As The Public Gets Distracted With Other Descriptions, Biden Is About To Pass The Worst Kind of Infrastructure Bill- One That Privatizes Our Public Assets

We are not even hearing about it, but something really awful is about to happen: It looks like we are about to pass the worst kind of “infrastructure bill,” one that will be privatizing public assets.  It’s being set up so nobody is supposed to notice.

If you really don’t pay attention to anything, maybe the only thing you’ll notice that they are describing the bill as a “Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal”– “Bipartisan” sounds sort cooperative and friendly, like something everybody should agree on as good.

If you think you are paying attention they might have successfully distracted you by highlighting other asserted flaws in the bill, flaws that may, or may not, be taken care of to some extent before the bill is passed; the flaw that the bill lacks measures to address climate change; flaws that it doesn’t meet social and racial justice standards by, for example, failing to spend on neglected public housing.

The New York Times coverage of the bill, including virtually no policy analysis, ruminated about its potential passage mostly as a political jockeying and horse race story, and referred to how the spending being planned was not addressing:

“human infrastructure”: education, child care, paid leave and tax credits to fight poverty, among other initiatives.

(See: Biden Kicks Off Sales Tour to Salvage Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal- An event in rural Wisconsin was meant to show liberals that the agreement was sufficiently ambitious — while assuring moderates that the president remained committed to the deal.  By Jim Tankersley, June 29, 2021.)

Democracy Now opened up its Tuesday, June 29, 2021 coverage as if the major part of the story would be how would be linked to how western states are battling record-breaking heat waves, (Portland hitting “116 degrees Fahrenheit Monday, making it one of the hottest places in the world”).  Starting into the story, we heard that:

Members of the Sunrise Movement called on Biden and congressional Democrats to pass an infrastructure bill that includes major investments in green energy, including a fully funded Civilian Climate Corps.

The Democracy Now story also pushed to the fore public housing that is being allowed to deteriorate.  (See: Rep. Jamaal Bowman: We Need Climate & Racial Justice Addressed in Broader Infrastructure Package, June 29, 2021.)

But then, as David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, was being interviewed as part of that Democracy Now story, he did an important pivot that had not been Teed up at the beginning of the segment and maybe wasn’t planned for.  He brought up that privatizing public assets was distressingly a “key piece” of the bill.

Here’s how it went in Dayen’s exchange with Democracy Now cohost Juan González:

DAVID DAYEN: . . .  But what’s the key piece of the bipartisan bill, to me, in addition to the lack of climate measures and, as you correctly point out, the fact that nature, from Seattle to Miami, where sea level rise may have been a large contributor to the collapse of the condo building, is just screaming for a change in priorities in America because of the climate crisis and a need to upgrade our infrastructure to reflect this new reality — but the other thing that’s in that bipartisan bill is privatization. So, it’s really the selling off of infrastructure to private companies, and really the substitution of public tax collection, where we pay for these common assets that we all use and share, to private tax collection, where you sell the infrastructure assets to a private company, whether for toll roads or privatized water systems, privatized parking meters, or what have you, and that private company gets to effectively tax the public. And inevitably, that tax goes up, because they have to build in their layer of profit. So, I think that’s something that progressives like Representative Bowman need to focus on, because it’s a very dangerous part of the bipartisan bill.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: But, David Dayen, are those concerns sufficient for many progressives to say, “No, let’s kill this thing altogether”? Because, clearly, the move to privatize public assets has been part of the neoliberal agenda now for about four decades.

DAVID DAYEN: It has been. And that’s why it’s incumbent to take a stand at this point. I mean, you have a representative on; you can ask him if that’s sufficient or not. But it is a serious issue. I mean, we have examples of this, as you say, Juan, all over the country — water systems that charge exorbitant rates, parking meters in places like Chicago that have gone up 800% in their rates over a number of years, and every time the street is shut down for a street fair, the private company gets to recoup lost revenue from that day. It’s not just the gouging of the people who use the infrastructure; it’s the loss of democratic control. So, a private company is in charge and says when the street will be shut down or not, and the private company is in charge of when a certain toll road is open or not. So, that’s, I think, at the core of the issue with privatization, which, as you correctly point out, was part of this neoliberal project. But we’re in a new era, and I would hope that there would be very strong pushback against it.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And what about that, Congressman Bowman, in terms of, in Chicago, for instance, a private parking meter company, whenever the city wants to shut down a street for a parade, it has to reimburse the private parking meter company for its lost revenues? . . .

It seems we are not supposed to be paying attention to these very important privatization provisions.  Read the New York Times coverage, scan it as hard as you can, you’ll find no mention of these important privatization provisions.  They are just not there. . .

. . . And oddly, the next day, Democracy Now did a follow-up on the infrastructure deal proposals interviewing Congressmember Nikema Williams of Georgia, and in that follow up totally neglected to have any mention or discussion about the privatization provisions.  Democracy Now host Amy Goodman set up the very limited discussion going right back to making it seem that the only flaw in the bill to focus on is its deficiency with respect to climate change provisions:

AMY GOODMAN: . . .It [the bill] does not include funding for major programs championed by progressives, including investments in green energy jobs and funds to combat the climate crisis, as we are experiencing the worst heat ever in this country, not to mention Canada, as well. Portland broke every record, one of the hottest places on the planet right now. That’s Portland, Oregon, just to name one place. In a moment, we’re going to talk about what happened in Florida with the catastrophic collapse and its connection, possibly, to the climate crisis. But what about this, the demand that the — linking the bipartisan infrastructure plan with the much larger one that Bernie Sanders and others are crafting?

In part, the horse race and political jockeying story being told (the Times story is such a prime exhibit in this regard) is another version of the corporate Democrats always winding up inexplicably incompetent to win anything they say they stand for when faced with the mysteriously always effective thwarting maneuvers from the corporate Republicans (who are nominally the corporate Democrats “opposition”).  It is yet one more example of Biden scaling back to seek far less than the very meager things he promised when he ran for office. . . forget about the public option, forget about minimum wage and now this infrastructure spending will be far less than what Biden talked about when he sought office.
                                            
Other than this lack coverage of the privatization aspects of the “bipartisan” infrastructure deal, the coverage has been about how inadequate the funds now being made available are versus how dire the need is to spend on our roads, bridges, water projects, replacing our lead water pipes, and other major projects, along with how great it would be to deploy reliable high-speed broadband internet in all our rural areas to reach “every American home” (NY Times).  This is the kind of narrative that regularly precedes and sets up an excuse for privatization and the sell off of public assets. . . `because he public just can’t pay for them'. .  `So the private sector has to take over to supply the funds while making a profit in doing so'. . . Blah, blah, blah.

Here is a link to the Citizens Defending Libraries page (including valuable information and further links) about the last forum we had on selling off public assets, Saturday, April 8, 2017:

Fourth Forum on Selling Off Public Assets, Presented by First Unitarian Congregational Society of Brooklyn's Weaving the Fabric of Diversity & Citizens Defending Libraries, April 8, 2017

What’s happening is very real.  This Biden infrastructure “deal” reflects continuity with what was underway in the Trump administration. Traveling with Trump to Saudi Arabia in 2016, NYPL library trustee Stephen A. Schwarzman brought back $20 billion from the Saudis for his Blackstone investment group as seed money for the selling off and privatizing of American public assets.  This is not just because Schwarzman has such good relationships with the likes of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (remember the dismemberment killing of Jamal Khashoggi- the illegal siege war and bombing of Yemen?); others like Goldman Sachs are busy raising funds for the same thing.

Thankfully, there are those who are being more forthright and honest than Democracy Now and the very deceptive New York Times.  Take this statement (‘Bipartisan’ Infrastructure Plan is a Privatization-Promoting Disaster– Wall Street takeover will cost ratepayers and must be rejected) released by Food & Water Watch Public Water for All Director Mary Grant:

“This White House-approved infrastructure deal is a disaster in the making. It promotes privatization and so-called ‘public-private partnerships’ instead of making public investments in publicly-owned infrastructure. Communities across the country have been ripped off by public-private schemes that enrich corporations and Wall Street investors and leave the rest of us to pick up the tab.

“Privatization is nothing more than an outrageously expensive way to borrow funds, with the ultimate bill paid back by households and local businesses in the form of higher rates. The White House identifies privatization as a means to finance infrastructure investment is disappointing and outrageous. Communities need real support, not privatization scams.

“The most sensible infrastructure solution is to provide robust public funding for publicly-owned projects, which would discourage price-gouging by corporate interests, protect public control over these precious assets, and save everyone money. The most comprehensive funding solution on the table is the WATER Act (HR1352, S916), which would provide $35 billion a year to fully fund the state revolving funds and other programs at the level that is needed.

“This package does not provide adequate funding to rebuild and repair our country’s infrastructure, nor does it do nearly enough to combat the climate crisis. Lawmakers can and must press for a better deal.”

“New Day Pacifica” Bylaw Proposals: A Group On The West Coast Is Declaring War on Pacifica And WBAI- Democracy and Free Speech Are In Peril

 Free Speech Peril!- A Group On The West Coast Is Declaring War on Pacifica And WBAI  . .  And On Democracy

To All Library Defenders-

Here is something that’s still in draft because we are still working on it, but it will inform you about urgent matters nonetheless.  One reason it's in draft is because the WBAI Local Station Board still needs to pass the included resolution.

If you believe in free speech and want to be able to continue to access narratives that are alternative to the propaganda the corporately owned mainstream press pumps out, we hope this will encourage you to take action, including that you and others become WBAI members (a mere $25) by April 7th.

We think you'll find the scenario reported on below familiar.  Powerful interests are working to shrink our libraries, where we get our information, and to eliminate the books; Let's not let them succeed in this parallel effort to take away free speech radio and the information and insight it provides.

Please let Carolyn and me know if you refresh or start your WBAI membership or get any of your friends to become WBAI members.

Should the Pacifica Free Speech Radio network be at war with itself? It’s a self-destructive course when it is.  But that’s exactly what seems to have happened.  The union of five free speech stations through the Pacifica network was meant to be a strengthening measure providing cross support between the stations . .

. . . But now it seems that there is a faction at the Pacifica stations on the West Coast that wants to declare war on the Pacifica stations on the East Coast and particularly New York City’s WBAI.  (WBAI is New York’s only true listener supported public radios station.) Especially considering the history of some of the actors involved in this attack, the so-called “New Day Pacifica,” proposals to strip democracy and listener accountability out of Pacifica’s bylaws, it does not seem as if that faction has the best interest of Pacifica at heart.

Do the attackers want to dismantle the Pacifica network and WBAI because they want to see free speech radio, radio for the 99.5% (WBAI is 99.5 FM on the dial in NYC) dismantled entirely?. . . .

. . . Or, do the attackers want to dismantle the Pacifica network and WBAI because they want to refashion it, do a make over so that all the stations broadcast content that falls in line with dominant, power-serving narratives pumped out by the corporate mainstream press, be it the divisive corporate “Red Broadcasting” by Fox, or the divisive corporate “Blue Broadcasting” by the likes of MSNBC.

In either case, such dismantling and destruction of Pacifica and WBAI would neutralize the threat that free speech and listener accountability pose to establishment power structures.

WBAI just aired a two-hour program to inform its listeners of the nefarious “New Day Pacifica" plans afoot.  You can find it to listen to here: “The Democracy Project,” March 6, 2021. . . (Because of the rules applicable when proposed Pacifica bylaw changes are to be voted on, WBAI is now in a period where WBAI has to be silent, neutral and unable to inform its listeners about the bylaws, but this program, predating the election period, can still be listened to on WBAI’s archive.)

Very worth listening to for understanding the overall context of obvious concerns is the stage-setting introduction for the program Johanna Fernandez, host of WBAI’s morning program, “A New Day.”  (Did “New Day Pacifica” intend to be stealing the name of Johanna’s morning show for “good will” confusion purposes?: Some people think so.)  Her introduction starts at 5:10 in the recording.

In her opening Johanna Fernandez makes a very good case that the “New Day Pacifica” proposals should be seen in an overall context of neoliberal privatizing takeover and shutdown of the free press.

Perhaps most important to listen to in that broadcast is former Pacifica board Chair Grace Aaron’s exceptionally clear technical description of the proposals that the New Day Pacifica proponents are trying to foist on the listener members of WBAI and Pacifica.  Grace Aaron names names in saying who the New Day Pacifica are and why all their actions, past and present, ensure these people and their motives are to be suspected.  (Her statement starts at 16:05 in the recording.)
 
As Grace makes clear, the proposals are designed to be an undemocratic and racially skewing dictatorial power grab by an elite minority with conflicts of interest that would shut out from representation the blacker, browner, more progressive East Coast Stations (WBAI and WPFW).  If these bylaw changes are approved they would establish locked-in leadership over Pacifica for three years by four self-appointed officers, including a Chair, Sharon Kyle, who may have a direct conflict of interest as she is the owner of the LA Progressive, an online, for-profit newspaper.  Although there would be one representative on the new board from WBAI and one from WPFW (our Washington, D.C. station). stations would be locked out of the 4 officer positions and would have fewer board members overall than the West Coast stations for 3 years.  WBAI and WPFW are Pacifica’s blacker, browner and more progressive stations.  Also, none of the 4 board officers would be from the staff or Pacifica’s affiliate stations.  The locked in structure would ensure minority opinion would have very little representation or voice.

The changes would also eliminate local control and influence over local station broadcasting by taking away the LSB oversight over station general managers.  Thus programing in New York City and Washington D.C. would be effectively determined top-down by those seizing power on the West Coast.  What could/would result?: During the October 2019 shutdown of WBAI these same people pumped into NYC programming from California that was innocuously bland, dull.  It was unthreatening to power and devoid of any sense of locality.

There is other insidious stuff tucked into the proposals like rejiggering staff representation rules to further lock in this West Coast Pacifica faction dominance.

The proposals would do absolutely nothing to improve Pacifica’s financial condition.  Instead, having to deal with proposals like these worsen it.  These now recurring launches by the same people to make different kinds of overhauling changes to the bylaws are probably intended as attempt to drain Pacifica’s preciously spare resources (including possible forcing a bankruptcy of Pacifica) and foment perpetual debilitating distraction, as much as they are actually in hope of successfully making any such changes.

How do we fend off this attack?: By April 7th,  WBAI needs to make sure that it has as many listener members ready and qualified to vote on on the upcoming bylaw referendum as possible.  That means that listeners should have contributed at least $25 or more within the year to the station.  One way to do that immediately (if someone is not currently up-to-date as a listener member) is to immediately become a member of WBAI as a BAI Buddy supporting the station or a show for $10 a month or more and then make up the extra with a one time donation (of $15 more more extra dollars?).

Another way to help win this fight is for WBAI supporters to make sure that two of their friends become WBAI members eligible to vote by April 7th.  If ever WBAI member got two friends to do that by April 7th WBAI member would more than double.  (plus it means a lot for people to be listening to WBAI and telling others about the cool and fascinating stuff they heard the there.)

And another quick stop for anyone, is to also sign (and pass along) the petition opposing the proposed bylaw changes up at The Democracy Project.

Here is the resolution that WBAI’s Local Station Board passed unanimously at its last meeting condemning the New Day Pacifica proposals:

Resolution of WBAI’s Local Station Board Finding That Proposed “New Day Pacifica” Bylaw Changes Will Be Extremely Destructive and Adverse To The Interests of Pacifica

Whereas, whenever proposals are made to fundamentally alter the structure of the Pacifica Foundation (“Pacifica”) it is essential to examine those proposals with care to determine whether such proposed changes would truly be helpful to Pacifica or would, instead, be detrimental and destructive;        

Whereas, while it would be nice to assume that proposals to make fundamental changes to Pacifica are always made with good faith intentions to improve Pacifica, that is something that should never be assumed;

Whereas, Pacifica, as currently structured, stands ready to be a provider of truth, facts, factual corrections, and alternative narratives that pose a significant threat to the dominating narratives of the monopolistic, corporate, mainstream press that serve power structures that seek to quash and censor opposition, and, as such, we must be on guard against those entering the Pacifica environment that, whatever their pretenses, choose to be destructive and disruptive to Pacifica;

Whereas, we have to be aware that Pacifica and its terrestrial radio stations are an even more obvious target for attack by these powerful interests, because unlike the internet sources of news, information and communication, terrestrial radio cannot be as easily shut down, censored, silenced, manipulated, monitored and surveiled as is becoming increasingly evident as a problem with respect to the internet;    

Whereas, we, as WBAI’s Local Station Board (“LSB”) do not want to see Pacifica destroyed by being driven into bankruptcy or by being dismantled and reconstructed as another arm of the corporate owned and corporately captured press and media conglomerates (for instance becoming a corporate Democrat “blue broadcaster” such as some of the corporately-owned cable channels);

Whereas, our LSB believes that WBAI is one of Pacifica’s most progressive stations, successful in steering away from the traps of corporately captured and promulgated narratives and that its independence, voice, and ability to continue to be this way should be protected and preserved;

Whereas, the best way to ensure that Pacifica fends off destruction and/or neutering of its ability to be a strong, free-speech source of alternative narratives that serve the public interest and intellectual freedoms is for Pacifica and its stations to remain democratically accountable to its listeners;

Whereas, the LSB has reviewed, and is alarmed in the extreme by, the “New Day Pacifica” proposals to change the bylaws seeing that they will be detrimental and disruptive to the essential purposes of Pacifica for all of the above reasons; and

Whereas, the LSB therefore wishes to set forth its condemnation of the “New Day Pacifica” proposals for reasons that include all of what we set forth below; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, by LSB as follows:

Section 1. The LSB condemns  the “New Day Pacifica” proposals because:

    A.   The LSB emphatically notes that many of the people behind the push for the “New Day Pacifica” proposals are the very same people who were behind and involved in: i) the surreptitious, unauthorized, illegal, and costly shutdown of WBAI of October 2019, ii) the simultaneous secretly launched and roundly defeated (by a 2/3rds margin) last set of disruptively proposed, antidemocratic bylaw changes of that time that destructively drained Pacifica of $150,000 of its resources, and iii) advocating for shutting down WBAI.

    B. The proposals are designed to be an undemocratic and racially skewing power grab by an elite minority with conflicts of interest that would shut out from representation the blacker, browner, more progressive East Coast Stations (WBAI and WPFW).  To wit, the virtually complete erosions of democracy include:
    
            •    The bylaw changes would establish locked-in rule over Pacifica for three years by four unelected, self-appointed officers, including with conflict of interest connections to for-profit media.  These individuals would have no professional radio experience.  The lock-in would include officers hostile to and connected with the shutdown of WBAI.  The individuals being picked for this lock-in of power do not include proper representation for WBAI or WPFW, the other East Coast station. None are from the staff or affiliate stations.
            •    Pacifica’s proportional voting representation ensuring a voice for minority opinion would be eliminated be reducing to one the number of representatives sent to Pacifica’s National Board from each station, thus ensuring that only the majority would have any representation or voice.
            •    To extend this elimination of elected voices the majority-representing national board members would get to appoint additional board members suitable to their more limited, undemocratic mind-set.
            •    The changes would eliminate local control and influence over local station broadcasting by taking away the LSB oversight over station general managers.  Thus programing in New York City and Washington D.C. would be effectively determined top-down by those seizing power on the West Coast.  As the example of the October 2019 shutdown of WBAI demonstrated, what these kinds of people chose to do the last time they had the opportunity to do this was to run programming that was innocuously bland, dull and unthreatening to power and devoid of any sense of locality.
            •    The changes would rejigger the staff representation rules in order to assure that the results of staff elections would always give the West Coast Pacifica stations assured dominance.

    C. The proposals are additionally very suspect because they would do absolutely nothing to improve Pacifica’s financial condition, but presenting and having to deal with proposals like these absolutely worsen it.  The recurring launches by the same people to make different kinds of overhauling changes to the bylaws are probably intended as attempt to drain Pacifica’s preciously spare resources (including possible forcing a bankruptcy of Pacifica) and foment perpetual debilitating distraction, as much as they are actually in hope of successfully making any such changes.

    D. The proposals would make the Pacific bylaws far longer than they are now and far more complicated, a highly undesirable outcome.

Section 2.  To defend against and repel this onslaught against listener interest, the LSB encourages WBAI listeners to increase their contributions to WBAI and Pacifica, and if they are not currently, to become current members of WBAI and Pacifica, particularly on or before April 7, 2021 (with a contribution of $25 or more), and to encourage everyone they know to do the same.
           
Section 3.  This resolution shall take effect immediately and the LSB directs the LSB chair to forward this resolution to the Pacific National Board and make every effort to promulgate it widely for public view and to ensure it becomes widely known that the LSB denounces the “New Day Pacifica” proposals by reason of all the harm the proposal of those bylaw changes are apparently designed to inflict on Pacifica in its pursuit of its mission and particularly on WBAI.

If you want to know more history about when a lot of the same ““New Day Pacifica” people were involved in the surreptitious, unauthorized, illegal and costly October 2019 sut down of WBAI, you can find it here along with the resolution that the WBAI LSB unanimously adopted to condemn it then:

Resolution of WBAI’s Local Station Board Responding To Shutdown of WBAI New York

Once again- Fend off this attack as follows:

            •    By April 7th,  help make sure WBAI has as many listener members ready and qualified to vote on on the upcoming bylaw referendum as possible.  That means that listeners should have contributed at least $25 or more within the year to the station.


            •    Make sure your friends (at least two?) become WBAI members eligible to vote by April 7th.

            •    Sign (and pass along) the petition opposing the proposed bylaw changes up at The Democracy Project.

What's Scary This Halloween? An Unfolding Wave of Censorship!

 

You might recognize this an undated version of our post from last Halloween.  Last year, the really scary thing was that WBAI, New York's only truly listener supported public radio station, had been taken off the air by a rogue group of minority insiders.  BUT it was Halloween, so, in the midst of that real scariness we got into the Halloween spirit to provide some fun listening made here available again, several recorded promo-carts that make the point of the value of WBAI as a bulwark to help avoid censorship.  Links to listen to those fun-scary carts carts appear at the end of this post (if you dare listen).

More important, but related is to talk about what is truly scary this Halloween: It's an unfolding wave of censorship.  We are on the eve of an election.  Many are waiting with bated breath fro the results.  But whether Trump assumes the office of president or Biden does, a wave of censorship is unfolding and it seems as if it will continue.

What do we mean?  Democracy was recently restored to Bolvia by an the overwhelming vote (55%) of a national election.  This was after it was finally admitted by most of the media that the previous popularly elected government of the country had been overthrown by a fascist coup that the United States unfortunately had too much to do with.

Restoration of democracy in Bolivia by an overwhelming popular vote; good news- Right?  Then why are Instagram and Facebook censoring those who are now tweeting about it?

That's an example of the latest coming from the internet giants that are involved in "policing" free speech.

Thursday night, October 29th WBAI's Local Station Board Report to the Listeners Michael D. D. White a co-founder of Citizens Defending Libraries and a member of the WBAI Local station board made these points about the frightening wave of censorship that is unfolding (his remarks are near the beginning of the first hour).  (BTW: You may detect that Mr. White may have had something to do with the Halloween carts linked to at the end of his post.).

Mr White said that WBAI as Free Speech alternative radio needs to be hyper-attuned to the following.

We are experiencing a new wave of increased censorship (while corporate media establishment propaganda narratives are being pushed to the fore).

Recent censorship pushes to be noted include:

    •    Zoom, Facebook and Twitter recently banned a San Francisco State University sponsored web-based conference (what other kinds are there these days?) titled "Whose Narratives? Gender, Justice and Resistance," because the conference included a Palestinian activist that it labeled as a terrorist.  (Depending on whose narrative it is, the British might have called George Washington a "terrorist.")

    •    The NY York Post’s story about Hunter Biden, which was not factually inaccurate and contained important information about the corruption of Biden and his father the presidential candidate (along with less relevant information tending to very the authenticity if the information) was censored with Twitter not allowing it to be tweeted about. In a related story, Glenn Greenwald resigned from the internet-based Intercept, which he helped found, the day of the WBAI broadcast, because the Intercept was censoring and refusing to publish his story about the Hunter Biden corruption and the way that the media was burying the story.

    •    Google will be involved in the roll out of the Covid vaccines.  Google has announced that YouTube will censor any videos that raise questions about the vaccines being rolled out (with FDA staff excluded from the process).

    •    Google’s YouTube (Google owns YouTube) and Twitter have just started censoring and removed all of the videos of the Last American Vagabond, plus Whitney Webb reports her tweets about Google censorship are being selectively censored.

    •    Maybe Russian bots will be blamed and given as the excuse for censorship?  Or will it be QANON?  QANON is so absurdly ridiculous that everyone has to agree on that point.  (However, without going down a rabbit hole to explain, QANON is probably not what it appears to be or is generally reported to be.) QANON is being used as a perfectly tailored excuse to start labeling as unacceptable “conspiracy theories” and engage in a major round of censoring theories that are critical and/or suspicious of government activity.  

    •    The persecution and prosecution of journalist Julian Assange for publishing factually accurate information about US war crimes is a new level of shut down with incredible implications.

    •    Another level of shutdown is the way that Google search, Facebook, the internet, and corporate media, is shutting down all reporting about the Julian Assange extradition trial.

    •    CodePink- Just tweeted a story about Twitter’s removal of Palestinian Activists- “Blaming Bots.”  ) CodePink has a program on WBAI.  Jeremy Corbyn, the United Kingdom's counterpart to Bernie Sanders,  was suspended by the Labour Party the day of the WBAI program.  Sanders and Corbyn are similarly inclined when it comes to policies and speak admiringly of each other.

Mr. White noted how easy so much of this censorship was to effect through the internet.  That’s one reason that WBAI’s terrestrial radio presence is so important. . . That’s so long as WBAI remains Free Speech alternative radio.

Mr. White admitted that sometimes he listened to shows that WBAI broadcasts via the internet, not through WBAI, and sometimes he even gave money to those shows directly, but he said he gave more money to WBAI because WBAI's terrestrial radios broadcasts are a backstop against more censorship of the internet.

(We hope you'll find this scary fun listening.)

WBAI October 31st Halloween No. 1

WBAI October 31st Halloween No. 2

WBAI October 31st Halloween No. 3

WBAI October 31st Halloween No. 4

You can give to WBAI here: Donate- WBAI Needs Your Help!

 

Bankruptcy of State Governments And Privatization In The Time Of Covid

Remember those mad scientists make tiny shrunken people movies?  Mitch McConnell and friends want to privatize the public's assets and add to the piggy banks of the corporate overlords.

Senate Majority Leader, Republican, Mitch McConnell suggests that it may be better for states to declare bankruptcy than for the federal government to give them access to the federal money they need during the coronavirus crisis.

Library Defenders have seen this before.  It’s the same thing as with libraries.  It’s purpose is to privatize the public assets held by the states.  Here it’s being done the same way as with libraries in New York City: You withhold funds making up a story about what you do and don’t have money for and then use the disaster that your underfunding creates as your cover and excuse for selling off and privatizing the assets that belong to the public.  Citizens Defending Libraries has held forums on privatizing public assets and the playbook for how it works is posted here: Our Public Assets Under Attack- A Calamity of the Commons Unfolding That We Must Act Collectively Against- How best To Express It?

Once privatized, formerly public assets are no longer under democratic control and, in private hands, the private sector takes whatever tithing of profit it feels the market will bear.  When, for example, that means that when healthcare must be delivered to the public through the intermediary of a profit-taking insurance industry, it also follows that healthcare is delivered far less efficiently, far less effectively and at far greater cost.

The coronavirus crisis is being used as an opportunity to besiege other public assets– We are also witnessing an effort to, by selectively withholding funds, take down the United States Post Office.  As is obvious, the coronavirus has created financial need and financial stresses every which way, creating a need for financial support to be deployed almost universally at all levels, but we are witnessing an effort by those in the federal government handing out the dollars to target the Post Office, in particular, for such rescue and maintenance funding to be withheld, even though that office’s vital infrastructure is constitutionally mandated and normally self-supporting on a not-for-profit basis.  As a Bernie Sanders tweet notes, “How in the hell does Carnival, a cruise ship company that pays virtually no federal income taxes, receive a bailout, but the Postal Service, the most popular government agency in America, does not?”

A privatizing dismantling of the Post Office at this time would have certain other effects.  Right now, the Post Office provides one of the only options for private and secure communications in a world where almost everything happens transacted through the private monopoly profit dominated universe of a data-scraping internet.  Because it is secure and run by reliable, trusted employees subject to strict laws, the Postal Service can be used for voting (a remote voting mechanism especially important in a time of covid), whereas the prospect of easily hackable internet voting is a joke.  Or in the future, when Amazon has taken over for FedEx, UPS, and the postal service, will Amazon handle the delivery of our election votes?

Naomi Klein, with her video warning about how we must fend off “Coronavirus Capitalism” (a particular flavor of the “disaster capitalism” she has astutely described for years now) refers to the bad ideas that come out of the woodwork as “ideas that are lying around” and “seemingly impossible” can be implemented in a crisis when the public's disorientation can be exploited.  (She sanguinely counsels the same can happen with good ideas that can be implemented in a catalyzing crisis.)   The idea of dismantling the Post Office has been around for a while: After all, what good excuse was there for Congress in 2006 to pass a hobbling law specially applicable to only the Postal Service requiring the Post Office, in an absurdly short period of time, to pay worker pension and health benefits three quarters of a century in advance?

These privatizing ideas have been, indeed, been lying around. Bankruptcy for states has been lying around as something the power manipulators have been eager to implement for a while.  But its not because state bankruptcy would enable the “red states” through the “ascendancy” of a conservative federal judiciary to impose “priorities upon the budgets of the richer states.”  Like a lot of other things, privatization, is not, and should not be diminished as a red team/blue team issue, the kind of thing that is so constantly used to distract us.  It’s another thing the corporatists want, because the extraction of profit and substitution of private control for democracy are always the end goals of the corporate elites.

Yes, bankruptcy of the states would enable a bleeding and ransacking of the pension funds of public workers.  That would reduce the workers’ pay, change the terms of their employment, maybe even after the fact.  But the pension funds that could be drained along with good working relationships with state workers are just a part of the assets and infrastructure that could be subtracted from democracy and democratic control.  There are also: schools, colleges, school systems, roads, bridges, every building any government occupies, parks, playgrounds, lakes, fire houses, police stations, hospitals, housing, memorials, and (as is a target in Puerto Rico) the electric power delivery system and grid.  When schools go, so do troublesome teachers unions, and what might be a unpredictable proclivity to actually teach children to think critically.  Oh. Are we forgetting to mention “libraries,” because that’s what we started by talking about.

The way that the federal government has been printing and handing out money during a halted economy and how arbitrarily those decisions are made reveals the extent to which money and the assignment of wealth that is somehow measured in dollars is a fiction, something that’s clearly subject to what we decide the rules are today at this moment, rules that may not be the same tomorrow. 

It’s scary that we have stimulus bills crank up the press to print money that’s getting handed out disproportionately to the wealthiest, repeating the 2008 financial crisis mishandling of the economy.  The actions taken by government in 2008 was one of the greatest wealth transfers ever, increasing wealth inequality in America by pumping money into wealthy investment funds, banks, and corporations at exactly the time that asset prices were low and temporarily suppressed, prices for things like the homes of people in the Main Street economy.  Those assets and homes were then bought up by those hedge funds, banks and corporations.  Probably worst: It was paid for with taxpayer money.  The people who lost their homes paid the taxes that financed those tilted economy buy ups that deprived them of ownership.

While it’s scary, that we may be doing that again, it is also instructive, because its clear that where the money goes are just decisions, nothing more than that, just decisions about where we want the money to be, where we want to recognize it as being. When we were dealing with libraries as part of New York City’s budget we were dealing with just the most infinitesimal fraction of the budget when the fiction was being made up that there was no money to fund libraries so that they supposedly needed to be sold.  Now our fictions about where money needs to be sent during a stalled economy has us dealing with trillions of dollars.

If we are not careful, we will consent to recognize an even greater transfer of wealth to the wealthiest than in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.  The bankruptcy of states and the sell off of the Post Office would be just part of the privatization that would go along with it.

Although Gov. Cuomo Halted Most Construction Statewide In Response Coronavirus Crisis, In NYC Where Crisis Is Worst, The Construction Of Tower Replacing Beloved Central Library Continues As “Essential Construction” of “Affordable Housing,” Except It’s NOT- It’s A Luxury Condo Tower

Address: One Clinton Street, Brooklyn
Category: Affordable Housing
All jobs for this BIN are approved

This is interesting– In a time when we are all wearing masks to deal with the Covid-19 crisis, the luxury tower replacing what was one the second biggest library in Brooklyn, the Business, Career, Education, and federal depository Brooklyn Heights library is wearing the mask of “affordable housing” in order to be able to continue construction despite Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s declared halt to most residential and commercial construction.

Apparently the luxury condo tower is calling itself “affordable housing” in order to be considered “essential construction” (see the image above with the site’s classification taken from the “Essential Active Construction Sites” data page.)   Let’s be clear, there is no affordable housing being built on this site.

The luxury housing was able to be built extra tall with more floor area because the developer has agreed to build and complete, ahead of time, affordable housing in Clinton Hill, but this luxury tower is not that affordable housing; there is no affordable housing being built at this site.

Curbed Governor Cuomo suspends construction in March, but "Affordable Housing Still Allowed"

At the end of March Governor Cuomo suspended “most construction statewide in response to the novel coronavirus pandemic sweeping New York, following outcry from workers and lawmakers when the industry was largely unaffected by a shut down of all nonessential businesses.”

Under Cuomo’s directive certain “crucial work, including on infrastructure, hospitals, and affordable housing, along with emergency repairs” was to be permitted.  Ergo, the luxury tower puts on a coronavirus mask and becomes “affordable housing.”

The Department of Buildings Commissioner Melanie E. La Rocca said that to “protect New Yorkers during this pandemic” there will be “stiff enforcement” of the rules (including shutdowns and fines of to $10,000) because “we simply cannot afford to continue business as usual.”  We'll see if this building being built by one of Mayor Bill de Blasio's favored developers, David Kramer, gets subject to that “stiff enforcement.”

Meanwhile, we will note that New York City libraries have been shut down during the crisis.  So libraries are not essential anymore, but that which replaces them is?  The shrink-and-sink deal agreed to by the city when it agreed to sell the central destination library means that a smaller library with far fewer books, pushed more underground is ultimately supposed to be built under the luxury tower.  Arguably that’s the actual public benefit to allowing the construction of the luxury tower to proceed.– We might hope then that, when that much smaller library is finally built, it is actually allowed to open, rather then the public simply being told at that time we have gone so long without libraries and physical books it proves they were never a necessity in the first place; that the only necessity in this world is luxury condos!

Views of David Kramer's Hudson Companies luxury One Clinton condo tower interspersed with the garden and library wall inscription that was lost

POST SCRIPT ADDENDUM: At the April 28, 2020 Brooklyn Public Library Trustees meeting following the original posting of this article, Jordan Barowitz of the Durst real estate organization, the BPL trustee who heads the BPL trustee committee overseeing real estate construction, told the trustees that most BPL library construction projects were halted.  He said that all DDC (New York City "Department of Design and Construction") library projects are halted.  DDC is the city's civil service agency accountable to the mayor from which library officials are working to wrest control, with among other things, the possibility of shifting projects to the Economic Development Corporation, an agency frequently criticized for how it is subject to developer capture.  Mr. Barowitz said that, because of its “affordable housing” component, the Sunset Park project was not halted.  Mr. Barowitz told the trustees that the David Kramer luxury tower Brooklyn Heights library construction was halted, but he added permission had been obtained to start construction again on the Brooklyn Heights project on May 5th.  Mr. Barowitz did not tell the trustees the basis for the grant of that permission unlike with the Sunset Park project.

POST SCRIPT ADDENDUM #2:  On May 7th, one of our Library Defenders reported the following-- They saw a project construction worker at the corner Pierrepont and Clinton, coming from Montague, holding a tall coffee or soda, no mask, ready to use cell phone.  First asking about when the building was to be completed, our Library Defender then curiously inquired: "I thought there was a ban on construction."  The construction worker answered, "This is essential construction."  To which our Library Defender responded asking, "How is it essential?"  The construction worker's answer: "It's affordable housing."  When the Library Defender expressed astonishment and insisted, "But this is a luxury condo!"  the construction workers disputed the point, saying that the building had an affordable connection.  "But that's in another neighborhood," our Library Defenders said.  "No, it's in this condo," the construction worker replied.  Perhaps the construction worker did not know he was wrong about where the "affordable housing" will be located?

As Michael Bloomberg Runs For President It’s Time To Resurrect And Reissue Our “Save New York City Libraries From Bloomberg Developer Destruction” Petition— (To Remind People How Mayor Bloomberg Defunded New York Libraries In Order To Sell Them To Real Estate Developers)

With Michael Bloomberg running for president it’s time to remind people what kind of mayor he was.

In 2013, when Bloomberg was mayor of New York, Citizens Defending Libraries formed immediately issuing our “Save New York City Libraries From Bloomberg Developer Destruction” petition.

We formed Citizens Defending Libraries and issued our petition  to oppose Bloomberg’s program of deliberately defunding New York City libraries at a time of increasing public use, population growth and increased city wealth, shrinking our library system to create real estate deals for wealthy real estate developers.  He launched an unjust and shortsighted plan that was particularly unfair in a time of cutbacks in education and escalating disparities in opportunity.

With Michael Bloomberg now running for president, it looks like it’s time to resurrect and republish our petition.  Actually, it can still be signed. We are still working to oppose the sale and defunding of libraries, the elimination of books and librarians.  We are still sending out periodic emails to the signers of our petition to keep people up to date about defending libraries and the threats they face.  And there is so much for people to know. . .

The plans Bloomberg launched to sell New York City go back until at least 2004 or 2005. In the Summer of 2007 the Mayor Bloomberg and First Deputy Mayor Patti Harris expressed enthusiasm for the NYPL’s plans to sell and redevelop major central destination Manhattan Libraries.  That included the shrink-and-sink sale of the beloved central destination Donnell Library in midtown Manhattan, which was sold in what was essentially a no-bid  deal that shortchanged the public and provided a windfall that enriched Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner with a $30 million windfall.

The first library sold, the 97,000-square foot, five-story central destination Donnell Library on what was documented to be the most valuable block in Manhattan at the time, was sold to net the NYPL less than $25,000 million.  The penthouse in the luxury tower that replaced it in the 50-story luxury tower replacing Donnell went on the market for $60 million.  Another single lower-level condo unit in the luxury building, 43A, sold for $20,110,437.50.  There is also a 114 guest room luxury hotel in the tower.  According to the Wall Street Journal, Chinese investors made that hotel,“the most highly valued hotel in the U.S.” after agreeing to buy it for “more than $230 million. . .  .more than $2 million a room.” . .

. .  In the luxury restaurants in the luxury hotel in the tower that now claims to the once publicly owned site, you can get $1,500 Ice Cream Sundaes and $500 Cocktails while you luxuriate on coyote pelts.


Bloomberg who was to leave office January 31, 2013, made the very expensive consolidating shrinkage Central Library Plan, which involved the sale of the Manhattan libraries, a stated priority to achieve by his term's end.  Similarly, it was his goal to achieve the shrink-and-sink sale of Brooklyn's second biggest library, the Business, Career, Education and federal depository library in downtown Brooklyn on the edge of Brooklyn Heights by the end of his term.  He didn't meet these time frames and his plans were somewhat derailed through work of Citizens Defending Libraries and other activist we teamed up with.  When other, better uses were proposed for the funds to be plowed into vastly expensive Manhattan library sale plans, those plans were unacceptable to Bloomberg.  Scott Sherman says in his book (“Patience and Fortitude- Power, Real Estate, and the Fight to Save a Public Library”) on the subject, "It seems that for Bloomberg, it was all or nothing."

It's important to pay attention to who, along with Bloomberg, is selling off NYC libraries.  Bloomberg cared enough about implementing these plans to have many of his administration high-ups on the city's three library boards.  His counsel became the chair of the Brooklyn Public Library board of trustees. Bloomberg's official representative on the New York Public Library board was his very own sister,  Marjorie Tiven.  At the press March 11, 2008 press conference announcing launch of the plans for the consolidating shrinkage of the Manhattan libraries Bloomberg praised his "friend" Stephen A. Schwarzman, one of the main people pushing NYPL libraries in sales out the door to benefit people like Jared Kushner.   Schwarzman is one of Trumps top economic advisors. He's a remarkable piece of work involved in arranging for the wholesale sale and privatization of American Public assets, proud to describe himself as a good friend of  Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (“MBS”-  You know the dismemberment killing of Jamal Khashoggi and Yemen war). . . . Not surprisingly, Bloomberg also hobnobs with MBS.

People should remember what Bloomberg did when was entrusted with New York City's libraries as Bloomberg now asks to be entrusted with the U.S. presidency. 

Exile of Another Journalist From Corporate Mainstream Media, David Wright Suspended By ABC– This Time It’s Not For Being Anti-war, It’s Just For Being Honest About How Corporate Media News Doesn’t Serve The Public

Here’s a striking news story. ABC has suspended veteran journalist David Wright because of secretly recorded remarks in which we described with frankness his opinion that mainstream corporate media, doesn’t properly serve the public. . .  It means we’ll have to add another journalist to our list of journalists exiled from corporate mainstream media.  (See: List of Journalists Fired or Self-exiled From Mainstream Media Outlets Because They Expressed or Wanted to Express Views (Like Being Critical of U.S. Wars) Unacceptable to the Outlets They Were Working For.)

We’ll also have to note how Wright’s suspension breaks the typical pattern of so many other exiled journalists on our list: Wright was not fired for expressing any antiwar sentiments, only for expressing his misgivings about the overall corporate media news system. And maybe for saying he personally favors a national health insurance, or thinks that there are too many billionaires?

What’s wrong overall with the corporate media news system may explain why the corporate media so often encourages us to go to war, but Wright’s secretly recorded remarks didn’t connect any of those dots.

ABC suspended its veteran correspondent despite David Wright’s history and credentials:

•    Emmy Award-winning ABC News correspondent. 
•    Joined the network nearly 20 years ago.
•    He has covered the White House and was "Nightline's" lead political reporter during the 2016 presidential campaign.

It’s remarkable that Wright was suspended for the remarks he privately shared given what he said.  His remarks, which actually seem wise and perceptive, were:

I feel terrible about it.  I feel that the truth suffers, the voters are poorly informed…

    And so, it's like there's no upside in — or our bosses don't see an upside in — doing the job we're supposed to do, which is to speak truth to power and hold people to account.

* * *
I don’t think we are terribly interested in the voters

* * *

The fake news abounds.  There are problems with the truth these days. 

* * *
The commercial imperative is incompatible with news. …

 It became a profit center, a promotion center. Like now, you can't watch "Good Morning America" without there being a Disney princess or a Marvel Avenger appearing. It's all self-promotion. And promotion of the company and also promotion of individuals within the company. As opposed to, kind of, the dedication to the story and a commitment to stories that we need to tell but that are maybe hard to tell.
           
* * *

I think some of that, at least in the places where I work and the  places like it, is that with Trump, we're interested in three things. We're interested in the outrage of the day, the investigation, and the palace intrigue of who's stabbing who. Beyond that, we don't really cover the guy. …   

We don't hold him to account. We also don't give him credit for what things he does do. …

And we're in this awkward moment where  — and created by this awkward moment — where we have this f**king president. And we can't figure out how to challenge him.

* * *

I'd consider myself a socialist. Like I think there should be national health insurance. I'm totally fine with reining in corporations. I think there are too many billionaires, and I think that there's a wealth gap. That's a problem.

* * *

So you know, real people talk about practical issues, when they’re thinking about a a candidate, “I want to get back n the workforce,” or “I need medical care for whatever.” Those things aren’t TV friendly things.  You know, we want to focus on impeachment, we want to focus on the big sh*t going on, but the things that help people make up their mind are little shit. 


* * *

I think that we don’t have the bandwidth to give everybody a fair shot .  And we should.

**

We are all guilty of the same thing.  I think all these big news organizations- I’m speaking about broadcast television.  That’s all Im speaking about: ABC, CBS, NBC.  And we recognize that we are dinosaurs and we’re in danger of dying.

In the secret recording Wright also exchanges views with his colleague Andy Feis that the media is screwing up in presidential campaign coverage by covering just the "horse race" aspect of things, not giving candidates their due, just wanting to do "flavor of the month, flavor of the week," wanting to emphasize conflict and keep moving on.

The incongruity that Wright was suspended for these remarks constituting news and insight about corporate media news that's probably more important and valuable than much of ABC News' own standard fare, is what is and what should be the main story here, although the story comes with a footnote important to pass along: The secrete recording was made by Project Veritas, typically described as a "far-right activist" group that often unreliably edits what it publishes after setting up entrapments.  It's unclear what Veritas thought it was proving about bias in the media when it recorded Wright and published what he said.  As you can read above, Wright's criticisms include that media doesn't, in his opinion give Trump credit when credit is due; his views are considered, not one-sided.

Here is the Project Veritas video:

‘Socialist’ ABC Reporter Admits Bosses Spike News Important to Voters, 'Don’t Give Trump Credit', February 26, 2020

The story was covered as a headline by Democracy Now, "ABC Suspends David Wright over Remarks Secretly Recorded by Far-Right Group," February 27, 2020, and the Salon coverage with worthwhile, "ABC's David Wright told the truth about network news and Trump — and paid the price," Dan Froomkin, February 27, 2020.

"ABC Suspends David Wright over Remarks Secretly Recorded by Far-Right Group,"

"ABC's David Wright told the truth about network news and Trump — and paid the price,"