[Marxism] Familiar ideas straight from cpusa.org - FYI

[Bonnie Weinstein <giobon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

In these articles comrades might see a recurrent theme that is reflected in
today's collapse of the U.S. antiwar movement.

This is what you get when you don't organize independently of the capitalist
class.

You get more capitalism. And worse, you offer no independent, working-class
alternative. That is the most serious crime committed by this reformist
policy--no matter who adheres to it.

Comradely,


Bonnie Weinstein

P.S., I looked this stuff up to see for myself. I got what I expected.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*

A Beginning Look At The 2008 Elections
Author: Joelle Fishman, Chair, Political Action Committee, CPUSA
First published: 09/25/2007 11:31
Report to National Board, Communist Party USA September 5, 2007
http://cpusa.org/article/articleprint/843/

This report is fragments of an outline, broad stroke ideas to discuss and
enlarge upon. It lays the groundwork for deeper analysis and conclusions. It
is an initial report in preparation for the November National Committee
meeting.

Everything we do and every new development relates to the 2008 elections.
There is an opportunity in this election to begin a fundamental change in
the direction of the country, which starts with taking the 2006 election
results further and ousting ultra-right Republican big business domination
of the federal government. It is a tough but realizable challenge for labor
and the people¹s movements.

It¹s amazing that on Labor Day 2007, when municipal races are just heating
up, the country is already well into the 2008 election cycle. Every state is
vying to be first to have a presidential primary. There may end up being
presidential primaries before Christmas! By mid February the majority of
primaries will be completed, and the selection is just about over. The
Democratic nominating convention will not be held until August 25-28 August
2008 in Denver, Colorado.

The Republican convention will be held September 1 to 4 in Minneapolis-St.
Paul, Minnesota

Labor Day 2007 set the tone for the upcoming election period.

Labor Day was marked with rallies preparing to fight back on the big three
auto negotiations and other key contract expirations and organizing drives
around the country. The AFL-CIO launched a massive national campaign for
universal health care aimed at mobilizing for the 2008 elections. as
millions of workers are wondering how long their job will last and how they
will meet their healthcare and mortgage and utility and college tuition
payments.

Labor Day was also marked by a re-invigoration of the movement to bring the
troops home from Iraq as Congress reconvenes. Vigils, national and local
actions are all building up to ten regional actions on Oct 27 as support for
ending the war continues to grow. Majority opposition to the war will fuel
the 2008 elections.

Along with Iraq, domestic spying and constitutional rights, children¹s
healthcare, the budget and immigration policy, the leave no child behind act
and requiring a paper trail on electronic voting machines are among the
items on the post-recess Congressional agenda.

Labor Day was marked by the demand by labor and civil rights organizations
for action two years since the Katrina disaster. The Katrina aftermath is an
enormous human catastrophe affecting the entire Gulf Coast region. Still
most families are homeless and the 9th ward in New Orleans is still in a
shambles. The inhumanity and racism of the inaction by the Bush
administration was instrumental in motivating voters to change congress in
2006 and will continue to impact the vote in 2008. The demand for a New Deal
program to rebuild and create jobs should be high in the election agenda.

Labor Day was also marked with stepped up raids and roundups of undocumented
immigrants, and the arrest and deportation of courageous immigrant rights
leader Elvira Arellano, along with an attempt by Bush to turn the Social
Security Administration into an enforcement agency of ICE using no-match
letters. This order has been temporarily stopped by a court action of the
AFL-CIO, ACLU and immigrant organizations, and mass pressure is being
organized.  

The unrelenting attack constitutes an emergency crisis for immigrant
communities, for all of labor, and for the struggle for democratic rights.
The ultra-right is clearly using immigration policy as a wedge issue in this
election cycle which must be answered.

All in all, as we enter the 2008 elections, working people are facing crises
in every area of their lives, and this will shape the presidential and
congressional elections. This was shown by the 17,000 union members at the
nationally televised AFL-CIO presidential debate in Chicago¹s Soldiers Field
and the ringing question by one SOAR member, ³why is this happening in
America and what are you going to do to fix it?²

Who wins the presidency and the size of the majority in Congress is of
crucial importance. These elections offer a chance to deliver a decisive
blow to the ultra-right and to change the course of the country. The
obstructionism of the Republicans has become more clear to the country as
the fight to end the war in Iraq and enact the elements of the 100 hours
program and a progressive agenda continues in Congress. It took a huge
effort in the face of this obstruction, but the minimum wage was finally
raised for the first time in a decade.

The mess that the Republicans find themselves in seems to be never-ending,
with constant scandals, the latest ongoing around Rep Larry Craig. Just
about every cabinet member has had to resign, most recently Karl Rove and
Alberto Gonzalez. Before that was Defense Secty Rumsfeld, UN Ambassador
Bolton, Counsel Harriet Meiers. Delay and Abromov had to step down. The list
goes on and on. Congressional hearings are unearthing one abuse of power
after another which is influencing public opinion.

Bush has become such a liability that fissures among the Republicans keep
expanding, reflecting divisions within the ultra right and among sections of
capital..This is reflected in the weakening position of some Republicans
around the Iraq war.

Every section of the electorate has a negative assessment of Bush and the
Republicans. Polls show 61% disapprove of Bush's job performance with big
negatives for Cheney.

It would be easy to assume the Republicans can¹t win, but that would be a
great mistake. We must not underestimate who we are dealing with. This crowd
will stop at nothing to steal or manipulate the election for their own
benefit. They have money, they are aggressive and they fight dirty.
Unforeseen developments can change the political landscape. This will be a
nasty campaign. The defeat of the Republican ultra-right is not inevitable.

It will take a focused mobilization by labor and the people¹s movements, but
it can be done.

Just a year and a half ago in January 2006 the main estimate of pollsters
and the mass media was that it would not be possible to change control of
congress. The change was bigger than most anyone anticipated. We are now
building on the victory.

Our Party has an important role to play in keeping the focus on the fight
for a new direction in our country for jobs, healthcare and an end to the
war. That is how the 2008 elections will be won.

A presidential election poll by Celinda Lake (7/07) shows the Democrats have
a 12 point lead. Independents give the Democrats an 18 point advantage..
When questioned about specific candidates, it is a closer match. And, asked
if they would vote for a third party 22% said yes and 20% said they might,
indicating a general dissatisfaction with both parties.

There is a general anger and re-thinking taking place. Organizing and
mobilizing on the issues is the key to winning a victory over the
ultra-right in this election and to building a base of labor and people¹s
movement that can lead a change in direction in the country.

The Iraq war will shape the election along with economic issues of which
healthcare is at the top. The AFL-CIO campaign for healthcare doesn¹t
specify a specific bill, but within labor there is momentum building for HR
676.

Danger of Disunity

The biggest danger is disunity. The only way the Republicans can carry this
election is by splitting the labor and people¹s movement and suppressing the
vote.

With this goal in mind, the Republicans are using immigration as the wedge
issue in this campaign.

A poll of battleground Districts by Democracy Corps (June 19) had disturbing
results regarding attitudes toward immigration. Respondents favored border
security and stopping illegal immigration by 22 points over legalization.
(Other polls have had different results) The authors said, ³We tested the
kinds of attacks Republicans will use on the immigration issue - ³English as
official language² to ?amnesty² and ³immigrants getting social security.²
Those demagogic attacks are not ineffective, in battleground districts, more
likely to play a key role in Democratic rural and exurban districts where
opposition towards immigration is stronger and Democrats hold a smaller
advantage.²

There is a tendency among the Democrats to stay away from the issue, or to
pander to border security issues. Winning a stronger alliance with the labor
movement on immigrant rights as a working class issue and a human rights
issue will be key. When raids happen where organizing is going on, such as
the UFCW at Smithfield, labor has responded strongly The Workers Centers are
another positive effort that can be built on.

More is needed to counter the corporate media lie that immigrants are
³taking jobs² from African American and low wage workers, and to deepen
understanding that the root causes of the problem lie in trade and foreign
policy. A deeper understanding of the racist character of the assault is
needed, and that the attack on immigrants is a threat to basic democracy.
Everyone is affected. The immigrant rights legislative subcommittee is
working on a brochure that will address these questions in a Myth and
Reality format.

Another divisive issue that will be used by the corporate ultra-right is
trade and China. The responsibility for loss of jobs should be placed on the
transnational corporations, not China or any other developing country. Scott
Marshall mentions a defensive attitude in labor that must be overcome on
both issues. The key is to link these issues to the main issues labor is
mobilizing around.

Republicans also continue to use issues of terrorism to divide and to blunt
opposition to the Iraq war. The Bush administration continues its policy of
never ending war and occupation, which is affecting the whole economy and
direction of our country.

Frustration with Democrats on the continuing war is a potential source of
disunity and demobilization among left and progressive sectors who are key
to mobilizing for the defeat of Republicans for Congress and President.

Significantly, ending the war in Iraq was one of the issues by which the
executive council of the AFL-CIO evaluated candidates for president at their
recent executive council meeting..Labor¹s engagement, along with anti-war
mobilization and organizing, can help push the Republicans and those
Democrats who are still supporting the Bush policy to break away, and give
added leverage to those Democrats who are working in Congress for an end to
the war and occupation.

The possibility of moving our country in a different and progressive
direction will raise enthusiasm and help set people into motion.

Presidential candidates.

We have probably all seen at least some of the many debates that have
already taken place.

The Democratic field: is more progressive than past campaigns. At the
AFL-CIO debate at Soldiers field each candidate was vying to be the most
pro-union, the best for healthcare. All have come out against the war,
although Clinton and Obama are still talking of leaving some troops behind
which is an inadequate position. The fact that the front runners are a woman
and an African American within a field including a Mexican American, a son
of a mill worker and a national peace leader has had a positive influence on
the national debate.

The AFL-CIO and many national civil rights organizations are focusing on the
issues rather than endorsements during the primaries, but individual unions
have begun endorsements. Hillary Clinton has the endorsement of the United
Transportation Union and IAM ; Chris Dodd has the endorsement of the
Firefighters. Barak Obama does not yet have any union endorsements. John
Edwards has the endorsements of USW, UMW and Carpenters; which reflects his
strong message on economic issues and his frontal attack on corporate
profits and power. For example, in a recent speech, speaking of the giant
transnational corporations, Edwards said ³Your cannot deal with them on
their terms. You cannot play by their rules, sit at their table or give them
a seat at yours. They will not give up their power - you have to take it
from them.²

The media was able to blockout the essentially same message from Dennis
Kucinich because he is not a frontrunner, but they could not entirely
blockout John Edwards. The very enthusiastic response that Kucinich receives
in debates more than likely encouraged Edwards. As Sam pointed out at the
National Committee meeting, Kucinich¹s role in presenting a comprehensive
left program from the presidential debate platform is helping raise the
level of consciousness in the country and gives new openings at the grass
roots..

Kucinich is returning from a trip to the Mid East and will tour the country
with his message to end the war and occupation. The American Israel Public
Affairs Committee (AIPAC), is leading the corporate opposition to Kucinich
by heavily funding a candidate to run against him for Congress. His strong
local support is expected to prevail.

The Republican presidential field is very reactionary. The messages in their
debates are based on hatred and fear. Their main appeal is to the Republican
evangelical conservative base. While the Democratic candidates are rushing
to support the Employee Free choice Act and Universal Health Care, the
Republican field is vying for who can be more anti-immigrant and anti-Roe v.
Wade. Mitt Romney called for solving the immigration situation by putting an
end to employers hiring undocumented immigrants, and putting an end to
sanctuary cities. Republican frontrunner Rudy Guiliani is hiding behind the
issue of national security.

Some unions have made the unprecedented decision to endorse both a Democrat
and a Republican in the presidential primaries. The IAM endorsed Mike
Huckabee along with Clinton, giving the reason that 35% of their members are
Republicans.. This is an unfortunate strategy that blurs the danger of the
extreme right-wing. It reflects a no-struggle approach toward union members
who have voted against their own class interests. We have a role to outreach
and convince those workers still voting Republican that is against their
interests. This can win elections.

A big new feature to the debates and the campaign is the role of the
internet. The yearly KOS Convention (Netroots, non-partisan, grassroots
political action community that uses Internet, blogs, YouTube, etc.) got big
coverage and a lot of involvement for their presidential debate. This is a
welcome expansion of political independence and democratic participation
into the election process.

Congressional campaign

In 2008 it is possible to enlarge the Democratic majority in general, and at
the same time to enlarge the progressive, Black and Hispanic caucuses and
union members in Congress by engaging in some primaries.. The Blue Dog
caucus has 47 members. On Aug 4, 31 Blue Dogs voted for the anti-democratic
Protect America Act (FISA), with provisions for wiretapping and internal
spying that shred basic constitutional rights. The bill passed with a 44
vote margin. The Blue Dog caucus has also voted with Bush on Iraq,
preventing a veto proof majority for setting a deadline to remove the
troops. In some Blue Dog districts, progressive candidates are expected to
garner the support of labor and allies to run a primary. As was learned in
2006, this can be a big positive where there is an understanding that no
matter who wins the primary, in the general election the main need is to
block the possibility of a Republican majority or near-majority.

Senate

The main emphasis in the Senate is to hold onto and enlarge the Democratic
majority. There are 3 open Republican seats which add to potential of larger
Democratic majority. They are: John Warner (R-VA) is retiring (Armed
Services Committee); Wayne Allard (R-CO) is retiring, and Craig Thomas (RWY)
died.

House

The August. 3 Democracy Corps poll of battleground districts projects the
potential for another wave election in the House, with Democrats picking up
as many as 20 seats. Democrats now hold an 18 pont advantage in the
battleground districts (55-37) and are in position to hold most of their
seats. More than half of Republicans are facing possible defeat. Two-thirds
of voters in Republican battleground say the country is headed in the wrong
direction. Six in ten voters have negative feelings to the war, 55% want to
reduce the troops and in Republican districts 60% ³want their member of
Congress to vote for measures that will force the president to change
policies and reduce troop levels in Iraq.² While overall ratings for
Congress are low, approval ratings for individual Democratic members are
good.

The ³Battleground 2008" July poll by Celinda Lake indicates that despite the
Democrats electoral advantage, the political atmosphere is poisonous. The
poll found that voters express extreme disdain for all politicians and hold
both parties in contempt, but that this is especially so for Republicans.
Respondents said that Republicans are ³too focused on the rich², ³support
Bush too much on the war² and ³are tied to corruption² The most frequent
criticism of the Democrats is giving in to Bush on Iraq. Independent voters
follow the nationwide trend. 63% disapprove of Republicans in Congress. 57%
disapprove of Democrats in Congress. The poll also found that 97% believe
Congress puts politics over people - this crosses over every demographic,
regional and attitudinal group This is an indicator of a mood of cynicism
and disgust with politics, and indicates a very important role for our Party
as well as labor and allies to educate, organize and mobilize on the basis
that a progressive agenda can be won with united action.

The poll confirmed that Iraq is the biggest issue, but also found that the
economy and jobs are top concerns. A plurality of voters (38%) think their
children will be worse off then they.are which is a phenomenon that has just
taken hold under Bush¹s tenure. Voters favor Democrats in congress on the
issues (52 - 37 on the war; 59-29 healthcare, 54-29 energy, 56-33 social
security, 55-38 jobs) A majority even prefer Democrats on the issue of
deficits (51-38). Republicans are not favored on any issue tested except
terrorism (49 R to 36 D). Independent voters afford Dems double digit
margins on every issue: health care (+44), social security (+40), energy
independence (+32), wasteful government spending (+12), deficits (+37),
economy (+5), jobs (+26), Iraq (+24), corruption (+18).
Every age group supports Democrats 18-34 (+28) 45-64 (+9) seniors (+5).
Republicans lead only among voters 35-44 (+9). Democrats break even with
married voters (44-44), lead among single voters (+25) and divorced voters
(+18)

Regionally, Democrats lead in the West (+17), Northeast (+14), Central
Plains (+12), Midwest (+11). Republicans lead only in the Mountain states
(+7). South and South Central are tied. Democrats win urban areas (+17),
suburban (+7), and lose rural areas by just 4 points. Among the swing
independent bloc Democrats lead (41-31) with 29% undecided. This shows the
possibility of undoing or at least cracking the Southern Strategy originally
developed by Richard Nixon.

Rural America a battleground. The June 8 poll, ³Rural America Competitive²
by Democracy Corps shows the deep economic crisis facing that part of the
country. Rural America has less economic opportunity and a higher cost of
living. As a result, the issue of changing course economically is
competitive with the issue of family values. The main problems listed are
the cost of fuel (77%), cost of healthcare (66%) and lack of good paying
jobs (52%).

In 2004 Bush carried the rural areas of the country with 19 points. In 2006
Bush lost ground. There was a 51-48 split. In 2008 there are possibilities
for Republicans in rural America. 50% say they are conservatives and place
family values at the top of their agenda. However, there are divisions on
Iraq, reflecting the large number of soldiers from rural areas that have
been killed in the war. Rural America will be a big battleground in 2008
Republicans need rural America to win, but Democrats have a chance to cut
deeply into the Republican base.

In 2006 ballot referenda to raise the minimum wage were effective in
Missouri, Ohio and several other states in shifting the focus from gay
marriage and abortion to economic issues. This election cycle, similar labor
and religious coalitions will focus on referenda in support of health care
for all.

The ultra-right is also utilizing ballot referenda, for the purpose of
creating disunity in battleground districts.. In Michigan, where an
anti-affirmative action initiative was used to divide the electorate in
2006, the right-wing is now collecting signatures for a referendum to make
Michigan a non-union, right-to-work (for less) state. They are exploring
other states to introduce these poisonous ballot initiatives. We can play a
role ideologically to show that racism and anti-labor attacks go hand in
hand, and serve to divide and weaken the growing alliances of labor and the
people¹s organizations.

The key to victory in 2008 for progressive forces will be to hold onto the
base built in 2006 and take the fight into the south and rural areas where
it is possible to break the back of the right-wing Republican machine.

Core forces of the all peoples front

The core forces of the all peoples alliance against the ultra-right are the
main expression of political independence, and the main forces for unity and
expansion of democracy.

Labor movement.

Scott Marshall reported on Labor 2008 at the August 20 meeting of the
Political Action Commission. The AFL-CIO presidential debate was a turning
point for labor¹s political independence. There is a high level of
discussion and involvement of the rank and file on choosing issues and
candidates. Jobs and economic security went above the Iraq war as the most
important issue in the AFL-CIO¹s latest polling.

For the last 10-15 years labor has been building an independent apparatus to
field and support labor candidates. In the 2006 elections. 25% of voters
were union members. The goal in 2008 is to increase that by involving and
developing a cadre of rank and file activists to carry out labor¹s political
work..

CBTU has launched a new method of voter registration, based on workers going
into the neighborhoods where they live to discuss the issues, register
voters and get out the vote from their neighborhood on election day. Working
America is a community based effort used for political action. 13 million
workers who have no union are signed up. This apparatus can be
strengthened..

The effort to elect union members to public office has the potential to be
expanded.

Latino

The Latino vote could be 10% of 130 million voters in 2008, compared to 5.8%
in 2006. It is estimated that the Republicans could lose 1.3 million Latino
votes in the battleground states of AZ, NM, FL, CO over the issue of
immigration. Evangelical Christians made up 10% of the Latino vote in 2004.
They lean conservative, Republican, and place family values issues first.
This year they are angered by the Republican anti-immigrant attacks and may
oppose Republicans in an independent way.

Latinos accounted for nearly half of the country¹s overall population
increase from 2002-2006, but many were too young to vote or were not
citizens in 2006. Governor Richardson has called for a goal to increase the
turnout of Latino voters in 2008 (Pew says 13% voted in 2006 out of 39% who
were eligible to vote)

Responding to an idea put forth by NALEO (National Association of Latino
Elected Officials), a massive year long media campaign is being carried out
by Univision to appeal to more than 8 million permanent residents to become
citizens. This would benefit Democrats at least twice as much as
Republicans, and could result in 2-3 million.

The early primary in Nevada is considered the ³Latino Iowa.². One in four of
1.8 million in metro Las Vegas are Latino, and many Latinos are union
members. Who wins the primary in Nevada will send a message to TX, CA, NY,
NJ, FL, CO, IL This is the first time that Latinos are in senior level
positions in every major Democratic presidential campaign organization.

The presidential campaign will be on the agenda of the LCLAA and National
Latino Congreso conventions in late September and early October.

Youth

On Election Day 2006, 10.8 million 18-29 year olds voted, which was two
million more than in the previous midterm election This trend is expected to
continue in 2008.

Democracy Corps: released a study ³Republicans Collapse Among Young
Americans² in June. In 2008 young people 18-31 will outnumber the baby boom
generation. By 2015 they will be one third of the US electorate. Republicans
and younger voters disagree on nearly every issue ­ the role of government,
Iraq war, global warming, gay marriage and illegal immigration (55% favor a
path to citizenship, 44% favor a focus only on border security). Issues like
global warming and the Iraq war can drive this vote. But young peoples¹
economic struggles, more than any other issue, defines their political
agenda They are pressed economically by jobs with few benefits, low wages
and rising costs of living. Young voters also indicate that they are ready
for a woman or African American president.

The youth vote will be very instrumental in the 2008 elections, and will
continue to have a big impact in coming years.

African American

The African American vote has historically been the most progressive force.
There is a major effort to get out the vote in 2008. Jesse Jackson is
conducting a voter education tour for jobs, peace, justice from Sept 15-19
in 12 So Carolina cities with the purpose of inspiring African American
voters to study the issues and vote in the February primary and beyond.

A campaign in the African American churches nationally will kick off with
Black Voter Empowerment Sunday, Oct 14. Power of the Sister Vote 2008 has
been formed to appeal to African American women who make up 58% of the Black
electorate. It is sponsored by the National Coalition on Black Civic
Participation, National Council of Negro Women and APRI to make sure issues
of women and youth remain on the front burner in 2008. VOTE - Voices of the
Electorate, Operation Big Vote, and Black Youth Vote are also moving into
high gear.

Barak Obama predicts that Black voter turnout will swell 30% if he wins the
primary. He says that ³If we just got African Americans in Mississippi to
vote their percentage of the population, it is a Democratic state.² The same
is probably true in Georgia, and South Carolina.

The CBC weekend in September will be a major force in focusing on 2008.

Women

In 2006 women voted Democratic by a 12 point margin That has now increased
to an 18 percent margin. Single women support Democrats in the largest
numbers. The presence of Hillary Clinton in the field has upped the ante for
every campaign to reach out for the women¹s vote..

Women comprise 59% of Democratic primary voters in key early states.
(Washington Post (6/11/2007). An ABC/Washington Post poll in June showed
while men are almost equally likely to support Clinton and Senator Obama,
among women, Clinton leads with a two to one margin. NOW was an early
endorser of Hillary Clinton.

The Coalition of Labor Union women (CLUW) will hold its convention October
10-13 around the theme ³A New Direction for Working Women,² which will
prepare for the 2008 elections

The women¹s vote will be an important factor in 2008.

Third Party issues

There are five third party presidential candidates, and two independent
presidential candidates.

Bloomberg¹s independent candidacy could have a negative impact on the
election dynamics. Cynthia McKinney may be the candidate on the Green Party
ticket, which could also have a negative spoiler impact in a close race. A
new formation Unity 08 is projecting a ticket that would include one
Democrat and one Republican for President and Vice President. We should also
be aware of the new formation, Committee for a Unified Independent Party, of
which Lenora Fulani is part. All of these efforts, from the left and the
right, will be diversionary in one way or another, and do not recognize the
main danger of the extreme right-wing and their corporate backers.

Of course the country needs a massive anti-corporate, pro-people third
party. But how do we achieve that goal? It cannot be accomplished which the
working class and people are forced into a defensive mode under ultra-right
domination of the federal government. In the process of achieving that first
task, the seeds of a new people¹s party are being sown.

Sometimes we are criticized as ³tailing the Democratic Party.² That is not
the case. We have no illusions about the Democratic Party. We, along with
labor and its allies recognize that at this moment the Democratic Party is
the only vehicle that has the possibility to enable a big shift in politics
in 2008..

Building the movement at the grass roots on the issues, bringing the troops
home, universal health care, employee free choice act, and jobs, and
connecting that program to the elections is the main expression of political
independence in 2008, led by the Labor 2008 campaign. If the president and
congress are elected with this mandate, and if the movement continues after
election day, it will have to be taken into account.

As Henry Winston used to say in relation to tactical questions, take into
account time, place, and circumstance.

Cindy Sheehan running against Nancy Pelosi is a negative. It takes the main
fight away from the initiators and main supporters of the war ­ the Bush
administration backed up by Republicans in Congress and some Democrats. That
is where pressure can make a qualitative difference in the effort to achieve
withdrawal.

In this period, independent campaigns are most effective at the local level.
There are several in the 2007 municipal election cycle. Some are Working
Families Party or Progressive Party and some utilize the Democratic Party
ballot line. There are a few Communists among them, but not nearly enough.

Protecting the Vote

Voter registration, education and election protection will be key in this
election. The right-wing can be expected to mobilize full force to suppress
the vote in 2008. One method of voter suppression is the idea that voting
doesn¹t make a difference, and all politicians are corrupt. The importance
of a huge voter turnout by labor, African American, Latino, women and youth
voters in order to achieve a stronger footing to win an end to the war and
economic demands has to be argued for and won.

In Louisiana, there is an attempt to purge Katrina evacuees from the voting
rolls. This large African American vote has kept Louisiana in the Democratic
column. The Black Caucus and the NAACP have filed a suit with the Justice
Department charging violation of the Voting Rights Act on the basis that
there was no pre-clearance for the voter purge.

Protecting the right to vote will loom as a bigger and bigger factor around
the country, especially in areas where Republicans are trying to defend
their shrinking base, and in areas where African American, Latino and other
working class families are relocating as they are pushed out of cities by
gentrification.

In California, the Republican Party is collecting signatures for a ballot
referendum in June that calls for selection of California delegates to the
electoral college on a proportional basis. California¹s huge Democratic
voting base would be undercut, endangering the national election for
President. Efforts to defeat it will need broad support. The California
Democratic Party has launched a campaign including a pledge card which
reads, ³Many of us believe that we need electoral college reform, but a
piecemeal, state-by-state approach that only changes the way California
votes is the wrong way. Any efforts to reform our elections system should be
about fairness, not creating partisan advantage. I pledge to stop the
Republicans from stealing the White House and stealing California¹s
electoral votes.²

These examples show that the ultra-right is in no way conceding the 2008
elections.

Our role

We have an important role to play in the 2008 elections, which is connected
to every issue and campaign in which we are involved. In the first place, we
play an ideological role as a force for unity. We must expose the class and
social forces behind the ultra-right and expose the threat to democracy they
represent. We have an important opportunity in the 2008 elections to raise
class consciousness, and to highlight and build up labor and people¹s
independent role.

The Peoples Weekly World / Nuestro Mundo, Political Affairs, and Dynamic
have played a consistently important role, and that should be expanded even
more. Our Party and press building campaign is very important to this
effort. Increasing the readership of our paper will make an ideological
contribution to the 2008 elections.

We should also develop our own program for 2008. How to end the war and
occupation. A New Deal program for Gulf Coast and country. An emergency
response to the economic crisis ­ Moratorium on foreclosures and payments on
mortgages under various conditions. Extend benefits for the unemployed, and
massive job creation 0 which is already being developed by the Economics
Commission.

Our work on the elections should build at the ground for the long term both
coalition and our own constituency. There are new possibilities to develop
left center relations between labor and the Party. We should think through
how to strengthen those ties. In 2006 we reached new levels of participation
in labor sponsored election activities. How can we deepen that in 2008 and
consolidate labor¹s growing independent trend?

We should get involved in voter registration in every club, and involving
every member. We can inspire voter registration and turnout by relating the
elections to ending the war, achieving universal single-payer health care,
and measures to respond to the economic crisis.

In every district we should identify the key House and Senate races where we
will work with labor and its allies. The Political Action, Labor, and Peace
and Solidarity Commissions can help in this process.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Memo on Congressional Legislative Outlook on Iraq War
Author: Judith LeBlanc, Chair, Peace and Solidarity Commission
First published: 01/09/2007 13:47
http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleprint/793/

³The January 27-29 actions in Washington DC called by UFPJ will be the
beginning of a highly motivated peace lobby. The close working relationships
with the Out of Iraq Caucus and the Progressive Caucus will give the peace
movement both an inside and outside strategy that can make the difference in
some of the crucial debates that will unfold in the new Congress.²

The Peace and Solidarity Commission prepared this memo for the National
Board discussion on legislative priorities. Out of necessity, it is also an
assessment of the Iraq Study Group (ISG) report released on Dec 6, 2006. The
2006 elections and now the country wide debate on the ISG report provides
new opportunities and challenges for the Party. Our aim within the peace
movement and in mobilizing the entire Party organization should be geared to
organizing a stronger grass roots movement to end the war/occupation.

Currently the main factor pushing forward the legislative process on Capitol
Hill is the Iraq Study Group (ISG) report released December 6, 2006. Many
Congress people and national organizations are issuing statements pro and
con. The ISG report is now the frame of reference for the debate on how and
when to end the occupation of Iraq. The Report will have long-term impact
due to the objective need for a bi-partisan solution in order to move
legislation.

The challenge for the peace movement is to on one hand push for the
immediate end of the war and occupation, while on the other, working with
anti-war Congressional allies for the best possible legislation to end the
war/occupation as soon as possible. The peace movement must be extremely
tactically flexible in the next period as various bills and proposals are
introduced, amended and changed.

Iraq Study Group Report

The history of the bi-partisan committee, its members and the intent of
their report have been widely discussed in the media. We need to assess the
main points and the impact on the debate in Congress.

The ISG report has opened up political space to continue the debate on not
if, but how to end the war. The debate on the ISG report is a mass
educational opportunity. This is the starting point for mobilizing the Party
organization in the movement to end the war.

In the Party¹s analysis, we have to advocate for implementing the elements
of the ISG proposals that push back the neoconservative policies on a basis
benefiting the Iraqi people and the democratic forces. At the same time, we
need to critique those elements that serve to impede the fight to end the
occupation.

While the ISG proposals in general reflect the majority sentiment against
continued occupation, they also seek to maintain US political and economic
control in the Middle East. Its authors represent the ³realist² sector of
the US ruling class. They desire a way out of the Iraq War that salvages US
hegemony in the region and protects US strategic interests especially access
to oil.

The report rebuffs the Bush Administration¹s policies in the following
areas:

    * It states that ³staying the course² is not an option characterizing
the dire conditions and the urgency for a change in policy;

    * It recognizes that there is no military solution to the spiral of
violence;

    * It calls for an Iraqi reconciliation process that inevitably will lead
to negotiations including representatives of the insurgency and the
militias;

    * It advocates against the division of Iraq;

    * It emphasizes diplomatic efforts and engagement with Iran and Syria,
and calls for the involvement of the UN Security Council, European Union,
and other countries in the region;

    * It cites the need for US relations with countries in the region based
on economic and political reform rather than regime change;

    * It acknowledges the staggering amount of money spent on the war;

    * It outlines why it is critical to address the Israel-Palestine crisis
for stability in the region and the need to renew efforts to negotiate a
two-state solution, acknowledging the potentially dangerous role that Israel
could play in the region.

ISG Report Fails on the Basic Issue: US Troop Withdrawal

If implemented, the ISG proposals would mark a major change of Bush policy
in Iraq, which has insisted that current troop levels and policies are
working. At the same time, the Report does not call for an increase of US
troops in defiance of some in the Pentagon and Sen. John McCain who have
advocated an increase of 100,000 troops for a ³surge² to bring the about a
quick resolution of the spike in violence. But on the basic issue of troop
withdrawal, the Report falls short.

The Report states that the long-term presence of the troops will not lead to
fundamental improvements in Iraqi security, yet if implemented, its
proposals would continue the occupation indefinitely. The ISG propose a
gradual US troop withdrawal to be completed by the first quarter of 2008 but
would maintain military trainers and a rapid response force numbering 70,000
to target Al Qaida in Iraq.

The Report also blames the Iraqis themselves and their government for the
internal strife. It covers up the reason why the Iraqi government is not
able to govern. We know the limitations on the Iraqi Government begin with
the US occupation and limitations on real sovereignty. The Iraqi government
will not be able to solve the problems in the country without ending the
greatest threat to its legitimate rule: the ongoing US occupation.

The need for immediate Congressional action to withdraw the troops is the
mandate of the 2006 elections. But the legislation on Iraq coming out of the
new Democratically-controlled Congress and Senate must go well beyond the
proposals of the ISG. The struggle for setting a timetable will be the
cutting edge of legislative work between now and the fourth anniversary of
the war, March 2007.

On Capitol Hill

Before the ISG report was released on Dec 6, there were a number of
consultative meetings about Iraq War legislation on the Hill.

The Democratic Party House Caucus held a briefing with a number of former
government officials. The Out of Iraq Caucus began consultations with the
peace movement to prepare for the legislative struggle to end the war and
occupation.

The Progressive Caucus also hosted a Congressional briefing with former Sen.
George McGovern and William Polk, who drafted a withdrawal plan. (See
http://www.harpers.org/TheWayOutOfWar.html) And the Progressive Caucus staff
has urged the peace movement to request a meeting with Pelosi, which is in
process.

Although many meetings and briefings are happening in the wake of the
election victory, the staffers for the key pro-peace Congressional
representatives say there isn¹t a push yet for a Democratic Party consensus
position on the war.

A few Congressional staffers have urged that the peace movement bring
together several Congressional representatives to discuss introducing one
major peace of anti-war legislation while others are skeptical. The peace
movement will take steps in January to see if it is a possibility.

Sen. Levin and others have advocated in the weeks since the election for
setting a July 2007 deadline to begin US troop withdrawal. The Out of Iraq
Caucus, with 73 members, is soliciting input on legislation. The caucus
members range in opinion from immediate withdrawal to a phased withdrawal.

Rep. Maxine Waters, the chair of the Out of Iraq Caucus, has participated in
two briefing sessions with UFPJ leadership and other peace movement leaders
in the last week. The UFPJ legislative network organized one. Rep. Waters
initiated the second for input into the next steps the caucus should take.

In the last meeting she asked, ³What does the peace movement mean when you
call for the troops out now?² She acknowledged the need to separate the role
of the movement and its slogans and demands from the positions that
Congressional allies will take. She spoke about the need to have a vocal,
organized, vigorous movement to support their efforts on the Hill, noting
that the 2008 elections is a powerful motivating factor.

 War Appropriations

A debate is emerging on the role of war appropriations legislation in the
struggle to withdraw the troops. Some in the peace movement believe we
should demand that the Democratic-led Congress should vote down the war
appropriations bill that is coming early in 2007. The peace movement needs
to approach the various war appropriations proposals tactically. The
Democratic Party leadership will not support voting down the war
appropriations because Bush and the Republicans will appeal to public
support of the troops to ridicule them.

Some newspaper articles are now saying, however, that the Democratic
leadership is considering a drive for amendments to qualify the type of war
appropriations they are willing to support. Some are saying they want a
withdrawal plan to be attached to any appropriations as an amendment. There
is continued opposition to new funding for US military bases in Iraq.
Measures cutting funding to permanent bases passed two times on a voice vote
in the last session of Congress although it was added back into the war
appropriations bill during the reconciliation process the first time around.

As of this week, only two Congressional representatives have taken concrete
steps on new appropriation legislation. Rep Kucinich, without consultation
with peace allies in Congress has prepared a briefing paper and is beginning
a campaign to completely end the funding for the war. Rep McGovern is
reintroducing his bill that would limit war funding to those that ensure the
safe withdrawal of troops.

The January 27-29 actions in Washington DC called by UFPJ will be the
beginning of a highly motivated peace lobby. The close working relationships
with the Out of Iraq Caucus and the Progressive Caucus will give the peace
movement both an inside and outside strategy that can make the difference in
some of the crucial debates that will unfold in the new Congress.

Our Party¹s Role

The Communist Party¹s approach should be to discuss within the peace
movement and as a part of general mass educational efforts why elements of
the ISG report are rebuffs to basic neo-conservative foreign policy tenets.
We also must clearly point out that the bottom-line solution to the crisis
in Iraq and it¹s domestic impact is a plan for US troop withdrawal and the
end of the occupation.

We have to support the calls by the movement for immediate withdrawal while
supporting Congressional efforts to set deadlines. We must curb
legislatively the Bush administrations attempts to stall the Iraqi
reconciliation process and to reduce the involvement of international
institutions and multilateral support for the Iraqi government.

The Party¹s emphasis is the fulfillment of the election mandate for ending
the war. Sixty-two percent of the people support withdrawal immediately or
within a year. ³Immediate withdrawal² means that a decision and a plan must
be made coupled with diplomatic and political initiatives that help the
Iraqi government, democratic forces and the people regain control of their
country.

Although the ISG report calls for diplomatic and political initiatives, we
must fight for the Congress to undertake policy support for diplomatic
efforts based on international law and national sovereignty. Another problem
is the ISG maps out a path to privatize Iraq¹s national oil industry. We
must emphasize that an end to war profiteering and US corporate control of
Iraqi oil together with support for Iraqi-led reconciliation and
reconstruction are key elements to any solution in the country.

Discussion by both Republicans and Democrats has begun to blame the Iraqis
for the problems in Iraq. Some right-wingers argue that we have to demand
that the Iraqis lead or the US will leave altogether. The racist argument
that blames those under occupation for the crisis in Iraq is being used to
argue against funding the reconstruction. We have to challenge this
rationale in order to prepare for the struggle for Iraqi-led reconstruction
and ending war profiteering. We must also help struggle with sections of the
anti-war majority that might fall for these arguments as the basis for
immediate withdrawal.

The Party should help fight for comprehensive legislation that incorporates
all the key concerns:

1) Ending the occupation as soon as possible, leaving no bases behind;

2) Funding for rebuilding Iraq under Iraqi control;

3) Support for an Iraqi-led reconciliation effort to end sectarian violence
and regain control of the country;

4) Support for a broad political, diplomatic effort involving the UN and
countries in the region.

If no single bill can achieve these ends, we should support all those bills
that most advance these principals in the weeks and months ahead.

We also should support calls for hearings to expose the Bush
Administration¹s preemptive war policies, war profiteering, drive to
privatize and control Iraq¹s oil and the continued violation of
international laws especially in regards to Guantanomo and the rendition of
prisoners.

We need to discuss the funding of the war as the budget debate begins in
March. We need tactics connecting the trillions spent on the war with the
unmet needs of our communities and the need for reconstruction funds for
communities destroyed in Iraq. We should support efforts to amend the war
appropriations with withdrawal plans. Congressional hearings leading up to
the appropriations debate will set the atmosphere for how we approach the
issue. We should prepare a comprehensive analysis of the economic costs of
the war.

Our approach has to be flexible and responsive to the swift changes that
will go on in Congress as the mass pressure mounts for fulfilling the 2006
mandate to end the war.

Addendum

Key Legislation on Iraq introduced in the last Congress

H.CON.RES.35, Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should
develop and implement a plan to begin the immediate withdrawal of United
States Armed Forces from Iraq.

Sponsor: Rep. Woolsey

H.CON.RES.184, Expressing the sense of Congress regarding additional steps
to expedite the success of the United States in Iraq, and for other
purposes.

Sponsor: Rep. Skelton

H.CON.RES.197, Declaring that it is the policy of the United States not to
enter into any base agreement with the Government of Iraq that would lead to
a permanent United States military presence in Iraq

Sponsor: Rep. Lee

H.CON.RES.321, Providing that the new permanent Council of Representatives
of Iraq is encouraged to debate and vote on whether or not a continued
United States military presence in Iraq is desired by the Government of Iraq

Sponsor: Rep. Kucinich

H.CON.RES.348, Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to
accomplishing the mission in Iraq

Sponsor: Rep. Thompson

H.CON.RES.402, Requiring certain committees of Congress to review and
evaluate the activities and progress of the Government of Iraq in securing
and stabilizing Iraq

Sponsor: Rep. Gerlach

H.CON.RES.417, Expressing the sense of Congress in support of a broad-based
political settlement in Iraq

Sponsor: Rep. Mark Udall

H.CON.RES.442, Expressing the sense of Congress that the Government of Iraq
should not grant blanket amnesty to persons known to have attacked, killed,
or wounded members of the United States Armed Forces in Iraq

Sponsor: Rep. Jackson-Lee

H.CON.RES.492, Urging the Government of the United States to declare that it
does not intend to establish a long-term or permanent military occupation of
Iraq, and to work with the United Nations to convene an international
conference on Iraq's future

Sponsor: Rep. Hinchey

H.RES.82, Disavowing the doctrine of preemption

Sponsor: Rep. Lee

H.RES.571, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the
deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.

Sponsor: Rep. Hunter

Note: This is the Republican response to Rep. Murtha¹s proposal to redeploy
US troops.

H.RES.861, Declaring that the United States will prevail in the Global War
on Terror, the struggle to protect freedom from the terrorist adversary.

Sponsor: Rep. Hyde

Note: This is the Republican response to Democratic calls to debate the Iraq
war. It dealt with the war on terrorism, rather than a clean debate on the
Iraq war.

H.RES.984, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Iraq is
in the midst of a civil war since the February 22, 2006, bombing of the
Golden Mosque in Samarra, Iraq, one of the holiest places for Shiite
Muslims.

Sponsor: Rep. Waters

H.RES.990, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the
original authorization for use of force against Iraq contained in Public Law
107-243 is outdated and Congress should vote on a new use of force
resolution that reflects the current situation in Iraq.

Sponsor: Rep. Waters

H.J.RES.55, Withdrawal of United States Armed Forces From Iraq Resolution of
2005--Homeward Bound

Sponsor: Rep. Abercrombie

H.J.RES.70, Requiring the President to submit to Congress a plan for the
withdrawal of United States Armed Forces from Iraq, and for other purposes

Sponsor: Rep. Price

H.J.RES.73, To redeploy U. S. Forces from Iraq.

Sponsor: Rep. Murtha

H.J.RES.90, Disapproving the granting of amnesty by the Government of Iraq
to persons known to have attacked, kidnapped, wounded, or killed members of
the Armed Forces of the United States or citizens of the United States in
Iraq.

Sponsor: Rep. Larson

H.R.871, War Funding Accountability Act

Sponsor: Rep. Mike Thompson

*---------*---------*---------*---------*

The Peace Movement¹s Challenges in the Midterm Elections

Author: Judith LeBlanc, Chair, Peace and Solidarity Commission

First published: 07/08/2006 00:59 by {article_topic_desc}

Found at: http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleprint/770/

³As the Republicans make the defense of the war in Iraq the centerpiece of
the midterm elections, the peace movement response must be targeted and
vigorous. The highest priorities are helping elect Democratic and peace
candidates, and organizing voter registration and education. The peace
movement needs to empower the peace majority through electoral struggle and
movement-building.²

Report to the National Committee of the Communist Party June 24, 2006

A change in the composition of the congress will make it more possible to
end the occupation in Iraq. That¹s the political reality.

Today I will not discuss the next national initiatives of the peace
movement, nor assess the tremendous 350,000-person national demonstration on
April 29, 2006 organized to mobilize the majority peace sentiments toward
the 2006 midterm elections. I also will not get into the details of the
upcoming national peace conferences or the work to organize joint actions
between the peace and immigrants rights movements.

I will discuss two points we, the Party and Left, need to address in the
next months: 1) the need for an active, vibrant peace movement in the lead
up to Election Day, and 2) Party District and Club initiatives to strengthen
the impact of the peace movement in defeating the right in November.

We need tactics that enable the peace movement to play its role as a
mobilization of the peace majority. The overall framework for peace movement
organizing must be to move the broadest cross section into practical
involvement in both political and ideological struggle.

After the past few weeks, the peace movement has a running start. We have
political momentum to encourage both new and incumbent candidates to speak
out against the war and challenge the rightwing Republicans.

The media spin has been that the Democrats are split on the war. The real
story is that 85% of the Democrats in Congress voted for withdrawal and are
in step with the majority public opinion. Eight months ago, two Democratic
senators were for withdrawal; two months ago it was four. This past week 39
Democrats in the Senate voted for withdrawal and the need for non-military
support for the reconstruction of Iraq.

The shifts among the Democrats matched the growth in the mass opposition to
the war. Meanwhile, the Republicans are united around a policy totally at
odds with the American people.

The mass opposition to the war is reflected dramatically in the labor
movement. On April 29 over 15,000 union members marched. It was the result
of months of organizing in workplaces and articles in the local union press.
The largest hospital workers union in New York City set up ³peace captains²
in over 60 work sites to prepare for the mobilization. They also collected
over 600 signatures in support of a city council resolution calling for the
troops to come home.

How many workers do you need to speak to collect those signatures, over how
many lunch breaks? It¹s an incredible organizing effort! It is a political
exercise in making the links between peace abroad and justice at home. These
very same unions were also in the midst of mobilizing for the immigrant
rights actions on April 10 and May 1.

The debate in the Congress and the shift among the Democrats is
breathtaking. The peace movement is a movement that must make the links
between the war policies and the domestic.

The peace movement is making progress in turning the politics of protest
into a real political shift for ending the occupation.

The rightwing Republican critique of the Democrats wanting to ³cut and run²
is premised on the idea that the only answer is military victory. Former
diplomats, intelligence officers and generals agree that there is no
possible military victory. The only way out is a political settlement.

If the US prepares to leave and sets a deadline, it opens possibilities for
the Iraqi government to involve the UN and Arab league to help Iraq regain
it¹s sovereignty and national security, and begin to rebuild.

This week, the Iraqi national security advisor wrote in the Washington Post
that the US troop presence galvanizes the support for the insurgency. He
also said that the withdrawal of troops is a prerequisite for legitimizing
Iraq's government in the eyes of its people; that Iraqis now see foreign
troops as occupiers rather than the liberators.

The Iraqi Communist Party says Iraq¹s national security is more than
military. It is a societal issue with economic, social and political roots.
They analyze the security issues within the context of worsening economic
conditions. They are for broad participation in the decision making process
and mass mobilizing for the formation of the national unity government.

They also emphasize the critical nature of mobilizing mass and political
struggle for labor rights and against unemployment, plant closings and
privatization and corruption. They believe the growth of sectarianism and
sectarian conflict presents a huge obstacle for the struggle for national
sovereignty. They say the presence of foreign troops is a violation of
national sovereignty and timetable for withdrawal is necessary for progress
to be made in Iraq.

It is now being reported in the British press that the Iraqi government will
announce a 28-point package for national reconciliation. It will offer Iraqi
resistance groups inclusion in the political process and an amnesty for
current prisoners if they renounce violence and lay down their arms.

The negotiations with the resistance groups have gone on for months and have
included the US ambassador.

In exchange, the Iraqi government will guarantee a finite, UN-approved
timeline for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq; a halt to US
operations against insurgent strongholds; an end to human rights violations,
including those by coalition troops; and compensation for victims of attacks
by terrorists or Iraqi and coalition forces.

We need to watch how this new initiative will play out. It¹s a huge
development. The Bush administration knew about the negotiations while the
debate raged on Capital Hill. As they Bush administration circled their
wagons, calling for a military victory in Iraq, they also knew that there
was a possible peace settlement.

Will Bush and the GOP take credit for brokering a peace deal and try to win
the midterm elections? Is it even possible for the Republicans to use this
development if it includes amnesty for all prisoners and the inclusion of
resistance forces in the political process and the possible prosecution for
war crimes committed during the occupation?

The challenge will be for the peace movement to underscore the need for a
political resolution to the crisis while at the same time stopping the
neoconservatives from sabotaging the steps that the Iraqis take in that
direction.

As the Republicans make the defense of the war in Iraq the centerpiece of
the midterm elections, the peace movement response must be targeted and
vigorous. The highest priorities are helping elect Democratic and peace
candidates, and organizing voter registration and education. The peace
movement needs to empower the peace majority through electoral struggle and
movement-building.

The movement-building must be done through education and ideological
struggle, which distinguishes the peace movement from the Democratic Party
or candidate campaigns. The movement helps to clarify the issues and
influence the debate and the positions of the candidates. Linking political
action with building a vibrant movement is a critical contribution of the
Communists and the left.

The movement is also critical to generating excitement on the streets for
defeating the right. The main obstacle to empowering the peace majority is
that over 50% of the people don¹t vote! Mass demonstrative actions and
educational work can activate the stay-at-home-vote.

The movement¹s role is to respond to the daily stream of war mongering and
new rationales for the occupation and to guard against new preemptive
strikes against Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba or on the Korean peninsula.

The movement¹s efforts in the midterm elections are geared to defeating the
Republicans in November and quickly moving into action with the new
Congress. No Honeymoon. We need to help develop tactics that result in a
more organized, stronger, broader movement post election.

One election cycle won¹t end the occupation or the US foreign policy of
first-strike preemptive war. The spiral of crises in Iraq, the ongoing death
of US troops and Iraqis is not enough to create a political shift although
it plays its role.

As a result of protests and an emphasis on Congressional pressure campaigns
in the years since the Presidential election, the movement has had a big
impact on the political terrain of the midterm elections. Think about it.
We¹ve shifted the position of the Democratic Party presidential candidate on
the war. Kerry now believes that his vote in support of the war was the
worst vote he has cast in his Senate career.

Now is not the time to sit out the elections, its time to step up! That¹s
the spirit the Party must bring into the peace movement organizing.

The rightwing is known for its election-year ³October surprises,² dirty
tricks to sway public sentiment with fear. This time around Al-Zarqawi¹s
killing was the ³June surprise² in attempt to make the Iraq War look like a
³success.² The peace movement has to be on guard against more provocations
and attempt to stir up the fear factor as the election approaches. The
manipulation of the threat of terror is the centerpiece of the fear factor
both internationally and domestically.

Not all of the candidates in the swing races are for troop withdrawal, they
must be reminded that the majority think the war is a mistake and want
congressional representation which reflects their view on the war. They need
to hear at candidates¹ nights, town hall meetings that 62 percent of people
do not believe the war is worth loss of life and other costs. They need to
be reminded that every major poll in the country shows majority want
withdrawal, large numbers want speedy withdrawal most want total withdrawal
in a year. 57 percent want reduced levels now.

The visible, vocal presence of the peace movement also bolsters the chances
of peace candidates. Grassroots peace mobilization helps make their
campaigns become more winnable. The most exciting example is the challenge
within the Democratic Party primary to Senator Lieberman.

The peace movement needs more Congresspeople like Kerry, Feingold, Boxer,
Inouye and Menendez, who are willing to stand firm and fight for a deadline
for withdrawal.

Either way, the peace movement must see it¹s main task between now and
November is to shift the majority in Congress away from the Party of war.
And then post election to exert the power of protest and congressional
pressure campaigns to bring the troops home.

The proposals for the Party¹s peace movement activity are simple and
practical. The proposals help to fill in the outline that Joelle gave in her
report. We are active in a cross-section of peace groups and local and
national coalitions. Our contribution can be great.

First, Party peace activists discuss on District and Club levels a list of
peace activists to meet with to discuss our outlook and assessment of the
elections and ways to move peace groups into action. We are also doing this
on the national level.

Although not all of our activists openly represent the Party in coalitions,
it is still important to have these discussions with other activists.

The aim of discussions is to involve peace groups and individual activists
in the swing congressional districts and on candidate campaigns.

If we are not able to move people into action on a specific candidates
campaign, minimally, we should help organize voter registration and
education and candidate¹s forums/nights.

The District and Club roles are important in setting priorities and figuring
out tactics in each congressional district.

For example, in New York City, the citywide coalition discussed the fact
that some groups might feel restricted by their tax status from doing
electoral work. Those groups that want to work on Congressional or local
election races in support of peace candidates will form separate committees
to facilitate electoral work. One group had quite a struggle around the
interpretation of their 501(c)(3) nonprofit status. But through discussion
with other groups, some of the leading members initiated a peace activists¹
letter as individuals in support of a Congressional candidate. One of our
comrades is one of the signers. The aim is to mobilize people to support the
congressional campaign by highlighting the strong anti war positions of the
candidate.

While we fight for the peace movement to engage in the November elections as
a key tactics in the struggle against the occupation, we should not at the
same time write off those who are fearful about engaging in political action
or who disagree with the necessity to do so.

We need to help find the ways that local peace groups can build their base
and simultaneously contribute to empowering the peace sentiments in a
targeted race through voter registration, candidates questionnaires, voter
pledges that help peace groups to be on the streets collecting names and
contact info.

Secondly, we should also be a part of the ongoing pressure on Congress
through the Fall adjournment. There are plans for faith-based initiatives
such as the Declaration of Peace, which emphasizes Ghandian principals of
public nonviolent action. For example, on Fourth of July a march is planned
in Philadelphia that culminates in a mass signing of the Declaration of
Peace (a play on the Declaration of Independence). We¹ve got to make it
clear, through participation in these types of activities that if you oppose
the war then the most important thing we can do is to change the composition
of Congress.

The end objectives of our involvement in peace movement activity leading up
to the midterm elections is:

1) To broaden the circle of people in the peace movement who are familiar
with the Communist Party¹s outlook on the elections and the need to defeat
the ultra-right.

2) To deepen the understanding of the role of movements in political
empowerment.

3) To strengthen basis for recruiting new Party members.

4) To energize the peace movement with tactics that move mass protest and
majority opposition to the occupation into political action.

The Democratic Party and its candidates are only as strong politically and
economically as the mass movements behind them. The greater participation of
the Party and Left, the more effective the movements are, the more likely we
can deliver a blow to the Right in November.

With our collective efforts in the targeted congressional races and our
mobilizations in the streets and in the halls of Congress, the mid term
elections can become a turning point in ending the occupation of Iraq.

Judith LeBlanc is a National Vice-Chair of the CPUSA and Chair of its Peace
& Solidarity Commission.

**************

 

 




________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism