Defeat 1E!

Pitting poor against poor

For whatever short-term savings Prop. 1E might provide, the long-term consequences are disastrous

By James Tracy

OPINION In 2004, California voters passed Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA), to fund the expansion of community-based mental health services. MHSA is funded through a 1 percent tax on the portion of a taxpayer’s income in excess of $1 million. It was a form of uniquely appropriate progressive taxation, making the rich pay for all the ways they test our sanity, made especially acute today in the wake of foreclosures and job losses.

Today, Gov. Schwarzenegger is leading a bipartisan assault on Prop. 63, which funds an array of needed services in California and San Francisco. By placing Proposition 1E on the May ballot, the governor is asking voters to divert MHSA money to pay for the budget deficit. This maneuver ignores the fact that California is a safer, saner place because of the act — 200,000 people are now enrolled in mental health services who were not in 2004.

The proposition pits the poor against the poor, making mental health consumers pay the price for the budget deadlock in Sacramento. Mental health services are designed to improve the lives of communities by minimizing the potential for homelessness and hospitalization. Prop. 1E, pitched as a two-year measure, leaves effective programs in the lurch, threatening resources in every neighborhood.

MHSA funds programs for youth and families affected by street and gang violence, queer youth showing early signs of mental health issues, and residents in supportive housing. One of its key accomplishments has been the expansion of resources designed to reach consumers in culturally appropriate ways, with an open process, allowing communities to design solutions to their own problems.

“After Prop. 63 was passed, people with untreated mental health needs saw a glimmer of hope,” remarked James Keyes, who serves as a member of the San Francisco Mental Health Board. “In San Francisco alone, we were able to do workforce training, prevention, and housing retention among people with mental health concerns. These innovative programs might not be with us if Prop. 1E passes.”

For whatever short-term savings Prop. 1E might provide, the long-term consequences are disastrous. The costs of untreated mental illnesses affect our public health system. Those who never get care, or who lose care, will likely find their jobs, housing, and relationships in peril, and will rely on the remaining (and much more expensive) threads of the social safety net.

Vote No on 1E and send a message to the state government that long-term budget solutions start with Prop. 63’s logic — progressive taxation on those with the most ability to pay. Letting the governor and the legislature cut essential survival services to balance the budget sets a horrible precedent. If voters let them get away with it, they will surely target poor people every time the budget is deadlocked. *

t-shirts as tombstones

t-shirts as tombstones
(love poem for oakland)
james tracy

capture the image
loose your breath
rewind
repeat

take the streets
loose the streets
rewind
repeat

gather the forces
gather the storn
rewind
repeat

announce the findings
prounounce him dead
rewind
repeat

break the windows
calm down
rewind
repeat

file the writs
bite the nails
rewind
repeat

remember the past
forget the past
rewind
repeat

read the paper
burn the paper
rewind
repeat

pray for peace
forget about peace
rewind
repeat

blame the system
blame the victims
rewind
repeat

inhale teargas
swallow pride
rewind
repeat

watch the kids
wonder about the future
rewind
repeat

turn on the television
lock the door
rewind
repeat

arrest them all
unarrest them all
rewind
repeat

raise bail
raise cain
rewind
repeat

run for your life
sit still
rewind
repeat

cite the statistic
become the statistic
rewind
repeat

set aside fear
drown in despair
rewind
repeat

invoke slave revolts
hope it will be different
rewind
repeat

write a letter
argue with your co-worker
rewind
repeat

call for oversight
call for insight

hope
act
move
retreat

rewind
repeat

repeat

Grand Opening-City Hall Sidewalk Service Center

Wednesday April 22nd, 2009 11am-2pm

Polk Street Side of San Francisco City Hall.

Understanding the Tax Revolt of 2009

by James Tracy

Populism, Parks Public Spaces and Police Protection
One of the ironies about the April 15th “Tea Party” protests is that they all seemed to take place in public places paid for by taxes; like parks and plazas. Not to mention the ample police protection the demonstrators received as they cashed in on their First Amendment rights, paid for, again by taxes.

Many liberal and progressive commentators have opined that the tax revolt is part of a sign of the apocalypse—heralded by four horsemen of fascism, racism, poor-people hating, and reaction. Certainly, many of the Tea Party’s celebrants politics veer sharply to the right. It’s pretty obvious that the tax protests have mainlined a large dose of hypocrisy. With the exception of Ron Paul’s campaign, you didn’t hear a peep from these people everytime the federal government spends billions of dollars on the war machine.

Just like the Left, who seem to be totally happy with the war when Obama promotes it, the Right only hates runaway government spending when America’s first Black President is doing it.

However, it’s time for the Left to wipe away it’s smug condescending attitude towards this revolt and dig deep and understand it for what it is—the resurgence of populism—rooted in real economic hardship. Populism is simply a revolt against elites, without a clear political trajectory. In times of populist upsurge, the movement will evolve both fascist and progressive faces.

Two Paths of Populism-Reaction or Progress
For example, in the 19th Century, the populist farmer’s movement achieved some impressive victories at limiting the power of the railroad industry to exploit workers and steal land from farmers. However, the same movement managed to evolve a seriously racist and anti-semitic face, as opportunistic leaders such as Tom Watson, and William Jennings Bryan.

Yet the populist impulse has also brought the United States some of its best moments—such as the Bonus Marchers, an integrated movement of World War I veterans who occupied Capitol Hill demanding relief and compensation for their service. The Unemployed Workers Movement, with their militant demands for jobs and housing, rooted in direct action against evictions, was one of the high-marks of the U.S. Left.

Whether the populist moment gives way to reaction or progress will depend on who is ready to organize, to explain the crisis, and point to real ways out of it. Dismissing the rank-and-file Tax Protester as a “racist” or a “redneck” signifies the fact that some in the Left have given up on reaching one of the largest parts of the US working-class. This doesn’t mean not confronting the forces of white and male supremacy who are salivating to gain control of this upsurge. In fact it is a call to confront it through the type of organizing that cedes nothing to the right.

In the sixties and seventies, organizations such as the Young Patriots Organization, Rising Up Angry, October 4th Organization, and Sojourner Truth Organization tried to build this kind of bold politics. The recognized that working-class whites could move simultaneously for their own economic interests and in solidarity with oppressed nationalities. However, to make this happen, the Left had to out organize the Right and offer an alternative set of politics. Of course, during this time, the Right actually out organized the Left and laid the ground for the Reagan Era. But their histories, and local victories, provide a good example that the pillars of racism can actually be challenged through hard work.

Rather we need to recognize that we are in a war of ideas—but to win we have to have ideas, vision, and the willingness to listen and struggle with the very people most of us have been taught to fear.

Today’s tax revolt is rooted in the fact that the corporations who have caused the economic meltdown have been completely left off the hook for paying for the mess they have made—while your average worker, whether low or middle income will be paying the price for years to come.

If the Left doesn’t acknowledge the reality that the nation’s tax structure does disproportionately punish small homeowners, and propose serious, viable programs for taxing the wealthy, then the Right will be there with its own program. That program will continue to deflect people’s attention from the structural causes of the crisis, and continue the scapegoating of immigrants, fuse the alliance between the elites and the middle, and lay the ground for a real fascist backlash.