, Oscar Grant would be alive today."
The practical impact of that conclusion, if endorsed by a jury, would probably be minimal for Pirone and others involved in the current suit. Both Pirone and Mehserle are defendants, and BART, as their former employer, would be responsible for any damages resulting from their conduct on the job.
But a finding of liability by a supervisory officer such Pirone would move the dial of responsibility closer to BART and its leadership.
Pirone wielded more authority than Mehserle, whose actions might be discounted as those of an inexperienced, low-level officer, said Robert Weisberg, a Stanford criminal law professor. Generally speaking, he said, an employer "shouldn't be responsible for the actions of a rogue employee, but for negligent supervision."
Pirone's lawyer, William Rapoport, did not return calls seeking comment. In sworn statements in the case, Pirone has said he feared for his safety, and he could try to justify his actions to a jury if the civil suit against him goes to trial.
The events leading to Grant's death began as Pirone responded to a report of a fight on the train just before it reached Oakland's Fruitvale Station in the early morning hours of New Year's Day.
He approached a group of young black men on the platform and pulled his Taser on them. When three of the men started to walk away, he ordered them to sit down, the court said.
Two others in the group, Grant and his friend Michael Greer, re-entered the train, but Grant, who had been involved in the fight, got out when Pirone shined his Taser beam on him. The officer then pulled Greer from the train, yanking him by the hair and knocking him down when Greer spun to face him, the court said.
Pirone later slugged Grant in the head, saying he had seen Grant place a hand on the officer's partner, Marysol Domenici. At that point, Pirone ordered Mehserle to arrest Grant and another man. Mehserle then pulled Grant down, and Pirone and Mehserle pinned him to the platform, facedown.
Training failed, officer says -
As Grant struggled - to breathe, civilian onlookers said, or to resist, the officers testified - Mehserle arose, told Pirone to step aside, pulled out his gun and shot Grant in the back. Mehserle then handcuffed and searched Grant before the 22-year-old Hayward man was taken to a hospital, where he died.
Mehserle testified that stress and inadequate training caused him to mistake his dark service revolver for the yellow Taser stun gun he thought he was shooting. The jury in his criminal case accepted his explanation and convicted him of manslaughter rather than murder.
Pirone was not criminally prosecuted. He was fired after the incident and is appealing.
BART has paid $2.8 million in settlements to Grant's mother and daughter, and could be assessed additional damages in the suits by Grant's father and the four friends, who spent hours in handcuffs at the transit agency's police station after the shooting.
Like the judge in Mehserle's criminal case, the appeals court last week rejected the former officer's claim that the shooting was legally justified and said it should go to the jury. The court also said a jury should decide whether Pirone had any reasonable basis for detaining Grant and his friends.
Courts usually give officers broad leeway in such heat-of-the-moment decisions, said David Levine, a law professor at UC Hastings in San Francisco.
But in this case, the appeals court said, evidence already presented to a federal judge would entitle a jury to conclude that Pirone had no reason to believe the men had committed any crimes, had no reason to hold them for investigation, and "had no lawful basis to detain the group."
The court cited U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel's findings in 2011 that Pirone had never asked the train operator if anyone was injured, if any weapons were used, if anyone had come forward to talk about the fight, or if the operator could identify any of the five men as participants. Pirone, by his own admission, never entered the train himself or looked for evidence of any crimes, Patel said.
'No apparent threat' -
A jury could rely on that evidence to conclude that Pirone had no reason to detain Grant and his friends, Judge Mary Murguia said in the appeals court's 3-0 ruling.
"Pirone encountered a group of black men who were doing nothing but talking when he arrived" at the Fruitvale Station, were not committing any crimes, and posed no apparent threat that would justify his pulling a weapon and holding them, Murguia said.
2013-07-31 "No Immunity for BART Cops in Oscar Grant Lawsuit"
by Aditi Mukherji [http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2013/07/no-immunity-for-bart-cops-in-oscar-grant-lawsuit.html]:
An Oscar Grant lawsuit against ex-BART police officer Johannes Mehserle and two other officers can proceed, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday. In a unanimous three-judge ruling, the court rejected attempts by the Bay Area Rapid Transit police officers to shield themselves from civil liability by asserting qualified immunity.
Mehserle shot and killed Grant, an unarmed 22-year-old, on the platform of BART's Fruitvale Station in Oakland in the early morning hours of New Year's Day 2009.
Grant's father and five of Grant's friends sued in the aftermath of the highly-publicized incident, which inspired the recently released movie "Fruitvale Station," reports the San Jose Mercury News.
No Qualified Immunity -
Qualified immunity shields public officials from damages for civil liability if they did not violate an individual's "clearly established" statutory or constitutional rights. It's meant to allow officers to do their job without fear of getting sued whenever someone gets hurt.
But the immunity has its limits.
Even while acting in the scope of their employment, officers can still be sued for intentionally violating a person's constitutional rights. Qualified immunity requires that an official act was undertaken in good faith and with due care.
"It is possible, after weighing all the facts, that the officers committed no constitutional wrongs," Judge Mary Murguia wrote in the 9th Circuit's ruling, according to the Mercury News. "But our task at this stage ... is instead to construe the facts in the manner most favorable to the plaintiffs, who have a right to their day in court."
As a result, the court rejected the officers' legal cushion and is allowing the case to proceed to trial.
Wrongful Death and Racial Profiling Alleged -
The complaint alleges that Mehserle should pay damages for Grant's death, and that the three officers violated the civil rights of Grant's friends when they were arrested early on New Year's Day, reports the Mercury News.
Mehserle was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to two years in state prison, which he has already served. Grant's father, however, asserts in the civil lawsuit that the shooting was intentional, and that Mehserle should be held liable for his son's wrongful death.
Grant's friends argue, among other claims, that they were targeted and mistreated based on racial profiling.
2012-11-29 "Oscar Grant movie to compete at 2013 Sundance Film Festival" by "Beat News Service" [http://www.californiabeat.org/2012/11/29/oscar-grant-movie-to-compete-at-2013-sundance-film-festival]:
A movie about the New Year’s Day 2009 shooting of BART passenger Oscar Grant by a police officer has been selected to compete for best dramatic film in the 2013 Sundance Film Festival, festival organizers announced Wednesday.
“Fruitvale” depicts the hours before Grant’s slaying by BART Police Officer Johannes Mehserle at the Fruitvale BART Station in Oakland. The shooting was captured on numerous cameras by witnesses and immediately went viral on the internet.
Academy Award winner Octavia Spencer and ”Chronicle” actor Michael B. Jordan play the roles of Wanda Johnson, Grant’s mother, and the shooting victim respectively.
The production is one of 16 independent movies selected for the US dramatic film competition, the Sundance Institute, which organizes the film festival, said.
CALIFORNIA BEAT’S IN-DEPTH COVERAGE: BART Police Shooting Special Section
The film is directed by Ryan Coogler, an Oakland native who wrote the screenplay at a Sundance Screenwriters Lab. Filming was done at several BART stations in the East Bay and in Downtown San Francisco in July and August.
The movie is currently in post-production and is expected to premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, which will be held in Utah from January 17-27.
Justice for Oscar Grant been denied!
"People v. Mehserle: Petition for review" denied in CA Supreme Court
2012-11-20 "Tony Pirone shouldn't have a badge; A possible twist in the struggle against the Oakland police"
by David McCarthy from "International Socialist Organization" [http://socialistworker.org/2012/11/20/tony-pirone-shouldnt-have-a-badge]:
ANTHONY "TONY" Pirone is seeking arbitration with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to be reinstated to his previous position with the BART police.
SocialistWorker.org readers may remember Pirone as one of the police officers on the Fruitvale BART platform in Oakland when Oscar Grant III was shot and killed by BART Police Officer Johannes Mehserle in the early morning hours of New Year's Day, 2009.
Pirone was caught on camera and observed by witnesses hurling racial epithets at Grant and physically assaulting him. He had his knee on Grant's back while Grant was laying on the platform as Mehserle shot and killed him.
Indeed, many consider Pirone as one of the main instigators in the events leading to Grant's murder.
Pirone, along with his partner Marysol Domenici, while never formally prosecuted for any crime or misconduct, were both fired on the recommendation of an independent consulting law firm regarding violation of BART rules of conduct--specifically, false testimony and physical assault, including Pirone's physical assault on various people and Domenici's violation of procedure in the use of a Taser).
Jack Bryson, the father of two of Oscar's friends who were with him on the platform the night he was killed, and Cephus Johnson, Oscar's uncle, have stated that people within BART management with whom they are in contact with have indicated that there is little chance Pirone will get hired back. But this isn't a certainty.
Bryson and Johnson think that it is highly unlikely Pirone would get his job back. While police in California have always been granted a great deal of leniency regardless how bad their conduct has been, there are reasons to think that BART may be reticent about having Pirone back on the force.
Pirone was used by Mehserle's defense to take a lot of the blame for the events leading up to Grant's murder. His aggressive attitude and the physical assaults against people detained on the platform were used by Mehserle's defense lawyer Michael Rains (infamous for his defense of the Oakland Riders) to label Pirone as the instigator of the events that night in order to attempt to excuse Mehserle's own culpability. Specifically, Rain portrayed Mehserle as an inexperienced "rookie" who got "caught up" in Pirone's violent methods.
That, combined with the defense's racist vilification of Grant, is responsible for Mehserle getting sentenced to only two years for involuntary manslaughter. By throwing Pirone under the bus to take "moral responsibility" for the events that led up to Grant's murder, BART officials and the defense were most likely hoping to avoid what would have been a far more damning scandal to BART, and police in general, in a city notorious for police brutality.
Johnson thinks that BART and the Oakland district attorney used the media blitz around Mehserle's trial to shift focus away from the additional officers who were intimately involved in the escalation of events that lead to Grant's murder. In the eagerness to get some measure of justice for Grant, Pirone and Domenici received less attention.
In the end, even the half-measure of justice that was achieved with Mehserle's conviction meant little. Along with Merhserle getting the lowest possible conviction and sentence, Domenici was re-hired before even a year had passed since her firing, with full back pay.
While hopeful that Pirone's attempts to seek re-hiring will not be successful, we must still say that the limited "justice" meted out after Grant's murder was no real justice at all. If Pirone gets his job back, the lack of real justice for people of color under capitalism will simply be made all the starker by the denial of even that limited "justice."
Any real justice for Grant and other victims of police brutality will not be achieved by leaving it to the courts or BART's discretion, but by building movements in the street capable of fighting back against racism and police violence.
There will be several more arbitration hearings over the next few months, with the last slated for January 2013, at which point a decision will be made.
2012-12-04 "BART Officer Who Fatally Shot Oscar Grant Seeks Legal Shield From Lawsuits"
by Sylvia Ramirez [http://www.kron4.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=5267]:
SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) -- A federal appeals court in San Francisco is mulling a bid by former BART officer Johannes Mehserle and two other officers to be shielded from some of the claims in lawsuits by the father and five friends of Oscar Grant III.
Grant, 22, of Hayward, was fatally shot by Mehserle at BART's Fruitvale station in Oakland early on New Year's Day in 2009. Mehserle and other officers were responding to reports of a fight on a BART train.
Mehserle, 30, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the state court system in a 2010 trial that was moved to Los Angeles County Superior Court because of intense publicity in the Bay Area.
He testified he intended to use a Taser stun gun but accidentally drew his revolver instead. Mehserle was sentenced to two years in prison and released last year after receiving credits that reduced his time served to about a year.
Both the shooting of Grant, which was recorded on cellphone videos by bystanders, and the verdict were followed by large-scale protests in Oakland.
Monday's hearing before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concerned a separate set of federal civil lawsuits filed against several officers by Grant's relatives and five companions who were handcuffed and detained by BART police for several hours.
Parts of the lawsuits have been settled. Sophina Mesa, the mother of Grant's now 8-year-old daughter, Tatiania, settled with BART and officers on behalf of her child for $1.5 million in 2010.
Grant's mother, Wanda Johnson, settled for $1.3 million in 2011.
Remaining in the case are Grant's father, Oscar Grant Jr., who claims loss of familial association, and the five friends, who claim the officers used excessive force and assaulted them when they were detained.
On Monday, a three-judge panel heard arguments for about an hour on contentions by Mehserle, former officer Anthony Pirone and officer Marysol Domenici that they should be protected from parts of the lawsuits by the doctrine of qualified immunity.
The doctrine shields officials from being sued for actions taken in the course of their work that do not violate clearly established rights. The three officers are appealing a 2011 ruling in which U.S. District Judge Marilyn Patel denied immunity on some of the lawsuit claims.
Appeals court judges Mary Murguia, Michael Hawkins and Wallace Tashima took the case under submission and will rule at a later date.
"Mehserle Trial" chronicles from "California Beat" 2010-05-27 to 2010-11 [northbayuprising.blogspot.com/2010/11/mehserle-trial-chronicles-from.html]
2010-10-19 Dueling Boats: "Justice 4 Oscar Grant" vs. "Free Mehserle" [northbayuprising.blogspot.com/2010/10/2010-10-19-dueling-boats-justice-4.html]
"New evidence of a coverup in the murder of Oscar Grant. Whistleblower needs support!" [http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/05/27/18680561.php?show_comments=1]
2011-05 flier:
Buttons made by Tracey Bell-Borden (2013-03) in honor of Oscar Grant 3rd. Tracy is an organizer with various Justice campaigns across the Eastbay.
Oscar Grant Foundation [www.oscargrantfoundation.com/]
Rachel Jackson’s summation of the Oscar Grant truggle for justice, delivered at the 2011-02-19/20 People’s Tribunal [http://peopleshearing.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/rachel-jacksons-summation-of-the-oscar-grant-truggle-for-justice-delivered-feb-11-at-the-peoples-tribunal/]:
More information about the "People's Tribunal" [bayareasolidarity.blogspot.com/2013/01/peoples-hearing-on-racism-police.html]
The Grant Station Project: [northbayuprising.blogspot.com/2010/11/the-grant-station-project.html]
2013-08-07 "Blame in Oscar Grant BART death may shift"
by Bob Egelko from "San Francisco Chronicle" [sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Blame-in-Oscar-Grant-BART-death-may-shift-4713100.php]:
Until now, the courts and the public have placed the responsibility for Oscar Grant's death entirely on the BART police officer who shot the unarmed passenger on an Oakland train platform. But a federal appeals court ruling could shift some of the blame to the officer's supervisor and perhaps the transit system itself.
Former Officer Johannes Mehserle, who fired the shot that killed Grant on Jan. 1, 2009, served 11 months in prison for involuntary manslaughter, and is also a defendant in the damage suit by Grant's father and four of his friends. While allowing claims against Mehserle to go to trial, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a ruling last week stressed the role of the lead officer at the scene, Anthony Pirone.
Based on a plausible view of the evidence, the court said July 30, Pirone had no legal justification for forcing Grant and a friend off of a train and onto the platform, where the fatal encounter occurred.
Detention called unlawful -
Attorney John Burris, who has represented Grant's family in earlier proceedings and represents his friends in the current case, said the ruling confirms what he has maintained all along: "But for (Pirone's) unlawful detention at the outset, Oscar Grant would be alive today."
The practical impact of that conclusion, if endorsed by a jury, would probably be minimal for Pirone and others involved in the current suit. Both Pirone and Mehserle are defendants, and BART, as their former employer, would be responsible for any damages resulting from their conduct on the job.
But a finding of liability by a supervisory officer such Pirone would move the dial of responsibility closer to BART and its leadership.
Pirone wielded more authority than Mehserle, whose actions might be discounted as those of an inexperienced, low-level officer, said Robert Weisberg, a Stanford criminal law professor. Generally speaking, he said, an employer "shouldn't be responsible for the actions of a rogue employee, but for negligent supervision."
Pirone's lawyer, William Rapoport, did not return calls seeking comment. In sworn statements in the case, Pirone has said he feared for his safety, and he could try to justify his actions to a jury if the civil suit against him goes to trial.
The events leading to Grant's death began as Pirone responded to a report of a fight on the train just before it reached Oakland's Fruitvale Station in the early morning hours of New Year's Day.
He approached a group of young black men on the platform and pulled his Taser on them. When three of the men started to walk away, he ordered them to sit down, the court said.
Two others in the group, Grant and his friend Michael Greer, re-entered the train, but Grant, who had been involved in the fight, got out when Pirone shined his Taser beam on him. The officer then pulled Greer from the train, yanking him by the hair and knocking him down when Greer spun to face him, the court said.
Pirone later slugged Grant in the head, saying he had seen Grant place a hand on the officer's partner, Marysol Domenici. At that point, Pirone ordered Mehserle to arrest Grant and another man. Mehserle then pulled Grant down, and Pirone and Mehserle pinned him to the platform, facedown.
Training failed, officer says -
As Grant struggled - to breathe, civilian onlookers said, or to resist, the officers testified - Mehserle arose, told Pirone to step aside, pulled out his gun and shot Grant in the back. Mehserle then handcuffed and searched Grant before the 22-year-old Hayward man was taken to a hospital, where he died.
Mehserle testified that stress and inadequate training caused him to mistake his dark service revolver for the yellow Taser stun gun he thought he was shooting. The jury in his criminal case accepted his explanation and convicted him of manslaughter rather than murder.
Pirone was not criminally prosecuted. He was fired after the incident and is appealing.
BART has paid $2.8 million in settlements to Grant's mother and daughter, and could be assessed additional damages in the suits by Grant's father and the four friends, who spent hours in handcuffs at the transit agency's police station after the shooting.
Like the judge in Mehserle's criminal case, the appeals court last week rejected the former officer's claim that the shooting was legally justified and said it should go to the jury. The court also said a jury should decide whether Pirone had any reasonable basis for detaining Grant and his friends.
Courts usually give officers broad leeway in such heat-of-the-moment decisions, said David Levine, a law professor at UC Hastings in San Francisco.
But in this case, the appeals court said, evidence already presented to a federal judge would entitle a jury to conclude that Pirone had no reason to believe the men had committed any crimes, had no reason to hold them for investigation, and "had no lawful basis to detain the group."
The court cited U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel's findings in 2011 that Pirone had never asked the train operator if anyone was injured, if any weapons were used, if anyone had come forward to talk about the fight, or if the operator could identify any of the five men as participants. Pirone, by his own admission, never entered the train himself or looked for evidence of any crimes, Patel said.
'No apparent threat' -
A jury could rely on that evidence to conclude that Pirone had no reason to detain Grant and his friends, Judge Mary Murguia said in the appeals court's 3-0 ruling.
"Pirone encountered a group of black men who were doing nothing but talking when he arrived" at the Fruitvale Station, were not committing any crimes, and posed no apparent threat that would justify his pulling a weapon and holding them, Murguia said.
2013-07-31 "No Immunity for BART Cops in Oscar Grant Lawsuit"
by Aditi Mukherji [http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2013/07/no-immunity-for-bart-cops-in-oscar-grant-lawsuit.html]:
An Oscar Grant lawsuit against ex-BART police officer Johannes Mehserle and two other officers can proceed, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday. In a unanimous three-judge ruling, the court rejected attempts by the Bay Area Rapid Transit police officers to shield themselves from civil liability by asserting qualified immunity.
Mehserle shot and killed Grant, an unarmed 22-year-old, on the platform of BART's Fruitvale Station in Oakland in the early morning hours of New Year's Day 2009.
Grant's father and five of Grant's friends sued in the aftermath of the highly-publicized incident, which inspired the recently released movie "Fruitvale Station," reports the San Jose Mercury News.
No Qualified Immunity -
Qualified immunity shields public officials from damages for civil liability if they did not violate an individual's "clearly established" statutory or constitutional rights. It's meant to allow officers to do their job without fear of getting sued whenever someone gets hurt.
But the immunity has its limits.
Even while acting in the scope of their employment, officers can still be sued for intentionally violating a person's constitutional rights. Qualified immunity requires that an official act was undertaken in good faith and with due care.
"It is possible, after weighing all the facts, that the officers committed no constitutional wrongs," Judge Mary Murguia wrote in the 9th Circuit's ruling, according to the Mercury News. "But our task at this stage ... is instead to construe the facts in the manner most favorable to the plaintiffs, who have a right to their day in court."
As a result, the court rejected the officers' legal cushion and is allowing the case to proceed to trial.
Wrongful Death and Racial Profiling Alleged -
The complaint alleges that Mehserle should pay damages for Grant's death, and that the three officers violated the civil rights of Grant's friends when they were arrested early on New Year's Day, reports the Mercury News.
Mehserle was convicted of involuntary manslaughter and sentenced to two years in state prison, which he has already served. Grant's father, however, asserts in the civil lawsuit that the shooting was intentional, and that Mehserle should be held liable for his son's wrongful death.
Grant's friends argue, among other claims, that they were targeted and mistreated based on racial profiling.
2012-11-29 "Oscar Grant movie to compete at 2013 Sundance Film Festival" by "Beat News Service" [http://www.californiabeat.org/2012/11/29/oscar-grant-movie-to-compete-at-2013-sundance-film-festival]:
A movie about the New Year’s Day 2009 shooting of BART passenger Oscar Grant by a police officer has been selected to compete for best dramatic film in the 2013 Sundance Film Festival, festival organizers announced Wednesday.
“Fruitvale” depicts the hours before Grant’s slaying by BART Police Officer Johannes Mehserle at the Fruitvale BART Station in Oakland. The shooting was captured on numerous cameras by witnesses and immediately went viral on the internet.
Academy Award winner Octavia Spencer and ”Chronicle” actor Michael B. Jordan play the roles of Wanda Johnson, Grant’s mother, and the shooting victim respectively.
The production is one of 16 independent movies selected for the US dramatic film competition, the Sundance Institute, which organizes the film festival, said.
CALIFORNIA BEAT’S IN-DEPTH COVERAGE: BART Police Shooting Special Section
The film is directed by Ryan Coogler, an Oakland native who wrote the screenplay at a Sundance Screenwriters Lab. Filming was done at several BART stations in the East Bay and in Downtown San Francisco in July and August.
The movie is currently in post-production and is expected to premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, which will be held in Utah from January 17-27.
Justice for Oscar Grant been denied!
"People v. Mehserle: Petition for review" denied in CA Supreme Court
2012-11-20 "Tony Pirone shouldn't have a badge; A possible twist in the struggle against the Oakland police"
by David McCarthy from "International Socialist Organization" [http://socialistworker.org/2012/11/20/tony-pirone-shouldnt-have-a-badge]:
ANTHONY "TONY" Pirone is seeking arbitration with Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to be reinstated to his previous position with the BART police.
SocialistWorker.org readers may remember Pirone as one of the police officers on the Fruitvale BART platform in Oakland when Oscar Grant III was shot and killed by BART Police Officer Johannes Mehserle in the early morning hours of New Year's Day, 2009.
Pirone was caught on camera and observed by witnesses hurling racial epithets at Grant and physically assaulting him. He had his knee on Grant's back while Grant was laying on the platform as Mehserle shot and killed him.
Indeed, many consider Pirone as one of the main instigators in the events leading to Grant's murder.
Pirone, along with his partner Marysol Domenici, while never formally prosecuted for any crime or misconduct, were both fired on the recommendation of an independent consulting law firm regarding violation of BART rules of conduct--specifically, false testimony and physical assault, including Pirone's physical assault on various people and Domenici's violation of procedure in the use of a Taser).
Jack Bryson, the father of two of Oscar's friends who were with him on the platform the night he was killed, and Cephus Johnson, Oscar's uncle, have stated that people within BART management with whom they are in contact with have indicated that there is little chance Pirone will get hired back. But this isn't a certainty.
Bryson and Johnson think that it is highly unlikely Pirone would get his job back. While police in California have always been granted a great deal of leniency regardless how bad their conduct has been, there are reasons to think that BART may be reticent about having Pirone back on the force.
Pirone was used by Mehserle's defense to take a lot of the blame for the events leading up to Grant's murder. His aggressive attitude and the physical assaults against people detained on the platform were used by Mehserle's defense lawyer Michael Rains (infamous for his defense of the Oakland Riders) to label Pirone as the instigator of the events that night in order to attempt to excuse Mehserle's own culpability. Specifically, Rain portrayed Mehserle as an inexperienced "rookie" who got "caught up" in Pirone's violent methods.
That, combined with the defense's racist vilification of Grant, is responsible for Mehserle getting sentenced to only two years for involuntary manslaughter. By throwing Pirone under the bus to take "moral responsibility" for the events that led up to Grant's murder, BART officials and the defense were most likely hoping to avoid what would have been a far more damning scandal to BART, and police in general, in a city notorious for police brutality.
Johnson thinks that BART and the Oakland district attorney used the media blitz around Mehserle's trial to shift focus away from the additional officers who were intimately involved in the escalation of events that lead to Grant's murder. In the eagerness to get some measure of justice for Grant, Pirone and Domenici received less attention.
In the end, even the half-measure of justice that was achieved with Mehserle's conviction meant little. Along with Merhserle getting the lowest possible conviction and sentence, Domenici was re-hired before even a year had passed since her firing, with full back pay.
While hopeful that Pirone's attempts to seek re-hiring will not be successful, we must still say that the limited "justice" meted out after Grant's murder was no real justice at all. If Pirone gets his job back, the lack of real justice for people of color under capitalism will simply be made all the starker by the denial of even that limited "justice."
Any real justice for Grant and other victims of police brutality will not be achieved by leaving it to the courts or BART's discretion, but by building movements in the street capable of fighting back against racism and police violence.
There will be several more arbitration hearings over the next few months, with the last slated for January 2013, at which point a decision will be made.
2012-12-04 "BART Officer Who Fatally Shot Oscar Grant Seeks Legal Shield From Lawsuits"
by Sylvia Ramirez [http://www.kron4.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=5267]:
SAN FRANCISCO (BCN) -- A federal appeals court in San Francisco is mulling a bid by former BART officer Johannes Mehserle and two other officers to be shielded from some of the claims in lawsuits by the father and five friends of Oscar Grant III.
Grant, 22, of Hayward, was fatally shot by Mehserle at BART's Fruitvale station in Oakland early on New Year's Day in 2009. Mehserle and other officers were responding to reports of a fight on a BART train.
Mehserle, 30, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the state court system in a 2010 trial that was moved to Los Angeles County Superior Court because of intense publicity in the Bay Area.
He testified he intended to use a Taser stun gun but accidentally drew his revolver instead. Mehserle was sentenced to two years in prison and released last year after receiving credits that reduced his time served to about a year.
Both the shooting of Grant, which was recorded on cellphone videos by bystanders, and the verdict were followed by large-scale protests in Oakland.
Monday's hearing before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concerned a separate set of federal civil lawsuits filed against several officers by Grant's relatives and five companions who were handcuffed and detained by BART police for several hours.
Parts of the lawsuits have been settled. Sophina Mesa, the mother of Grant's now 8-year-old daughter, Tatiania, settled with BART and officers on behalf of her child for $1.5 million in 2010.
Grant's mother, Wanda Johnson, settled for $1.3 million in 2011.
Remaining in the case are Grant's father, Oscar Grant Jr., who claims loss of familial association, and the five friends, who claim the officers used excessive force and assaulted them when they were detained.
On Monday, a three-judge panel heard arguments for about an hour on contentions by Mehserle, former officer Anthony Pirone and officer Marysol Domenici that they should be protected from parts of the lawsuits by the doctrine of qualified immunity.
The doctrine shields officials from being sued for actions taken in the course of their work that do not violate clearly established rights. The three officers are appealing a 2011 ruling in which U.S. District Judge Marilyn Patel denied immunity on some of the lawsuit claims.
Appeals court judges Mary Murguia, Michael Hawkins and Wallace Tashima took the case under submission and will rule at a later date.
"Mehserle Trial" chronicles from "California Beat" 2010-05-27 to 2010-11 [northbayuprising.blogspot.com/2010/11/mehserle-trial-chronicles-from.html]
2010-10-19 Dueling Boats: "Justice 4 Oscar Grant" vs. "Free Mehserle" [northbayuprising.blogspot.com/2010/10/2010-10-19-dueling-boats-justice-4.html]
"New evidence of a coverup in the murder of Oscar Grant. Whistleblower needs support!" [http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/05/27/18680561.php?show_comments=1]
2011-05 flier:
Buttons made by Tracey Bell-Borden (2013-03) in honor of Oscar Grant 3rd. Tracy is an organizer with various Justice campaigns across the Eastbay.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
"Hip Hop and the New Slavery, Rap stars speak on music industry shackles, and prison industrial complex: A new trend?"
2013-08-06 by Toure Muhammad from "The Final Call" newspaper [www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/National_News_2/article_100633.shtml]:
(FinalCall.com) - Rappers talking about oppressive, unfair record deals, the false trappings of capitalism and the prison industrial complex is not new to hip hop, but it’s usually the underground, unsigned and/or activists, artists who talk about it.
But well-known artists, including Kanye West and rising star J. Cole, have raised these topics in recent music. Kanye and J. Cole had CDs released on the same date, June 18, the day before the annual Juneteenth celebrations in the Black community. Could this be a new trend with more artists unafraid, fed up and/or frustrated enough to confront and analyze more complex, relevant social topics in their music?
“After years of some of the most self-hating and ignorant music our people have ever been forced to digest, this is definitely new and refreshing what J. Cole and Kanye West are saying. I hope it spreads like wildfire to other artists. We need balance back in all forms of Black music, no question,” said Kevin Powell, president and cofounder of BK Nation, a new national organization based in New York City.
J. Cole’s project, “Born Sinner” has a track titled “Runaway” where he discusses how a conversation with his racist manager had him thinking about the legacy of chattel slavery in America: “Made me reflect on the time when we was 3/5s of them/chains and powerless/brave souls reduced to cowardice … ”
Then he makes the connection to today: “Rich white man rule the nation still/Only difference is we all slaves now, the chains still concealed.”
Kanye’s new release, “Yeezus” has a track titled “New Slaves” which rails against racism, capitalism and the prison industrial complex: “My momma was raised in an era when, clean water was only served to the fairer skin ... use to be only n----rs now everybody playing, spending everything on Alexander Wang … meanwhile the DEA teamed up with the CCA. They trying to lock niggas up, they trying to make a new state. See that’s the privately-owned prison, get your piece today.”
DEA refers to the Drug Enforcement Association and the CCA refers to the Corrections Corporation of America, which along with the GEO Group are the two biggest corporations that operate for profit prisons and detention centers in the United States.
Even in Lil Wayne’s latest project “I Am Not a Human Being Part 2,” he ruminates about if he will die today or go to jail right after these lyrics in a song titled “God Bless America:” “Yeah, my country tis of thee, Sweet land of kill ‘em all and let ‘em die, God bless America, uh, This so Godless America.”
Both the Republican and Democratic parties have supported the increased incarceration rate.
Initially, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan pushed and established the current drug war policies that caused the prison population to jump, but Bill Clinton leaned heavily to the right with “tough on crime” policies that continued the Republican policies and caused a boom in the prison population. There is no sign that trend has changed. Vice President Joe Biden, a senator during the Clinton administration, wrote the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which, among other things, called for $9.7 billion in increased funding for prisons and stiffer penalties for drug offenders.
One can actually go back to the Constitution itself to see the root of current policies. The 13th Amendment of the Constitution outlawed slavery except for criminals. It reads: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
So, a convicted person is legally a slave. Consequently, slavery was never fully abolished, and prisoners in America have very little to almost no rights at all.
The 2011 U.S. incarceration rate of 716 people per 100,000 is the highest in the world and more than 60 percent of the people in prison are racial and ethnic minorities. For Black males in their thirties, 1 in every 10 is in prison or jail on any given day. These trends have been intensified by the disproportionate impact of the war on drugs, in which two-thirds of all persons in prison for drug offenses are people of color, according to the Sentencing Project.
If you can’t find work at a major U.S. company, just go to jail, you’ll find work quickly. According to Russia Today, hundreds of American companies such as Starbucks, Nintendo, Victoria’s Secret, JC Penney, Sears, Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Eddie Bauer, Wendy’s, Proctor & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson, Fruit of the Loom, Motorola, Caterpiller, Sara Lee, Quaker Oats, Mary Kay, or Microsoft use prison labor. Lucky prisoners get minimum wage, others get pennies an hour and yet others, no pay at all.
Some prisons have commercials advertising their captive workforce that never has baby sitting or transportation problems. Prison labor is being harvested on a massive scale, according to professors Steve Fraser, editor-at-large of New Labor Forum and Joshua B. Freeman, who teaches history at Queens College and at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and is affiliated with its Joseph S. Murphy Labor Institute.
“All told, nearly a million prisoners are now making office furniture, working in call centers, fabricating body armor, taking hotel reservations, working in slaughterhouses, or manufacturing textiles, shoes, and clothing, while getting paid somewhere between 93 cents and $4.73 per day,” the professors said.
While the recent lyrics are a good sign, activist and writer Powell doesn’t think that the next movement will come from the Hip Hop community, although it could help spread the word about it. “Movements come from people who are actually socially conscious and engaged. Cultural movements are inspired by political movements. The Black Arts Movement was inspired by the civil rights movement. So until we have another very serious political movement springing from our communities the culture is not going to change any time soon,” he said.
(FinalCall.com) - Rappers talking about oppressive, unfair record deals, the false trappings of capitalism and the prison industrial complex is not new to hip hop, but it’s usually the underground, unsigned and/or activists, artists who talk about it.
But well-known artists, including Kanye West and rising star J. Cole, have raised these topics in recent music. Kanye and J. Cole had CDs released on the same date, June 18, the day before the annual Juneteenth celebrations in the Black community. Could this be a new trend with more artists unafraid, fed up and/or frustrated enough to confront and analyze more complex, relevant social topics in their music?
“After years of some of the most self-hating and ignorant music our people have ever been forced to digest, this is definitely new and refreshing what J. Cole and Kanye West are saying. I hope it spreads like wildfire to other artists. We need balance back in all forms of Black music, no question,” said Kevin Powell, president and cofounder of BK Nation, a new national organization based in New York City.
J. Cole’s project, “Born Sinner” has a track titled “Runaway” where he discusses how a conversation with his racist manager had him thinking about the legacy of chattel slavery in America: “Made me reflect on the time when we was 3/5s of them/chains and powerless/brave souls reduced to cowardice … ”
Then he makes the connection to today: “Rich white man rule the nation still/Only difference is we all slaves now, the chains still concealed.”
Kanye’s new release, “Yeezus” has a track titled “New Slaves” which rails against racism, capitalism and the prison industrial complex: “My momma was raised in an era when, clean water was only served to the fairer skin ... use to be only n----rs now everybody playing, spending everything on Alexander Wang … meanwhile the DEA teamed up with the CCA. They trying to lock niggas up, they trying to make a new state. See that’s the privately-owned prison, get your piece today.”
DEA refers to the Drug Enforcement Association and the CCA refers to the Corrections Corporation of America, which along with the GEO Group are the two biggest corporations that operate for profit prisons and detention centers in the United States.
Even in Lil Wayne’s latest project “I Am Not a Human Being Part 2,” he ruminates about if he will die today or go to jail right after these lyrics in a song titled “God Bless America:” “Yeah, my country tis of thee, Sweet land of kill ‘em all and let ‘em die, God bless America, uh, This so Godless America.”
Both the Republican and Democratic parties have supported the increased incarceration rate.
Initially, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan pushed and established the current drug war policies that caused the prison population to jump, but Bill Clinton leaned heavily to the right with “tough on crime” policies that continued the Republican policies and caused a boom in the prison population. There is no sign that trend has changed. Vice President Joe Biden, a senator during the Clinton administration, wrote the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which, among other things, called for $9.7 billion in increased funding for prisons and stiffer penalties for drug offenders.
One can actually go back to the Constitution itself to see the root of current policies. The 13th Amendment of the Constitution outlawed slavery except for criminals. It reads: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
So, a convicted person is legally a slave. Consequently, slavery was never fully abolished, and prisoners in America have very little to almost no rights at all.
The 2011 U.S. incarceration rate of 716 people per 100,000 is the highest in the world and more than 60 percent of the people in prison are racial and ethnic minorities. For Black males in their thirties, 1 in every 10 is in prison or jail on any given day. These trends have been intensified by the disproportionate impact of the war on drugs, in which two-thirds of all persons in prison for drug offenses are people of color, according to the Sentencing Project.
If you can’t find work at a major U.S. company, just go to jail, you’ll find work quickly. According to Russia Today, hundreds of American companies such as Starbucks, Nintendo, Victoria’s Secret, JC Penney, Sears, Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Eddie Bauer, Wendy’s, Proctor & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson, Fruit of the Loom, Motorola, Caterpiller, Sara Lee, Quaker Oats, Mary Kay, or Microsoft use prison labor. Lucky prisoners get minimum wage, others get pennies an hour and yet others, no pay at all.
Some prisons have commercials advertising their captive workforce that never has baby sitting or transportation problems. Prison labor is being harvested on a massive scale, according to professors Steve Fraser, editor-at-large of New Labor Forum and Joshua B. Freeman, who teaches history at Queens College and at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and is affiliated with its Joseph S. Murphy Labor Institute.
“All told, nearly a million prisoners are now making office furniture, working in call centers, fabricating body armor, taking hotel reservations, working in slaughterhouses, or manufacturing textiles, shoes, and clothing, while getting paid somewhere between 93 cents and $4.73 per day,” the professors said.
While the recent lyrics are a good sign, activist and writer Powell doesn’t think that the next movement will come from the Hip Hop community, although it could help spread the word about it. “Movements come from people who are actually socially conscious and engaged. Cultural movements are inspired by political movements. The Black Arts Movement was inspired by the civil rights movement. So until we have another very serious political movement springing from our communities the culture is not going to change any time soon,” he said.
Contra Costa County disables Affordable Care Act Call Center, mistreats workers
2013-08-06 "Healthcare Reform: It's Comedy Central in Contra Costa County"
from "SEIU 1021 NewsWire":
It's the kind of story you know John Oliver (filling in for Jon Stewart) would love.
Last week we reported that employees of the Affordable Care Act Call Center in Concord were told the full-time jobs with benefits they started last month were in reality "permanent intermittent" (less than part-time) jobs with no health care benefits at all. The call center is one of three established in the state to help citizens enroll in new health care options under the Affordable Care Act.
"The confusion and the fact that some call center employees do not receive employer paid health care — despite their jobs enrolling citizens in a universal health care program — have brought national attention to Contra Costa," the Contra Costa Times reported [http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_23787798/obamacare-call-center-fiasco-explained-by-contra-costa].
That irony got the Daily Show sniffing around in search of its next lampoon. Let the comedy begin.
2013-08-06 "Concord: State delays slowing Obamacare call center training"
by Matthias Gafni from " Contra Costa Times" [http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_23807144/concord-state-delays-slowing-obamacare-call-center-training]:
MARTINEZ -- On Oct. 1, the day the state is scheduled to begin taking calls enrolling citizens in Obamacare, the controversial Concord call center may be the only one that is operational statewide, the Contra Costa official supervising the project said Tuesday.
Training material has been delayed, hiring has been slow in the two other state-run call centers in Fresno and Rancho Cordova, and the computer system is nowhere near complete, Kathy Gallagher, employment and human services director, told county supervisors.
In her report updating the county's much criticized hiring process, Gallagher said delays in getting other call centers up and running will not force Contra Costa County to subsidize its center's operations from the general fund.
"My concern is to make sure this remains cost-neutral to the county," Supervisor Candace Andersen said.
The delays are the latest bumps in the state's effort to implement the federal Affordable Care Act. The county, which won a contract to host the call center earlier this year, had championed its 204 jobs as a boon for the regional economy. But complaints that many newly hired workers only recently learned their jobs were part time without benefits has overshadowed the good news.
In its bid for the center, Contra Costa County stated that it would have 90 full-time call service agents and 90 agents who are "permanent intermittent," a classification below part-time where the worker is guaranteed no hours and pays 100 percent of their own health care to start. The county does offer health benefits for those employees as long as they work at least 50 percent of full time hours for three consecutive months. However, they contribute more toward their premiums than other workers.
That information was not always conveyed to job seekers, or to county officials. Public staff reports showed the 90-90 split, but in some charts all of the jobs were shown as full-time. The job listing also stated the positions were full time.
One call center employee, who wished to remain anonymous out of fear of job loss, said all call center employees received "verbal contracts."
"We were asked if we would accept the full-time employment in a phone call and were asked to respond that we would accept the offer," the employee said. "Which we did."
Many of those employees said they would have never left previous jobs to take the call center positions had they known they were not guaranteed hours or health care.
"At the end of the day, the impacts on those folks are real, and we need to be mindful of them," supervisor Mary Piepho said, adding there was a "lack of consistency in the flow of communication."
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, whose district covers the call center, asked staff to return with a report by the end of September on what will happen to those affected employees.
"We have to fix the problem that we've created for the people who have left other jobs, who thought they were getting full-time jobs with benefits," Mitchoff said.
She said they may need workers who are "permanent intermittent" because of the long hours the center will be open to the public, and staffing needs to be flexible. She said the call center will gauge demand once Obamacare enrollment debuts.
In addition to the state delays that are out of the county's control, Gallagher said they are faced with an unprecedented implementation.
"There is no template, there is no guidebook," she said.
For instance, the computer system delay is causing the county to create "manual workarounds" so they can be ready for a soft launch Aug. 19 where they will start taking inquiries from the public. On Oct. 1, they will start enrolling citizens, and the program will start Jan. 1.
The confusion and the fact that some call center employees do not receive employer paid health care -- despite their jobs enrolling citizens in a universal health care program -- have brought national attention to Contra Costa. "I don't want to be a poster child out there," Mitchoff said.
"The ridicule is unfair. The system is new and there are bugs in it," Piepho said. She added that much of the national attention is from detractors of the Affordable Care Act in general.
2013-08-04 "Obamacare call center fiasco explained by Contra Costa County officials"
by Matthias Gafni from "Contra Costa Times" [http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_23787798/obamacare-call-center-fiasco-explained-by-contra-costa]:
CONCORD -- Part-time Affordable Care Act call center employees who felt bamboozled in the expedited hiring process will remain without health benefits as the county, labor and elected officials sort through what went wrong in a story that has garnered nationwide attention.
Contra Costa's Employment and Human Services director, who oversaw the creation of the Concord call center, released a report Thursday detailing what led to the benefits controversy, acknowledging some mistakes, but calling it an overall success.
"Given the breadth and extent of the call center recruitment; the enormous interest and response of applicants; the short time frame by which to test, interview, select, conduct background checks, and make employment offers and hire individuals by July 10," Kathy Gallagher wrote, "the hiring process for the call center was very successful and relatively few complaints were received."
Meanwhile, many employees are still fuming over the experience, and union lawyers are investigating the hiring process, which included job listings announcing the positions as full time. Instead, many newly hired workers found out their jobs were part time, and that they would not be receive health benefits.
It was the latest speed bump for the call center, one of three in California but the only one not operated by the state. Even after Contra Costa secured the call center, Concord and Richmond battled for the right to host it and later labor threatened to bag the project without promises.
The call center is supposed to have a soft opening this month, begin fielding Obamacare calls Oct. 1, and enroll citizens Jan. 1.
With more than 7,000 applicants, the county was overwhelmed with the response, particularly because it also had to deal with moving deadlines from the state, Gallagher said in her report. The 152 customer service agents were hired "in spite of false starts, missteps and schedule changes by the state that are inherent in and expected as part of a new national initiative of this size and magnitude." She said the state's two other call centers have had troubles hiring employees on time.
A 52-year-old Brentwood woman who found out late in the process she would be part time was so fed up she resigned days later.
"It was very disappointing and they manipulated us and it's kind of maddening," she said, declining to give her name out of fear she could not get a future county job.
Many of the call center employees overcame long periods of unemployment or underemployment, she said, and cried when they were suddenly told they would be part time. She did the math and realized rather than paying $600 a month for health insurance as a call center part-time employee, she would return to her bookkeeping and accounting job from home and enroll in Obamacare for $243 a month.
"I'm going to be one of those people calling them once the call center opens," she said.
Contra Costa likely landed the call center because of its bid, which included 90 full-time customer service agents and 90 part time, to keep costs down and to provide flexibility during extended hours and as the center determined demand.
"In order to make it work, we needed that," said county Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, who represents the call center's district.
There are 42 part-timers left, Mitchoff said. Despite staff reports alerting supervisors and the public of the 90-90 split, the supervisor said she expected them to all have benefits.
"We were talking about this being good jobs and that's why we want them coming to the county," Mitchoff said.
One part-time employee, who did not want to be named for fear of losing the job, left a full-time position to take what many thought was a more secure call center position.
"This thing has been a nightmare," the employee said, adding that human resources officials came to the call center Thursday and apologized for how the process has gone.
Anna Bakalis, a spokeswoman for Service Employees International Union Local 1021, said the union was "pressured to say yes to the 50-50" split of full-time and part-time positions. As the county tried to secure the contract, the union that represents the call takers was told that fighting the ratio could derail the project, she said.
"The jobs had been championed as full time the whole time," Bakalis said.
She said the situation at the new call center follows a government employment trend of "part-timeization," where formerly full-time jobs are now part time so agencies do not have to offer health benefits and pensions.
Supervisors will discuss the report Tuesday at their 9 a.m. meeting.
"There was no intent to hire people with no benefits whose job it was to get people benefits," Mitchoff said.
That irony has drawn nationwide attention. Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," which is known to lampoon government, has started sniffing around. And Mitchoff has turned down an interview with Fox News.
"I was concerned they were going to use this story to criticize the Affordable Care Act," she said.
By the numbers
7,457: Applications received for call center positions
6: Civil service examinations administered
1,947: Passed exam
721: Indicated interest in part-time or intermittent work
600: Interviews conducted for customer service agent positions
152: Customer service agents hired
from "SEIU 1021 NewsWire":
It's the kind of story you know John Oliver (filling in for Jon Stewart) would love.
Last week we reported that employees of the Affordable Care Act Call Center in Concord were told the full-time jobs with benefits they started last month were in reality "permanent intermittent" (less than part-time) jobs with no health care benefits at all. The call center is one of three established in the state to help citizens enroll in new health care options under the Affordable Care Act.
"The confusion and the fact that some call center employees do not receive employer paid health care — despite their jobs enrolling citizens in a universal health care program — have brought national attention to Contra Costa," the Contra Costa Times reported [http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_23787798/obamacare-call-center-fiasco-explained-by-contra-costa].
That irony got the Daily Show sniffing around in search of its next lampoon. Let the comedy begin.
2013-08-06 "Concord: State delays slowing Obamacare call center training"
by Matthias Gafni from " Contra Costa Times" [http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_23807144/concord-state-delays-slowing-obamacare-call-center-training]:
MARTINEZ -- On Oct. 1, the day the state is scheduled to begin taking calls enrolling citizens in Obamacare, the controversial Concord call center may be the only one that is operational statewide, the Contra Costa official supervising the project said Tuesday.
Training material has been delayed, hiring has been slow in the two other state-run call centers in Fresno and Rancho Cordova, and the computer system is nowhere near complete, Kathy Gallagher, employment and human services director, told county supervisors.
In her report updating the county's much criticized hiring process, Gallagher said delays in getting other call centers up and running will not force Contra Costa County to subsidize its center's operations from the general fund.
"My concern is to make sure this remains cost-neutral to the county," Supervisor Candace Andersen said.
The delays are the latest bumps in the state's effort to implement the federal Affordable Care Act. The county, which won a contract to host the call center earlier this year, had championed its 204 jobs as a boon for the regional economy. But complaints that many newly hired workers only recently learned their jobs were part time without benefits has overshadowed the good news.
In its bid for the center, Contra Costa County stated that it would have 90 full-time call service agents and 90 agents who are "permanent intermittent," a classification below part-time where the worker is guaranteed no hours and pays 100 percent of their own health care to start. The county does offer health benefits for those employees as long as they work at least 50 percent of full time hours for three consecutive months. However, they contribute more toward their premiums than other workers.
That information was not always conveyed to job seekers, or to county officials. Public staff reports showed the 90-90 split, but in some charts all of the jobs were shown as full-time. The job listing also stated the positions were full time.
One call center employee, who wished to remain anonymous out of fear of job loss, said all call center employees received "verbal contracts."
"We were asked if we would accept the full-time employment in a phone call and were asked to respond that we would accept the offer," the employee said. "Which we did."
Many of those employees said they would have never left previous jobs to take the call center positions had they known they were not guaranteed hours or health care.
"At the end of the day, the impacts on those folks are real, and we need to be mindful of them," supervisor Mary Piepho said, adding there was a "lack of consistency in the flow of communication."
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, whose district covers the call center, asked staff to return with a report by the end of September on what will happen to those affected employees.
"We have to fix the problem that we've created for the people who have left other jobs, who thought they were getting full-time jobs with benefits," Mitchoff said.
She said they may need workers who are "permanent intermittent" because of the long hours the center will be open to the public, and staffing needs to be flexible. She said the call center will gauge demand once Obamacare enrollment debuts.
In addition to the state delays that are out of the county's control, Gallagher said they are faced with an unprecedented implementation.
"There is no template, there is no guidebook," she said.
For instance, the computer system delay is causing the county to create "manual workarounds" so they can be ready for a soft launch Aug. 19 where they will start taking inquiries from the public. On Oct. 1, they will start enrolling citizens, and the program will start Jan. 1.
The confusion and the fact that some call center employees do not receive employer paid health care -- despite their jobs enrolling citizens in a universal health care program -- have brought national attention to Contra Costa. "I don't want to be a poster child out there," Mitchoff said.
"The ridicule is unfair. The system is new and there are bugs in it," Piepho said. She added that much of the national attention is from detractors of the Affordable Care Act in general.
2013-08-04 "Obamacare call center fiasco explained by Contra Costa County officials"
by Matthias Gafni from "Contra Costa Times" [http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_23787798/obamacare-call-center-fiasco-explained-by-contra-costa]:
CONCORD -- Part-time Affordable Care Act call center employees who felt bamboozled in the expedited hiring process will remain without health benefits as the county, labor and elected officials sort through what went wrong in a story that has garnered nationwide attention.
Contra Costa's Employment and Human Services director, who oversaw the creation of the Concord call center, released a report Thursday detailing what led to the benefits controversy, acknowledging some mistakes, but calling it an overall success.
"Given the breadth and extent of the call center recruitment; the enormous interest and response of applicants; the short time frame by which to test, interview, select, conduct background checks, and make employment offers and hire individuals by July 10," Kathy Gallagher wrote, "the hiring process for the call center was very successful and relatively few complaints were received."
Meanwhile, many employees are still fuming over the experience, and union lawyers are investigating the hiring process, which included job listings announcing the positions as full time. Instead, many newly hired workers found out their jobs were part time, and that they would not be receive health benefits.
It was the latest speed bump for the call center, one of three in California but the only one not operated by the state. Even after Contra Costa secured the call center, Concord and Richmond battled for the right to host it and later labor threatened to bag the project without promises.
The call center is supposed to have a soft opening this month, begin fielding Obamacare calls Oct. 1, and enroll citizens Jan. 1.
With more than 7,000 applicants, the county was overwhelmed with the response, particularly because it also had to deal with moving deadlines from the state, Gallagher said in her report. The 152 customer service agents were hired "in spite of false starts, missteps and schedule changes by the state that are inherent in and expected as part of a new national initiative of this size and magnitude." She said the state's two other call centers have had troubles hiring employees on time.
A 52-year-old Brentwood woman who found out late in the process she would be part time was so fed up she resigned days later.
"It was very disappointing and they manipulated us and it's kind of maddening," she said, declining to give her name out of fear she could not get a future county job.
Many of the call center employees overcame long periods of unemployment or underemployment, she said, and cried when they were suddenly told they would be part time. She did the math and realized rather than paying $600 a month for health insurance as a call center part-time employee, she would return to her bookkeeping and accounting job from home and enroll in Obamacare for $243 a month.
"I'm going to be one of those people calling them once the call center opens," she said.
Contra Costa likely landed the call center because of its bid, which included 90 full-time customer service agents and 90 part time, to keep costs down and to provide flexibility during extended hours and as the center determined demand.
"In order to make it work, we needed that," said county Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, who represents the call center's district.
There are 42 part-timers left, Mitchoff said. Despite staff reports alerting supervisors and the public of the 90-90 split, the supervisor said she expected them to all have benefits.
"We were talking about this being good jobs and that's why we want them coming to the county," Mitchoff said.
One part-time employee, who did not want to be named for fear of losing the job, left a full-time position to take what many thought was a more secure call center position.
"This thing has been a nightmare," the employee said, adding that human resources officials came to the call center Thursday and apologized for how the process has gone.
Anna Bakalis, a spokeswoman for Service Employees International Union Local 1021, said the union was "pressured to say yes to the 50-50" split of full-time and part-time positions. As the county tried to secure the contract, the union that represents the call takers was told that fighting the ratio could derail the project, she said.
"The jobs had been championed as full time the whole time," Bakalis said.
She said the situation at the new call center follows a government employment trend of "part-timeization," where formerly full-time jobs are now part time so agencies do not have to offer health benefits and pensions.
Supervisors will discuss the report Tuesday at their 9 a.m. meeting.
"There was no intent to hire people with no benefits whose job it was to get people benefits," Mitchoff said.
That irony has drawn nationwide attention. Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," which is known to lampoon government, has started sniffing around. And Mitchoff has turned down an interview with Fox News.
"I was concerned they were going to use this story to criticize the Affordable Care Act," she said.
By the numbers
7,457: Applications received for call center positions
6: Civil service examinations administered
1,947: Passed exam
721: Indicated interest in part-time or intermittent work
600: Interviews conducted for customer service agent positions
152: Customer service agents hired
Monday, August 5, 2013
Oakland recycle facility workers on strike against unsafe workplace, low wages
2013-08-05 "Oakland Recycling Workers Raise Hell Over Corporate Greed"
by Craig Merrilees of ILWU-10 for "California Labor Federation" [http://www.calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/oakland_recycling_workers_raise_hell_over_corporate_greed]:
Over 200 Oakland recycling workers staged a powerful show of unity and action by striking on Tuesday, July 30. Employees from the City’s two recycling contractors – Waste Management and California Waste Solutions (CWS) – walked off their jobs midway through the morning shift.
Strike ’n roll -
Then, instead of picketing in remote industrial areas where the recycling plants are located, workers formed caravans that converged downtown at Oakland’s City Hall. The result was a full day of political action and solidarity that included marches, “human billboards” along Broadway and 14th Streets, visits with local and state elected officials, and a spirited rally. The day ended where rally participants – including many community allies – filled the upper seats of the City Council chambers and addressed the City Council that evening.
Dirty dangerous work -
Recycling worker Emanuel San Gabriel is one of CWS workers who left his dusty and noisy workplace behind to join the protest. He wasn’t alone, with 100% of his CWS co-workers joining the effort. San Gabriel spoke at the rally, explaining that the work they do is valuable for the community and environment – but not respected because of low pay and a lack of benefits.
Death caused by company negligence -
Last year, Waste Management was charged by Cal-OSHA with violating safety rules that led to the death of a landfill worker, employed at the Davis Street facility is San Leandro where recycling also takes place. Waste Management refused to pay any fines and continues to deny responsibility for causing the worker’s death.
Dramatic display of hazards -
Other workers, including many from Waste Management, detailed the hazards that they face each day. The dangers were made obvious with a 30’ display of typical items found on a recycling line. Mixed with the paper, plastic and glass were used hypodermic syringes, animal and human feces, hazardous wastes and solvents, and building materials that often contain asbestos and lead.
Strong message & media coverage -
The hazard display was one of many ways that workers used to send a strong message that resonated with the public. Interviews, in most cases, were done by workers – not union officials. Signs were clear with simple messages calling for “justice” and “respect.” Workers felt comfortable talking about “corporate greed.” The result was good coverage from television, radio and newspapers – all featuring workers speaking in their own voices.
Labor violations -
The job action was triggered by labor law violations committed by Waste Management and CWS, resulting in an “unfair labor practices strike.” But the concerns raised by workers went beyond the unlawful retaliation, bad faith bargaining and other violations by the companies. Nearly everyone raised the problem of disrespect – which became the common rallying cry among the predominantly immigrant workforce.
Low wages -
Among the many signs of disrespect, they say, are the low wages, which amount to just $12.67 and less per hour – while the same recycling work in San Jose and San Francisco pay $20. While the low paychecks are issued by private companies (Waste Management and CWS) the City of Oakland sets the terms and conditions for lucrative contracts – which both companies are now lobbying to extend for another 10-20 years.
Recycling worker Alejandra León: "We want a better life for our families. We do important work for the environment and this community, and these companies can afford to treat us better."
Every worker wore the same button: “$20 by 2016!” – referring to their goal of parity with other Bay Area cities who already pay recycling workers more fairly.
Practice protests -
In the weeks leading up to the strike, workers organized weekly protests in front of the Waste Management’s corporate headquarters on 98th Street in Oakland, near the airport. The effort – planned by workers themselves – attracted impressive support from co-workers who volunteered hundreds of hours of time to the cause. Good media coverage at those actions allowed workers to practice talking about Waste Management’s $800 million dollar profit last year, and the $7 million compensation awarded to their CEO. The theme of “corporate greed” used by workers at these “practice protests” became a key theme in the public messaging for the strike.
Coalition support -
While workers and organizing in the workplace remains the heart of the campaign, important support from allies in the community was evident at the action. The East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE) that includes the Faith Alliance for a Moral Economy (FAME), the Sierra Club, Environmental Health Coalition, Worksafe!, and the global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), ACCE, Mujeres Unidas y Activas, and many others. The recycling workers at waste Management and CWS belong to ILWU Local 6 which is helping the workers organize their campaign.
Bi-lingual is better -
While most recycling workers speak Spanish, the strike events and materials were bi-lingual, to make sure everyone understood and felt included. This became an advantage with media coverage, that attracted Spanish-language stations to both “practice protests” that led up to the strike. Translation and a mix of languages were noticeable throughout the day – building unity by reducing differences.
Good green jobs or more junk jobs?
Oakland’s City Council will ultimately decide whether their recycling workers join the better-pay that San Jose and other cities provide, or continue to stagnate with low-wage “junk jobs” instead of the good green jobs that Oakland and other cities so desperately need.
by Craig Merrilees of ILWU-10 for "California Labor Federation" [http://www.calaborfed.org/index.php/site/page/oakland_recycling_workers_raise_hell_over_corporate_greed]:
Over 200 Oakland recycling workers staged a powerful show of unity and action by striking on Tuesday, July 30. Employees from the City’s two recycling contractors – Waste Management and California Waste Solutions (CWS) – walked off their jobs midway through the morning shift.
Strike ’n roll -
Then, instead of picketing in remote industrial areas where the recycling plants are located, workers formed caravans that converged downtown at Oakland’s City Hall. The result was a full day of political action and solidarity that included marches, “human billboards” along Broadway and 14th Streets, visits with local and state elected officials, and a spirited rally. The day ended where rally participants – including many community allies – filled the upper seats of the City Council chambers and addressed the City Council that evening.
Dirty dangerous work -
Recycling worker Emanuel San Gabriel is one of CWS workers who left his dusty and noisy workplace behind to join the protest. He wasn’t alone, with 100% of his CWS co-workers joining the effort. San Gabriel spoke at the rally, explaining that the work they do is valuable for the community and environment – but not respected because of low pay and a lack of benefits.
Death caused by company negligence -
Last year, Waste Management was charged by Cal-OSHA with violating safety rules that led to the death of a landfill worker, employed at the Davis Street facility is San Leandro where recycling also takes place. Waste Management refused to pay any fines and continues to deny responsibility for causing the worker’s death.
Dramatic display of hazards -
Other workers, including many from Waste Management, detailed the hazards that they face each day. The dangers were made obvious with a 30’ display of typical items found on a recycling line. Mixed with the paper, plastic and glass were used hypodermic syringes, animal and human feces, hazardous wastes and solvents, and building materials that often contain asbestos and lead.
Strong message & media coverage -
The hazard display was one of many ways that workers used to send a strong message that resonated with the public. Interviews, in most cases, were done by workers – not union officials. Signs were clear with simple messages calling for “justice” and “respect.” Workers felt comfortable talking about “corporate greed.” The result was good coverage from television, radio and newspapers – all featuring workers speaking in their own voices.
Labor violations -
The job action was triggered by labor law violations committed by Waste Management and CWS, resulting in an “unfair labor practices strike.” But the concerns raised by workers went beyond the unlawful retaliation, bad faith bargaining and other violations by the companies. Nearly everyone raised the problem of disrespect – which became the common rallying cry among the predominantly immigrant workforce.
Low wages -
Among the many signs of disrespect, they say, are the low wages, which amount to just $12.67 and less per hour – while the same recycling work in San Jose and San Francisco pay $20. While the low paychecks are issued by private companies (Waste Management and CWS) the City of Oakland sets the terms and conditions for lucrative contracts – which both companies are now lobbying to extend for another 10-20 years.
Recycling worker Alejandra León: "We want a better life for our families. We do important work for the environment and this community, and these companies can afford to treat us better."
Every worker wore the same button: “$20 by 2016!” – referring to their goal of parity with other Bay Area cities who already pay recycling workers more fairly.
Practice protests -
In the weeks leading up to the strike, workers organized weekly protests in front of the Waste Management’s corporate headquarters on 98th Street in Oakland, near the airport. The effort – planned by workers themselves – attracted impressive support from co-workers who volunteered hundreds of hours of time to the cause. Good media coverage at those actions allowed workers to practice talking about Waste Management’s $800 million dollar profit last year, and the $7 million compensation awarded to their CEO. The theme of “corporate greed” used by workers at these “practice protests” became a key theme in the public messaging for the strike.
Coalition support -
While workers and organizing in the workplace remains the heart of the campaign, important support from allies in the community was evident at the action. The East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE) that includes the Faith Alliance for a Moral Economy (FAME), the Sierra Club, Environmental Health Coalition, Worksafe!, and the global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), ACCE, Mujeres Unidas y Activas, and many others. The recycling workers at waste Management and CWS belong to ILWU Local 6 which is helping the workers organize their campaign.
Bi-lingual is better -
While most recycling workers speak Spanish, the strike events and materials were bi-lingual, to make sure everyone understood and felt included. This became an advantage with media coverage, that attracted Spanish-language stations to both “practice protests” that led up to the strike. Translation and a mix of languages were noticeable throughout the day – building unity by reducing differences.
Good green jobs or more junk jobs?
Oakland’s City Council will ultimately decide whether their recycling workers join the better-pay that San Jose and other cities provide, or continue to stagnate with low-wage “junk jobs” instead of the good green jobs that Oakland and other cities so desperately need.
California Senator Feinstein advocates removal of protections for volunteer journalists
2013-08-05 "Senator's Attempt to Define 'Real Journalism' Blasted By Journalists; Feinstein seeks to exclude Wikileaks, unpaid reporters from 'shield law' protecting journalists and their sources"
by Sarah Lazare from Common Dreams [www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/08/02-6]:
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says a bill protecting reporters and their sources should only apply to 'real journalists,' declaring that WikiLeaks employees, and nonsalaried reporters, don't count.
The "shield law" under debate in the Senate Judiciary Committee would protect journalists and their confidential sources from court orders and subpoenas.
Feinstein criticized the language of the bill Thursday, declaring she was "very disappointed" that the law contained a "flawed definition" of journalists—which she says is inclusive of WikiLeaks and nonsalaried reporters. "I’m concerned this would provide special privilege to those who are not reporters at all," she exclaimed, according to a statement released by her staffers to Common Dreams. Feinstein and Senator Dick Durbin (D - Ill.) are demanding changes to the bill's definition of journalists that reflect these concerns.
As the bill faces a third attempt at passage, after two previous failures, Thursday saw debate in the Senate Judiciary Committee over the definition of journalists and whether unpaid reporters should have the same protections as paid ones. While all parties agreed that WikiLeaks should be excluded from protection, some insisted the language already stipulates that exclusion.
"The world has changed. We’re very careful in this bill to distinguish journalists from those who shouldn’t be protected, WikiLeaks and all those, and we’ve ensured that," said Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y). "But there are people who write and do real journalism, in different ways than we’re used to. They should not be excluded from this bill."
The debate comes amid a chilling climate for journalists and their sources who cross US power. Bradley Manning was found guilty Tuesday of over 20 counts including espionage and is facing a potential 136 years in jail for revealing documents to WikiLeaks that exposed US human rights abuses and corruption across the world.
"It is dangerous to rely on only those sources the government deems worthy of protection," said Nathan Fuller, writer for the Bradley Manning Support Network. "WikiLeaks is a serious news publication: it edits material and protects sources. Wikileaks has anonymous submissions because it knows its contacts don't get protection."
The bill advances following a May scandal in which Justice Department officials were publicly exposed for seizing phone records of AP reporters without due process or notice and monitoring communications of a Fox News reporter.
Meanwhile, journalists expressed outrage at Feinstein's denigration of unpaid reporters in a climate where journalism jobs are quickly disappearing and independent, and often unpaid, reporting plays a key role in exposing the truth and holding power accountable. Author and Nation reporter Jeremy Scahill tweeted the following response:
"Sen. Feinstein wants to define who's a "real" reporter. OK. Let's talk about who is a "real" lawmaker".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)