Gooey butter cake, the Gateway Arch, the Cardinals, and telling jokes on Halloween. There is no doubt that all of these things remind you of the city of St. Louis, Missouri. But what if, when you thought about St. Louis, you pictured the MetroLink or a MetroBus similar to how we think of the Subway in NYC or the El in Chicago? Well, if St. Louis ever wants public transportation to be as prominent as it is in these two cities, we’ve got a lot of work to do.

Currently our Metro system spans a total of 46 miles throughout St. Louis City, St. Louis County, and St. Clair County (Illinois). Within the MetroLink specifically, ridership has declined 11% since June of 2017. Some of the possible reasons for the decline in ridership include the negative security perceptions of the community, the relocation of the Rams lessening traffic downtown, lower gas prices, and the increase in rideshare services such as Uber and Lyft. So far, Lyft has created $15 million in revenue for local drivers in their 16 months of service in STL. Recently, the company struck a deal with Chaifetz Arena at St. Louis University to create a designated area for Lyft drivers to pick up customers. Just this past August, Lyft provided around 5,000 rides for people during the PGA tour in St. Louis. Rideshare programs like this are generally more appealing to consumers mainly because of the ease at which one can summon a ride through a simple app on their cell phone.

In St. Louis, feeling safe riding a train to and from work is important if we ever want to have a successful public transit system within this city. It’s a given fact that when people feel unsafe using a specific form of transportation, they are more likely to find other methods of transport to get to and from places. According to the Belleville News Democrat (BND), in 2017 there were “1.4 violent crimes, such as homicide or robbery, per 100,000 boardings” on the MetroLink. By comparison, “8.5 people per 100,000 Illinois residents died in a motor vehicle crash” that same year. So, for all the people who believe that everyone driving their own car to and from work would be safer, that’s not necessarily true.

Currently, our MetroLink stations have no turnstiles on their platforms, which makes it easier for people to sneak onto the trains. Every now and then, there are fare inspectors who will randomly ask riders to show their time stamped ticket as proof that they paid for the ride, but this becomes more of a challenge when trains get super crowded. An additional safety concern is that there are currently no connecting train cars for police or passengers to move between while the train is moving. This means that it is harder for passengers to escape possible danger that arises as the train is in motion.

While many of these concerns can be solved through the reconstruction of trains and stations, there are still safety concerns regarding policing policies throughout the system. For instance, the Metro security guards don’t share a common radio frequency with the local police departments, nor is there a common radio system shared among the three different security jurisdictions of St. Louis City, St. Louis County, and St. Clair County. If this did exist, it would make it easier to deploy officers when and where it’s necessary if a train is in motion. Other possible improvements to security include adding turnstiles, fences, or some sort of barrier, putting a guard on each platform, or having just a single access point to platforms instead of multiple entry points.

As a response to this growing uncertainty that St. Louisans have towards the MetroLink, St. Louis County officials have decided to delay the study of further expansion of the MetroLink until they have completed an evaluation of security practices used within the system. Keep in mind that the new Cortex station has been the only new station to open in the past 10 years of the MetroLink system. Going back to the security assessment, it will be carried out by an engineering company named WSP USA. This investigation of the 38 MetroLink stations in MO/IL will include looking at the lack of coordination between local municipalities across the system and reviewing the general policies of each police force. The study is expected to be completed by January 2019.

On the other side of the Mississippi in St. Clair County, they have been actively implementing new measures to increase safety on their trains. An example being that they have a deputy on every train from 5:00PM – 1:00AM in locations where higher crime has been reported. As a result of this, there has been a 7% decrease in crime on the MetroLink in this county. Both STL City and STL County need to take note and recognize that if they want to see more people taking transit, then they better step up their game and patrol more officers.

Throughout all the chaos of trying to increase public transit use, there is one group, Citizens for Modern Transit (CMT), that has been somewhat successful. The purpose of this group is to “…lead efforts for an integrated, affordable, and convenient public transportation system with light rail expansion as the critical component that will drive economic growth to improve quality of life in the St. Louis region. One of their more popular programs is called “Try and Ride” which helps first time riders become more familiar with the Metro system. So far, they have helped over 5,800 people through providing services such as personalized route information, free fare for an entire month, and registration in the Guaranteed Ride Program. This programs allows travelers to use ride-hailing services such as Lyft or Uber in case of sickness, unscheduled overtime at work, other personal emergencies, etc. CMT will provide up to $60 per ride in these instances.

Of course will always be pros and cons to public transportation, but for a city currently in the midst of a battle over public transit, privatizing our local airport may not be the best idea. Currently, there is an active push to privatize St. Louis Lambert International Airport, which falls within St. Louis City jurisdiction. The headliner for this project is Rex Sinquefield, a well-known financial contributor to political campaigns in Missouri. His nonprofit organization, Grow Missouri, helped pay for STL’s approved application sent to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This whole idea of privatizing the airport was introduced in early 2017 when Mayor Slay was still in office, and has now been passed onto Mayor Krewson by default. St. Louis City has selected members for the FLY314 Coalition of Advisors (supported by Grow MO aka Rex) whose job is to work closely with the Board of Estimate and Apportionment to look at ideas from interested investment partners. Supposedly, their job is to also inform the community and airport operations throughout this process, but unfortunately, it is being done under the radar, hidden from public view. Airport privatization needs to be approved by the FAA, Board of Aldermen, Board of Estimate and Apportionment, and a majority of the airlines at Lambert Airport in order to pass.

However, if St. Louis ever hopes to see the day where public transit is a main method of transportation, we have to use a more efficient process than the one used in the whole Loop trolley ordeal, which by the way, is still not in full service! According to the 2018 State of the St. Louis Workforce Report conducted by St. Louis Community College, one of the top five potential barriers to expanding employment is lack of transportation. Thus, if we are able to make using our public transportation system safer, easier, and generally more enjoyable, it’ll benefit our workforce, eventually improving St. Louis as a whole.

Links:
https://custapp.marketvolt.com/cv.aspx?cm=1198762691&x=51036870&cust=427641269

That Guy | Metro St. Louis

https://www.bnd.com/news/local/article210317754.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/traffic/along-for-the-ride/st-louis-county-delays-study-of-future-metrolink-expansion/article_0637637f-f55f-50b8-b133-b2c104ff6239.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/metrolink-study-to-focus-on-justifying-project-showing-strong-local/article_013f1546-9cad-57fb-8fa1-c051f7363e4f.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/traffic/along-for-the-ride/efforts-to-improve-security-on-metrolink-move-forward-but-slowly/article_1799c5c7-eacf-5ffa-939d-be41cabd6a0c.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/try-try-again-st-louis-county-seeks-firm-to-study/article_cffe1ad1-ad2c-5a2f-8b1d-68cd31c3e09d.html

CMT’s Try & Ride Program

System Maps

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/tough-to-gauge-risk-to-metrolink-riders/article_c3e4a153-4446-50a0-b227-f2a83b191aa5.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2018/08/14/expand-metrolink-ridership-falls-as-subsidies-grow.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/latest-loop-trolley-opening-guesstimate-mid-autumn-at-the-latest/article_bb26b910-778d-5db3-9d83-7db2674d0398.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/top-city-officials-vote-to-begin-exploration-of-privatizing-lambert/article_14e304e2-9f86-5b11-bdd1-dfc67fc30735.html
https://www.masstransitmag.com/press_release/12429091/metro-transit-invites-region-to-celebrate-stl-car-free-day-on-september-21

The post St. Louis public transportation needs to get on track appeared first on Occasional Planet.

What’s in a choice? Options. In order to make a choice, you must have options. As descendants of those who fled religious persecution, many of our forefathers understood the importance of options and the power of choice. That’s why they guaranteed our right to freely exercise religion in the first amendment. I think we can all agree that’s a good thing.

I read an article the other day that I can’t get out of my mind about reproductive care in Catholic hospitals. As @JillFilipovic reports on Al Jazeera America:

Catholic health care providers are bound by the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, a document issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that governs how health care providers should deal with reproductive issues, end-of-life care, the “spiritual responsibility” of Catholic health care and a variety of other concerns. The range of women’s health care options that Catholic facilities offer is limited — sometimes, like when a pregnancy goes wrong, to a deadly degree. And while most doctors have an ethical obligation to inform patients of all their options, Catholic facilities routinely refuse to offer even abortions necessary to save a pregnant woman’s life; their doctors are also barred from telling a patient with a nonviable pregnancy that there are other, often safer options available elsewhere, lest the patient seek care at another facility. (LGBT patients may also run into problems, whether it is with hormone therapy for transgender patients or simply the right of married same-sex partners to be treated as next of kin in making health care decisions).

Some other particularly disturbing accounts from the article:

Tamesha Means, a Michigan woman, had a different, more terrifying experience. Her water broke at 18 weeks, too early for the fetus to be likely to survive. A friend drove her to the closest hospital, a Catholic facility where medical providers told Means the baby would probably not live, but they refused to terminate her pregnancy. She went back a second time and was sent home, despite being at risk of infection and in excruciating pain. The third time she went back, this time bleeding, in pain, running a fever and suffering from an infection from a miscarriage in progress, she was again directed to go home. She went into labor while filling out hospital discharge paperwork. Only then did hospital employees begin to attend to her. She delivered, and the very premature infant died shortly thereafter.

In one case in Arizona, a pregnant mother of four went to a Catholic hospital’s emergency room with a condition so life-threatening that her chances of imminent death without an abortion were nearly certain. She was too ill to transfer to another facility, so the hospital’s administrator, a nun, approved an emergency termination. The woman lived. The nun was excommunicated. Her standing with the church was eventually restored, but the hospital lost its 116-year affiliation with the Catholic Church.

As a 25-year-old woman, who went to a Catholic hospital only a few hours prior to reading that article, it really resonated. I immediately recalled how the woman checking me in had asked if I’d disclose my religious affiliation — I declined. And upon further reflection I realized that my general practitioner/gynecologist’s office was a part of the same Catholic healthcare system as the hospital. At no point was I informed by my doctor that seeking care at a Catholic facility could affect my access to care.

In outrage, I shared this with a friend. She responded, ”I agree that it’s poor healthcare practice, though I do think private hospitals should have the right to make such management choices….just as I think Catholic or Jewish schools can rightfully teach religion and god in a manner that would be completely unacceptable in public school.” Her school analogy challenged my initial gutteral rage reaction, transforming it into thinking. I must say that it also helped that my friend concluded our email with the prompt, “What do you think?”

 Options and choices

When there’s a choice in the matter (a choice defined by the existence of economically and logistically viable options), I don’t really have a problem with the dogma. If parents or children don’t like the way religion is taught at a private school, they’re free to choose a public alternative (even if the quality of education is worse). In this scenario, parents/children can weigh their options and make the best decision for them. If they choose to attend the private school that teaches a religion different than their own, that’s their choice. They are free to choose the imposition.

With hospitals, I don’t think that these options exist. When the only option is a regional hospital and that hospital has a religious affiliation that prevents its staff from offering certain services, patients are left with no choice but to abide by the rules of a religion they may not even believe in — and with concrete consequences to their health. I think that’s tyranny.

And it’s not just a rural vs. urban thing either. The power dynamic between hospital and patient is different than that between school and child/parent. If a school isn’t good for a child, the parent can transfer the kid to another school – and the parent/child can actually take time to weigh the decision and explore other options. When somebody’s bleeding to death, the only option is the closest hospital. And once the person walks (or is carried) through the hospital doors, they are going to get treated at that hospital.

For instance, if harm befalls a pregnant woman and she’s taken by an ambulance or whomever to the nearest hospital that happens to be Catholic, she literally has no other option but the Catholic hospital. And then if there’s some complication where it’s save the mother vs. save the baby and the mother is not offered lifesaving options due to the hospital’s religious beliefs, that is an infringement upon her religious rights.

 Freedom of religion

Inherent in the freedom to exercise one’s religion is the right to NOT exercise a religion. And in the case of religious hospitals, the religious institution is trampling the right of the individual to not follow the doctrine of a religion he/she doesn’t believe in – and in life and death situations.

I just don’t think hospitals should have religious rights. Perhaps unless they’re exclusively serving those that ascribe to their religious doctrine. If only practicing Catholics were tended to by the Catholic hospitals and then denied certain care that’s deemed anti-Catholic, that’d be a different story. Their religion, their choice. Not tyranny. On the other hand, when the hospital follows its religion to the detriment of its non-religious patient and doesn’t allow the patient to make the tough ethical call, then I strongly feel that that’s the exact type of tyranny our forefathers were trying to avoid with the 1st amendment.

Also what about the ethical implications for non-Catholic doctors, nurses, etc. who work at Catholic hospitals? Surely not all who work at Catholic hospitals are Catholic…

I definitely don’t hate religion, and I understand the need for certain institutions to center the way they run things around a certain religion without fear of reprimand from the government. But where is the balance? What about the individual’s right to follow or not follow a religion?

The post Lesson learned: My Catholic hospital can limit my medical choices appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In a trend that adds a nice dose of fairness to election laws, 22 states now allow citizens who will be 18 years old on or before a general election to vote in their party’s corresponding primary or caucus. Illinois, for example, allows 17-year-olds who were born on or before Nov. 4, 1996, to register and cast ballots in this year’s March 18 party primary election, as the teens will be 18 and able to vote in the Nov. 4 general election.

Where 17-year-olds can vote in primaries and caucuses:

States that currently allow 17-year-olds [who will be 18 by the date of the general election in November] to vote in primaries and caucuses are: -Alaska–Connecticut–Hawaii–Illinois–Indiana–Iowa–Kansas–Kentucky–Maine–Maryland–Minnesota–Mississippi–Nebraska–Nevada–North Carolina–North Dakota–Ohio–Oregon–Virginia–Vermon–and Washington.

Of course, when things like this are done state-by-state, there are always some quirky, local variances. In Alaska, Kansas, North Dakota and Washington, 17-year-old Democrats may caucus, but 17-year-old Republicans cannot participate in their party’s caucus.

To check on your voting status in your state, go to Vote411.org

The rationale for “Suffrage at 17” is simple. Fair Vote, a voting-rights advocacy group, puts it this way:

A notable portion of citizens who have the right to vote in the general election in November currently do not have a voice in determining who will be on that general election ballot. Granting voting rights in primaries and caucuses to these 17-year-olds is only fair and will increase their political engagement through participation.

“Suffrage at 17” advocates say that one of the prime benefits of allowing 17-year-olds to vote in primaries is that it encourages civic engagement at an earlier age. Voting when young starts a lifetime habit, they contend. That’s good for political parties, too, goes the argument, because once someone has voted in a particular party’s contest, that young person may vote for that party for decades–if parties are important to you.

Opening up primary voting and caucus participation to 17-year-olds taps into a large market of potential new voters—a significant demographic. In 2008, there were more than four million 17-year-olds in America. Young eligible voters (18 to 29 year-olds) have traditionally voted at the lowest rates because they are not prepared for participation. Advocates say that the “Suffrage at 17” policy puts  more young people on the voter rolls and prepares them to participate in the general election.

[As an aside, for some, the notion of “Suffrage at 17” doesn’t go far enough. A few years ago, a group of Massachusetts teens launched an initiative to lower the voting age to 17–for school-board and local elections. Their rationale was that school boards make decisions that directly affect teenagers, and that they should have a say in those elections. To me, that argument has some merit–and to those who worry about “immaturity” at the polls, I’d say that young people are no more likely to engage in irrational voting and immature behavior than older voters, who demonstrate a lot of stinkin’ thinkin’ at the polls during every election cycle.]

“Suffrage at 17”  makes sense. It doesn’t do anything drastic, like officially lowering the voting age for everyone [we did that in 1971, when the legal voting age went from 21 to 18]. It’s logical–especially in a world where primaries and caucuses reign supreme in determining who will be on general-election ballots. And it’s a welcome example of a voting-rights expansion at a time when too many state legislatures are going in the opposite direction.

[By the way, we really need a whole new system for presidential primaries. Read more about this issue here.]

The post Voting news: Some 17-year-olds can vote in primaries and caucuses in 22 states appeared first on Occasional Planet.

This daily blog is composed of clips and links from other progressive blog and news sites, accompanied by my own observations. It documents the failure and decline of the Republican party and the efforts of the Obama administration to build a new, lasting Democratic coalition.

GOP strategy #743 on Obamacare: We’ll fix it 

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/189775-gop-shifts-now-wants-to-fix-obamacare

Weeks ago, many Republicans said ObamaCare — including Speaker John Boehner (Ohio) — was too broken to fix. But now, the GOP is drafting legislation that aims to do just that.

The GOP wants to rebuild its political capital and public credibility by solving ObamaCare’s implementation problems. . . .  [NB: Yep, folks, the GOP just wants to help Obamacare work BETTER. Yes, that’s right. . . uh . . . Why are you laughing?] 

Lindsey Graham is an ass

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/graham-squirms-cnn-after-cbs-retracts
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Sunday defended his decision to block President Barack Obama’s executive branch nominations partially based on a story about Benghazi that 60 Minutes was forced to retract. . . . .

More: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/11/graham-still-wants-to-block-obama-nominees.html

GOP Bizarroworld

The post Progressive Blog Digest: “The fix is in” appeared first on Occasional Planet.

It’s not shocking news that there are a lot of empty lots in St. Louis. Some are from demolished homes, some are seized property for tax reasons, and some are failed development projects. They can be real eyesores. The city is trying to do something about those vacant lots though. (Sadly, it isn’t building affordable housing.) Instead, they are leasing them out to well-meaning individuals and community groups so that residents can build city gardens. And they’re doing it for $1.

That’s right. For the price of a side salad from the McDonald’s  value menu, you can rent enough land to grow your own mixed greens. The dollar leases the land for a whole year, unless it actually gets sold for development. The Garden Lease Program is sponsored by the Land Reutilization Authority, which is the biggest land owner in St. Louis. Thanks to St. Louis’s economic woes, the LRA owns hundreds of lots. These aren’t just blighted North St. Louis areas either, they have land by Tower Grove Park, the Bevo Mill area, Holly Hills, Cherokee Street, Lindenwood Park, the Central West End and a slew of other well thought of (and some downright trendy) regions.

This sort of program is win-win for St. Louis. It decreases the number of lots that the LRA has to provide maintenance for, creates more green space for the community, decreases illegal dumping and some of the other illicit dealings that go on in unsupervised spaces, and can even provide healthier food for communities found in food deserts. There’s no reason a community shouldn’t have a garden, other than St. Louis’s persnickety weather.

The post Doing something good and green: St. Louis’ Garden Lease Program appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In baseball, it’s often said that you have to be a good pitcher to be a twenty game loser. The reason is simple; if you weren’t good, the manager wouldn’t send you out to the mound twenty times with the expectation that you’d give your team a chance of winning.

Who is the last presidential candidate of either major political party who was good enough to lose two consecutive elections? The answer is Democrat Adlai Stevenson, Jr. of Illinois. He lost to Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956.

To get a sense of how progressive he was, we can examine his explanation of his religious views:

He classified himself as a Unitarian and said. “I think that one of our most important tasks is to convince others that there’s nothing to fear in difference; that difference, in fact, is one of the healthiest and most invigorating of human characteristics without which life would become meaningless. Here lies the power of the liberal way: not in making the whole world Unitarian [Universalist], but in helping ourselves and others to see some of the possibilities inherent in viewpoints other than one’s own; in encouraging the free interchange of ideas; in welcoming fresh approaches to the problems of life; in urging the fullest, most vigorous use of critical self-examination.”

This is clearly one of the main tenets of the progressive movement. He was open-minded and looked to bridge differences rather than fight over them.

Stevenson served as governor of Illinois from 1949-1953. He worked to protect civil liberties, but gained special recognition for cracking down on illegal gambling, improving state highways, and reorganizing the state police. He was remarkably popular, despite being described by many as an “egghead intellectual.” He charmed people with his self-deprecating humor.  In one speech, he joked, “eggheads of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your yolks!”

When President Harry Truman decided in early 1952 to run for a second full term, he met with Governor Stevenson and, following the meeting, Truman decided to support Stevenson for president. Others had initiated a “draft Stevenson” movement. Stevenson sealed the deal at the Chicago convention, where as host governor, he gave a welcoming speech that roused the delegates, because it was so energetic and thoughtful.

Stevenson lost to Eisenhower that year, and it was not a surprise to many. Had the Democrats had their choice, Eisenhower would have been their nominee. However, after much thought and consideration, Ike decided in 1951 to run as a Republican. Stevenson was a good second choice for the Democrats, but not good enough to win. A little insight into Stevenson’s campaign can be gained by viewing a photograph that revealed a hole in the sole of his right shoe. This became a well-known symbol of Adlai’s frugality and earthiness. Photographer William M. Gallagher of the Flint Journal won the 1953 Pulitzer prize on the strength of the image.

1956 was essentially an “instant replay,” as the popular Eisenhower chose to run for a second term, and Stevenson was a satisfactory candidate for the Democrats. The party was rather splintered, particularly between the northern and southern factions. Stevenson campaigned well, but garnered only 42 percent of the popular vote, and 73 electoral votes from a mere seven states.

Stevenson still had the presidential bug in 1960 and sought the nomination. However, the top two contenders were John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. Stevenson never really had a chance, as Kennedy garnered the nomination through excellent showings in the several primaries that existed at that time, as well as clever back room politicking at the convention. Kennedy then defeated Richard Nixon in the general election. The President then appointed Stevenson U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, where his oratory, laced with irony, shined, particularly in the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

Adlai Stevenson lives deep in the memory bank of many Americans. The oldest amongst us are fortunate enough to remember Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal. Others go as far back as “Give ’em hell” Harry Truman, who among other things, integrated the U.S. armed services. The baby boomers remember Kennedy and Johnson. Lost in the shuffle is Stevenson, who truly was a positive force in the progressive movement, a “happy warrior” like FDR and Hubert Humphrey; not a “grumbler like Ralph Nader. In the 2012 election, Barack Obama, who like Stevenson is from Illinois, chose to wear the progressive mantle more than he did in 2008, and he exhibited much of the joie de vivre of Stevenson. It was a good time to be a progressive in the 1950s, even if we lost, because Stevenson gave us a lift. It’s certainly a good time to be a progressive now.

The post Adlai Stevenson, the last real progressive candidate appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In 2008, the Des Moines Register endorsed then Senator Barack Obama for president over Senator John McCain. For largely inexplicable reasons, this year the Register endorsed former Governor George Romney over President Obama.  This is the first time that the Register has endorsed a Republican for president since 1972, when it urged readers to give Richard Nixon a second term, rather than supporting Senator George McGovern and his efforts to end the Vietnam War.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell shows the absurdity of the Register’s thinking.  He reveals how the very reasons that the paper endorsed Obama in 2008 are even more apropos in 2012.  He shows how the reservations that it had about Nixon in 1972 in many ways apply to Romney in 2012.

Below, you can read a short summary of O’Donnell’s comments of Tuesday, October 30.  The full presentation is available in the following video.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

 …O’Donnell accused The Des Moines Register of “adopting Mitt Romney’s magical thinking” by endorsing the Republican candidate for president.

In the Rewrite segment on Tuesday’s edition of The Last Word, he called their decision one of the “most embarrassing endorsements in the history of that newspaper.”

His bone to pick with the Iowa paper’s editorial board revolved around how they argued the case for Romney, not their specific choice of candidate. It’s “not because they chose Romney,” O’Donnell said. “Not because they chose a Republican, but because they gave absolutely no rational reason for it.”

The Register justified its entire endorsement on the basis of  consumer confidence.

The op-ed main’s rationale for Romney: “Consumers must feel more confident about their own economic futures to begin spending on the products and services that power the economy. A renewed sense of confidence will spark renewed investment by American companies. Industry will return to full production and hiring will begin again.”

O’Donnell said it’s the result of “pure magical thinking that the very sight of Mitt Romney taking the oath of office will suddenly make consumers run out to Best Buy and load up on TVs made in Japan.”

The last time the paper got behind a Republican candidate for president was in 1972, when they endorsed Richard Nixon.

The post O’Donnell calls Des Moines Register’s Romney endorsement “magical thinking” appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Mitt Romney’s campaign has come under fire for a number of gaffes recently, but one action by the company he cofounded, Bain Capital, is following a long-standing Romney tactic. Mitt Romney has a long history of exporting jobs overseas, according to Forbes magazine (hardly a liberal bastion). Vanity Fair has revealed that, while with Bain Capital before 1999 (the earliest date Romney claims having left Bain), Romney did indeed make sizable profits from sending American jobs to China, jobs that are unlikely to return. Although Mr. Romney is no longer in direct control of Bain Capital, he still makes $440,000 a week from his investments in the company.

On the same day that Americans go to the polls to vote for either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama as President, Sensata will lay off the last workers at the plant in Freeport IL. Sensata is now owned by Bain Capital. Sensata is moving 165 jobs to China and closing down the plant in Freeport, after having required American workers to train their overseas replacements. Romney will share in any profits gained by these actions.

Workers in Freeport IL have responded to the imminent loss of their jobs by protesting at a site they call “Bainport.” The protesters are asking that Romney save their jobs by demanding that the plant remain open. An alternative demand is that Romney debate Obama in Freeport, which was the site of one of the famous Lincoln and Douglas debates. So far, there has been no response from the Romney campaign, with claims that they are unaware of the situation.

Amy Goodman of “Democracy Now!” spoke with Dot Turner, who has worked at the company’s Freeport site since 1969. Turner described having been able to make a decent living at her job and having few if any prospects once the plant closes. Cheryl Randecker gave an account of being sent to China to train her replacements, who did not immediately seem to understand what was required to run the technical machinery. Workers at the plant believe that their jobs are being sent overseas simply to save money, with China providing the facilities for free, and workers paid at a much lower rate than their counterparts. Protesters first attempted to confront Mitt Romney at the RNC Convention, but were turned away.

Final layoffs from the plant closure are scheduled to take place on Election Day, with workers planning to vote, and immediately afterwards file for unemployment benefits.

Efforts to save the jobs in Freeport have included local Republican congressmen Don Manzullo, R-Ill., and Bobby Schilling, R-Ill writing to Sensata. The company response indicated that while the company sympathizes, they plan to shut down the plant just the same. Sensata employees have also heard from IL Governor Pat Quinn and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill who are pushing a bill that stops tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas. The Bring Jobs Home Act is currently dead, thanks to a failure to get enough votes for cloture, a necessary move to get past a threatened GOP filibuster.

Meanwhile, the protesters of “Bainport” are gathering signatures on a petition asking Mitt Romney to address the situation.

The post Romney to export Illinois jobs on Election Day appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Earlier this year, National Catholic Reporter called Hyatt Hotels “the worst hotel employer in the industry.”

Allegations about working conditions at Hyatt sound as if the profit  now takes priority even over the health of workers. Maids are required to clean up to 30 rooms in a single day, with many reporting detrimental health effects.  Cathy Youngblood reports that she “could smell the injustice” on her first day of employment and now has “a diminished quality of life.” Long-term regular employees making $12 to $14 an hour have been laid off and replaced with minimum wage temporary workers, impacting families and the community.

In Chicago, local groups led by teachers are protesting a $5.2 millionTIF (Tax Increment Financing) the city is awarding to a local Hyatt, while school local budgets are being cut by $3.3 million, and 27 teachers are being laid off.

These grievances are the at the heart of calls for a nationwide boycott of the hotel chain, with thousands of individuals, groups and companies already taking the pledge to not do business with Hyatt until it cleans up its act.

Chicago protests over the use of TIF funds at the same time the city is cutting back essential services is aimed at Hyatt heiress and CEO Penny Pritzker in particular. Ms. Pritzker was a major financial backer for President Obama’s 2008 election campaign, and many with deep pockets look to her for leadership on whether to continue supporting the President during his reelection bid. Accusations include conflict of interest, since the Hyatt chain stands to gain, and Ms. Pritzker sits on the unelected school board getting the financial cuts. To its credit, the Obama administration has not attempted  to counter the criticism directed at Pritzker. Some speculate that other backers are taking the Obama administration’s lack of action as a reason or excuse to withhold further backing.

Religious groups have stated that Hyatt has a moral obligation to correct its policies and treat their employees properly. A flash Mass was held at Hyatt hotels around the country to draw attention to the plight of employees. Clete Kiley, a Catholic priest of the Chicago Archdiocese stated, “Hyatt now faces a stark moral challenge. Will it continue to put profits before human dignity, or meet its responsibility to be an ethical corporation?”

Unite Here! Local 1 of Chicago has been central in organizing the boycott and is receiving support from some major hitters. The NFL players association has agreed to honor the boycott, as has the AFL-CIO, the National Organization of Women (NOW) and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. Beside direct protests at local Hyatts, there is also a petition effort to name the company worst employer. Those wishing to sign the petition can find it here.

Pushback and defense of Ms. Pritzker and Hyatt has focused either on denying any benefit from company policies, denying there is anything wrong and blaming others. When confronted about financial gains fro, TIFs, corporate spokesmen responded that the TIF goes to a local franchisee and the company directly.

While that may be true, it would seem that when local franchises prosper, so does the franchise organization as a whole. The company accuses Unite Here! Of using the controversy as a recruiting tool, and that there is no truth to accusations of employee mistreatment. In light of the evidence available, these defenses seem disingenuous at best.

Further information on the Hyatt boycott, what you can do and testimonials from employees can be found at Hyatt Hurts.

The post Hyatt hurts appeared first on Occasional Planet.

As plans move forward for renovations to St. Louis’ iconic Gateway Arch, a group of local urbanists known as City to River have a dream to make the project even better: Demolish a section of Interstate 70 [known locally as the “depressed lanes”] that walls off the Arch from the downtown area. Getting rid of that portion of the highway [which will be rendered superfluous when a new Mississippi River bridge is completed in 2015], would reunite the Arch with its host city and make the downtown area more accessible to the legendary river that built the city in the first place.

So far, City to River has not convinced the National Park Service—which controls the land on which the highway was constructed– to go along with their idea. But they’re not alone in their quest to rethink antiquated highways that, in many cases, are interfering with better ideas for urban development.

Recently, Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) issued a report called “Freeways Without Futures,” a list of the top ten locations in North America “where the opportunity is greatest to stimulate valuable revitalization by replacing aging urban highways with boulevards and other cost-saving urban alternatives.

The list came from a CNU call for nominations. CNU reviewed the submissions and prioritized them based on factors including the age of the structure, redevelopment potential, potential cost savings, ability to improve both overall mobility and local access, existence of pending infrastructure decisions, and local support.

St. Louis’ project didn’t make the list, But the top-ten teardowns offer opportunities unique to their communities that any new urbanist would cheer for. Here’s the list of the top ten. You can get detailed information about the challenges they represent [plus pictures] at the links.

1. Alaskan Way Viaduct, Seattle, WA
2. Sheridan Expressway, Bronx, NY
3. The Skyway and Route 5, Buffalo, NY
4. Route 34, New Haven, CT
5. Claiborne Expressway, New Orleans, LA
6. Interstate 81, Syracuse, NY
7. Interstate 64, Louisville, KY
8. Route 29, Trenton, NJ
9. Gardiner Expressway, Toronto, ON
10. 11th Street Bridges and the Southeast Freeway, Washington D.C.

[Cover image: Claiborne Expressway, New Orleans, LA]

The post Freeways without futures appeared first on Occasional Planet.