|
Starbucks fights tax aimed at
funding childrens’ education
By Andrew Buncombe
Aug. 20— In Seattle, they are waging the great espresso
war of 2003. It is a conflict pitting Starbucks, the giant that introduced
the world to double decaf cappuccinos, against many of its own customers.
It is a conflict in which Seattleites are being denounced by friends
and neighbors as either self-hating coffee drinkers or foamed-topped,
penny-pinching misers.
The bone of contention is a proposed “latte tax,” a 10-cent
levy on all espresso-based coffee drinks to be put before Seattle voters
on Sept. 16. Proceeds from the tax would go to the city’s cash-strapped
early education programs for pre-school children.
Proponents of the measure say it is a near-painless way to raise revenue
for a good cause. As John Burbank, the economic policy analyst who had
the idea, likes to say: “One of the good things about Seattle is
we love our coffee and we love our kids. So let’s make that connection.”
But Starbucks and the Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce have formed
Joined to Oppose the Latte Tax, or Jolt. To them, the 10-cent tax is
irrational, discriminatory and threatens to unleash a slew of seemingly
innocuous levies on popular consumer items.
“We’re concerned this... would set a precedent for taxing
different products or services at different rates, to pay for totally
unrelated programs,” Jolt spokeswoman Stephanie Newman said.
What, she asked, if bottled water suddenly cost 25 cents more to pay
for immunization programs, or Seattle Mariners’ baseball tickets
went up $2 to pay for literacy programs? To which Burbank and others
say these would hardly be the end of the world, and might save vital
social services amid economic gloom and budget shortfalls.
The tax originated with a petition signed by 20,000 people last year.
Seattle is unusual in opting to pay more for something it famously loves.
These taxes are usually directed at perceived social evils, say, alcohol
or cigarettes.
Opinion polls suggest support for the tax as high as 74 percent, and
Burbank’s campaign has raised $100,000. Jolt has raised only $70,000,
much of it from out-of-town interests, presumably corporations worried
that latte taxes and similarly horrifying proposals could be coming
to their city soon, too.
Source: Independent (UK)
Muslim, Arab families
await papers, deportation
By Haider Rizvi
New York City, New York, Aug. 22 (IPS)— “Look at him.
I don’t understand why they are punishing this innocent one,”
says Rukhsana Saeed, pointing to her infant son who cries in her lap,
his small hands holding a plastic bottle filled with milk.
Separated from her husband for more than 10 years, Saeed, a mother of
three, came to the United States in April last year, but within 12 months
the couple were separated again.
“This all happened in March this year. They raided our apartment
in the morning. My husband woke me up. He was crying. He said to me,
‘please protect me. They are going to put me in jail’,”
she says, tears constantly rolling down her cheeks.
“I said, ‘how could I protect you’? I just cried and
cried. The kids were crying too ... but they took him away.”
Saeed’s husband was no hardened criminal, and he had no links to
any terrorist organization. He was simply one of the millions of economic
immigrants who come to the “land of the free” dreaming of
prosperity and a bright future for their children, say neighbors and
lawyers familiar with the family’s plight.
Sitting in a shady apartment that immigrant rights activists have converted
into what they call a “legal clinic,” located in one of New
York’s working-class neighborhoods, Saeed admits that her husband
lived in the United States on fake documents but adds, “He worked
hard. He was a good father.”
Rights activists familiar with the case say Mohammed Saeed, 43, was
held for more than one month before he was deported to Pakistan, after
officials dug out his file that had been buried for 10 years. During
his detention he was not allowed to telephone his family members.
“This is happening in clear violation of the US constitution. This
is a policy of discrimination and bias towards Muslim and Arab immigrants,
who have nothing to do with the terrorist acts of Sept. 11,” said
Bobby Khan, an organizer at the Coney Island Project, a group providing
legal help to the families of immigrants who are in detention or expect
to be deported.
Beginning last year, the Department of Homeland Security ordered adult
males from 24 Arab and Muslim countries (and North Korea) to visit immigration
offices to be fingerprinted, photographed and interrogated, or face
deportation and criminal prosecution.
Hundreds of people who answered that call were detained. They were reportedly
kept in overcrowded cells and many were denied food, sleep and necessary
medicine. Among those arrested and jailed were large numbers who had
properly applied for visas, but whose paperwork was pending.
“Many of these people applied to adjust their immigration status
under the ‘safe harbor’ provision, a program designed to keep
families together, which was strongly supported by President George
W. Bush,” said a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU), the oldest US civil rights group.
Immigration officials say more than 13,000 men (about 16 percent of
those who answered the “special registration”) are likely
to be deported. But they admit that only a few of those men have been
linked to terrorism.
“The dramatic rise in deportations is a side effect, not an objective
of the registration program,” Bill Srassberger, a Homeland Security
spokesman told the Washington Post newspaper in July.
“Any time an immigration officer comes into contact with someone
who is unlawfully present, they do have a responsibility to place that
person in deportation proceedings.”
But activists say the process creates a deportation trap for immigrants.
“It is causing a lot of fear and apprehension,” said Ibrahim
Hooper, a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, in
a statement. “It creates a sense of being besieged.”
“I fear they are going to deport me in October,” said Mian
Ahmed, a 48-year-old Pakistani immigrant who works at a New York area
grocery store. “I have been waiting for work authorization for
the past two years. But so far there has been no word from the labor
department. I don’t know what to do.”
Sitting next to Rukhsana Saeed at the legal clinic is a young Pakistani
man who is equally frustrated and fearful. Sajjad (who refused to give
his last name), 26, says he has been in the country for about 18 years.
His authorization has been pending since late 1980s, but now he has
been served with deportation orders.
According to government statistics, about 13,000 people from Middle
Eastern and Muslim countries are deported annually, but that number
has more than doubled after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
More than 5,000 Pakistanis have also fled the United States for Canada
since 9/11, said a report this week in the Philadelphia Inquirer newspaper.
Among nations included in the special registration were: Afghanistan,
Algeria, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia,
Syria, Tunisia, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
Khan says his group has come into contact with the families of about
300 detainees and more than 200 deportees. “Many of these people
have been cheated by the immigration authorities because they were not
properly informed about the procedures,” he says.
Saeed says it has become increasingly hard to feed and clothe her children
since her husband was deported. Two of her elder children, who are enrolled
in a local public school, keep asking when their father will return.
“I don’t know to what to tell them. I just make false promises
to them,” she said.
Holding an eviction notice from the landlord, she is also worried about
losing the family’s one-bedroom apartment, but says she cannot
telephone her husband in Pakistan, because, “I have to choose between
a long-distance phone card and the food for my kids.”
She sees no future for her children in Pakistan; the infant is a US
citizen.
“There’s poverty, guns, and sectarian violence in the city
I came from. I just dream ... I just pray to God that one day Saeed
will be back among us. I don’t understand why they separated us.”
Lawsuit for Gulf War veterans
targets WMD businesses
By Heather Wokusch
Aug. 22— A lawsuit on behalf of over 100,000 Gulf War veterans
has the Bush administration on edge and businesses running for cover.
The class action suit names 11 companies and 33 banks alleged to have
helped Iraq with its chemical weapons program in the 1980s, despite
knowledge Saddam Hussein was actively using WMD against both Iranians
and his own people.
At the time, Reagan’s Middle East envoy was one Donald Rumsfeld,
hard at work opening doors for Hussein’s regime to purchase millions
in aircraft, hardware and other potential weaponry.
But after the invasion of Kuwait bumped Hussein from Pentagon friend
to the “Most Wanted” list, coalition forces got stuck with
the nasty task of dealing with the same chemical weapons that businesses
had profited by helping Iraq amass.
Unfortunately, most Gulf War troops didn’t realize that in destroying
Hussein’s WMD, they would also be endangering their own lives.
In the 1991 air war against Iraq, coalition forces bombed weapons production
facilities and ammunition dumps, subjecting themselves to widespread
and unexpected fallout; in one disastrous case, over 100,000 service
members were exposed to sarin nerve gas when the US military improperly
blew up chemical weapons sites in Khamisiyah.
Today, it is estimated that up to half of the 697,000 Gulf War veterans
are sick, many suffering from a variety of symptoms collectively known
as Gulf War Illness. The US Department of Defense (DOD) has been repeatedly
criticized for mishandling the veterans’ health complaints, often
citing lack of diagnosis as justification for withholding treatment
and compensation.
However, recent medical research has established causal links between
exposure to chemical warfare agents, Gulf War Illness and birth defects
among veterans’ children.
It’s those links attorneys Gary Pitts and Kenneth McCallion will
address. Maintaining “companies and banks have not yet had any
negative consequences for helping Saddam Hussein build his chemical
weapons of mass destruction,” Pitts and McCallion claim the lawsuit
is not only “to seek just compensation for the poisoned veterans
and their birth-defected children, it is to deter companies from engaging
in this kind of behavior in the future.”
And in light of today’s conflict in Iraq, the lawsuit’s implications
are both broad-reaching and ominous. At least 100 Gulf War II troops
have already contracted a “mystery” pneumonia-like illness
the US Department of Defense can’t properly diagnose, and the families
of soldiers based in Iraq are demanding answers. Michael Neusche describes
how his 20-year-old son Josh, a former track star from Missouri, wrote
home from active duty in Iraq on June 26 saying he would be doing a
secretive “hauling” mission. By July 1, Josh had fallen into
a coma. The military promptly reclassified Josh as “medically retired,”
thus stripping him and his family of entitlements. On July 12, Josh
died from what the Pentagon called “other causes.”
In a similar case, Zeferino E. Colungo, a 20-year-old from Texas, died
after battling an unexplained pneumonia-like illness. In a recent letter
to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the Colungo family says, “We
deserve to know why a healthy young man who was supposedly screened
and determined fit for deployment would suddenly die. It is our right
to receive honest answers.”
It’s clear the DOD has some explaining to do; GW II troops must
not be forced to receive the same medical run-around suffered by their
predecessors.
The lawsuit on behalf of Gulf War veterans, however, ups the ante considerably
— this time not only the DOD is under fire. By targeting companies
and banks for compensation, veterans are sending the weapons industry
a clear warning: it’s getting dangerous to profit by helping dubious
governments produce WMD.
Source: www.CommonDreams.org
|
