Stuff Real Mayors Do

Mayor of Philadelphia spends New Years' Day speaking to inmates.

On New Year's Day, while many Philadelphians were enjoying bowl games and parades, Mayor Nutter was up early and delivering a message of hope - with a little tough love mixed in - to the inmates of seven of the city's correctional facilities.

He was joined by about 40 clergy members, from a number of denominations, for the annual Ecumenical Services and Civic Engagement Visit to the Philadelphia prison system.

Part of Nutter's message to the clergy, which started at a breakfast meeting, was a practical accounting of money and choices.

He said that of the city's nearly $4 billion operating budget, 24 percent is spent on all the components of the criminal-justice system.

"We don't need more incarceration, we need more education," he said. "Some of these people don't need to be locked up, they need a job."

The message to the 200 inmates at Curran-Fromhold Correctional Facility - his first stop - was just as pragmatic.

"We spend a lot of money to keep track of you up here," Nutter said. He told them it cost $30,000 a year for each prisoner, compared with $10,000 for a community-college student.

"Where do you think I'd rather spend our money?" Nutter said.

--

Before he left Curran-Fromhold, two inmates, Lynwood Ray and Alex Naranjo, presented Nutter with a portrait of him they had painted. He told them he would hang it in City Hall.

Later, Nutter said that it was "painful and personal" to see talent wasted in prison and that the city could be doing more to help inmates.

"It just shows you, when properly motivated and directed, every one of these men and women can be doing something totally different and don't have to be in prison," he said.

When the entourage arrived at the Riverside Correctional Center for women, Nutter received a foot-stomping, hand-clapping, rock-star welcome.

His message was the same. Have a reentry plan. Play by the rules. Stay away from bad influences. And don't return.

"Never, never, never come back to this place," Nutter said to the about 125 women in attendance.

That's all for today's installment of Stuff Real Mayors Do.

President Obama's visit to New Orleans

I have a whole bunch of really fuzzy pictures from my increasingly useless digital camera right here on the flickr. I took pictures of political people I recognized. From the New Orleans City Council, I spotted Shelley Midura, Cynthia Hedge Morrell, Arnie Fielkow, and Jackie Clarkson. From our Baton Rouge delegation, I noticed Jim Tucker, Walk Leger, Ed Murray, and Karen Carter Peterson. Of course I also spotted Mayor Nagin, Governor Jindal, State AG Buddy Caldwell, as well as Representatives Cao, Scalise, and Melancon. As far as aspirant candidates are concerned, I saw Murray and John Georges but wasn't able to pick Badon or Perry out of the crowd. They may have been there; this is certainly not an exhaustive list.

I had a great time and came away satisfied with the experience. Seeing a Presidential speech in person is not a bad way to spend a Thursday afternoon. Being close enough to shake Mr. Obama's hand was also very exciting, as I've obviously been an admirer of his for some time.

More substantively, I found his comments to be largely uncontroversial, and therefore, somewhat unsatisfying. Some have criticized the President for what he did and did not say during his junket here. I don't necessarily disagree with many of the critiques I've read, but I'm going to take a different approach and discuss what I think are some significant signs of progress specific to our region during the administration's first nine months.

1.Housing

To me, this is the area in which the administration has been most proactive. Before HUD's Shaun Donnovan can even begin to evaluate housing policy here, he has to at least have people on the ground with the credibility to tell him what's happening. I'm encouraged by Donnovan's decision to send in an entire team to gut and rebuild HANO after Alphonso Jackson's pathetic receivership of the agency. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever heard of such an intervention before.

2. Coastal Restoration

The Obama administration has created the Gulf Coast Interagency Working Group to deal with environmental issues and coastal restoration. In part, this move seems to be designed to force the Army Corps out of isolation and into a collaboration with local agencies in Louisiana and Mississippi.

3. Criminal Justice

The Department of Justice and FBI have opened up a series of investigations into the NOPD's conduct during and after Hurricane Katrina. I've speculated that this could result in the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division possibly pursuing a consent decree with the city of New Orleans.

4. FEMA/DHS

President Obama has cleaned out the local FEMA office, appointed a new director who everyone seems fired up about, and established an arbitration system that will resolve ongoing reimbursement pursuits in less time than the traditional appeals process that local agencies had previously been muddling through.

5. Schools, healthcare, infrastructure

The stimulus bill has allowed Louisiana to compete for lots and lots of money - to accelerate school construction, to fix roads and build new train lines, and to keep clinics open. It is unfortunate that our Governor has decided we shouldn't try for some of this money but that's not the administration's fault. It's also unfortunate that our Congressional delegation - especially since Congressman Cao was not prepared to be effective when he was first sworn in - wasn't able to do more to push important Louisiana-specific infrastructure projects in the stimulus bill.


--

To me, that's an okay first nine months considering everything the country faces right now while also keeping in mind that President Obama is not the Mayor of New Orleans or the Governor of Louisiana. It's not fantastic, but it ain't bad.

The biggest problem is that our local officials are really poor advocates for the needs of the city.

The most common critiques I've seen from others and the biggest complaints that I have myself, revolve around the perception that the federal government isn't really serious about coastal restoration or levee protection, the sense the the administration doesn't care about punishing those who abused their power during Hurricane Katrina, and the idea that the administration isn't resolved to invest in infrastructure and opportunity here on the Gulf Coast.

Are our Congressional Delegation and our Governor all on the same page when it comes to proposing and advocating for the grander initiatives we need to move forward?

Is anyone from our local delegation calling for investigations into post-Katrina racism? John Conyers is, but he's from Michigan.

Is our local delegation united on an independent commission to look into the army corps and the federal levee failures? As far as I can tell, there isn't a significant lobbying effort by our Congressional delegation or our Governor for such a commission.

Are our local elected officials making a case for expanded federal funding of our infrastructure needs? Absolutely they are not. In fact, Governor Jindal seems to be consciously working against federal funding of infrastructure projects. When the stimulus was being negotiated, was the really city prepared ahead of time with a list of projects that need additional federal support? Were state agencies on the same page with the Congressional delegation about the needs of the region?

--

I don't mean to absolve the President of any criticism. It does seem like the President isn't interested in a transformational platform to make Southern Louisiana sustainable or to extend opportunity to its residents. It does seem like he's only taking President Bush's programs and making them work a little bit better.

That's not enough.

Nonetheless, it is the job of our local officials to work toward a consensus vision for rebuilding this region, not the President's. Until our local leadership can articulate that vision and mobilize New Orleanians to support it, this President and future Presidents are not going to risk political capital on big ideas for Southeast Louisiana or New Orleans.

This was awesome

Thanks to everyone who came. Fun times.

Netroots and New Orleans

I had a fun time in Pittsburgh and found the Netroots conference to be, as I did last year, a great opportunity and experience. Getting to speak on two separate panels was exciting from a personal standpoint and gave me two chances to talk about our efforts at local progressive political reform and the contributions of this community to local investigative news gathering efforts. I went to several trainings, speeches, and panels. I approached people who I wouldn't ordinarily have opportunities to meet.

The feedback I got from folks that attended one of my panels and from people who I spoke to in lobbies, elevators, bathrooms, and bars was extremely positive and encouraging. When you have the opportunity to do some retail politics about the importance of New Orleans, when you can pose direct questions gauging people's thoughts on what obligation the Left and/or the Netroots has to address New Orleans, they pay attention. They get it.

--

I blog about two things really.

I blog about my local environment and I blog about national/ international politics.

That's pretty similar to what most Netroots bloggers do. The difference is other people's local environments don't include New Orleans. Or the South at-large, for that matter.

And unfortunately, New Orleans doesn't fit in to the national political picture for most people anymore except for once or twice a year. That's unfortunate and unfair.

Add it to the pile.

--

Upon thinking about my conference experience for the last few days and after reading through a pretty resentful local email thread about the perceived reception for the New Orleans panel, Netroots organizers, or what is perceived as Netroots leadership, I think there are two very bad but easily reversible things going on.

First, I think that the Netroots conference specifically and the Netroots in general face a real crisis about what they want to be. I asked a question similar to this within the blurb I wrote for the New Orleans panel.

Are Netroots progressives chiefly concerned with affecting chance in American communities or more concerned about achieving more electoral victories for Democratic politicians?

A lot of times, those concerns align quite nicely. But a lot of other times, they don't.

It was really an honor to see Bill Clinton speak. I like the Big Dog. It was exciting.

But is it the right thing to do for Netroots to invite President Clinton to keynote but not answer questions or address challenges from the audience?

I will probably try to go to Las Vegas next year. I understand it is fun for a weekend and Netroots is a useful place to exchange ideas with like-minded people.

But is it the right thing to do for Netroots to go to Las Vegas for the second time in five years while overlooking the nation's most challenged communities? Does going to Las Vegas again reflect the progressive principles that drove the 50-state strategy and the overall growth of what could be a larger, more diverse, national progressive movement?

I'm not the only one asking. There are a lot of Netroots attendees vexed by the challenge of what Netroots is and what it should do.

Certainly, it feels to me to be way too much like the Democratic National Convention Lite.

We talk about this stuff.

I... I'm finding it bizarre to type.... twittered... my displeasure with the announcement of Las Vegas as the site for next year. A few hours later, the Chairman of the Board of Netroots specifically sought me out at the bar to talk to me about it. So too, separately, did another Netroots bigwig. I don't like their explanations very much but I see where they're coming from.

They have a tough job. Not inviting Bill Clinton or other big names means less tickets sold and less people attending. They try to go to places with robust local progressive communities. They try to go places that are cheap and accessible via air and road. They try to go places where hotels will offer generous deals. They try to go places that work on attracting them. They go where it is convenient.

Should they challenge themselves to take Netroots to places like New Orleans and Detroit, places where it would matter?

I made the case. They didn't disagree. They know they need to come down South.

I'm going to continue to engage them in a dialogue about it. That's what I'd like to think we progressives try to do.

And that brings me to the 2nd bad but easily reversible trend: our own tendency toward bitterness and isolation.

When the NCAA chooses somewhere else instead of New Orleans to hold March Madness, I don't boycott college hoops.

I don't think it helps us, not just in terms of attracting more attention from national progressives, the Left, and/or Netroots, but in terms of obtaining attention from anybody to immediately go all Sinn Fein anytime anybody does something we don't really like.

I like the idea of ourselves alone. I like it as a local organizing principle and a rallying cry for our work to clean up what's in our own backyard. I wish many more communities would adopt a similar approach to local change. But our problems are bigger than that and are beyond our backyard.

We have problems with the front porch and the roof.

We have problems next door, down the street, and on the next block.

It really matters what the rest of the country does.

I don't see how New Orleans achieves medium-term sustainability, a reasonable quality of life for its residents, or any whiff of justice for what has happened here without federal attention. I don't see how we obtain federal attention without engaging people around the country about what the situation here is.

I don't really post very often to DKos or TPM Cafe or anywhere else that might reach a national audience. Most of us don't. It would be helpful if I and we did that more often.

I'm excited by the conversations I had with other folks that blog about social, racial, and economic justice issues in other parts of the South and other urban areas. I look forward to continuing those discussions over the course of the year about how to better aggregate information on issues of mutual concern and how to organize around policies that might address those issues. I look forward to figuring out ways we can help each other.

And, as I said before, I plan on continuing to engage with conference organizers about coming to New Orleans in 2011 or 2012 or about a smaller, mid-year "salon session."

I'd like to think that they would be welcomed.

I'm curious to see people's thoughts.

Netroots Nation '09!!!

Netroots Nation is an annual conference of the nation's top progressive bloggers and leaders of the loose progressive movement partially responsible for the mini-resurgence of the Left since 2004.

You may be wondering: "How the hell did E get invited?"

Well, like an annoying neighbor or relative, it's because I invited myself.

I pitched a New Orleans-centric panel for this year's conference and it got accepted!

So I'm flying my ass up to the wrong side of Pennsylvania in - wow - just over a week and will do my best to rep our fair city.

Of course it's never too late for you to waste your vacation days in Pittsburgh.

Come on up!
It's August 13-16th!

The panel is called New Orleans on the Brink: Why Progressive America Can And Should Contribute To A Sustainable Recovery and the basic idea is to try to communicate where we're at, why we're here, and to discuss where we need to go.

This is how I billed it a few months ago when I submitted the proposal:

While statistical evidence has consistently identified the failed federal response to Katrina as the watershed event contributing to the decline of the Bush administration's approval ratings, progressives and the netroots have largely abandoned the cause of New Orleans as a political and moral issue. The Left has a responsibility to see to it that New Orleans survives and thrives, for the sustainable recovery of this city will be the primary measure used for determining whether the netroots indeed represent a substantive movement concerned with the betterment of American communities or just another vessel for cyclical change in partisan fortunes. As it stands, New Orleans is on the brink. Rates of crime, illiteracy, poverty, imprisonment and life expectancy too closely resemble those of developing nations. Political power remains ensconced in the hands of economic and tribal elites. Basic retention of the population that has been able to return is as pressing a challenge as bringing home the tens of thousands who remain displaced almost four years after the levees failed.

It's always tough trying to find that sweet spot when talking about New Orleans to a national audience. One has to disabuse people of two contradictory notions. Some folks inaccurately believe that New Orleans is a hopeless post-apocalyptic hell scape while others just as inaccurately believe that we've had 'excellence in recovery.'

Similarly there's a tough balancing act when you're talking to a national audience because of the generalizations one sometimes has to impart context to people that can't possibly understand the nuance that locals implicitly know. That's an inarticulate way of saying how tough it is to make honest and critical assessments and acknowledgments of what we need to get straight in our own backyard without undermining the all-important argument about ongoing federal indebtedness to New Orleans for decades of environmental costs associated with shipping, oil, and Mississippi River dams. And then there are the costs associated with the failed federal levees, of course.

So without further adieu, let me introduce you to the panelists.

James Perry: housing advocate, fighter of discrimination, mayoral candidate, and all-star twitterer

Karen Gadbois: news organization founder, 'gadfly,' champion of justice, and all-around superstar

Jacques Morial: renaissance man, world-straddler, and human encyclopedia of New Orleans politics and history

June Cross: professor at Columbia School of Journalism, documentary-slayer, and producer of one of the greatest stories of Post-Katrina resilience, the Old Man and the Storm

Last and certainly least, the conversation moderator:

Eli (Me!) Ackerman: increasingly annoying poser

My job, I think, will be to get coffee and keep time.

--

So I think this is an incredibly balanced panel. Insiders and outsiders. Boys and girls. Black, white, and creole. A Mayoral candidate and a barely employable pimple-popper.

What about you all? What do you think about the lineup? Given that we have an hour and will almost certainly devote 40% of that time to audience Q&A, what should we talk about?

Are there any messages you'd like me to deliver to scheduled celebrity pol speakers Joe Sestak, Arlen Specter, Howard Dean, or Valerie Jarret?

What about for your favorite (or most detested) snarky voice from the blogosphere?

--

Also looking for your suggestions on how to behave myself at another panel I've been invited to participate in, about the role of local blogs in investigative journalism or something.

--

Let 'er rip!

District A

For all of Shelly Midura's shortcomings as a stateswoman, she ended up being the only real progressive voice on Council and pushed for criminal justice reform, environmental sustainability, and was an important Entergy watchdog.

She was engaged and accessible and so was her staff.

Fmr. Councilman Jay Batt is going to be running for his old seat again and is already being called the frontrunner.

When Shelly Midura beat him in 2006, Batt had a campaign warchest of over $1 million.

Midura had maybe a third of that.

Batt lost anyway and he'll lose again this time too.

His act is way out of style.

Correction: Midura had 15% of the campaign funds that Batt did.

Does the Left care about progressive reform in the South?

I flagged a number of blog posts from two weeks ago about Texas Governor Rick Perry's secessionist rhetoric. If you're not familiar or not quite remembering, Perry spoke to one of those tea party things in Texas:

"There's a lot of different scenarios," Perry said. "We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot."

Perry is facing a tough reelection road. Not only might Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson challenge him in the GOP primary, but some pretty strong Democrats (Tom Shieffer maybe?) could be waiting in the wings in the general. As a result, many viewed his foray into the world of organized tea bagging as a pretty predictable pandering to the ultra conservative base that he'll need to beat Hutchinson in a possible primary.

But by using the language of secession, Perry made national headlines. Maybe Perry was just being flip but politicians in former Confederate states that raise the specter of dissolution of the union should probably know to expect that comments like those he delivered are going to cause a commotion. That's not even addressing what it means when that rhetoric is used because the nation's first African American President wants to increase the marginal tax rate on the top 1 or 2 percent of income earners back to the rate it was under Reagan. Suffice it to say, the optics are horrendous if one cares about what anyone outside of the base of the Texas GOP thinks about you.

Obviously, I was pretty disturbed by Perry's rhetoric and other instances where professional conservatives have seemingly embraced the language of insurrection.

But I was also not particularly pleased with the reaction to Perry's comments by some of the more respectable progressive bloggers out there.

For instance, Matthew Yglesias:

Honestly, though, I agree with Mike Tomasky that if Texas wants to leave the union we should probably just let them go and I’d say the same for other southern states that feel oppressed by our efforts to use federal tax money to help them take care of their unemployed citizens. Back during the Civil War, the cause of keeping the union together was intertwined with the cause of fighting the great evil of slavery. But assume we just welcome migrants from the Republic of Texas with open arms if they want to flee north, there’d be no comparable problem with letting Texas leave.

A day or so later, he went into a longer policy-based rant about how secession might be handled.

Another favorite, Nate Silver, responded to Perry as follows:

Then he rattled off a series of points about how much better off the Democrats would be without Texas.

I don't think that Nate Silver or Matthew Yglesias actually believe that Texas should secede from the union or that the US would be better off without Texas or any of the other former Confederate states whose Senators and Governors have mounted stunningly politicized opposition to stimulus funding that would help their own states' flagging economies.

Yet, there's something quite unfortunate about their dismissive tone that's indicative of a larger pervasive and insidious national attitude toward the South. The problem is not just that people are too insulated in the culture of the Beltway or the major media centers of New York, LA, and Chicago; it's that for so many on the Left view the South derisively as purely a symbol of extremist conservatism while expressing so very little empathy for the people of the South who actually are suffering from the consequences of this kind of GOP-inspired institutionalized poverty.

For instance, let's take the stimulus bill.

When you really distill down what has happened, you basically had a bunch of ultra-conservative Southern governors and senators screaming bloody murder because the Obama Administration was giving them money that they could use to improve institutions, infrastructure, and services. While conservatives of course would argue that improved institutions, infrastructure, and services represent larger more intrusive government, the reality is that these are the poorest and least developed states in the country with huge populations of impoverished residents and minorities saddled with the most institutionally dysfunctional justice systems in the industrialized world.

When viewed using this lens, the resurgence of the extremist rump of the GOP has absolutely nothing to do with an ideological opposition to government spending, pork, or the national debt.

Instead, it is more indicative of a long-standing ideological refusal by wealthy Southern elites to do anything at all that might address the really messed up dynamics of race and class that are still disproportionately omnipresent throughout the old Confederacy compared to other regions of the country.

The attitude exemplified by Yglesias and Silver reaction to Perry's ridiculous secessionist rhetoric wasn't about bolstering an ongoing meme about how Southern politicians were working against the interests of their own constituents and how to help the residents on the ground that are fighting for reform from within.

Instead, it was about how obstructionist these politicians are and how best to usher their states clean out of the union.

That anything resembling secession would spell doom for the huge population already bearing the disproportionate negative impact of being born in the wrong region of the country didn't seem to cross their minds.

Rather than discussing how the mechanics of secession might work to the Democrats' advantage, I think it would be much more helpful to the majority of people from Texas, the rest of the old Confederacy, and to the nation at-large if progressives instead concentrated on how best to enact policies that will improve conditions in the nation's most at-risk communities and how best to organize for grassroots progressive reform from within.

The whole pervasive good riddance attitude is something that people in the South have become really sensitive to, consciously or not, and it alienates many that otherwise would really benefit from and support progressive public policy.

Update: Hendrik Hertzberg does the same thing starting at 9:00 in.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

And more eloquently in this column.

Philly Confronts Rich Tax Evaders

The beloved Philadelphia Eagles haven't paid their taxes and ACORN was brave enough to call 'em out.

Meanwhile, Mayor Nutter has taken a complimentary approach toward the city's tax delinquents:

Was that just another sidewalk altercation yesterday afternoon on South Broad Street, or was it Mayor Nutter trading verbal barbs with an alleged tax deadbeat?

Robert Gamburg, one of three lawyers at 121 S. Broad St. who owe the city a total of $348,000 in business privilege taxes, didn't like that Nutter chose to shame him with a news conference outside his building.

Nutter called the conference for 2 p.m. yesterday to show the measures he would take to embarrass delinquent taxpayers.

Nutter held a similar news conference in November, when he told those who owed more than $50,000 that he would be coming after them. Nutter said the city has collected $2.5 million in delinquent taxes in that effort.

--

After Nutter denounced the three in front of the building, sheriff's deputies proceeded to deliver notices, while television cameras rolled, notifying the lawyers that their belongings were to be sold at auction on April 2 if they fail to pay their bills.

"The city will be forced to collect our money by any means necessary," Nutter said.

Take it to 'em Mike!

Now that's real leadership!

It's difficult to even imagine such bold action on behalf of the public good here in New Orleans and that's shameful.

The racial demography in Philadelphia is not so unlike New Orleans. There, however, diverse coalitions have been able to come together around progressive change. When that happens, so does real world progress. This crackdown on wealthy tax cheats is what is allowing the city to keep neighborhood library branches operating amidst a difficult municipal budget squeeze.

I decided to remain in New Orleans after I graduated college because I know in my heart that we can do the same kind of things here, in spite of all the parochialism and mistrust.

Philly Confronts Reality

In Philadelphia, tax increases are preferable to spending cuts.

Mayor Mike Nutter, elected by the largest margin in City of Philadelphia history, has had a rough first year on the job as a result of recession-induced budget deficit.

His proposed library branch closures were met by a huge public outcry. This environment has contributed to the long overdue reevaluation of the tax hikes v. spending cuts debate.

--

New Orleans should go this route as well. We should stop rolling back the millage and start improving services. Obviously, something for after May of 2010 when hopefully a grownup will start restoring some basic financial accountability and public credibility to City Hall.

Depressing

A really disturbing question popped into my head recently and I've really been struggling to find a satisfactory answer.

Given the sober outlook for many of the poorer, lower lying areas of the city over the medium term (10-15 years) in regard to societal basics (economic opportunity, education, housing, health, safety) and fundamental life sustainability (flood protection, subsidence, rising seas), at what point to rational organizations working in the public interest determine that it is more in the interest of disadvantaged New Orleanians to work on subsidizing rescue relocation instead of rebuilding?

Everything I've tried to do in New Orleans from a political standpoint has been predicated on my unwavering belief that it was humanity's moral imperative to rebuild this city while wholly recreating the conservative state institutions and instruments that systemically perpetuate for generational poverty, structural racism, and their associated societal ills.

It was also predicated on my belief that this region is uniquely positioned to capitalize on macro trends that will undoubtedly create economic opportunity around different aspects of the sustainability movement.

But so much and so little has changed.

On the national level, the economic crisis has pushed the obligation to New Orleans further and further away from priority status. Additional infusions of federal capital to the Gulf seem increasingly unlikely given the ideological opposition to federal spending by 90% of our Congressional delegations. The realization of the right of return seems like a pipe dream given the confluence of these and other national and international factors.

On the local level, political discourse in general terms remains largely monopolized by supremacist robber barons and short-sighted machine widgets. The public has little faith in municipal institutions nor is there enough working trust between citizens of different backgrounds to appreciably alter those institutions in the short term. On this front, I have sensed some hard-fought incremental progress.

In other cities, or if this city hadn't experienced such devastating trauma, the incremental change that has occurred over the last 2-3 years would seem monumental.

But the time window New Orleans has in which to make fundamental, perhaps radical change is much much smaller than anywhere else's. We live in a state of political emergency. It may not be right that we should have to prove our right to exist given absolute federal culpability in the disaster that has brought us to this point but unfortunately that's the situation we find ourselves in, isn't it? Especially now after recovery resources have been squandered, stalled, or have otherwise failed to substantially put this city on the road toward short, medium, or long term recovery. Especially now after the national economy has created emergency situations throughout the sunbelt. Especially now as the region's political clout has waned.

I'm sorry that this post is so depressing, especially on such a beautiful sunny day just hours before the Krewe of Muses rolls down St. Charles Avenue. And certainly the morose outlook here is somewhat colored by my personal frustration as a young man searching for stable, fulfilling employment in this time of economic contraction. But I don't think I'm exactly going overboard here.

The fact is that the preconditions for a robust and equitable recovery still remain. But time is running short. Really, really short. Joseph Cao short.

There will be a new Mayor elected one year from now. It's the last best chance to save this city. We have until then to reach out, educate, and organize. The events of this week - the Mayor's politicking and Council's pandering - demonstrate very clearly the uphill climb that remains before honest conversation and evaluation of the city's health can occur in the public domain.

It's too early to pick a Mayoral candidate, but I'm looking for someone that can articulate an optimistic vision for how to maximize the region's advantages without sugarcoating the extremely dire forecast that New Orleans faces if we make no change or only small change.

There's something romantic and courageous about the sinking ship imagery and the unwavering commitment that people have to go down with it, so to speak. But I worry about the people that don't really get a choice in the matter. And I worry about my own transformation from energetic wide-eyed young man to perpetually exhausted and disillusioned curmudgeon.

Perry Campaign Already A Daily Affair

While everyone anxiously awaits my next Mayoral odds line (later this week but no promises) why don't we check in with dark horse darling James Perry?

Perry, the executive director of the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center, confirmed his interest in the Mayor's office to WCBF in mid-December:

The fundamental concern is that the rebuilding effort is failing. So far, the folks who have discussed running for Mayor have not had a strong record when it comes to rebuilding. Many of them are great folks with strong records but they haven't been pushing on these issues around getting the neighborhoods in New Orleans rebuilt.

Frustrated by the lack of support municipal government has provided for the city's various grassroots citizen-driven recovery initiatives, James Perry seems to have both the record and rhetoric local progressives like myself have yearned to inject into the political discourse.

The question for Perry has been and will remain whether or not he can generate the grassroots support necessary to compete with wealthier rivals. Without a vast personal fortune or the seemingly prerequisite political alliances, Perry will have to outwork adversaries in every other facet of the campaign from messaging to the field organizing. To be taken seriously when campaign fever hits the rest of the city, James Perry will have already needed to infect an army of supporters with his own mutated strain of the virus.

Considering the mountain ahead of him, it's hard not to be hopeful about the initial groundwork. He's announced his interest and formalized his exploratory committee, which is more than other contenders can say. He's launched a simple but interactive website, cultivated online social networks, attended more community meetings and events than previously considered possible, and set an initial fund-raising target. The $25,000 goal is extremely modest considering what he'll eventually need to compete, but nothing grows without seeds.

Recognizing that a competitive coalition will depend heavily on the enthusiastic support of young voters and the city's most engaged progressives, Perry is already laying down tracks - demonstrating the ability to use the tools of online networks for concrete organizing in the flesh. He hasn't just started a Facebook page for his campaign, he's tapping his early supporters there to host house parties on his behalf. He hasn't just opened a Twitter account, he updates regularly. He hasn't just published a website, he's provided forums for supporters to contribute to his platform.

So if you haven't yet...

Join Convince James Perry to run for Mayor of New Orleans!!!

Follow James Perry on Twitter

Donate a small sum to his campaign

Contribute your voice to his issues pages for crime, economic development, education, and housing. (I'm dominating these mini-forums by the way, someone had better get over there and shout me down.)

And if you're already ready already, endorse him on your blog - like my main man DSB or bad ass Princeton politics professor Melissa Harris Lacewell.

At the very least, join the facebook group and get to know the guy and what he stands for.

Heckuva Job Bushie! (And more thoughts on Katrina, the Left, and New Orleans)

The administration's response to Katrina was rapid, as I'm sure you recall:

"Don't tell me the federal response was slow when there was 30,000 people pulled off roofs right after the storm passed," Bush said at what was likely his final news conference as president. "You know, I remember going to see those helicopter drivers, Coast Guard divers, to thank them for their courageous efforts to rescue people off roofs -- 30,000 people were pulled off roofs right after the storm moved through. That's a pretty quick response."

A heartfelt thanks to the Bush administration for its incredible compassion to the people of New Orleans. History books will remember those days very kindly. And since everything's fixed here, we can all have a laugh and move on, right?

--

This bit of revisionism is quite bold, don't you think?

Last weekish, Oyster highlighted this article from the Institute for Southern Studies.

In it, Chris Kromm highlights the latest confessions from aides close to Bush who point to Katrina as the absolute low point for the administration.

So it's kind of surprising that President Bush would bother trying to put any kind of silver lining on what is so indisputably a giant smelly turd. Wouldn't it be better to just admit that it was a low point, and use the mythology campaign to chisel away on issues that are at least a little bit more argueable?

--

But Kromm and ISS don't really hammer away at Bush in that article, rather they use the admission of these top-level aides to wonder about the Left:

What's shocking is how little progressives and Democrats understood this. In the months after Katrina, progressives were rightfully pouring into the streets to protest the Iraq war, and blogs and book writers were churning out millions of pages on human rights crimes like CIA torture flights and Abu Ghraib.

But on one of the biggest human rights tragedies within our own borders -- a hurricane which devastated an area the size of Great Britain, killed 1,800 people and uprooted a million residents -- progressives had little to offer.

It has been quite frustrating as a progressive living in New Orleans. Here's part of what I think happened:

Within the first few weeks of the storm, conservative talk radio had effectively galvanized listener opinion against storm victims. They intoned against victims of Katrina, simultaneously using racial imagery to depict victims of the federal flood and of slow administration response as responsible for their own predicament while pushing back hard against a caricatured interpretation of Kanye West's allegations of overt racism on the part of the administration.

While the vast majority of the American public tithed generously and remained largely sympathetic, the larger Right found refuge from accountability on the issues of poverty and race within the bosom of their base. This proved to be enough political cover to kill Democratic efforts for an independent commission on the Bush administration's Katrina response.

There was partisan stalemate in Washington. Democrats were in the minority and Republicans had enough juice from their base to limit federal intervention into the recovery process. President Bush and Karl Rove worked on doing public opinion damage control while the GOP caucus worked on limiting the ability of Congressional Democrats to claim that they'd won any victories on the matter.

Then what happened?

Then Ray Nagin was reelected Mayor.

Regardless as to what you personally believe about Mr. Nagin's culpability in the Katrina disaster, he was largely discredited at the national level. The Right may have overzealous in targeting Nagin as a means for absolving the Bush administration of responsibility, but it was clear to pretty much everyone that Nagin was an ineffective leader during those days. Some choice quotes during his reelection campaign only compounded his national image problem.

While locals know that Mayor Nagin got reelected by frightening a traumatized African American population with rhetoric while making specific political promises to local Republicans, national progressives and Democratic leaders were at a loss for an explanation. The Right was able to pounce on Nagin's victory as evidence to support the racist memes they had been pushing about storm victims all along. Elected Democrats and progressive bloggers, meanwhile, began to consider our issues to be something of a political hot potato. Mayor Nagin and indicted former Congressman Jefferson were public relations cancers and had to be avoided. As local and state level Democrats struggled with corruption and basic competence, national Democrats had to inch away from actual nuts and bolts recovery policies or else get their hands dirty in the clogged septic tank known as Louisiana politics. Progressive bloggers and advocates lazily abandoned the recovery of New Orleans because focusing on the original disaster response was such a simple sensational bludgeon.

If there was a popular, charismatic, and engaged Mayor elected in early 2006 instead of Mr. Nagin, I'd bet that we would have seen many more joint press conferences with Congressional Democratic leaders from here in New Orleans. It would have certainly been much easier to champion rebuilding and recovery as a mainstream campaign issue. Instead, Democrats stuck to running against general incompetence and for the need to fix FEMA. If you're a Democrat campaigning for Congress in Pennsylvania or Virginia or Indiana, why would you take the unnecessary risk of taking a position on Gulf Coast recovery when you can just rail against administration and FEMA incompetence? If you're a progressive activist, you wouldn't hold a congressional candidate from Indiana, Pennsylvania, or Virginia accountable (through the media or campaign donation) for not having a detailed position on rebuilding and recovery. National Democrats hammering on the issues facing the Gulf could too easily be faced with tough counter arguments related to the utility of sending more money into what was increasingly portrayed (somewhat accurately) as a garbage disposal.

Thus in so many ways, New Orleans ceased to be a national issue. "Katrina" was still a live battlefield but "New Orleans" was too complicated, with too many pitfalls for progressives.

I wrote about that in more detail after the Nation recently published an article about vigilante racism during the storm:

For the nation, the federal response Katrina signalled a final deathblow to President Bush and conservative governing philosophy. Polls demonstrate that the public pretty much turned on the GOP for good as a result of the Katrina saga. The PR battle that took place between the parties was one in which the Right blamed Nagin and the natives for their lack of "personal responsibility," while the Left (and the vast vast majority of the country) blamed Bush and his henchmen for their inexplicable and inexcusable inability to respond to an entirely predictable catastrophe in a major American city.

Since then, national analysis of New Orleans is through these lenses, not just the lens of 'Katrina' but the lenses of were was the immediate partisan reactions to Katrina.

The Left, during Katrina, was justifiably incensed over the way that African Americans were labeled "looters" while whites just looking for food. That's why it is unsurprising to see the lions of the liberal netroots (HuffPo, Think Progress, Color of Change) seize upon this story - it scores points in that old front against racist right wing media portrayal.

Katrina is an eternally smoldering political fire, that actual people live here New Orleans is an abstraction that most don't, can't, and won't think about in the midst of the constant drone of the 24 hour news cycle. That the story of New Orleans continues, that it takes on new twists and turns, that its existence continues to be tenuously propped up on a three-legged stool of racism, corruption, and incompetence seems lost on much of the progressive netroots, on thinkers who I respect greatly and read every day.

To get back to the article from ISS, it isn't that progressives didn't understand that Katrina had dealt a deathblow to President Bush. Rather, everyone seems to understand this quite well. The thing progressives didn't understand or work to learn was how to help New Orleans, partially because there weren't any local leaders to show them the way.

Interestingly enough, this theory of mine will be put to the test. New Orleans has another Mayoral election coming up next year. National progressives like blogging about elections, and national progressives are good at donating money to campaigns. One of New Orleans' most desperate needs is for progressive political reform, for new leadership.

Get it?

Harry Shearer Gets It Wrong

I generally like Harry Shearer but his response to A. C. Thompson's article in the Nation profiling the racist killings on Algiers Point during Katrina is way off track.

It is not how I want to face the nation.

I actually had a number of concerns about A.C. Thompson's writing style and the lack of context too. I also lamented the lack of national progressive attention to issues like the closure of Charity Hospital.

But the facts were there for all to see. Maybe you've seen this despicable video by now:





Harry Shearer read that article and watched that video and started his response acknowledging that the actual crux of Thompson's article - the part about the supremacist white mobs hunting down unarmed black men during Katrina, bragging about it on tape, and the NOPD letting it slide - is solid journalism.

Then he proceeds to rip Thompson apart for "lies" related to basically off-topic factual infractions. For instance, Shearer complains that Thompson said Katrina "crashed" into New Orleans when it is technically true that it was the undermining of the poorly constructed Federal levee system that truly precipitated our tragedy. He implies that the article was written as part of some mainstream media refusal to investigate the levee failures.

Maybe so, but way way off-topic.

In downplaying the racial tensions that exist here, he suggests that Thompson's article - about the city ceding authority to a modern day lynch mob, their failing to investigate the murders they committed, and the free murderers basically confessing on tape that they went out and shot black people for sport, all chased down over 18 months - was published by the Nation because the publication had "contented itself with a crime story."

Certainly, Thompson's article included some unhelpful and inflammatory rhetorical embellishments. It also boasts some pretty gaping context gaps. But let's be real.

This disgusting event happened in our city. The tragedy of Katrina touched people of all backgrounds. But let's not pretend for one second that African Americans weren't treated "special." I'm not just talking about the indifference of Bush and Brownie because state and city officials also played their respective parts. So did some of our police and so did some of our citizens.

Shearer's pride in anecdotal "casual, easy, frequent interactions" with black neighbors just isn't evidence that this city doesn't have gravely serious racial tensions to work through. I'd point to statistics that discuss which community is disproportionately victimized by things like, I dunno, the criminal justice system, the public education system, neighborhood recovery policy, public health policy, post Katrina economic development policy, and affordable housing policy.

Progressive New Orleanians are working to form diverse coalitions around those actual policy matters. When African American victims of supremacist crimes cannot get the NOPD to investigate, there is a huge problem, one very indicative of the many forms of institutionalized racism that progressive New Orleanians must work to eradicate.

Shearer has worked hard as an advocate for New Orleans and for the need for a massive federal infrastructure intervention. His point has always been that America needs to step up and take responsibility for the 2005 flood.

And he's right.

But New Orleanians need to step up themselves and take responsibility for local institutionalized racism. Mr. Shearer could have made all the points that he did without totally brushing aside the matter at hand. Our African American neighbors are hurt by this. We shouldn't ignore that just because Thompson said 'race war' without offering a nuanced differentiation of liberal whites and the supremacist vigilante terrorists that appear in the video.

We can draw that contrast pretty sharply ourselves by condemning these acts and demanding a full criminal investigation.

Shearer should have used his national forum to do that first and foremost. His larger mission to hold the Federal government accountable would not be undermined, it would be that much more credible.

Meta Talk Time. How do we build a grassroots progressive coalition in the Crescent City?

I don't think we need to get into too much detail when describing what is meant by 'progressive.'

For me, it means demolishing the notion in this city that people who care about social justice and people who care about tax dollar efficiency must be in mutually exclusive groups.

Barack Obama just won the Presidency on a general platform that combined transparency, competence, and social justice.

We can replicate that on the municipal level and I think we have to.

---

Cliff gets at something good in the comments portion of this post.

I think it's hard to organize the big picture. I got myself pretty frustrated at times trying to figure out ways to get the big picture message across. Ultimately, I decided that I could be a more effective advocate for the kind of change I believe in by actually engaging in an issue, by injecting a progressive perspective into the repetitive back-and-forth "discourse" that has characterized the political arena.

But Cliff is right, the big picture is what is ultimately important.

The question I've been struggling with all along is how do we get there.

At some point, you've just got to dive in.

By engaging a variety of singular issues, we can build loose coalitions that can be tied together to form a cogent vision for progressive change.

That is why I'm anxious to see how I can now contribute to the fight against the destruction of Lower Mid City.

And there will be plenty of others after that too.

One key, I think, is to figure out how to translate our online communities and our online tools into live direct action. New Orleans progressive bloggers have had some very notable successes, but now is the time to push forward.

Priorities!!!

Via email:

Unfortunately, there is no more money in the 2008 budget to make streetlight repairs for the rest of this year, and the 2009 budget that was passed includes only the smallest amount for repairs in 2009, despite Council Member Midura’s efforts to get this infrastructure fund properly funded at the budget meeting.

It is possible your lights are likely to remain out for a while. We will continue our best efforts to provide a remedy to this situation.

Thank you.

Where is our money going instead?

Just a peek, from City Business:

The budget includes $75 million to acquire 34 acres of property for the new VA hospital and remove infrastructure, although the city is still evaluating “that which we can keep and that which we can get rid of,” Blakely said.

Also in the spending plan is $30 million for the first phase of the Reinventing the Crescent project, a plan to redevelop nearly 7 miles of the Mississippi Riverfront. It will pay for “the design and development of 1.5 miles of new riverfront, roughly tripling the length of what folks can access now (at) Woldenberg Park,” said Sean Cummings, executive director of the New Orleans Building Corp. and the project’s conceptual architect.

Sounds like we've got our priorities straight. Zero money for average residential neighborhoods. Tens of millions of dollars to demolish one such neighborhood or for 'economic development' in an elite neighborhood.

Such progress we're making giving all this money to a neighborhood that didn't flood and is doing just fine without the extra assistance.

I live in a neighborhood expected to benefit greatly from the RTC project. I'd love to have pedestrian access to the river, I really would.

But I'd gladly put the whole thing off for a decade in the blink of an eye to help out the neighborhoods that truly need it.

Did you know that for the 2.1 billion some odd dollars we're collectively sinking into the destruction of Lower Mid City, we could build a brand new comprehensive mass transit system? Probably we could build two of them for that kind of money.

If we had a plan to that ready to go, we might even get it funded by the Feds. After all, Obama is proposing to spend a trillion bucks on local infrastructure projects within the next several months.

Update:

Jan Moller tells us that the state is ready to demolish a neighborhood without the hospital construction money in hand. It's apparently illegal for the state to put itself in that much debt. Perhaps they'll scale back plans by NOT demolishing a neighborhood and instead rebuilding Charity Hospital.

With the economy slumping and energy prices falling, state revenue is expected to plunge well below current projections, giving the state even less room to issue construction debt. Moreover, hundreds of projects across the state are competing for money under the cap, making it unlikely that the state would commit $400 million to a single project.

Update II

I was going to let it slide but I can't. For some reason, in an article that profiles the various ways we might reduce the state's financial obligation, in an article that floats a "scaled-back alternative," Moller doesn't even mention the proposal to rehabilitate and reopen Charity.

Ringing In The New Era

A funny juxtaposition to think about as I collect myself for later analysis:

Last night I watched the returns with my "youthy" peers at One Eyed Jacks. DJ Soul Sister threw a giant victory party and it was a lot of fun.

Anyway, Soul Sister was properly drunk well before Ohio got called so you can try to imagine how things were by the time the networks had made the call.

While waiting for Obama to take the stage for his victory speech, she invited a couple of people on stage to speak. After that, she just threw her hands in the air and invited anybody who wanted to on stage to say what they were feeling, which was something awesomely normal to do on election night in the world's greatest democracy. DJ SS kept on handing me free drink tickets so I wasn't too far behind her in the lost inhibitions department and decided that I had something super important to say. I'll attempt to recreate what I said:

"I feel very privileged to be part of this moment and to be part of this movement. Louisiana didn't go our way tonight but we all got together to vote in Orleans Parish to change the leadership of this country. We need to recreate that here. In 2010 we have to reunite once more to change the leadership of this city when we get to elect a new mayor. I hope all of you will be part of that."

Anyway, I thought that was an important thing to say. I felt like it was a good idea to highlight the change we still seek at the local level. I'm sure it wasn't as stated as clearly as in my recollection of the moment but let's just pretend that I was confident, eloquent, and direct. Also let's pretend I was 6'3'' with rippling biceps and triceps.

My comments were pretty well received from my standpoint and I hopped off stage.

Then what my friends and I have nicknamed a "wooo girl" (think drunk co-ed at a tailgate party) got up to deliver her thoughts. Again, to paraphrase:

"I'm just so happy that Barack is President and that we won the election and beat John McCain. I'm super excited. Ohmygod I love him."

She may have delivered a more stirring sentence or two at the beginning there but the last line, especially her delivery, just cracked me up.

And it provided me something to chew on today as I reflect on where our country is going and where our progressive movement is going.

Full Speeed Ahead: Sailing in Circles

This weekend's election results were a major disappointment containing few silver linings and an ugly long-term outlook.


The Sad Truth: The 2nd Congressional district will see a runoff between the disgraceful William Jefferson and the uninformed conservative puppet Helena Moreno. For many weeks, I had anticipated this result and often used words like 'disastrous' and 'embarrassing' to describe a possible non-choice between Jefferson and Moreno. Somehow out of a slate of 7 below average candidates, we ended up a choice between the least qualified candidate and the most demonstrably corrupt candidate. This will not be viewed kindly by outside observers. This city desperately needs federal recovery dollars, and outsider perceptions of our 'worthiness' for such expenditures have already been battered by racist conservative media narratives. The reelection of someone as image-killing as Bill Jefferson or someone so patently unqualified for one of the city's highest offices represents another major blow to our civic credibility.

The Cynical Optimist: We'll have another crack at unseating Congressman Jefferson either when he's sent to prison or in two years. It gives us a chance to regroup behind a credible challenger about whom we can be relatively enthusiastic, a stark contrast to this year's slate of clothespin catalysts. I don't know how well we would have been served by erecting a new wall of Congressional incumbency around the likes of Troy Carter or Cedric Richmond.


The Depressing Facts: The Orleans Parish School Board is now lacks diversity in demographic makeup and in ideological philosophy. The grossly gerrymandered district maps have always encouraged a white majority, but post-K New Orleans magnifies those advantages. Much more substantively, the new school board has demonstrated an unfortunate disengagement from the most critical issues facing public education in New Orleans. The new school board includes conservatives in Brett Bonin, Woody Koppel, and Seth Bloom who ran on an ideological predisposition counter to the needs of a public school system. Far from actually possessing a plan to improve our public schools, these conservative candidates are primarily concerned with finding cheaper ways to produce the same results. Their primary goal, if I'm understanding their platforms correctly, is to reduce the school district's burden to the taxpayers. That is something that appeals to some people, particularly those that do not think they have a personal stake in the public school system, but this does not appeal to me. I believe education is a worthwhile investment for my tax dollar and I want a school board that will see to it that I get more impressive returns. This city needs strong public schools but an OPSB controlled by advocates of disinvestment is ideologically predisposed to not providing them.

The Smiling Idiot: A few strong progressives ran classy campaigns on little to no budget and began to build localized grassroots networks. Percy Marchand from District 06 and Amy LaFont from District 03 were extremely engaged in the actual issues facing the school systems from the very beginning. They each ran their campaigns on substance. They spoke out against the master plan because they not only took the time to read it but they truly engaged the material. They can be proud of that. District 06 is probably the least hospitable in the entire city for a progressive candidate like Percy Marchand, and the election results demonstrated this. Mr. Marchand is by far more qualified for the school board than Woody Koppel but the truth is that too many district 06 voters likely share Mr. Koppel's predisposition to decentralize and divest. Amy LaFont changed the debate in District 03. Her knowledge of the school master plan predates that of any of the other candidates by many months and her strident criticisms of the plan's effects on District 03 forced even Republican candidate Brett Bonin was forced to adopt a more skeptical rhetoric.


The Future:

In 2004, when I was still very depressed about George Bush's reelection, my father cheered me up with some clairvoyant analysis. He said that when Bush and his congressional cronies screwed up, there would be no where for them to hide the blame. He anticipated that Bush's reelection allowed for the total unravelling of the neoconservative movement because the only government for the neoconservatives to pin everybody's problems on would be their own. How lucky we are that the United States was strong enough to have come this close to withstanding the disastrous reign of the worst President of all time. We might just barely make it.

But is New Orleans that strong? Does New Orleans have the luxury of waiting?

How many more cycles of inept, corrupt, or conservative governance can this city withstand? How much longer can New Orleans be lead around the same circle of establishment consensus?

A lot of people I know romanticize New Orleans as a sinking ship where love for life is enhanced by the freedom gained from recognition of the inevitability of drowning. But a lot more people I know would love life a lot more if we'd just fix the holes in the boat. Can't we agree, at the very least, that this ship should sink more slowly? Our captains obliviously want to go full steam ahead into storm after storm, refusing to plug the gaping holes in our in-between moments of daylight. I don't know how much more water we can afford to watch pour into the hull before we decide to take our mutiny to the deck.

Can't we drop anchor, make repairs, ditch the sinking ship metaphor, and instead adopt one involving flight?

Get into the Details?

I don't want to dwell on LaBruzzo for ever and ever. His shocking and abhorrent proposal is not something I want to continue to talk about. It discriminates based on race, class, and sex both in theory and in practice. It is hateful in every respect. It is also impractical and stupid from the get-go. As the Times-Picayune pointed out today, welfare expenditures actually represent an almost insignificant portion of the budget. LaBruzzo's proposal is a typical racist's attempt to deflect criticism of the excesses of the wealthy onto minorities.

Eugenics is pure evil. Period. LaBruzzo can never recover from this ever. He's finished in my book. Finished!

The controversy does remain of critical relevance.

Why?

Because look who else has exposed themselves to be racist:

(Excerpted from today's T-P)

Some of LaBruzzo's political backers, meanwhile, responded cautiously to his controversial pronouncements.

"It definitely caught me by surprise," said lawyer James Garvey, a member of the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education. He has given $1,000 to LaBruzzo's campaign treasury. "I guess I would say that Johnny is a really good guy and really bright guy and that he comes up with ideas that have not been thought of by many other people. Some are good. Some are bad."

Garvey said he had not given LaBruzzo's sterilization idea enough thought to take a position on it. "This might turn out to be a horrible idea," he said, "but you can't get his good ideas without getting some of his off-the-wall ideas."

Real estate developer Henry Shane, who has given LaBruzzo $2,000, also was noncommittal, saying he has not digested the proposal or talked to LaBruzzo about it.

"I'd have to know what he is actually proposing," Shane said. "It sounds like it might be unusual, but when you get into the details of it, it may make sense."

WHAT? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? There is no due diligence here. When someone proposes genocide through sterilization you condemn it automatically. There's no 'oh well he's a great guy, there might be something good in here' or 'yeah you know I'm not ready to take a position until I see the proposal.' THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST RACIST BILLS ANYONE COULD EVER PROPOSE. EVER.

James Garvey is on the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education and may soon rubber stamp a proposal that closes New Orleans public schools. Do you think he cares about the public education of the poor minority children of Orleans? Sounds to me like he wants them to have never been born. If James Garvey is the type of guy to take a pro-eugenics bill 'under advisement,' he has no business being in government, let alone on a board with jurisdiction over the lives of children.

This petition prevents the BESE board from rubber stamping the master plan until Orleans Parish voters get their say through a new school board. You should probably sign it, unless you're a soulless fool that thinks eugenics bills should be entertained.

This other guy, Henry Shane, whoever he is (a big Vitter-booster), also appears to be a flaming racist. He's suggesting that LaBruzzo's eugenics proposal might "make sense" if us crazies only took the time to look at the details.

Beyond that, we see that Congressman Steve Scalise continues to tout the endorsement he got from LaHitler on his website. I'd love to know what Mr. "the Sleaze" has to say about his friend's proposal. Until he repudiates it publicly, rejects and denounces LaHitler's endorsement, and returns any and all money LaHitler helped raise, I'll just have to go ahead an assume that Scalise is a white supremacist too. We're 48 hours and counting. Anything to say Scasleaze?

Perhaps Mr. Scalise is worried about alienating his base, the racists of Jefferson Parish. He has a difficult political calculation to make because he needs strong racist turnout if he's to retain his seat against the surging Jim Harlan, who not only rejects and denounces 19th century white supremacist philosophies like eugenics, but has a bold plan to move forward on coastal restoration. I fully expect that Mr. Harlan will have no problem pointing out this key difference with his opponent.

Mr. Harlan is closing the gap toward single digits! Prove reasonable people wrong, Jefferson Parish. Vote against politicians like Steve Scalise and his white supremacist friend, Eugenicsathan LaGenocide.

SIGN THE PETITION: EXTEND THE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN PUBLIC COMMENT DEADLINE

A petition is now online to extend the public comments period on the school facilities master plan to January. I can't tell you how critical this is.

Go here to sign it.

The school facilities master plan will guide the capacity of this city's public education institutions for decades to come. It was poorly conceived to begin with and is structurally flawed now that it has been 'completed.'

Go here to sign it.

As of this moment, the Orleans Parish School Board and the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education are scheduled to vote on the master plan within days though the plan was released in the midst of Gustav panic and is close to 2000 pages. The case for extension of the public comment deadline based on the insufficient amount of time the public has had to review and provide comment would be plenty compelling by itself. Yet, disturbingly, we've learned that some members of the Orleans Parish School Board, who are, and I can't stress this enough, directly responsible for the approval or rejection of an absolutely critical guiding master plan, HAVE NOT READ IT THEMSELVES.

Go here to sign it.

Over half of the members of the current school board are lame ducks, some of whom may have already checked out: they are disengaged from what is going on but are still prepared to vote on a 1.8 billion dollar blueprint that they may not even have read.

Go here to sign it.

Orleans Parish voters will elect a new school board on October 4th and it is they who should be making any decisions on the master plan.

Go here to sign it.

Thus, it is of urgent importance for anyone and everyone that cares about either education, democratic processes, or both go HERE to sign the petition to extend the public comments deadline. Currently there is a target of 1000 signatures. I know that we can meet the target and I think we can do it quickly.

Go here to sign it.

Cynthia Willard-Lewis' "Constituent Problem"

This was passed along to me anonymously but I'm sure the original author wouldn't mind me posting it because it was CC'd to just about every media personality and elected official in the city:

Ms Lewis,

What do the residents of New Orleans East have to do to get you, the district's representative, to take a stand and enforce the existing laws to clean up this part of New Orleans Both pre and post Katrina, the area between Interstate 510 and the Chef Mentuer bridge is a dumping ground for New Orleans. It is littered with trash, blighted properties, abandoned nursing homes, abandoned boats, and automobiles.

This is the only area of New Orleans that is suitable to support any type of large industrial or recreational growth and employment. Currently it houses two of New Orleans biggest employers: NASA and Folgers Coffee. Textron Marine has already moved its offices to the North Shore, and other businesses in this area are up for sale. How to you expect to draw new employers and resident back to this area if it looks like its been abandoned and/or bombed out? It is one of the gateways to city from the east and could be a beautiful entrance into the city.

Ms, Lewis this area of the city, the district you represent is a disgrace. You stand up on your pulpit preaching verbal diarrhea. You have pulled the wool over your constituents eyes for too long.

You held a press conference earlier this month on Old Gentily Road about the trash dumping by the landfill. Although every area of New Orleans is important, it appears the only reason you are concerend about this area is that one of the major contributers to your campaign Newport Environmental Services, wants to build a new landfill in New Orleans East .

I am sending you pictures of Chef Menteur Highway from 510 to the Chef Pass bridge. This has been the dumping ground for New Orleans for years and you have negelected to repreresent and protect the residents you supposedly serve.

Ms. Lewis,when are you going to stop dumping on New Orleans East? You should be ashamed of yourself!

I remember Cynthia Willard-Lewis' soaring rhetoric when she forcefully spoke on the side of public housing advocates at around the 7th minute of this video:




Before she of course voted YES to demolish the public housing of this city. What a sell out.