The Democratic Party Stiffles Independence In California, progressives are supposed to be celebrating. The recent elections brought to power Democrat Governor Gray Davis, reelected Democrat Senator Barbara Boxer, and expanded the power of Speaker of the Assembly Antonio Villaraigosa and Senate President John Burton. For many community groups and liberals who are now tied by the umbilical cord to the Democrats this is a great event. But the Left has another tradition--a left that is in conflict with the Democratic Party and its "liberal" center-right agenda. In the 1960s, the New Left was built with the understanding that Vietnam was "the Democrats' war" and the main opponents of the Civil Rights movement were Southern racist Democrats and Northern liberals who were more interested in political party loyalty and party deals than the liberation of Black people a century after slavery. Today, the degeneration of the Democratic Party is so complete that Gray Davis got elected by taking out more ads than anyone else trumpeting his support for the death penalty and surrounding himself with more cops than NYPD Blue and Law and Order combined. Additionally, Antonio Villarai-gosa proclaimed that the electorate has proven it wants "moderates." DEMOCRATS IN POWER: SO-CALLED "PROGRESSIVES" ASK FOR A FIGHT One would think that such a Civil Rights struggle would be embraced and supported by many if not all progressive elected officials, union leaders, and activists. One would think that these progressive forces would support a vision of a low cost, clean fuel, on-time public transit system that benefits the riders who use it rather than rail contractors and construction lobbyists who get rich off taxpayer funded rail construction projects. One would think that a movement seeking such a vast redistribution of wealth from corporate forces to low income and working class communities would be a cause progressives could rally around. But our struggle, and those of many other independent social movements, has come up against a major obstacle. In the six years of our struggle with the MTA, we have yet to count any elected Democrat ic official, progressive or otherwise, as a reliable ally for the bus riding class. We have found most so-called "progressive" labor union leaders, many of whose members are part of the bus riding class, are also reluctant to take a stand with the Bus Riders Union. These elected officials, union leaders, and other activists are beholden to the Democratic Party structure. They depend on that mechanism to maintain their positions and advance a politics that supports corporate capital over the needs of working-class and low-income people. The form it takes in Los Angeles is that these "progressives" make ties with corporate forces, conservative union structures, and the Democratic Party to raid bus riders' money for future rail construction or support the expansion of the Alameda Corridor--a commercial transportation infrastructure that benefits mostly multi national polluters and shipping companies. Assembly members Antonio Villa-raigosa, Gilbert Cedillo and Kevin Murray, State Senators Tom Hayden and Richard Polanco, Councilmember Jackie Goldberg, Congressmembers Xavier Becerra, Lucille Roybal-Allard, and Julian Dixon, and other Democratic elected officials have supported policies that have created obstacles for our struggle with the MTA. Their ties to the Democratic Party structure and the more privileged people of color keep the money train rolling for rail projects rather than working to shift that money to support the Civil Rights of bus riders protected by our Consent Decree. While the bus riders of Los Angeles are 81% people of color, 50% Latino and 60% women, they are poor, immigrant, disabled, and apparently their Civil Rights don't count for these politicians. This is sad because Mr. Villaraigosa was one of the few friends we had on the MTA board when he served as Supervisor Gloria Molina's alternate. In the Summer of 1994, Mr. Villaraigosa pleaded with his colleagues not to allocate $124 million of bus eligible money to the Pasadena Blue Line. The board approved the money and that act was a major impetus for our lawsuit against the MTA. Mr. Villaraigosa's testimony was used in our court documents, and he was prepared to testify in court to the very offense that we are still fighting today--that the MTA raised bus fares because it was raiding bus eligible funds to shift to the Pasadena Blue Line. During his campaign for State Assembly some of our members volunteered for his campaign because they felt he would be an ally in Sacramento as well. This has not turned out to be the case. In the summer of 1995 Assembly-member Villaraigosa, Senators Tom Hayden and Richard Polanco and Assemblymember Gilbert Cedillo (founding member of the Labor/Community Strategy Center, then SEIU Local 660 General Manager) led a raid of $375 million of bus money to make up for a funding gap in L.A. County's public health system. Rather than lead "progressive" efforts to solve the problem, such as taxing corporations and the wealthy or reducing funding for the Sheriffs Department, Mr. Villaraigosa and other progressive elected officials instead used the MTA's reputation as a spendthrift agency to shift state bus funds into the county health system. We launched the "Don't Tear Us Apart" Campaign that clearly showed other sources of revenue for the hospitals and highlighted the contradiction of progressive politicians taking money from the very bus system that poor people use to get to the county hospitals. Eventually the legislation was defeated in court by a citizen's lawsuit. A CIVIL RIGHTS CONSENT DECREE MUST BE PROTECTED How would you feel if your union signed a contract with the company and a third party attempted to derail the benefits the union had won? How would you feel if your immigrant rights group won some concessions from the INS that benefited your constituency but some other forces worked to stop those concessions? How would you feel if your welfare rights organization won some health benefits from the Department of Social Services (DPSS) but a county supervisor moved to reverse that decision? These are all antagonistic moves and would be a violation of your contracts or agreements. Well, the Bus Riders Union has signed a contract with the MTA and it's called the Consent Decree! More to the point, it is a Civil Rights Consent Decree and any threat to that contract is also a violation of civil rights: Yet, the MTA Board commited a $300 million to the Alameda Corridor to benefit multinational shipping firms; Councilmember Jackie Goldberg sat as Gloria Molina's alternate on the MTA board and never introduced a motion to halt subway construction, yet voted in City Council to give $200 million of bus eligible money to the Red Line; Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky has pushed to shift money from the suspended Eastside Metro Red Line Extension to the North Hollywood Metro Red Line Extension instead of to the bus system; Assemblymembers Villaraigosa and Schiff and Senator Polanco are going after bus eligible money for the Pasadena Blue Line Construction Authority. These actions are violations of our contract and civil rights. Once a Civil Rights Consent Decree is signed you cannot by law violate it. Whe-ther socialist, left-liberal, progressive or whatever, you are not expected to support the awarding of multimillion dollar contracts to rail contractors and lobbyists at the expense of Civil Rights. Would you support the return of legal segregation because it aided a building contractor? Would you support prolonging the Vietnam War if it supported a defense contractor? Would you support the gerrymandering of white segregated school districts after "Brown v. Board of Education" mandated integration of Black children? Well, neither would we and neither should public elected officials. As we speak, the BRU is fighting in the courts and in negotiations with the MTA to purchase 500 additional buses (complete with almost three new bus driver jobs per bus) to reduce overcrowding. We are fighting for as many as 1,000 new additional buses for new service, and again, 3,000 new bus driver jobs--along with mechanics and maintenance people if we win. The MTA cannot afford to fund the Consent Decree and the Pasadena Line; either the working class will win or the corporate developers will. We are demanding that the State Legislature and the California Transportation Commission force the Metropolitan Transportation Agency to stop any tranfer of funds to the new Pasadena Blue Line Authority, and instead, to lock-in the funds needed for the bus system. We are meeting with Antonio Villaraigosa and Kevin Murray who have publicly pledged to help us; we are asking them to go against Villaraigosa's own bill, to reverse the vote, to protect $350 million for the bus system. In two years Villaraigosa's Assembly term will be up, and he is already rumored to be running for mayor. Many community groups, in on the new payola brand of state funding, are lining up to support him. While the BRU does not focus on electoral politics, a "No" on Villaraigosa campaign is being discussed among our members. The Democratic politicians say that to have any power you have to reward your friends and punish your enemies. Just like in the 1960s, taking on the Democratic Party and the corporate liberals is a critical and very tangible way of winning real victories and rebuilding the Left. It is critical that we send the message to our elected representatives, and particularly the new Democratic leadership that will control the California Transportation Commission, that we will not stand for a raid on public funds that should be used to improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of bus riders. MARTÍN HERNANDEZ |
