Revised
[MS Word version -
PDF version]
The approach of our non-voting Delegate to the House, Eleanor Holmes
Norton, to winning voting representation and statehood has been highly problematic,
more part of the problem than a contribution to an effective struggle for full
democracy. Along with her demand to end federal taxation without representation,
her proposal for "virtual statehood" that includes the demands for
voting representation, budgetary and legislative autonomy, are all unlikely
to be passed by Congress in the near future, but even if implemented would be
subject to cancellation in any future Congressional session. The very offer
to trade a part of our democratic rights for money in the form of federal tax
exemption is itself an insult to DC residents. Moreover, in the very unlikely
event that federal tax exemption would be passed by Congress, such an exemption
would mainly benefit the wealthy and be an invitation for accelerated gentrification
as wealthy tax dodgers move in. In addition, her strategy of winning full voting
representation without full democracy is itself a diversion from the struggle
for statehood itself. In the unlikely event that full representation alone will
be achieved, apparently possible only by a Constitutional Amendment, a formidable
obstacle would thereby be created to achieving full democracy in the form of
DC Statehood. Likewise the prospect is bleak for passage of Norton's bill for
a non-resident tax credit that would generate some $400 million in additional
revenue for the District, less than 1/4 of our obligated but denied federal
payment (cut off by virtue of the Revitalization Act she supported in 1997).
Her collusion with Gingrich in the creation of the Control Board is another
example of her negative record with respect to furthering the struggle for self-determination.
While some may argue in her defense that she prevented an even more egregious
erosion of our political rights under Home Rule, I submit she should have at
the very least brought the choices forward for public discussion in town meetings
in every ward before concluding the nefarious deal with Newt presented at their
love-in at Eastern High School (we could dream of a Delegate who would use the
resources of her office to actually organize mass resistance!).
Just updated, the platform of DC Statehood Green Party (DCSGP) avoids the false
promises of "virtual statehood" and voting representation without
achieving full democracy that would make us equal to citizens of all the other
states of the United States: "We demand statehood which would give us democracy
and self-government including: Local authority within the District over our
three branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial. The elimination
of all Federal government committees and sub-committees that have oversight
or appropriation power over D.C. government. Complete and equal voting representation
in the United States Congress." But why hasn't the movement for full democracy
for our citizens achieved its objective by now? The main theme I am arguing
here is that there is a profound synergy between the struggles for political,
social and economic human rights, that a campaign for statehood, that is for
our political rights, is unwinnable in the near future without the linkage of
all three aspects of the human rights struggle.
While our colonial status has been a significant factor in the assaults on our
human rights, consider this: the horrible health statistics of the District
and indices of growing income inequality are similar to those of
In 1999, the latest data available from IRS, some 75% of District taxpayers
earned less than $50,000/year (adjusted gross income). Most of this population
constitutes the working class majority of the District, and I include in this
category a large fraction of the so-called middle class, the working poor and
TANF recipients and of course most of the recent immigrant population, documented
and undocumented. They along with small business people have the most to gain
from statehood, but have been largely unorganized by either labor or democracy
advocates. Part of the problem is the effect of stagnant or even declining real
incomes of this majority in the last decade (while the income of the wealthy
has been booming), bringing many below the self-sufficiency level, that is above
the federal poverty level but insufficient to pay the bills in a city with an
eroding stock of affordable housing.
The Self-Sufficiency Standard is a far more realistic measure of a minimum adequate
income for individuals and families to get by in the District than the federal
poverty level (The Self-Sufficiency Standard for the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan
Area, 1999, Diana Pearce and Jennifer Brooks, Wider Opportunities for Women).
For example, the annual income required to cover all costs without public or
private subsidies to be truly self-sufficient is $19-36K above the federal poverty
level for a family of four (two adults, two children; the range depends on the
age/needs of the children). Approximately 50% of D.C. residents live in families
below the self-sufficiency level (data from 1997-1999 Census Bureau, compiled
by Ed Lazere, CBPP). With many working class residents having
The intersection of race and class is critical to understanding the dynamics
of District political economy (of course I am using the term "race"
to describe the social construct so central to the reproduction of U.S. ruling
class hegemony; skin color differences and other features as well as the social/cultural
histories of each group permit racial identification but not the basis for any
valid biological racial classification). The "chocolate" city is becoming
vanilla, though still mocha (African Americans still constitute the majority
of DC residents, about 60%). The violations of human rights in the District
are profoundly racist given the racial composition of the recipients of the
most egregious effects of these violations, particularly children of color (see
Appendix for documentation). This institutionalized racism is "an emperor
with no clothes" outside the acceptable political discourse to the media
opinion makers. Increasing polarization of rich and poor divides the community
along both class and race lines.
Of course, given the political economy of
Up to recently with the campaign to save DC General, the political discourse
has been dominated by advocates of the corporate agenda, albeit with a "bowtie
spin" claiming to serve all residents. Since 1994, devastating budget cuts
in the social safety net for our children, poor, disabled and elderly were forced
by the Control Board with the unfortunate compliance of our elected District
government. The Control Board was created by Congress on the pretext of eliminating
a large budget deficit. But the real agenda of this unelected body has become
clear: to lubricate the wheels of finance capital, by promoting privatization,
weakening income security for workers and the poor, increasing economic inequality
and the "misery index", neoliberal globalization come home.
Mayor Tony Williams was the Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") of the
unelected Control Board. As CFO he recommended the hurtful budget cuts in the
safety net, with the general compliance of our elected District government.
Our mainstream media, projected this new arrival to DC, with significant financial
backing by individuals and organizations associated with regional corporate
interests (the Federal City Council), into the Mayor’s office. The working class
majority, particularly east of the Anacostia River, was demoralized by the neoliberal
assaults that remained largely unchallenged by any on the Council (with his
weak record and program, Chavous could not bring out the Barry vote that would
have beaten Williams in the Democratic Primary in 1998). With growing gentrification
and migration of affluent whites into and the black working class out of the
District, our City Council is moving to a vanilla complexion. Now Catania is
being mentioned as an attractive candidate for the next Mayor by some media
pundits, and even by politicos who have articulated the centrality of race in
District politics, and in spite of his conservative record on economic issues
(e.g., a leading advocate for the Tax Parity Act of 1999, the tax cut for the
wealthy).
Our politicians have a convenient subtext to divide our working class which
is predominantly people of color: the "undesirables", i.e., the so-called
"underclass" of welfare recipients. It is no accident that the
Mayor and Council emphasize attracting "middle class" residents back
to the District. A real anti-poverty program with necessary local funding from
the substantial tax base of the wealthy is simply not an option for these technocrats
carrying out the neoliberal agenda of the Federal City Council. Our Mayor and
many Council members pander to anti-welfare prejudice, almost always with gestures
of real concern for the homeless. The following remarks by Frances Fox Piven
are right on target with respect to this issue:
"The ruling class has kept working poor and welfare recipients
divided by focusing welfare policy on the alleged behavioral defects of welfare
recipients. Rather than debating welfare reform in terms of socio-economic conditions
that force people to welfare, mainstream and conservative policy makers vilify
recipients and blame their welfare dependency on laziness, irresponsibility
and stupidity. To the extent that working people buy into these stereotypical
myths about recipients, they will never see themselves as having the same interests,
despite the fact that many are only a paycheck away from homelessness themselves...
Welfare doesn't regulate the morality of the poor; it is a labor market institution.
It has a systemic impact, and the moral issues have only to do with the fairness
of the choices that women are facing, and not with whether these women are moral!
Public assistance creates a floor under working wages... The lower the floor
for income protection programs, the lower our wages... We need to win back the
social safety net programs and make them better... Unions need to organize
workfare workers." (9/27/97. Piven is the author of Regulating the Poor,
and Poor People's Movements)
With the significant increase in the immigrant population particularly from
The working class majority will be energized and organized by addressing issues
that most impact their lives, i.e., employment, housing, economic security,
health, education, taxation, criminal and urban environmental injustice.
Success is contingent on creating and expanding the institutional resource base
needed for organizing, derived particularly from organized labor and black churches,
along with progressive foundations and the social service sector (but beware
of political strings attached, particularly from corporate-linked boards!).
The political establishment should be challenged to stand up for human needs
rather than cater to the corporate agenda, by utilizing the full rights remaining
under eroded Home Rule. We in the DC Statehood Green Party believe that the
Democratic/Republican establishment will not fulfill the expectations of the
social and economic justice movements which will turn increasingly to our Party
as their electoral expression if we are immersed in their struggles. We are
certainly now moving effectively in this direction by our participation in the
save DC General, housing, education, criminal injustice, and trash transfer
coalitions etc. But success will require qualitatively new levels of Party building,
recruitment of creative talent and expertise, broader coalitions etc.
While we recognized the reality of dictatorial powers of the Control Board,
we never accepted the legitimacy of this antidemocratic "Junta" which
imposed devastating budget cuts impacting on children, the poor, elderly, the
disabled, municipal workers and our university UDC. We resisted its authority
and its instruments by both mobilization and legal challenge, by attempting
to organize a progressive political movement and majority coalition independent
of the Democratic and Republican Party machinery. The budget deficit has been
used to explain the necessity of balancing the budget on the back of low income
residents. Since the imposition of the Control Board, our elected officials
told us there is no alternative since we had to balance the budget under Control
Board legislation. However, we have been "sold a bill of goods".
The Council and Mayor consistently maintained that their "hands are tied",
hiding behind the disinformation regarding our local tax base and rhetorical
support for a commuter tax that Congress blocks. Our elected leadership continued
to submit to the Control Board dictatorship - the alternative was always resistance,
with our elected officials, including our delegate to Congress giving moral
and political leadership.
For example, the Mayor/City Council could have sent forward its own recommended
budget to Congress, instead of an austerity joint consensus budget with the
Control Board, increasing rather than cutting funding to essential programs,
while still balancing the budget, a requirement of the Control Board legislation.
Budgets could have been balanced by restructuring our local taxes, drawing needed
revenue from the real tax base of the District, the booming income of the wealthy,
as well as a reorientation away from economic development driven from the corporate
sector (e.g., Convention Center). Instead the Tax Parity Act of 1999, a tax
cut strongly favoring business and wealthy individuals, was passed; according
to latest CFO projections, when fully phased in Tax Parity will reduce revenue
by a cumulative total of nearly $1 billion.
In 2000 when Chavous was urged to support repeal of Tax Parity, he said there
was no guarantee that even $1 billion in extra revenue would be used for programs
beneficial to the people of the District. True, but it is hard to imagine how
such extra revenue could be generated without empowering the working class majority
of the District going hand in hand with their articulation of new priorities
for the budget and economic development. In the hypothetical and unlikely event
that Congress suddenly passes say Norton's tax credit for non-resident employees,
giving us a $400 million windfall in extra revenue, under the present political
regime it is likely that most would go to programs fostering further gentrification
and economic development following the agenda of the Federal City Council.
Changing the District's budgetary priorities requires empowerment of those
who would benefit most by such change.
Until the District achieves statehood or temporary budgetary and legislative
autonomy, all legislation is subject to Congressional review. But here is where
real leadership from a future Delegate to Congress and progressive City Council
and Mayor comes in, building a broad coalition of labor, child advocates, churches
and their allies, a coalition that could mobilize militant direct action, "lighting
a fire" under Congress. The offices of our elected officials should be
organizing centers for this activity! Every lever available under the Home Rule
Charter should be used in the struggle for achieving human rights in the District.
There was never an excuse for our elected officials to stand paralyzed and compliant
before the authority of the Control Board and Congress. Can we blame this cowardice
on a neocolonial psychology? Perhaps in part, but our elected leaders with rare
exceptions were always beholden to the campaign contributions and agenda of
the regional corporate elite. Now thanks to the pressure of labor community
coalition to save DC General, and the immanent demise of Control Board oversight
(?), the Council has shown some signs of resistance to the Mayor and Control
Board dictates.
But we face a formidable challenge. With a growing lack of affordable housing
for most residents, the construction of luxury apartments and the Convention
Center is highest on the agenda of real estate interests in the District. If
unchallenged by an effective labor community coalition, "economic resurgence"
will continue to benefit the wealthy while driving out the working class of
the District.
With the Control Board gone, the regional corporate agenda will still be imposed
on the District unless the power of a labor community coalition is asserted.
The assertion of this countervailing power is an immediate priority. While all
U.S. citizens should have voting representation in Congress, I submit that statehood
should not be supported for a hypothetical future District that is predominantly
affluent and white; retrocession would be the just solution for this future
(does Orange County, California deserve statehood?).
There are of course other dimensions to our struggle for statehood, particularly
gaining regional, national and international solidarity. Support of Maryland
and
The DC Statehood Green Party joined by Standup for Democracy have launched
a global online petition to the UN Commission on Human Rights for DC Statehood
and Human Rights. Sign it and spread the news to your friends and relatives!
Online Petition for DC Statehood and Human Rights: http://www.dcstatehoodgreen.org
We are internationalizing our struggle for our basic human rights! The goal
of this global outreach initiative is to present our case at a hearing of the
UN Commission on Human Rights, while in the process making our case to the global
community and of course the people of our nation. This is the first time the
global community as a whole will hear our case. This initiative emphasizing
the comprehensive violations of human rights in our community builds on previous
testimony and actions on the same theme, namely Sam Jordan’s presentation and
endorsement of DC self-determination at the meeting of European Greens in 1996,
Tim Cooper's petitions to the OAS and recently at Geneva (UN Committee on the
Elimination of Racial Discrimination), focusing on the denial of our political
rights (particularly the lack of voting representation in our national legislature),
the testimony of Marilyn Preston-Killingham at the UN Sub commission on Promotion
and Protection of Human Rights, 8/14/00, on the violations of our political
rights and their implications to bad health of our residents, as well as the
case made on national violations of economic and social human rights by the
Economic Human Rights Campaign (Kensington Welfare Rights Union) at the UN in
1999, and now the OAS. In addition, a petition to the UN Commission on Human
Rights focusing on
The endorsement of our petition by individuals and organizations around the
world will demonstrate the broad international support for a hearing of our
grievances at the UN Commission on Human Rights. This a the beginning of a sustained
campaign that will of course entail the assemblage of a broad legal team who
will document the evidence of our human rights violations in order to push for
such a hearing. This Commission is really appropriate because the human rights
violations are political, economic and social, not just political as the extremely
important previous efforts of Tim Cooper have focused. Thus, this initiative
will be complementary to any other action. This will have immense moral and
political force. Our government, including Congress will have to feel the heat
of world public opinion in a sustained campaign to achieve a meaningful remedy
to our present lack of political, social and economic human rights. Of course
this petition is also seeking US individual and organizational endorsement,
thereby contributing to our campaign of building national support for Statehood.
We are convinced that this effort will give us the necessary leverage to achieve
a substantial realization of our long denied human rights.
Online Petition for DC Statehood and Human Rights, and more material
on this website: http://www.dcstatehoodgreen.org
Notes
(1) See Anthony D. King, 1990, Urbanism, colonialism, and the world-economy:
cultural and spational foundations of the world urban system, Routledge.
Appendix:
The Reality
While DC’s life expectancy has declined, contrary to national trends, income
inequality has increased. One half of our children live below the poverty level,
as a result of welfare "reform" and impact of inflation since the
1970s. Infant mortality for African Americans remains at twice the national
average. While life expectancy has been increasing nationally in the last 15
years, it has declined in the District. Using the most recent statistics available,
life expectancy for DC men is 10 years below the national average, for women
5 years. For Black men in DC, the life expectancy is now apparently 58 years
or less, for Black women 72. The life expectancy for Black men in the District
is lower than for any nation in this hemisphere except for Haiti (Doug Struck
and Hamil R. Harris, "Death in the City", Washington Post 6/29/98;
David Brown and Avram Goldstein, "Death Knocks Sooner for D.C.'s Black
Men", Washington Post 12/4/97). The District income gap is greater than
any state, or virtually all the nation's major cities, and is the underlying
cause of the poverty and bad health of so many of our residents (see e.g., James
Lardner, "Deadly Disparities", Washington Post 8/16/98). DC’s ratio
of the top fifth to bottom fifth of average income of families with children
is 27 to 1, $203,110 to $7,498, compared to the national ratio of 10 to 1. DC’s
ratio just a decade ago was 16. The middle fifth of family income, averaging
$36,918, has not kept up with inflation (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,
Economic Policy Institute). The same trends have been highlighted in "D.C.
Gap Between Rich, Poor Widening Census Data Show A City Polarized On Several
Scales", by D'Vera Cohn and Sarah Cohen, Washington Post, 8/13/01, B01
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1585-2001Aug12.html): "The
dramatic divisions between the District's haves and have-nots widened over the
1990s, according to new census data that show a growing number of rich and poor
even as the middle class is shrinking." Instead of "trickle down"
economics, we have witnessed an "artesian well" flow of wealth to
the top. This is also demonstrated by IRS statistics for District tax payers,
showing the booming incomes of the wealthy, while low/middle income brackets
stagnate or decline. Meanwhile Congress and the President denies us an obligated
federal payment amounting to at least $1.8 billion per year as well as the ability
to tax the income of non-resident workers.
Catastrophic cuts in the District’s "safety net" have occurred in
the last few years, forced by the austerity regime of the Control Board with
the unfortunate compliance of the City Council and Mayor. "With the city
in better financial shape, Williams said he hopes to begin rebuilding the social
services network for children, seniors and the poor that was devastated by hefty
budget cuts in recent years. 'All of them took a huge cut as we made the policy
choices... to get us out of the financial predicament we faced" (Washington
Post 2/9/99). We are still waiting for the rebuilding of the safety net promised
two years ago. Programs such as Tenants, General Public and Emergency Assistance,
Chore Aid for Seniors and Disabled have not been restored. Homeless Services
remains seriously under funded. Over 50,000 residents remain without any health
coverage, while the Mayor's health insurance program for those under 200% of
poverty remains grossly inadequate and under funded. The destruction of DC General,
our only public hospital, is an assault on the human rights of our residents,
especially our low income and working class majority. The TANF benefit with
entitlements included remains below the federal poverty level. Budgeting for
these programs are literally a matter of life and death.
Human Rights Violations in the District of Columbia, Political, Economic
and Social
In 1996, the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations issued General Comment
25, which held that the status of the residents of the District to be a flagrant
violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular, articles 23,
25 and 26 outline each person’s right to housing, food, education, health care
and a job at a living wage. For example, Article 25 states: "Everyone
has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being
of himself [herself] and his [her] family, including food, clothing, housing,
and medical care and necessary social services...".
The U.S. government, its instrument the Control Board with the acquiescence
of DC government now stand in clear contempt of the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child (signed by U.S. on 2/16/95; the U.S. along with Somalia
are apparently the only nations in the world which have still not ratified this
Convention!) This Convention asserts the following:
"The child has a right to the highest standard of health and medical care attainable. States shall place special emphasis on the provision of primary and preventive health care, public health education and the reduction of infant mortality...Every child has a right to a standard of living adequate for his or her physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development.. The child has a right to leisure, play and participation in cultural and artistic activities."
All of these social
and economic rights have been systematically violated as a result of DC budget
cutting, implementation of the national welfare reform, and the continued denial
of political rights of District residents. For example, Congress continues to
forbid the use of local, public and even some private funds for the District's
clean needle-exchange program to cut short the HIV/AIDS epidemic which now mainly
impacts people of color.
Finally, the continual threat of the reimposition of the death penalty in DC
by federal authorities or Congress is contrary to internationally recognized
standards of human rights. The violations of these human rights are objectively
and profoundly racist since its worst effects are borne by African Americans,
Latinos and other people of color, first of all children, but the rights of
all DC residents are being violated.
------------ END -------------
A paper written to encourage debate!
Revised
[MS
Word version - PDF
version]