SOCIAL ISSUES
is one of several DAF working groups. More about them here.

If interested in joining this group, please contact Linda Quinet.

A June 19 '05 discussion focussed on strategy and future topics:

• Separation of church and state - Peter Villani
• Monitoring the Patriot Act - Barney Kirchoff
• Gay and Lesbian rights - Edwin Lau
• Mental illness - Linda Quinet
• Affirmative action and/or racial issues (to be defined) - Sophie Marzin

The person leading discussion will frame the issue and can incorporate the help of others, such as requesting research on related topics. These topical meetings can lead to a public meeting and/or meeting with another policy subgroup. The end goal will be a one-paragraph recommendation intended for platform use.

Next meeting will be early October '05. Please join us! Peter and Edwin will meet in August regarding the relationships between their topics and report. Many budget decisions will be made in September, so this will be reported and linked to the earlier meeting devoted to how the budget shapes social policy (link below). The first meeting focussed on the Patriot Act.

PATRIOT ACT February 20, 2005
Another meeting focussed on the BUDGET PROCESS

Discussion reflected that: The constitution is being superceded in the name of terrorism. So far the Patriot Act hasn't been used against terrorists necessarily—rather, to infringe on the rights of Americans. It does not appear to be stopping terrorism, since of the approximately 1000 cases resulting, most have been about immigration issues.

Infringements on rights in the Patriot Act discussed were: Enemy combatant status for almost any infraction. You can be legally "disappeared" with no access to legal counsel or right to challenge the reason for arrest (forget habeus corpus). If a suspected terrorist, you have no rights in the US, even if you are a citizen, nor under the Geneva Convention; this doesn't mean just Arab-appearing people, it can also be applied to environmentalists, peace groups and other so-called left wingers. Information gathering can be considered to be clandestine intelligence activities for a foreign power (essentially making gathering news illegal). Government agents can search without prior approval. Contempt charges can be lodged against anyone who refuses to incriminate him/herself or others. Whistleblower protection is abolished for federal agents. Martial law can be used without declaration of war. And on and on...

Activists in other countries have simplified the message to make complex legislation understandable in terms for ordinary citizens. For example: "If you reply Yes to any one of these questions, the government could brand you a terrorist:

• "1. Have you ever disagreed with any government policy and joined with others to express this by sending emails or phoning any politician, government department or bureaucrat?
• "2. Have you ever joined or been associated with the activities of a trade union, local protest group, or political or religious organisation?
• "3. Have you ever participated in a non-violent protest, rally or strike?
• "4. Have you ever donated money, bought raffle tickets or in any other way supported an international environmental, political or human rights organisation such as Amnesty International or Greenpeace?
• "5. Have you ever provided any professional advice for any political or religious organisation?" (http://www.agitprop.org.au/stopasio.htm)

Congresspeople initially voted for Patriot Act I without a chance to read it. Politically, there seemed to be little choice, given it was so soon after Sept. 11. Patriot Act II expands and enlarges on the original Act. How Patriot Act II came about appears to be a replay of the pressures enabling passage of the first Patriot Act.Ê The group questioned: How can crying wolf and the sky is falling keep being the reason that the Patriot Act keeps getting forwarded? None of this was explained to the American people, especially that the Patriot Act II gives Bush dictatorial powers.

A question raised: Do Democrats have alternatives for combatting terrorism?

RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) Summarize this discussion on the Democrats Abroad web site, (2) Get more people involved on our committee, (3) Create awareness at the DNC how rights are being infringed upon; that we support the Bill of Rights; reiterate them; draft something for the caucus, let congress know we are unhappy with this...and want liberties back. (4) Build bipartisan coalitions against the Patriot Act: Members of the subgroup will pursue related aspects: Peter will research what is concrete about how civil liberties are being denied. Edwin will research the Open Government Act which strengthens the FOI Act.

Zach Miller led discussion about the Patriot Act(s) (I and II). The article* he sent out in advance (written by a conservative) was meant to illustrate how this issue can unite Rebublicans, Conservatives, Libertarians and Democrats. Other information for the meeting was collected primarily from the aclu.org site and William Safire's article, "You are Suspect." Zach maintains that the Bush administration has overplayed its cards with the Patriot Act. Democrats should agressively go after this issue and make it theirs, defending the constitution and bill of rights.

(*an analysis of Patriot Act II by Alex Jones: Total Police State Takeover - The Secret Patriot Act II Destroys What is Left of American Liberty)

Member Peter Villani created a web site: http://www.zenoparadise.lunarpages.com/dialog/ue.php containing resources that clarify the effects of the Patriot Act.

Attending the meeting: Barney Kirchhoff, Edwin Lau, Lynn Lindstrom, Sophie Marzin, Zach Miller, Linda Quinet, Peter Villani.