theguardianuk--2019-11-20--Colombia to close its borders in attempt to contain mass protests

Colombia’s government has announced plans to close its borders, part of a string of measures to contain mass strikes and protests planned this week amid sweeping unrest in South America.  Tens of thousands are expected to join protests on Thursday against the rightwing government of Iván Duque, whose popularity has dwindled steadily since he took office in August last year.  The marches, announced weeks ago following proposed austerity measures, come amid a wave of political turmoil across the region: Chile has seen more than a month of anti-government protests, which last week led its political parties to agree to a referendum on replacing the country’s dictatorship-era constitution; Bolivia is still reeling from the military-backed ousting of the president, Evo Morales. Colombia’s neighbours are also mired in political turbulence: Ecuador’s president, Lenín Moreno, was forced to backtrack on austerity measures by a wave of popular protest, while Venezuela is still mired in economic collapse and political violence.  Duque’s government is clearly nervous. On Monday, his government authorized a number of riot-control measures ahead, allowing local authorities to impose curfews and ban the sale of alcohol. Colombia’s borders will also be closed until Friday morning, it was later announced.  In the capital, Bogotá, squadrons of riot police could be seen outside a number of universities. Many businesses will close while schools have instructed staff and students to stay home.  On Tuesday, police searched 27 homes of people thought to be involved in the protests.  “The government is worried because the people and organizations who have come out in support of the protest are more heterogeneous than they are used to,” said Sergio Guzmán, the director of Colombia Risk Analysis. “It’s not only the labour unions, or the students, or indigenous people; it’s all of them.”  The protests were called in response to a range of issues and follow a spate of occasionally violent student demonstrations in September.  Some marchers will be protesting against the government’s perceived slow-walking of a peace deal with leftist rebel group the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (or Farc). Others are incensed by the routine murders of indigenous leaders and local activists. And others are unimpressed with government malaise and corruption.  Nancy Patricia Gutiérrez, the interior minister, told journalists on Monday that some of the motives for the strike were “false”.  After decades of civil conflict, Colombia has recently been among the more stable countries in Latin America. Protests often fail to attract large numbers, which activists attribute to a fear of being demonized as hardline leftists or rebel sympathizers. That stigma looks to be lifting ahead of Thursday.  “I’m marching because I’m one of those Colombians who isn’t afraid,” said María Paula Hernández, an audiovisual producer who is organizing a group of colleagues to protest in Bogotá. “I’m marching because I stand against this government.”


theguardianuk--2019-12-12--Two shot dead in Indian protests over citizenship bill

Two protesters have been shot dead by police in the Indian state of Assam during unrest over legislation that will allow for Hindu but not Muslim migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan to become citizens of India.  The citizenship amendment bill (CAB), passed by the parliamentary lower house on Monday and by the upper house on Wednesday night, has faced fierce opposition from indigenous people in the north-eastern states of Assam and Tripura.  Protesters in Assam fear giving citizenship to Hindu and other immigrants from Bangladesh will place a burden on their resources and put the traditional Assamese way of life at risk, while many are also opposed to the openly discriminatory and anti-Muslim nature of the bill.  Tens of thousands of people took to the streets of Assam’s capital, Guwahati, on Thursday, defying a government imposed curfew. There were violent clashes with special forces and police, who fired teargas as protesters burned cars and tyres, pulled down political billboards and setting a bus terminal and two trains alight.  At least two people died due to bullet injuries after police opened fire on protesters. One of the civilians killed was named as 18-year-old Dipankar Das.  Under to the new legislation, tens of thousands of Hindu, Christian, Jain, Buddhist and Sikh migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan will be allowed to claim Indian citizenship/ The government has justified the measure on the grounds that they face religious persecution in their home countries.  The same does not apply for Muslims, however, and neighbouring countries where Muslims are the minority and face persecution – such as Myanmar and Sri Lanka – have not been included in the bill.  While the bill has proved controversial across the country, it has been particularly sensitive in Assam. The state has long argued it has borne the brunt of immigration from Bangladesh, particularly between 1951 and 1971.  A national register of citizens (NRC) was carried out a few months ago, in which citizens had to present documents to prove their Assamese ancestry. More than 1.9 million people were left off the citizenship list and faced being sent to detention centres. However, the legislation means the 1.5 million of the excluded who are Hindu are now protected from being declared illegal and can simply apply for citizenship, much to the anger of those in Assam who argued that the register was never meant to discriminate on religious grounds.  The All Assam students’ union (AASU), which has played a prominent part in the protests, said: “We will intensify our protest calendar with each passing day until this bill is not taken back by the government. This is not acceptable to us in Assam or even the people of the north-east. This bill has a communal agenda. They want to polarise the whole population in the name of Hindu and Muslim.”  On the streets the anger was palpable. “We will never accept it, we will make sure they roll this bill back,” said a woman who was wearing a mask and asked not to be identified. “Assam has come to standstill and it will continue to do so. For us it’s never been about Hindu versus Muslims, but due to vote politics by the BJP [the party of the prime minister, Narendra Modi] they are making it one. They will never succeed at least in Assam. Hindu, Muslims, Christians all live peacefully in harmony and love in Assam.”  Anupam Deka, 21, a student of political science in Guwahati, said more than a dozen of his friends had joined the protest. “Illegal immigrants from Bangladesh have taken away our jobs and other resources apart from threatening our culture and language,” said Deka. “People overwhelmingly supported BJP in the last assembly election because it promised that it would make our state free from all illegal immigrants, Muslims as well as Hindus. But now, through this bill, BJP wants to make the Bangladeshi Hindu immigrants Indian citizens.”  His fury was echoed by Jugal Barman, 27. “We want the government to roll this bill back before the President signs it or else Assam will burn,” said Barman. “This will turn into Kashmir one day.”

Ahmer Khan in Assam and Hannah Ellis-Petersen in Delhi


theguardianuk--2019-12-20--India: largest protests in decades signal Modi may have gone too far

Standing in the shadow of Delhi’s historic red fort, SA Khan pushed angrily against the wall of police barricades blocking his way. Khan, like thousands of others, had planned to take part in a peaceful march through the capital to voice his opposition to India’s new citizenship law, but the authorities had other plans.  “They are denying us our basic right to protest, so how can we still call India a democracy?” said Khan. “Modi has underestimated the Indian people if he thinks he can tear apart our constitution and try to divide us all down religious lines with this citizenship act. We stand here today united as Indians, Muslim brothers with Hindu brothers, and we will stay out here on these streets until the citizenship act is revoked and Modi is on his knees.”  After a week of nationwide protests, some of the largest in India for almost four decades, Narendra Modi’s government had banned gatherings of more than four people in turbulent areas across the country in an attempt to quell dissent. But thousands of protesters – Hindu and Muslim, young and old, farmers, students and academics – were not to be stopped.  On the streets of Delhi, Bangalore, Lucknow and elsewhere, demonstrators took to the streets in droves for peaceful protests in breach of the section 144 orders. Police responded with force, brandishing batons and rounding up all those participating in civil disobedience. More than 1,000 people were detained in Delhi, and in Bangalore police did not have enough buses to transport all those they had arrested. Police jails began to overflow.  One arrest in particular prompted horror. Footage of India’s most eminent historian, Ramachandra Guha, being carted off by police officers went viral. He had been standing peacefully on a street in Bangalore brandishing a picture of Gandhi.  “It’s the sign of a paranoid, insecure regime who can not deal with dissent in any way,” Guha said after he was released from detention. “We’ve had difficult times in our republic but this is one of the worst I’ve seen in my 60-year lifetime.”  The unrest was sparked by the passing of citizenship law that many believe brazenly discriminates against Muslims and could tear apart the secular foundations of India.  The law states that all Hindu, Christian, Jain, Buddhist and Sikh migrants who arrived from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan before 2014 will be allowed to claim Indian citizenship. The same will not apply for Muslim immigrants.  The government has defended the legislation as a benevolent act meant to offer protection to Hindus who have faced persecution in neighbouring Muslim-majority countries. But put into the context of decades of discriminatory rhetoric and actions perpetrated by Modi, his home minister, Amit Shah, and their political party, the BJP, the motives have been seen by many observers as sinister.  Modi’s rise to power was built on religious polarisation, fomenting anti-Muslim sentiment and the oppression of dissent, critics say. As chief minister of Gujarat, in 2002 he was accused of allowing or even encouraging the massacre of thousands of Muslims when sectarian rioting and violence broke out in the state.  “This is how Modi ran Gujurat, with a completely iron fist,” said Guha. “They manipulated universities, they intimidated the media, threatened the judiciary – and they think they can extend that to all of India. This regime hates Muslims and now, more clearly than ever, it is exposed for what it is: authoritarian and sectarian and spectacularly bigoted.”  When Modi came to power in 2014, his government began enacting what looked to many to be a Hindu nationalist agenda that aimed to recast India as a Hindu nation rather than a secular one as laid out in the constitution.  For the first five-year term, this manifested mainly in sectarian rhetoric and the assertion that to be Indian was to be Hindu. But after Modi’s re-election in May, when he won a huge parliamentary majority, the agenda picked up the pace.  First came the revocation of the special status of the Muslim-majority state of Kashmir. Then, in November, the supreme court ruled that India’s most hotly contested religious site, Ayodhya – which Hindus regard as the birthplace of Rama and where a 16th-century Mughal mosque was demolished in 1992 – belonged to just Hindus rather than both communities, which Modi’s government claimed as a political triumph.  The brazenness of the citizenship law has galvanised the masses in opposition in a way that public lynchings of Muslims, low-level sectarian violence and the Kashmir decision all failed to do.  “This citizenship legislation is at the core of their Hindu nationalist project, where the relegation of Muslims to second-class citizens is fundamental,” said Niraja Gopal Jayal, a professor at the Centre for the Study of Law and Governance, at India’s Jawaharlal Nehru University.  “In Modi’s first term you saw it gradually through the fostering of an ecosystem that was hostile to Muslims, where for example those who carried out vigilante lynchings of Muslims could act with complete impunity.  “But in the past six months, the alacrity with which they have escalated the Hindu nationalist project, first with revoking article 370 in Kashmir, then banning the triple Talaq [an instant divorce allowed in Islam], then the favourable verdict for the Ram Mandir [the temple in Ayodhya], there is this sense that they are on a roll and can accomplish whatever they want.  “So this legislation, where Muslims will be lucky if they are counted second-class citizens and not just thrown in a detention centre, is an inevitable culmination of that project. But judging by the protests, it is also possible that this time they have gone too far and never anticipated this kind of response.”  Jayal said the demonstrations werepart of “a battle for democracy, a battle for civil liberties, a battle for secularism and the plural character of Indian society.”  For one of the first times since Modi came to power, his slick social media and spin operation has failed to shift the narrative in his favour. The diverse makeup of participants in the protests means Modi’s attempts to dismiss them as self-loathing liberals and hopeless cosmopolitans have been met with derision.  “I think Modi and Shah had grown so over-confident, had grown so arrogant that they thought they could get away with it, because they were convinced they had consolidated the country around the idea of a Hindu majority nation, and the country and the media would go with them,” said Kapil Komireddi, the author of Malevolent Republic: A Short History of the New India. “But they did not bank on this outpouring of resentments that has accumulated over a long time.”  Like many observers, Komireddi drew comparisons between this week’s unrest and the protests that preceded Indira Ghandi declaring a state of emergency in 1975 and suspending the constitution. “What we are living in now is already a kind of undeclared emergency, where in effect in many parts of India democracy has effectively been suspended by Modi’s government,” Komireddi said.  Nonetheless, he remained optimistic about the sea change occurring across India in the wake of the citizenship act. “In 2014 India was the first democratic country to succumb to this wave of populism,” he said, “and now India will be the first country that will show the way to reclaim democracy from the clutches of these thugs.”


theguardianuk--2019-12-24--Hong Kong police fire teargas to disperse Christmas Eve protests

Hong Kong riot police fired rounds of teargas at thousands of anti-government protesters, many wearing masks and reindeer horns, after scuffles in shopping centres and a tourist district on Christmas Eve.  Demonstrators inside the malls threw umbrellas and other objects at police who responded by beating some with batons; one pointed his gun at the crowd, but did not fire.  Police used teargas to disperse protesters who had occupied the main roads and blocked traffic outside the malls and nearby luxury hotels, including the Peninsula, in the Tsim Sha Tsui tourist district of Kowloon.  There was a heavy police presence into the night with hundreds of officers standing guard on the roads as thousands of Christmas shoppers and tourists, some wearing Santa hats, looked on.  Many families with children had congregated in the same area to view the Christmas lights along the promenade, the spectacular backdrop of Hong Kong island on the opposite side of the harbour.  The protests in Chinese-ruled Hong Kong, now in their seventh month, have lost some of the scale and intensity of earlier violent confrontations. A peaceful rally this month still drew 800,000 people, according to organisers, showing strong support for the movement.  Scores of black-clad, masked protesters chanted slogans including “Revive Hong Kong, revolution of our time” and “Hong Kong independence” as they roamed the malls.  “Lots of people are shopping so it’s a good opportunity to spread the message and tell people what we are fighting for,” said Ken, an 18-year-old student. “We fight for freedom, we fight for our future.“  At one mall in the teeming Mong Kok district, also on the Kowloon peninsula, police used pepper spray to disperse some protesters, according to Cable television.  About 100 protesters vandalised a Starbucks in another mall called Mira Place, breaking the glass counters displaying pastries and spraying graffiti on the walls.  The coffee-shop chain has been a common target of protesters after the daughter of the founder of Maxim’s Caterers, which owns the local franchise, condemned the protesters at the UN human rights council in Geneva. Demonstrators have previously defaced Starbucks outlets around the city, daubing anti-China graffiti on its windows.  The Civil Human Rights Front, which has organised some of the biggest marches involving more than 1 million people, has applied to stage another march on New Year’s Day.  Police have arrested more than 6,000 people since the protests escalated in June, including a large number during a protracted, violent siege at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University in mid-November.  Many Hong Kong residents are angry at what they see as Beijing’s meddling in the freedoms promised to the former British colony when it returned to Chinese rule in 1997. China denies interfering and says it is committed to the “one country, two systems” formula put in place at that time and has blamed foreign forces for fomenting unrest.  In a video posted on her Facebook page, the city’s chief executive, Carrie Lam, wished Hong Kong citizens “a peaceful and safe Merry Christmas”.  Lam has so far refused to grant protesters’ demands, which include an independent inquiry into police behaviour and the implementation of full universal suffrage.


theguardianuk--2019-12-30--Hong Kong braces for fresh protests during new year festivities

Hong Kong will end 2019 with multiple protests planned for New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day aimed at disrupting festivities and shopping in the Asian financial hub, which has seen a rise in clashes between police and protesters since Christmas.  Events dubbed “Suck the Eve” and “Shop with You” are set for New Year’s Eve on Tuesday in areas including the party district of Lan Kwai Fong, the picturesque Victoria Harbour, and popular shopping malls, according to notices on social media.  A pro-democracy march on 1 January has been given police permission and will start from a large park in bustling Causeway Bay and end in the central business district.  The organisers, Civil Human Rights Front, were behind the peaceful million-plus marches in June and held a mass protest earlier in December, which they said about 800,000 people attended.  “On New Year’s Day, we need to show our solidarity ... to resist the government. We hope Hong Kong people will come onto the streets for Hong Kong’s future,” said Jimmy Sham, a leader of the group.  The protests began in June in response to a now-withdrawn bill that would have allowed extraditions to mainland China, where courts are controlled by the Communist party, and have evolved into a broader pro-democracy movement. Police said they would deploy crowd-control patrols on Tuesday and urged marchers on Wednesday to remain peaceful.  In a Facebook post, police commissioner Chris Tang thanked his frontline officers for guarding Hong Kong’s “safety and stability”, and issued a warning to protesters: “If you use violence, you will not get public support. We, police, will do all we can to arrest you.”  The demonstrations planned over new year follow an increase in clashes since Christmas Eve, when riot police fired teargas at thousands of protesters following scuffles in shopping malls and in a prime tourist district.  While the protests – now in their seventh month – have lessened in intensity and size in recent weeks, marches or rallies continue to occur almost daily.  Hundreds of people gathered in the Central district on Monday night to remember people killed or injured during the protests.  More than 2,000 protesters have been injured since June.  While there is no official count of deaths, student Chow Tsz-lok died after a high fall during a pro-democracy rally in November. Multiple suicides have also been linked to the movement.  “For most Hong Kong people, Christmas and New Year’s don’t mean anything to us any more,” said Roger Mak, a 35-year-old who attended Monday’s rally.  “What we’re fighting for is our future,” he said, adding that he planned to attend both protests scheduled this week.  Police arrested 34 people over the weekend and used pepper spray to break up a gathering aimed at disrupting retail business near the border with mainland China.  More than 6,000 protesters have been arrested since challenges began to the extradition bill, seen as an example of meddling by Beijing in freedoms promised to the special administrative region when Britain returned Hong Kong to China in 1997.  China denies the claims, and says it is committed to the “one country, two systems” formula put in place at that time. Beijing blames foreign countries including Britain and the United States for inciting unrest.  The protests have battered Hong Kong’s economy, already reeling from the fallout of the US-China trade war.


theindependent--2019-01-15--Zimbabwe protests Military deployed after eight killed in fuel hike demonstrations

Zimbabwe protests: Military deployed after eight killed in fuel hike demonstrations

At least eight people, including one police officer, have been killed in Zimbabwe, where violent protests are continuing in the capital of Harare for a second day, according to Amnesty.  A further 200 people have been detained, Amnesty added, and a miltary helicopter was seen on Tuesday firing tear gas at demonstrators.  The unrest broke out after the country's government hiked the price of fuel by 150 per cent.  The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions had called for a three-day national shutdown to protest the price hike.  Demonstrators filled the streets of Harare, where they burned tires and blocked a road at a busy intersection.  Soldiers attempted to disperse the crowd, as confrontations with angry civilians threatened to escalate.  Among Monday's fatalities was a police officer, who was stoned to death by protesters in the city of Bulawayo, a police spokesperson said.  She said that three people had been killed in the protests, a lower figure than that given by activists and human rights groups in Zimbabwe.  Security forces have faced numerous accusations of heavy-handedness. Social media across Zimbabwe, including WhatsApp, Twitter and Facebook, has reportedly been blocked as the unrest continues.  Monica Mutsvangwa, the country's information minister, said she was not aware of an internet shutdown and Zimbabwe's three mobile telecoms firms had no immediate comment on the outage.  Critics have accused Emmerson Mnangagwa of resorting to Mugabe style tactics to control the protests.  "We are suffering. Mnangagwa has failed this country. Enough is enough, we no longer want this," Takura Gomba, a protester in Harare, said.  Amnesty International expressed alarm about reports of protesters being shot by police officers.  “The police must use force only when strictly necessary," Muleya Mwananyanda, Amnesty’s Deputy Director for Southern Africa, said.  "Even then, they must exercise restraint at all times and use the lowest level of force needed. Firearms may only be used as a last resort, and when strictly unavoidable, to protect life.”  “Millions of Zimbabweans are terrified about the knock-on effects that the fuel increases will have on their daily lives, including for food and healthcare.  “The Zimbabwean authorities must ensure that people are able to express their views freely and safely and must promptly investigate in an independent and impartial manner allegations of police shootings of protesters."  The human rights group said that a boy had been shot in the stomach in the suburb of Mbare. A woman in Harare is also believed to have been shot in the face while on her way to work.  Officials are beginning to engage with the demonstrators and government officials have entered negotiations with union representatives.  Labour Minister Sekai Nzenza also promised that public workers would get a monthly supplement, of between 5 and 23 per cent of their salaries, from January to March.  The opposition and other groups supporting the shutdown urged people to stay indoors rather than engage in street action.


theindependent--2019-09-06--Brexit Far-right groups threaten to riot at London protests as Boris Johnson warned over language

Brexit: Far-right groups threaten to riot at London protests as Boris Johnson warned over language

Far-right groups are threatening to riot over Brexit amid warnings that some of Boris Johnson’s language is “calling to” nationalists.  The Metropolitan Police said it was “ready to share resources across the country” if disorder breaks out at protests planned for Saturday.  A demonstration called by the Democratic Football Lads Alliance (DFLA) is expected to draw the largest numbers in Westminster, as Brexiteers take to the streets in Manchester, Birmingham and other cities.  The protests were organised amid a surge in anger over parliament’s moves to prevent a no-deal Brexit with a bill that was approved by the House of Lords on Friday.  Extremists using numerous far-right channels on the encrypted Telegram messaging app calling MPs who backed the bill “traitors” and “scum” while planning rallies.  One member of a chat group purporting to contain supporters of Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party threatened “Brexit or we burn the country” after a fellow user called for unrest like that seen in Hong Kong.  A member of another group used by Britain First supporters wrote: “I predict a riot, then serious civil unrest until the 31st. Protect your loved ones and property, Britain is about to go in to biblical battle.”  “It’s time to f*** s*** up,” another post read. “Let’s f***ing smash um! Britain take to the streets!”  Another person wrote: “It needs to kick of Saturday big time.”  In the same chat, which includes racist and Islamophobic memes, a user called for “some good old civil unrest”.  In a different group for “patriots”, people were sharing photos of smoke grenades they had bought online to take to the protests.  The Metropolitan Police said it was prepared for the demonstrations and the possibility of further protests in the run-up to Brexit.  “To date, protests have been largely peaceful and we have no intelligence at this time to suggest that will change,” a spokesperson added.  “Our officers are well trained to maintain public order and stand ready to share resources across the country if any disorder breaks out. We will not hesitate to take necessary action against anyone who deliberately chooses to act outside the law.”  Senior police officers have been calling for politicians and other political figures to avoid worsening tensions with inflammatory language.  Martin Hewitt, chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, issued a warning over the “incredibly febrile atmosphere”.  “If you’re in a position where you know you’re going to be listened to, you need to be very careful about the language you are using so it doesn’t end up with consequences that weren’t intended,” he urged.  Last month, the head of UK counterterror policing said all public figures should be “bringing society together” as Brexit worsens polarisation.  “We should be really careful about what we say, we should be balanced, because there is no doubt in my mind that it has an effect,” assistant commissioner Neil Basu previously told The Independent.  The prime minister has been forced to defend remarks where he compared Muslim women to “letterboxes” last year after research suggested they caused a 375 per cent rise in Islamophobic hate crimes.  Speaking in the House of Commons on Wednesday, Mr Johnson said the comments had been part of a “strong liberal defence of everybody’s right to wear whatever they want in this country”, and refused to apologise.  In the same session, he characterised a bill proposed by opposition parties to prevent a no-deal Brexit as a move against the “democratic will of the people of the UK”.  Mr Johnson described the proposed law as a “surrender bill” eight times during the session, and the term was then repeated by extremists.  Experts said the prime minister and some other pro-Brexit politicians were “using the language of the far right” and playing into extremist narratives.  Chloe Colliver, who leads the digital research unit at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue think-tank, said that by using the phrase “surrender bill” and positioning himself as enacting the “will of the people”, Mr Johnson was “calling successfully to a nationalist interpretation of the Brexit debate”.  “It seems very purposeful to me and it really harks back to the Second World War nostalgia in this debate, which plays powerfully to the far right and nationalist groups,” she told The Independent.  “They don’t understand the mechanisms and decisions being made on their behalf, and that’s a ripe opportunity for these groups to step in with a simple narrative that pits them against everyone else.”  Mr Johnson is currently receiving substantial support from key far-right figures, including former Britain First leader Jayda Fransen, who praised him for “purging the traitors” in his party and called on others to fall behind him.  The operators of Tommy Robinson’s official Telegram channel called on people to “back Boris”, while supporters shared memes depicting him as Winston Churchill.  Ms Colliver warned that if the far right feel Mr Johnson is “in their corner”, it may reduce unrest in the short term but make them feel that their ideals have mainstream support.  She said the political stalemate over Brexit was undermining faith in democratic processes, and being “used to channel violent undemocratic objectives to a newly broad and receptive audience in the UK.”  Dr Joe Mulhall, senior researcher at Hope Not Hate, said far-right groups had seized upon Brexit as a nationalist cause and used it to gain mainstream support.  He said the global extreme right-wing had celebrated the result of the 2016 referendum, but then worked the following delays into a “narrative of betrayal” by “elites”.  “Their sense of betrayal could well spill out into anger and violence,” Dr Mulhall said. “They want no deal but if things go terribly it will be blamed on politicians, or the corrupt elite or global powers. Whatever the outcome is, they will be outraged.”


theindependent--2019-10-25--A Lebanese city once blighted by extremism has become the unlikely focus of nationwide protests

A cacophony of beating drums, fireworks and chants rattles across Tripoli’s central square, but the thumping music rises above them all. The beat drops, and the crowd erupts.  It has been the same here every night this week. Tens of thousands have headed to the streets in Lebanon’s second city to call for the fall of the government, and the numbers keep growing.  As mass demonstrations have swept across the country, Tripoli has made a strong claim for the title of protest capital.  For a city that has been long neglected and maligned, this uprising has been as much a coming out party as it has a protest. For years, Tripoli has been plagued by a reputation for violence and radicalism, often used as a byword for the country’s sectarian ills.  It might appear from the outside that a dramatic change has taken place. But for residents here, the story of these demonstrations is not one of transformation, but of a city showing its true face to the world.  “It was always minority causing all the trouble,” says Badr Safadi, a 53-year-old portrait photographer. “Most people were just trying to live their lives.  “I’m an optimist. I always thought people would come together, they just needed a reason.”  In Tripoli, a coastal city of more than 700,000 people in northern Lebanon, the reasons abound. Huge protests erupted across the country last week after the government announced a tax on the popular messaging service WhatsApp – a proposal that was quickly cancelled. But the deeper causes have been building for years.  Decades of widespread corruption and economic mismanagement by Lebanon’s leaders have brought it to the brink of financial collapse. It is one of the most indebted countries in the world, jobs are scarce, prices are rising and basic services such as electricity and water are intermittent.  These underlying causes of the protests are more acute in Tripoli than anywhere else. The city lies in the poorest region of Lebanon – some 57 per cent of its population lives in poverty. In the most deprived suburbs, nearly two thirds of people are unemployed.  “The middle class just doesn’t exist any more in Tripoli,” says Rene Charkass, a 24-year-old sports journalist, who has been protesting every day.  “Salaries are very low compared to the rest of the country. We pay electricity twice, water twice, there are no social services. Many families can’t afford food, education or medical treatment.  Young people growing up in the city, who make up a large contingent of protesters in the square, are afraid there will be no jobs for them once they leave school.  “Everyone here is poor – people are searching for work every day but there is nothing,” says 16-year-old Kareem Shlaylat, an IT student, as he watches the protests from the fourth floor of an abandoned building overlooking the square.  “It feels like the politicians help each other but don’t help poor people. I want the politicians to go away and for us to have new people who can be trusted.”  The city’s woes have been compounded by years of sectarian violence. Up until 2014, the city saw frequent armed clashes between Sunni residents of the Bab al-Tabbaneh district and Alawites in neighbouring Jabal Mohsen.  The outbreak of the Syrian civil war just over the border exacerbated those tensions, and led to a rise in Islamist militancy. Gunmen once streamed through the same square where tens of thousands now gather.  That violence has given Tripoli a reputation that it has struggled to shake.  “I think people have the wrong perception of Tripoli and it’s because of the media,” says Mariam al-Kotob, 26, a graphic designer. “They only show the war.”  She adds: “A lot of people wouldn’t dare to come and figure it out for themselves.”  All of which explains why the giant, raucous, musical protests in the city have caught the attention of many Lebanese. A video of a giant “protest rave” in the centre of the city went viral around the world earlier this week. “If you really want to protest you should go to Tripoli,” one protester was reportedly overheard saying at a demonstration just outside of Beirut.  “The scenes in Tripoli have been deeply moving because many had written off the city as a hub of Sunni extremism,” says Lina Khatib, head of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House think tank and a Lebanese citizen.  “The peaceful and joyous coming together of Tripoli’s residents and their chants of solidarity with fellow Lebanese from those southern cities also unfairly reputed as hubs of Shia extremism took many by surprise, but is one of the most powerful expressions of Lebanese society taking a stand against sectarian divisions.”  A Lebanese army campaign against militants in the city in 2014 put an end to the fighting, but the city’s problems have not gone away. Despite its dire need for reconstruction and investment, Tripoli has been perennially neglected by the government in Beirut and by its own leaders. Big development projects, often announced with great fanfare, repeatedly fail to get off the ground.  “Look at all the promises they made for Tripoli, and nothing happened,” says Safadi, the photographer. “All the politicians give us is words. They cannot give us anything else. We’re not unique in that sense. We’re the same as Baalbek and Sour and any other city in Lebanon.”  The past few months saw Lebanon’s financial crisis spiral out of control. Fears of a US dollar shortage have sparked panic for businesses across the country. Petrol stations have closed down in protest at the rising exchange rate and bakeries have warned they will not survive.  In Tripoli, where people were already living on the edge, the impact was devastating. When the WhatsApp tax was announced, people took to the streets across the city and the country at large. Even after the tax was shelved, protests spiralled and grew.  Previous outbreaks of unrest in Lebanon have tended to be party political. This time, however, protesters are demanding a complete overhaul of the country’s political system, calling for an end to the sectarian, civil war-era parties that have held onto power through clientelism and gerrymandering.  Across the country, protesters are expressing anger at the failures of all party leaders. “All of them means all of them,” is a popular refrain on the streets. But Tripoli has been failed by its politicians more than other cities due to its unique political makeup.  “Successive prime ministers, some of whom hailed from Tripoli, and parliamentarians, have taken the city for granted,” says Randa Slim, senior fellow and director of conflict resolution at the Middle East Institute.  “Unlike other areas of Lebanon, Tripoli is a city that is heavily contested politically: no single party or leader can claim a dominant role in the city politics. Because they have other sides to blame for their failure to deliver, blame cannot be focused on one party.”  That strategy worked when the city was polarised, but things have been slowly changing in Tripoli over the past few years – as they have across Lebanon. When the current crisis bit and the city’s leaders could offer no help, something broke.  “I wasn’t surprised when I saw people on the street, because I was waiting for this to happen,” says al-Kotob, the graphic designer. “Everything was so bad, it was kind of an explosion.  “A lot of political parties were trying to keep Tripoli down. They were using the people of this city for elections.  “What is happening now is a lesson for them. When people are hungry, they are ready to fight.”


theindependent--2019-11-07--Iraq protests: Four anti-government activists shot dead despite promise not to use live rounds

Security forces in Iraq have shot dead at least four anti-government protesters in central Baghdad, a day after the military said officers were ordered not to use live fire.  A further 35 people were also wounded on Baghdad’s Shuhada Bridge, according to police and medical sources, as mass demonstrations continued for a 13th day straight with thousands rallying to central areas of the capital.  The demonstrators were killed as they tried to remove barriers blocking a march towards the Green Zone, which houses government offices and foreign embassies, the sources added.  Monitoring group Net Blocks also reported that the internet was shut down once again across most of the country.  Protesters in the troubled capital told The independent they feared the government was deliberately strangling connectivity so that civilians could not communicate what is happening to the outside world.  “Last night a sit-in in [Baghdad’s] Bab al-Moathem area was also attacked with live ammunition and several protesters died, even though people were just minding their own business,” said one protester, who asked for his identity to be withheld for security reasons.  “The internet is a major problem for everyone. The blackout means people are stranded here with no idea what is going on. People are scared something might happen without warning and the world wouldn’t know about it,” he added.  Another demonstrator in the Shia holy city of Karbala, around 100km (62 miles) south of Baghdad, agreed.  “People are extremely worried about the internet blackout. Many only come out during the day and go home at night fearful about what the secret forces will do,” he said.  He added that security forces used live ammunition on protesters overnight after attempting to enter a local building in the city, which has also been rocked by protests.  “Mosques have started giving out food and drinks and even offering medical assistance,” he added.  Amid global condemnation of the rising death toll, Iraqi military spokesman Major-General Abdul Karim Khalaf reassured reporters on Wednesday that security forces had been given “clear and strict instructions” not to allow any use of live ammunition against rallies.  He also said that orders had been issued to “immediately” arrest “saboteurs who cut off roads” and refer them to the judiciary.  He claimed Iraq had incurred losses exceeding $6bn (£4.6bn) as a result of the closures and vowed to come down hard on those who disrupted key facilities.  It did little to deter protesters in the south of the country who once again forced the closure of the country’s main Umm Qasr port.  The Iraqi government has failed to quell weeks of unrest which has seen tens of thousands of people take to the street against widespread corruption, soaring unemployment and terrible basic salaries.  Many are furious there are few jobs and regular power cuts despite Iraq’s vast oil reserves.  Decisions by Iraqi prime minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to create stipends for the poor, more job opportunities for graduates and pledges to punish a handful of corrupt officials have done little to satisfy protesters.  Many are demanding a complete overhaul of state institutions, the electoral process and system of governance.  The protests have also exposed long-simmering resentment at Iran’s influence in the country.  Protesters have repeatedly targeted Shia political parties and militias with close ties to Tehran as well as Iran’s consulate in Karbala.  Security forces, meanwhile, have been accused of using excessive force after more than 250 people have been killed since the unrest erupted on 1 October.  The United Nations in their latest report released on Tuesday said that there had been nearly 100 deaths since 25 October alone.  The UN’s special representative of the secretary general for Iraq, Jeanine Hennis, added that there needed to be “immediate action” to stop the “vicious circle of violence”.  However, she later sparked fury from protesters who accused her of prioritising “oil over blood” when she tweeted of her “grave concern” at the disruption of critical infrastructure such as the oil ports.  Protesters have repeatedly blocked roads and ports to ramp up pressure on the government.  On Thursday, authorities unsuccessfully attempted to reopen of the Umm Qasr port, which houses a vital oil terminal and is an entry point for food and basic goods.  By the afternoon, protesters burnt tyres and blocked the road to the port, forcing trucks to come to a standstill.  Ms Hennis had said on Twitter it was the “responsibility of all to protect public facilities” adding that “Threats/closures of roads to oil installations, ports causing billions in losses. [It is] Detrimental to Iraq’s economy, undermines fulfilling protesters’ legitimate demands.”  Shahad Al-Rawi, an Iraqi novelist and supporter of the protests, was among many to reply, writing “blood is more precious than oil and the people of Iraq know their own interests. We don’t need your advice!”  Central bank sources, meanwhile, said it was not just the unrest in the streets or ports that was battering the economy.  Speaking to Reuters, one bank official said that the internet outages have caused as much as $40m (£31.2m) of losses per day for the private sector.  The source said the losses by the private banks and mobile phone companies, money transfer services, tourism and airline booking offices had averaged almost $1.5bn (£1.17bn) for Iraq in just over a month.


themoscowtimes--2019-08-06--Who Are the 10 Russians Risking Prison Time for Opposition Protests

Who Are the 10 Russians Risking Prison Time for Opposition Protests?

Nine men have been placed in pre-trial detention while one is wanted on suspicion of taking part in “mass unrest” by protesting in support of opposition candidates barred from running in Moscow’s local elections.  Police detained more than 2,000 people overall during protests on July 27 and Aug. 3 in central Moscow, using violence in several cases, while courts have ordered the arrests of more than 100 people over the protests.  Authorities opened criminal proceedings over the July 27 protest, saying it had identified 10 key suspects in what it said was mass civil unrest that day.  The charges of participating in mass civil unrest, which all nine of those detained have denied, carry a maximum prison sentence of eight years.  The “mass unrest” case has prompted Russia’s independent Novaya Gazeta newspaper to launch a petition urging the authorities to put an end to what it called “political terror.” President Vladimir Putin’s human rights council has pledged to ask prosecutors, investigators, the National Guard and police to look into the July 27 and Aug. 3 crackdowns that took place.  Here’s a brief overview of the suspects who have been placed in pre-trial detention until Sept. 27 as protesters plan to take to the streets again this Saturday:  — Yegor Zhukov, 22, a student at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics (HSE) and popular YouTube blogger. Arguably the most high-profile defendant in the “mass unrest” case, with fellow students staging single-person pickets in his support outside the Moscow police headquarters.


themoscowtimes--2019-08-08--What to Expect From Moscow Protests This Saturday

Moscow’s opposition plans to press ahead with more protests this Saturday even after election officials closed all avenues for several Kremlin critics to run for office in the Russian capital next month. The ongoing standoff between Russia's opposition and its leadership that has taken place in recent weeks has drawn international attention to what would have otherwise been a minor race for the 45-seat Moscow City Duma, which has relatively little power, on Sept. 8.  Moscow police have detained more than 2,300 people at rallies this summer protesting the candidates' exclusion. While most of those detained were quickly released, authorities accused protesters of using violence against the police. Investigators opened criminal proceedings against 11 people over what they have called mass civil unrest, an offense punishable with up to eight years in jail. Russia's main election board on Wednesday rejected the appeals of several opposition politicians, including hunger-striking Lyubov Sobol, to get back on the ballot. Authorities say they have been disqualified for failing to gather enough genuine signatures of support, something the opposition politicians say is a lie. Despite the rejection, the candidates have called on supporters to take to the streets for a fifth consecutive weekend on Saturday in a gathering that has been approved by the authorities. Here’s a brief overview of what to expect at this Saturday’s protests:  Supporters in other Russian cities plan to join Moscow in its marches for the rejected City Duma candidates, according to Leonid Volkov, an ally of jailed opposition politician Alexei Navalny. Authorities have approved a demonstration “in solidarity with Moscow” in Russia’s fourth-largest city of Yekaterinburg, Navalny’s team wrote on social media. The Tyumen city administration in western Siberia said it also authorized its own event, followed by the southern cities of Krasnodar and Rostov-on-Don. In all, Navalny supporters in 40 cities from St. Petersburg to Vladivostok have announced “pickets in solidarity with Moscow” this Saturday. Authorities in the western city of Belgorod refused to authorize a protest at its central square. Instead, they reportedly said that space had been reserved for “events in support of Russian law enforcement officers’ actions in support of unauthorized public event participants’ illegal actions.”  With most of the candidates jailed on charges of organizing unauthorized gatherings, a march that some of the candidates have called for after the two-hour rally is not expected to be a well-coordinated affair. Some who were scheduled to be released ahead of Saturday have been re-arrested and placed in custody again for several days.  Three musical acts have volunteered to perform at Saturday’s opposition rallies. The lineup includes IC3PEAK, a well-known techno duo whose shows had been shut down by the authorities last year, as well as the rapper Face, who drew controversy for releasing a politically charged album that compared Russia to a prison camp. Moscow City Hall has barred the three performers but organizers say the acts will still take the stage. Yury Dud, one of Russia’s most popular YouTubers, has announced that he will attend Saturday’s protest, calling on his 2.3 million Instagram followers to join him. Dud previously spoke out in support of the opposition protesters. On Friday, Russian rapper Oxxxymiron announced he would join the rally as well and called on his 1.3 million followers to attend.  Authorities announced this week that they plan to hold a dubiously named “Meat & Beat” festival on the day of the protests. Several popular artists, including Russian singer Manizha, have denied reports that they were slated to perform there, while other artists’ managers said they had been booked “long ago.”  Last Saturday’s marches were rivaled by the City Hall-organized Shashlik Fest, which claimed to have hosted a whopping 300,000 guests. Russian and international media outlets noted that this attendance figure dwarfs the average crowd numbers at festivals like Coachella in the U.S. and Glastonbury in Britain.  Past marches that have taken place with a “sanctioned” label have had significantly higher turnout and lower numbers of detentions.


breitbart--2019-09-02--Union Bosses Fear Workers Will Stick with Trump Its a Serious Problem

Union Bosses Fear Workers Will Stick with Trump: 'It's a Serious Problem'

A report by the Wall Street Journal reveals how union bosses and Democrats are looking to peel off Trump’s support from American union workers who back his agenda, where most recently he has demanded multinational corporations move their production in China to the U.S.  “It’s a serious problem for us,” said Alan Netland, president of the North East Area Labor Council in Duluth, Minn., which represents 40,000 union members. “People may say, ‘I voted Republican and the world didn’t fall in, so maybe I better keep doing that.’” [Emphasis added] Union officials, along with Democratic presidential candidates, are now trying to highlight what they see as a yawning gap between the president’s pro-worker rhetoric and his policies. [Emphasis added] Democratic candidates have put appeals to working-class voters at the front of their campaigns. “I am a union man,” declared former Vice President Joe Biden, who leads in 2020 primary polls, during his campaign kickoff in Pennsylvania in May. [Emphasis added]  Vice President of the United Mine Workers of America in Uniontown, Pennsylvania, Chuck Knissel said based on the current 2020 Democrats running for president, it will be difficult to get union workers to vote for anyone other than Trump.  “It’s going to be tough to get our members to vote for a Democrat,” Knissel told the Journal.  In interviews with the Journal, union workers who supported Trump in 2016 said 2020 Democrats have “gone so far left” with positions such as forcing union workers off their current healthcare plans and onto Medicare, as well as their calls to eliminate the coal industry entirely and provide free taxpayer-funded healthcare to illegal aliens.  Some Democrat candidates, such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), have been forced to shift their healthcare policy plans after union workers voiced opposition to the Medicare for All plan. Others, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), have attempted to supplement their 2020 platforms with plans such as cracking down on corporations outsourcing American jobs — the agenda that Trump heralded in 2016.  John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.


cnbc--2019-04-29--Democrats rush to secure union support as they woo workers in 2020 primary

In a Democratic primary where candidates have lashed corporations and praised workers, presidential hopefuls have started a furious push for union support. Ahead of his first official campaign event Monday at a union hall in Pittsburgh — a city associated with blue-collar work — former Vice President Joe Biden secured the first major endorsement of the primary. The roughly 300,000-member International Association of Firefighters backed Biden on Monday. In a video, IAFF General President Harold Schaitberger called the former vice president "one of the staunchest advocates for working families." Biden's rivals want a similar seal of approval from organized labor as America's largest unions start deciding who to back. While union membership — and the organizations' political clout — have dropped in recent decades, Democrats' efforts to woo labor show a constituency that still carries weight in a party increasingly tailoring its message to workers. Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who have railed against alleged corporate mistreatment of workers more than any other Democratic presidential candidates, are considered two of the top contenders for union support. Other Democrats, including Sens. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Cory Booker, D-N.J., and former Rep. Beto O'Rourke, have made plays for labor backing. It sets up a rush within the Democratic field to secure support from major unions, nearly all of which have not endorsed a candidate yet. The National Education Association — the largest union in the country, with 3 million members — told CNBC it has not yet decided who to endorse. Other large unions affected by President Donald Trump's trade policies, such as United Steelworkers and United Autoworkers, also say they have not chosen who to back. Organized labor has historically leaned toward supporting Democrats, and unions have more than 20 to choose from in the presidential primary. Who the groups and their members support could in part hinge on whether candidates backed trade deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, which not only Trump but also liberals including Sanders and Warren have slammed as devastating for American workers.  Trump has supported right-to-work laws, GOP-backed measures that allow people to work in unionized companies without joining a union and paying dues. Appearing to respond to the IAFF's endorsement of Biden on Monday, Trump shrugged off the need for support from union brass and contended that lower-ranking members will vote for him. "I'll never get the support of Dues Crazy union leadership, those people who rip-off their membership with ridiculously high dues, medical and other expenses while being paid a fortune. But the members love Trump," the president wrote in a tweet. In a follow-up tweet, he argued that "The Dues Sucking firefighters leadership will always support Democrats, even though the membership wants me." Biden responded in a tweet with a defense of labor unions: "I'm sick of this President badmouthing unions. Labor built the middle class in this country. Minimum wage, overtime pay, the 40-hour week: they exist for all of us because unions fought for those rights."  How Democrats have talked to unions  Democrats have always vied for electoral support from unions. But a focus on workers has shown even more clearly in policy and campaign strategy this year. The vast majority of Democrats in the 2020 race have sworn off contributions from corporate political action committees. The field has broadly endorsed a $15 per hour minimum wage and more robust benefits packages for workers. Candidates have railed against right-to-work laws. The focus on unions showed from the start of the campaign. Sanders' campaign workers formed a union, while former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro also pledged to let his campaign unionize. Candidates such as Klobuchar highlighted union members from their families in campaign launch speeches. One opportunity to appeal to unions arrived earlier this month, when workers from the grocery chain Stop & Shop went on strike in New England. Various candidates sent messages of support to the workers. Biden rallied in Massachusetts with workers. Warren stopped by a picket line with Dunkin' donuts in tow, reportedly telling workers that "unions will be rebuilding America's middle class." Securing support from labor could give any candidate a boost in a primary marked by candidates' efforts to cast themselves as the most friendly to workers.  Democrats hope to regain their footing with union members after Trump performed better with them than recent GOP candidates had. Democrat Hillary Clinton enjoyed only an 8 percentage-point edge among union households in 2016, according to exit polling data. In 2012, President Barack Obama won union households by 18 percentage points. The president's success relative to other Republicans could relate to his trade policy. He slammed both NAFTA and the U.S. trade relationship with China, arguing globalization damaged U.S. manufacturing workers. The Trump administration is pushing to get a revised North American trade deal through Congress and strike a new agreement with China. While current or former union members may have helped Trump squeak out key victories in states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in 2016, signs suggest their support could waver. The president's approval rating among union members dropped 15 percentage points from March 2017 to March 2018, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll. Biden secured the first major union endorsement among the Democrats trying to challenge Trump. But it remains to be seen whether workers more influenced by trade policy will get behind the former vice president. Biden voted to ratify NAFTA as a senator in 1993, while Sanders voted against the deal in the House. As part of the Obama administration, Biden supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a sprawling free-trade agreement that Trump withdrew U.S. support from during his early days in office. Sanders, Warren, Booker, Klobuchar and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., all voted against giving Obama the authority to expedite TPP negotiations in 2015. The Biden campaign did not immediately respond to a request to comment on whether the former vice president's trade stances could hurt his bid to win more union endorsements. In responding to the firefighters union's endorsement of Biden on Monday, the Republican Party of Pennsylvania tried to appeal to workers in the state. The state GOP released a statement from Jim Gaffney of Goshen Mechanical Contractors, a services and construction company in eastern Pennsylvania. He said that "times are better for the labor unions I contract with than they ever were under the failed Obama-Biden recovery."


cnn--2019-01-02--Banks and credit unions move to help federal workers hit by shutdown

(CNN) Banks and credit unions that cater to federal workers are readying financial help for their customers as the government shutdown drags on.  The assistance includes low- or no-interest payroll advances and loans for workers facing dwindling cash reserves.  A total of 800,000 federal employees have been furloughed or working without pay since December 21, and won't receive their next paychecks until the government reopens.  "Our observation is that the folks that we serve are not wealthy people," said Scott Spiker, the chairman and CEO of First Command Financial Services, whose customers include members of the Coast Guard.  While the Department of Homeland Security found money to pay Coast Guard payroll at the end of December, future paychecks are uncertain if Congress and President Donald Trump can't strike a deal on border wall funding.  Spiker told CNN that First Command is offering its members who are federal employees interest-free payroll advances, as well as other assistance.  Democracy Federal Credit Union is offering a short-term emergency loan with 0% interest, lending director Antoine McStay said. Bankers are also referring customers with specific concerns to their in-house financial counseling services, he said.  Other institutions, like USAA Bank and Transportation Federal Credit Union, have said they'll provide low-interest loans to their customers.  USAA spokeswoman Laura Propp told CNN that "thousands" have reached out to the bank for help or advice.  Many workers may be starting to feel the pinch only now that the shutdown is stretching into a new pay period.  Spiker added that for many of his bank's clients, "their big payments coincide with their checks" at the beginning and middle of the month -- including mortgage payments, car loans and utility bills.  "Many people have payments that they try to have land on the 1st," he said.  "If they don't get paid, then their loan does not get paid, which puts them in a past-due or delinquent status," she said, which can damage credit or lead to costly fees.  Contractors may not be eligible for help  While federal employees typically receive back pay after the government reopens, federal contractors often do not.  That means lenders can't necessarily count on contractors being able to quickly repay the loans or advances, and offers for federal employees like the emergency loan from Democracy Federal Credit Union aren't available to them.  Assistance for contractors is a "traditional banking equation," Spiker of First Command explained. Contractors will require more scrutiny than federal employees "to understand their future ability to pay."  McStay said Democracy Federal Credit Union is offering contractors other options, such as delaying their payments on existing loans.  While reaching out to creditors makes sense, Spiker said the OPM recommendation that government employees offer to barter services such as painting "in exchange for partial rent payments" rings hollow.  "That is a very hard position to put people in," Spiker told CNN. "In many cases for these folks, they're not trained to be negotiators, and there's not a widespread marketplace that says, 'Gee, landlords, be good citizens and everybody chip in.' "


dailyheraldchicago--2019-11-13--New Lake County rule: Good for business and workers, or unfair advantage for unions?

Companies seeking contracts for construction projects and other jobs with Lake County must participate in registered apprenticeship and training programs under a new bidding rule.  A divided county board approved the policy Tuesday. The 14-6 vote closely followed party lines, although two Republicans joined the board's Democratic majority to support it.  Proponents said the new rule, effective immediately, will boost local employment.  "Lake County believes in the value of apprenticeships," said board member Paul Frank, a Highland Park Democrat who leads the board's financial and administrative committee. "(It's) a good policy for Lake County."  But critics said the change gives unionized businesses an unfair advantage over other firms chasing contracts for projects such as building construction, sewer installation or repair and landscaping. The policy will prevent smaller contractors that don't offer apprenticeships from getting those county jobs, critics said -- including some that already have worked with Lake County.  The new policy tells nonunionized Lake County businesses "we want your tax dollars, but we don't want your business," said board member Dick Barr, a Round Lake Beach Republican.  "This is not free market," Barr said. "This is direct, government control of business."  Under the new rule, companies seeking contracts for public works projects must participate in active apprenticeship and training programs registered with the U.S. Labor Department's office of apprenticeship for each of the trades needed for the particular job.  Federally funded construction projects are exempt from the policy if the cash would be jeopardized. Lake County transportation division projects may be exempt, too.  The requirement applies to contractors and subcontractors.  In an email to the Daily Herald, Frank called the new rule "a policy statement that Lake County values workforce training opportunities."  "And we want to encourage contractors who work with us to support that," Frank said.  Emphasizing a preference to work with contractors that support apprenticeships helps train and develop the workforce, Frank said.  "Workers need these opportunities," he said.  During Tuesday's debate, proponents noted DuPage County has a similar policy in place.  But that didn't fly with board member Ann Maine, a Lincolnshire Republican. Adopting a policy simply because other counties have done so isn't a good enough reason to act, she said.  The new policy was supported by all 12 Democrats on the board as well Republicans Steve Carlson of the Gurnee area and Judy Martini of Fox Lake.  "Training workers is not a partisan issue," Frank said.  The six Republicans who voted against the measure were Barr, Maine, Michael Danforth of Fox River Grove, Linda Pedersen of Antioch, Mike Rummel of Lake Forest and Craig Taylor of Lake Zurich.  Zion Republican Brent Paxton was absent for the vote.  Before casting his "no" vote, Barr said he supports union workers and nonunion workers, as well as apprenticeship programs. The mandatory nature of the policy earned his scorn, however.  Barr also noted that most Lake County public works contracts already go to companies participating in apprenticeship programs.  "This is running up the score (for unions)," he said.


fortune--2019-03-14--Workers at Anchor Brewing One of Americas First Craft Breweries Vote to Unionize

Workers at Anchor Brewing, One of America’s First Craft Breweries, Vote to Unionize

Employees at Anchor Brewing Company have voted to unionize, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Workers are seeking better benefits and wages, and Anchor has 10 days to dispute the union.  San Francisco-based Anchor Brewing is often thought of as America’s first craft brewery. Founded in 1896, Anchor was sold to Japan’s Sapporo for an undisclosed amount back in 2017.  In recent years, as the cost of living in the San Francisco Bay Area has continued to skyrocket, workers have seen their benefits cut again and again. According to Mission Local, workers’ hourly wages have dropped, and what were once 45-minute paid lunch breaks were cut to 30 unpaid minutes. Sick time has been cut back as well, and health insurance payments have gone up. In 2018, after the Sapporo acquisition, the company stopped contributing to employee 401(k) retirement accounts.  Craft breweries—all 7,000-plus of them in the United States—are generally not unionized, according to reporting by Splinter News. But there are some domestically produced union-made brews. The AFL-CIO maintains a list a number of beers, wines, and liquors made by unionized workforces.  If unionized, Anchor Brewing employees will join the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU). Looks like brewery workers and their new union friends have a reason to toast.


foxnews--2019-01-10--Federal workers unions march on White House as first payday without paycheck approaches

Federal workers, unions march on White House as first payday without paycheck approaches

Democratic senators and union leaders led federal workers in rallies at the White House and across the country on Thursday, just one day before the partial government shutdown over border wall funding threatens to deny all of them their first full paycheck.  As President Trump visited the southern border in McAllen, Texas, and declared that he will "almost definitely" use his emergency powers to build the wall if talks remain stalled, the demonstrations emphasized the financial strain imposed on government employees since the shutdown began Dec. 22.  Roughly 420,000 employees were deemed essential and are working unpaid. An additional 380,000 are staying home without pay. On Thursday afternon, after assurances from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., that President Trump will sign the bill, the Senate passed legislation to provide back pay for federal workers furloughed during the ongoing government shut down.  Statistics provided by the Department of Labor showed that 4,760 federal employees filed for unemployment benefits in the last week of December, an increase of 3,831 from the 929 who applied the week before.  "Shutting down the government is not a policy that should be followed," House majority leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told a boisterous crowd of protesters in Washington, D.C., on Thursday. Some near the White House chanted, "Do your jobs, so we can do ours."  "Ladies and gentlemen, we need to keep yelling and screaming and hollering until this president opens up that government -- of the people, for the people and by the people," Hoyer continued.  Also speaking at the rally, Democratic Virginia Sen. Mark Warner accused Trump of using federal workers as "pawns."  Protesters initially gathered near the AFL-CIO building in Washington, where union leaders placed the blame squarely on Republicans.  "Let's call this shutdown what it is: It's a lockout," AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka shouted. "Shame on the Senate. Shame on the White House. This lockout has to end, and it has to end now."  Two large unions representing federal workers -- the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Treasury Employees Union -- have argued it is illegal to force workers to show up to their jobs without pay.  Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who delivered his own rebuttal to Trump's Tuesday night address from the Oval Office, also rallied attendees on Thursday. Sanders has consistently accused the White House of manufacturing a crisis, and has argued that climate change and health care are more urgent concerns than illegal immigration.  "Today we say to this president, ‘Grow up, do your job, end this shutdown,’” Sanders said.  Maryland Democratic Sens. Benjamin Cardin and Chris Van Hollen also spoke to the crowd, as did Connecticut Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal.  Other rallies were taking place in Atlanta, Denver and Ogden, Utah, where some 5,000 IRS workers are affected by the shutdown, according to KUER NPR Utah. A local food bank reported that 50 percent more families have showed up this week than the last.  Democrats have increasingly sought to make federal workers the face of the shutdown in recent days, amid reports that hundreds of unpaid Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials are calling out sick at airports.  "He thinks maybe they could just ask their father for more money," House speaker Nancy Pelosi said after a contentious meeting at the White House on Wednesday. "But they can’t." (Trump walked out of the meeting after Pelosi flatly refused to consider any spending bill that included wall funding.)  Although Trump has said that "most of the people not getting paid are Democrats," he has also sounded notes of empathy during the shutdown.  "I can relate," Trump told reporters this weekend. "And I’m sure that the people that are on the receiving end will make adjustments. They always do. And they’ll make adjustments. People understand exactly what’s going on. Many of those people that won’t be receiving a paycheck, many of those people agree 100 percent with what I’m doing."  “There is not gonna be any bend right here," Trump added.  The shutdown, which enters its 21st day Friday, will be the longest in history by this weekend. Most of the government workers received their last paycheck two weeks ago.  TRUMP AGAIN ASSERTS POWER TO DECLARE NATIONAL EMERGENCY DURING BORDER VISIT  Some workers are relying on donations, including launching GoFundMe campaigns. A food pantry has opened up at a Coast Guard base in Boston.  Gabrielle Roesch, who identified herself a government scientist, wrote on Twitter: "Applied for unemployment....even though I have a job... surreal."  Essential government workers, like TSA agents, have been required to show up to work without pay, and have little basis for an unemployment claim, analysts said. While furloughed workers and government contractors may have stronger unemployment claims, they would likely have to return the money if Congress approves back pay to furloughed workers once the shutdown ends, as it has done with previous shutdowns.  However, many government offices that process unemployment claims are understaffed, creating another headache for furloughed workers and contractors running low on funds.  Theodore Atkinson, a furloughed trial attorney in the Justice Department's civil division, told The Associated Press he is spending "extraordinarily stressful" days anxiously watching the news at his home in Baltimore.  He was told to stay home during the last government shutdown in 2013. But this time, he had little time to prepare for a missed paycheck or tie up loose ends with the cases he is working on, he said.  With two children and a mortgage, child support and alimony payments, Atkinson said he has taken out a personal loan to cover two paychecks, just to be safe. But if the shutdown stretches into February, he may need to take out another.  "It's all uncertain and I don't know how it ends or resolves itself," he said. "This isn't a matter of me not going to the movies or out to eat as much. I can't cut off my power or my cellphone or move out of my house."  CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP  Negotiations to end the shutdown stalled on Thursday, as Trump, during his visit to the U.S.-Mexico border in Texas, argued a barrier made of steel would deter human trafficking and other violent crimes.  Trump, accompanied by elected officials and border agents, highlighted gun, trafficking and drug crimes along the border during remarks at a patrol station in McAllen. The president spoke in front of a table of items border agents have seized, including a rifle, handguns, a plastic bag full of cash and bricks of heroin and methamphetamine.  “If we had a barrier of any kind, a powerful barrier, whether it’s steel or concrete ... we would stop it cold,” Trump said of human trafficking. The president then took part in a briefing by border agents.  Back in Washington, Democrats on Thursday were blocked in the Senate after trying to proceed with House-passed spending bills that would fund the government and end the partial shutdown without new border wall money. Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican majority leader, blocked that effort, saying it amounts to “pointless show votes.”  Fox News' Alex Pappas and The Associated Press contributed to this report.


foxnews--2019-03-14--In letter to AOC Big Labor says Green New Deal could cause immediate harm to union workers

In letter to AOC, Big Labor says Green New Deal could cause 'immediate harm' to union workers

Big Labor is not buying the Democrats' Green New Deal, saying the proposed economic and energy reforms could cause “immediate harm” to millions of union employees and threaten their livelihoods.  The AFL-CIO, which represents 12.5 million union workers, outlined its opposition to the proposal in a recent letter to its leading sponsors: U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.  “We welcome the call for labor rights and dialogue with labor, but the Green New Deal resolution is far too short on specific solutions that speak to the jobs of our members and the critical sections of our economy,”  the AFL-CIO Energy Committee told the congresswoman and the senator in a letter dated March 8.  GREENPEACE CO-FOUNDER TEARS INTO OCASIO-CORTEZ, GREEN NEW DEAL: ‘POMPOUS LITTLE TWIT  “We will not accept proposals that could cause immediate harm to millions of our members and their families. We will not stand by and allow threats to our members’ jobs and their families’ standard of living go unanswered,” they wrote. “We are ready to discuss these issues in a responsible way, for we all recognize that doing nothing is not an option.”  The Green New Deal has earned the support of a number of Democratic 2020 presidential candidates. Its backers say the ambitious concept is designed to tackle income inequality and climate change by eliminating much of the fossil fuel consumption in the United States and would most likely require tax increases.  Ocasio-Cortez has described the deal as a “life and death” issue. She has not addressed the AFL-CIO letter.  AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said last week that unions were not consulted before the plan was released in February.  “Look, we need to address the environment. We need to do it quickly,” he said, the Washington Post reported. “But we need to do it in a way that doesn’t put these communities behind and leave segments of the economy behind. So we’ll be working to make sure that we do two things: that by fixing one thing we don’t create a problem somewhere else.”  Sen. John Barrasso, R- Wyo., tweeted a copy of the letter Monday, saying “I agree with the AFL-CIO.”  CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP  Markey slammed the Republican Party’s record on climate change in response.  “We will continue to work and partner w @AFLCIO, who is right to say that “doing nothing is not an option,” he tweeted. "But until Republicans say that climate change is real, caused by humans, and demands action now, the only people they are in agreement with are Big Oil and the Koch brothers.”  The GOP is expected to bring the Green New Deal up for a vote this month, according to the Hill.


foxnews--2019-03-15--Bernie Sanders presidential campaign workers unionize team says

Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign workers unionize, team says

Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign team on Friday announced that some of their employees have unionized, a move they labeled as a historic feat.  The Democratic White House contender’s team in a news release said the move will make them “the first major party presidential campaign in history to have a unionized workforce.”  BERNIE SANDERS HITS HEAD ON SHOWER DOOR, RECEIVES STITCHES, CAMPAIGN SAYS  Most of Bernie 2020’s “bargaining unit employees” recently selected the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 400 to be their “exclusive bargaining representative,” the campaign said.  “The campaign recognized a card check system to indicate support for the union and did not require an election,” the news release said.  RNC ASSAILS BERNIE SANDERS OVER REPORT HE CALLED FOR NATIONALIZATION OF MAJOR US INDUSTRIES IN 1970S  Campaign Manager Faiz Shakir hailed the lawmaker as being “the most pro-union candidate” among those in the ever-widening Democratic pool. Shakir added they’re “honored that his campaign will be the first to have a unionized workforce.”  United Food and Commercial Workers Local 400 verified the news to The Associated Press, with President Mark P. Federici saying he expects the decision will mean that Sanders' campaign workers have pay parity and transparency, without gender bias and harassment.  CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP  Sanders, I-Vt., announced last month that he would be making another bid for the White House, after losing the Democratic nomination in 2016 to Hillary Clinton.  Fox News’ Andrew Fone and The Associated Press contributed to this report.


freebeacon--2019-11-25--Government Worker Behind Landmark Anti-Union Case Wants His Money Back

The Illinois man who won a landmark Supreme Court case that struck a blow against government unions is back in court fighting to recover the money seized from his paychecks, one of many lawsuits that could cost labor groups more than $100 million.  Mark Janus is asking a federal appeals court to force his former union to return the money that it unconstitutionally deducted from his paychecks. The former child support specialist was the named plaintiff in 2018's Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 Supreme Court decision, which declared that public-sector unions may not forcefully collect union contributions without employee consent. Associate Justice Samuel Alito affirmed in the Court's majority opinion that forcing employees to pay partial dues known as "agency fees" to their unions violates the First Amendment.  Janus is still locked in a legal battle, seeking to recover the thousands of dollars that the union forcefully collected from his paychecks before the 2018 decision. A panel of judges on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that unions don't have to refund dues collected in compliance with the pre-Janus legal statutes. Janus has appealed that judgment, asking for an en banc review to be carried out from every judge on the circuit.  "The Supreme Court agrees with me—the union was wrong to take money out of my paycheck without my permission," Janus said in a statement. "The union knew what it was doing was wrong. The union shouldn't get to profit from behavior that the Court recognized as unconstitutional."  The union did not return request for comment about the case.  Janus's current court battle could have significant ramifications on the bottom lines of unions. If AFSCME Council 31 is forced to retroactively return money it took from Janus's paychecks, it would strengthen the cases of dozens of class-action lawsuits filed by workers across the country, according to Patrick Semmens, a spokesperson for the National Right to Work Foundation. The foundation is representing employees in more than a dozen lawsuits that could force labor groups to refund $120 million of past dues and fees to workers. Workers in several other states and cities across the country filed similar suits.  "There is probably another 20 or 30 cases that aren't ours … likely [worth] hundreds of millions of dollars," Semmens said.  Janus is seeking to recover about $3,000 he paid the union between March 2013 and June 2018, the month the Supreme Court declared forced dues illegal. Semmens said that the suit does not seek refunds for union dues before 2013, because it would be beyond the statute of limitation.  A lower court and the appellate panel have ruled that Janus's union acted in good faith and followed legal precedent in collecting mandatory dues before June 2018, limiting the retrospective applicability of the Supreme Court decision.  Janus's legal team believes the court erred in its judgment because legal precedents established the retroactive applicability of Supreme Court rulings. Semmens said that the Janus decision recognized that the Supreme Court put public sector unions "on notice" that the mandatory dues might be constitutionally suspect as early as 2012's Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000.  "When the Supreme Court rules, they don't change the law, they say this is what the law has always been," Semmens said. "This is what the First Amendment has always protected."  Four Trump-nominated federal judges sit on the Seventh Circuit. It has nine Republican-appointed and two Democrat-appointed members.  The suit is the latest in a string of legal disputes testing the limits of the Janus decision. Alaska Republican governor Mike Dunleavy recently cited the ruling when he signed a new policy requiring government employees to annually reaffirm their union membership before unions can deduct dues, triggering union lawsuits. Meanwhile, Pennsylvania's unions agreed to end a practice that gave workers only a short time to opt out of membership following a lawsuit from dissident employees.  Semmens said his client is prepared to return to the Supreme Court to secure his refund if that's what it takes.  "This exact case has been to the Supreme Court once," he said. "Whichever way it comes out at the court of appeals here, I suspect the side that doesn't win would ask the Supreme Court to take it."


hitandrun--2019-04-29--Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being Reason Ro

Harris Wants to Ban Right-to-Work Laws, Chooses Union Endorsements Over Worker Well-Being: Reason Roundup

Kamala Harris wants to make absolutely sure that we know she's an authoritarian. Fresh off announcing that as president she would override Congress to get her way on gun policy, the Democratic senator from California and 2020 presidential hopeful said she would use executive power to push for bans on state laws she opposes, too.  Speaking to a Service Employees International Union (SEIU) gathering on Saturday, Harris spoke of the need for "banning right-to-work laws" that nearly half of states have enacted and how, as president, she would use both her "bully pulpit" and "executive authority" to accomplish that.  Right-to-work laws are often framed by Democrats as an anti-worker policy. In fact, all they say is that employees can't be told to join a union or pay union fees as a condition of employment. They're still welcome to do so; they just have to make that choice for themselves.  In the topsy-turvy world of Harris and other Democrats, however, giving workers options is no good. If elite forces in Washington think workers would be better off joining unions, then they're just going to override the will of individual employees and state governments across the country. Do as they say! Or else! For your own good.  Sure, some low-income workers might think their hard-earned dollars are better spent on securing immediate material well-being for them and their families. But Harris thinks their dollars would be better off with a massive and bloated international organization that can help her presidential campaign. I mean, have you seen SEIU's massive mansion across the street from the White House? How could any group so swampy be wrong?  Right to work is a bugbear to union leaders because it crimps their finances for political spending, and Ms. Harris is eager to get the endorsement of the SEIU and other major unions. Her first big policy proposal, unveiled in March, would have the feds give teachers across the country an average pay raise of $13,500 a year. That payoff to the teachers unions would cost federal taxpayers some $315 billion over 10 years, not including what states would have to contribute to qualify for these Harris Grants. The big story of the 2020 campaign so far is the Democratic Party's lurch to the left, and Ms. Harris's pitch against right to work is evidence that her goal is entrenching union power rather than assisting workers.  Several years ago, Reason ran a series of articles on whether libertarians should support right-to-work laws. Here's Shikha Dalmia making that case that yes, "right to work laws are indeed libertarian." Meanwhile, contributors Sheldon Richman and J.D. Tuccille make a libertarian case against right-to-work laws, arguing that they interfere with freedom of contract, here and here.  The state's presence was minimal, and villagers sustained themselves through farming and remittances from relatives working in the Persian Gulf. Even in retrospect, nothing in those days indicated that my home province would become the main transit hub for jihadists moving from Syria into Iraq after the 2003 invasion, or the site of the Islamic State's final battle as a caliphate.  Now Hassan struggles "to connect images from my past with the reality of today," he writes in The Atlantic. Read the whole thing here.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown (elizabeth.brown@reason.com)


hitandrun--2019-07-31--Pete Buttigiegs Plan to Unionize Gig Economy Workers Will Destroy the Gig Economy

Pete Buttigieg's Plan to Unionize Gig Economy Workers Will Destroy the Gig Economy

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg reiterated his vision to let gig economy workers unionize during the second round of Democratic primary debates on Tuesday night in Detroit.  "There are people in the gig economy who go through more jobs in a week than my parents went through in their lifetime," said Buttigieg to a round of applause. "It's why I've proposed that we allow gig workers to unionize because a gig is a job and a worker is a worker."  The remark reflects one of his recent proposals, which centers around "empowering workers in a changing economy" by increasing workplace protections, particularly for those who choose to work in the gig economy. As it stands, Buttigieg sees their status as too precarious.  But in order to successfully execute that plan, the presidential hopeful would need to ensure those workers are reclassified as fully-fledged employees, as opposed to independent contractors. That may be a tough sell: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) already ruled that Uber drivers cannot unionize because they are independent contractors, and the Department of Labor similarly declined to classify gig economy participants as employees. Both agencies said that those individuals are free to work when they please, can set their own hours when it best suits them, and are permitted to work for competing companies. Those criteria, and several others, make them contractors.  Changing their employment status would be fairly devastating to the gig economy business model that makes that work possible and those services accessible and affordable. Mandating employee status for all workers would allow them to unionize, yes, but it would also require those app companies to provide benefits and supply workers with a minimum wage.  Buttigieg says that would be a good thing. But such a move would send labor costs through the roof, catalyzing a significant spikes in prices—something that will disproportionately affect low-income individuals, who benefit immensely from access to these services. Higher prices would reduce demand and make such jobs less available. In New York City, 90 percent of app-based drivers are first-generation immigrants, a testament to the opportunity such apps give the disadvantaged. With Buttigieg's plan, those opportunities would surely shrink.  And as Reason's Nick Gillespie points out, private sector union participation is small, a trend that's unlikely to reverse itself. As the country continues to move away from industrialized labor, so, too, have workers moved away from unionization.


inquisitr--2019-09-28--Elizabeth Warren Campaign Workers Reach Tentative Deal To Unionize After Four Months Of Negotiations

So far, the only other campaign to reach this step in the unionizing process is Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.  Individuals working for the campaign of Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat running for president, announced Saturday that they had reached a tentative collective bargaining agreement to unionize, The Hill reported.  According to The Hill report, Warren campaign staffers reached a bargaining agreement with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which requires base pay for Warren’s organizers to be set at $4,175 per month. The tentative agreement also requires organizers be given a cell phone stipend, sets a 60 hour per week limit on work, and mandates that staff get at least one day off each week.  The tentative deal comes following a four-month negotiation, per a tweet from ABC News campaign reporter Cheyenne Haslett.  “I’m proud that my campaign has reached an equitable agreement with IBEW 2320 and I’m grateful to the bargaining teams for getting us there,” the Democratic presidential hopeful said. “Every worker who wants to join a union, bargain collectively, and make their voice heard should have a chance to do so. IBEW has long fought for the dignity of working people, and we’re proud to be part of that tradition.”  So far, the only other campaign to reach this step in the unionizing process is Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, whose campaign unionized in May following negotiations. The self-described Democratic Socialist candidate is a public proponent of unions. According to The Hill report, the Sanders campaign deal to unionize tackled issues including access to mental health services, pay transparency, and gender equality.  Sanders and Warren, who are perceived as some of the more progressive candidates in the 2020 Democratic Party primary race due to support of progressive policies like Medicare for All, have gained support in national polls, per a previous report from The Inquisitr. Warren, in particular, has seen growth in recent polls.  As The Inquisitr previously reported, Warren fared well in two polls released earlier this week. A poll conducted by Monmouth University found that Warren was the favored candidate among voters, with 27 percent of support of those polled. Former Vice President Joe Biden, who still leads the crowded field of candidates in many polls, was in 2nd place with 25 percent support.  In that poll, Sanders sat comfortably in 3rd place behind Warren and Biden, with 12 percent of supporters expressing that they favored the Vermont senator. Warren also pulled ahead of Biden in last week’s Des Moines Register/CNN/Mediacom poll.  The poll numbers have seemingly sparked a fire in the Biden campaign, as it sent an email that claimed recent unfavorable polling numbers were worse than news reports that a whistleblower alleged President Trump urged the leader of Ukraine to investigate Biden and his son, Hunter.


newsweek--2019-01-09--What is he talking About Federal Worker Unions Democrats on the Offensive After Trumps Border W

‘What is he talking About?’ Federal Worker Unions, Democrats on the Offensive After Trump’s Border Wall Address

Labor Unions, federal employees and Democrats went on the offensive on Capitol Hill Wednesday following President Donald Trump’s Oval Office address on Tuesday evening, in which he continued to call the southern border situation a “crisis” and demand for more than $5 billion to fund a border wall.  Holding news conferences throughout the morning, federal employee union leaders and Democrats slammed the president’s speech and continued to accuse him of holding the government and hundreds of thousands of its workers hostage.  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, after delivering the Democratic Party's televised rebuttal following Trump’s speech, continued to refute him on Wednesday.  “I don’t think he persuaded a soul with his talk last night,” Schumer said of the president. He “spouted more malice and misinformation," said Pelosi, "and appealed to fear instead of facts. He is now holding the American people hostage to his ineffective, expensive wall and withholding paychecks for hardworking Americans.”  With about 15 federal workers standing behind them, the Democrats continued to repudiate Trump’s repeated claims that “many of those people that won't be receiving a paycheck... agree 100 percent with what I'm doing.”  “Federal employees are absolutely, completely and without reservation opposed to this government shutdown,” said David Cox, president of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). “We oppose being held hostage. We oppose being collateral damage. We oppose the use of extortion instead of reasoned debate. We oppose politicians who think so little of us, our work, and the institutions of government that they think nothing of bringing whole government departments to their knees.”  AFGE represents approximately 700,000 federal workers, who Cox said took home an average of $500 a week.  “I can relate, and I’m sure that the people that are on the receiving end will make adjustments,” Trump told reporters Sunday. “They always do—and they’ll make adjustments.”  Randy Erwin, president of National Federation of Federal Employees, which represents approximately 110,000 blue- and white-collar government employees, expressed scorn over Trump's comments while speaking with reporters alongside House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and other Democrats on Wednesday outside the Capitol.  “Don’t tell us that you can relate. Those words don’t mean anything,” Erwin said. “Show us you can relate by ending this shutdown immediately.”  He continued to slam the president, questioning what Trump meant when he said people would "make adjustments."  “What, exactly, is he talking about?” Erwin asked. “Is he saying they’re not going to fill prescriptions that they can’t afford anymore? Is he going to say that they’re going to start missing payments and ruin their credit? Are they going to turn off the heat in the middle of winter and just tough it out? Those are the kinds of things–that is the predicament that middle-class people are dealing with in this country.”  Currently, there are roughly 800,000 federal employees forgoing paychecks because of the shutdown, 420,000 of whom have continued to work, despite not getting paid. The union announced a lawsuit against the federal government on New Year’s Eve for requiring employees to continue to work without pay, alleging it violated  the Fair Labor Standards Act.  Speaking with Newsweek after a news conference with Pelosi and Schumer, Cox said that despite the president’s unwillingness to budge on his funding demand, he wanted the Democratic leadership to “continue to move forward with the bills that they have sent to the Senate.”  The House passed a spending package January 3 to fund the government through September 30, except for Homeland Security, which would be funded through February 8. The bill included $1.3 billion for border security but did not include funding for a wall, which has been a sticking point in the budget negotiations.  On Wednesday, the House is expected to pass the same spending bills, this time separately, in an attempt to end the shutdown. The GOP-controlled Senate passed the same spending bills before the shutdown that began last month before Trump reversed and demanded more than $5 billion for a border wall.  “Allow the negotiations to take place, but do not hold 800,000 hardworking federal employees hostage. That’s what he is doing," Cox said of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has yet to put the House bills to a vote.  The House is “sending the Republicans bills. They voted for them. I don’t know why they would not vote for them again,” Cox added.  Trump had lunch with Senate GOP members Wednesday, while Pelosi said she and other Democratic leaders would head to the White House later in the day to meet with him.