Affordable health care for all Americans is one of the goals of America In Solidarity. Every time we meet with a member of Congress, this issue is brought up as it alones bankrupts, kills or severely disrupts the quality of life for thousands of working families in Washington State. HR 676 is the gold standard of progressive legislation proposed in Congress that would provide a single-payer national plan for every American. This past Monday, there was a message left on our voicemail that stated "Congressman Dicks has signed on to be a cosponsor of HR 676, thought you should be one of the first to know."

Nearly 400 people rallied in Tacoma, joining cities across the nation, in a call for affordable health care. America In Solidarity joined a wide range of faith, labor and community groups in the rally and march that took place on May 30th. Among the speakers were Tacoma Mayor Bill Baarsma, City Councilmember Marilyn Strickland, State Representatives Tami Green and Dawn Morrell, and Congressman Adam Smith.

Join hundreds of your fellow residents of Tacoma and Pierce County to let our elected leaders know that 2009 is the year that the United States gives the right to accessible and affordable health care to all of its citizens.

Rally and march on May 30th at 9:30am at First United Methodist Church.

For more info, go to the official rally website.

Join us for our 6th Annual Tacoma-Pierce County May Day Celebration. This year's event will feature:a panel discussion about the economic crisis' impact on working families with State Representative Larry Seaquist, Pierce Co.Councilmember Tim Farrell and Tacoma City Council member Marilyn Strickland. There will be a spaghetti feed with all profits going to support America In Solidarity's scholarship fund.

It'll be at 7pm on Friday May 1st at First United Methodist Church in Tacoma (621 Tacoma Ave., two blocks north of the County-City building).

AIS volunteer Bill Gimbel who works at the Government Printing Office in Washington D.C. is asking his fellow AIS volunteers to write their U.S. Representatives and Senators to support Tony Zagami for nomination as Public Printer of the United States.
The previous Bush appointee was nothing but trouble for the union members that work at the GPO, and Gimbel feels that Zagami would work favorably with the unions there.
He sent the following message:
In his bid to secure the nomination for Public Printer of the United States, the head of the U. S. Government Printing Office (GPO) in the Obama-Biden Administration, Anthony J. “Tony” Zagami has gained the support of the following Members of Congress, and International/National Labor Unions (as well as their local unions at the GPO).  All have written the White House with letters of support and recommendation on his behalf.  In addition to those listed above, many other private individuals, local labor unions, and organizations, some affiliated with or maintaining an interest in GPO, also have written letters to the Obama-Biden Administration on behalf of Tony Zagami.
 
1.  United States Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts
2.  United states Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia
3.  United States Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii
4.  United States Senator Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland
5.  United States Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland
6.  United States Congresswoman Donna L. Edwards of Maryland
7.  United States Congressman Christopher Van Hollen of Maryland
8.  United States Congressman Gerald E. Connolly of Northern Virginia
9.  United States Congressman James P. Moran of Northern Virginia
10.  The International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT)
11.  The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)
12.  The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM)
13.  The National Fraternal Order of Police (FOP)
14.  The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)
 

NOTE:  At the present time, other Members of Congress, individuals, and organizations are reviewing Tony Zagami’s information, thus the above list of supporters for his nomination is likely to increase in the future.   

The office of the U.S. Trade Representative has said it wants to move forward this year with the Panama Free Trade Agreement -- a trade deal negotiated by the Bush administration that repeats most of the same major problems found in NAFTA and CAFTA. Bush's Panama FTA represents business-as-usual on trade, and is not the type of change that voters were promised.

Here are a few good reasons why the Panama FTA should be opposed:

• Panama's Tax Haven Status: Panama's economy thrives on banking secrecy, and its "comparative advantage" rests on the ease with which U.S. companies can create subsidiaries there to evade U.S. taxes. A Government Accountability Office study identified Panama as one of eight countries -- and the only current or prospective FTA partner -- that was listed on all of the major tax-haven watchdog lists. Panama has long been a key target of the OECD and other tax transparency entities for its resistance to international norms in combating tax evasion and money laundering. Given the role that banking secrecy played in the global financial meltdown, a trade agreement with Panama should be conditioned on much greater regulation and transparency within its financial sector.
• Threats to U.S. Sovereignty: The investment chapters in the Panama FTA allow foreign corporations to challenge food safety rules, responsible land use decisions, environmental protection initiatives, banking regulations and other public interest policies as "barriers to trade" through closed trade tribunals that circumvent the U.S. judicial system. Under NAFTA alone, more than 40 complaints, seeking $28 billion in damages have already been filed against existing public policies. The Panama FTA's procurement provisions further undermine U.S. "Buy American" and "Buy Local" purchasing preferences, and threaten procurement policies with environmental and social goals.
• Inadequate Labor and Environmental Standards: The Panama FTA includes the modestly-improved labor and environmental standards of the Peru FTA, rather than the virtually non-existent standards of NAFTA and CAFTA. Nonethless, the experience of the Peru FTA demonstrates that these standards are still far from adequate to protect working people or the environment. The Peru FTA was implemented in early 2009 without Peru improving its labor law to meet International Labor Organization standards as supposedly required, and after Peru rolled back environmental protections that existed prior to the FTA's signing. Stronger labor and environmental standards must be added to the Panama FTA's core text in order to avoid these clear failures.
• Increased Poverty Abroad: Like NAFTA and CAFTA before it, the Panama FTA is expected to increase rural poverty by forcing small Panamanian farmers out of business in competition with subsidized food imports from U.S. transnationals. For this reason, the FTA is expected to increase hunger, drug cultivation and undocumented migration. In addition, Bush's FTA includes NAFTA-style provisions that undermine Panama's right to obtainaffordable medications for its impoverished citizens.

America In Solidarity is extending the deadline for receiving scholarship entries to May 1st. Due to a family tragedy, our scholarship coordinator has not had the opportunity to alert sources to the extent we would like to. Also, the economic crisis has hit this organization like most non-profits across the country, and we would like another month to try to raise more money for our scholarship program. Over the past three years, America In Solidarity has given out $4,000 a year in scholarships, but currently we are short of our fundraising projections.

America In Solidarity sponsored a community forum called “Health Care and the Economic Crisis” on March 2nd at the University of Puget Sound in Tacoma. The forum looked at proposed health care cuts, asked for input from attendees, and concluded with a community vote on the importance of each program.
There were approximately 25 attendees and represented a variety of ages from college students to retirees; also present were nearly a dozen people who work in the health care industry as either providers, advocates or management. We provided a list of 11 potential cuts as stated by Governor Gregoire’s proposed budget. When asked to vote upon programs to cut, there was much resistance as one person proclaimed “Who am I throwing out of the lifeboat?” Several attendees refused to vote on a cut, instead writing on the side: No cuts to health care.
After a few short presentations, a lively discussion followed with many participants agreeing with the comment, “It is a shame we are looking at a list like this.” Some of the discussion points and anecdotes include: