The eviction that Occupy Wall Street protesters feared nearly two weeks ago never took place, but many of their fellow Occupiers in other cities haven't been so fortunate. Occupy Oakland began a protest yesterday afternoon to retake the public area (which some have unofficially renamed Oscar Grant Plaza) from which police had removed them from in the predawn hours.
The police reaction was such that they were not successful. Tear gas had a lot to do with it:
Police gave repeated warnings to protesters to disperse from the entrance to Frank Ogawa Plaza at 14th Street and Broadway before firing several tear gas canisters into the crowd at about 7:45 p.m. Police had announced over a loudspeaker that those who refused to leave could be targeted by "chemical agents."
Protesters scattered in both directions on Broadway as the tear gas canisters and several flash-bang grenades went off. Regrouping, protesters tried to help one another and offered each other eye drops.
One wounded woman, who others said had been hit by one of the canisters, was carried away by two protesters.
One protester, 35-year-old Jerry Smith, said a tear gas canister had rolled to his feet and sprayed him in the face.
"I got the feeling they meant business, but people were not going to be intimidated," Smith said. "We can do this peacefully, but still not back down."
Oakland's embattled mayor, Jean Quan, reportedly rushed back from Washington, D.C. once word of the events broke. Her official statement commended Oakland's interim chief of police for the way the police handled themselves, and the chief himself offered justification for their behavior -- the police were being hit with objects thrown by protesters:
"We were in a position where we had to deploy gas in order to stop the crowd and people from pelting us with bottles and rocks," the chief said. Protesters had also thrown paint "and other agents" at officers, he added.
Mother Jones, Boing Boing and local news publication Oakland North all had comprehensive coverage during and after the events that are worth a look. Heads-up: a lot of the video is at least PG.
Leave a Comment:
Video footage of an Oakland pig firing a flashbang into a crowd tending to an injured protester: http://youtu.be/QqNOPZLw03Q
Glad you found that Alex. I thought that was the most disturbing video of the night. firing a flashbang grenade in the middle of people trying to render assistance to an injured woman. There are no words to describe how upset I was when I saw that. When the teargas was released NO objects were being thrown at the police. The protesters were being peaceful.
Here is the Training Bulletin for the Oakland Police Department. It clearly shows that the police did NOT follow procedure and they put peaceful protesters exercising their right of free speech and assembly at risk of bodily harm.
http://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/PN-CA-0018-0021.pdf
Note that, by definition in this document, the occupy demonstration was to be left alone to demonstrate and were only to be monitored. Whatever may have happened earlier in the day, they were trigger happy later in the evening.
SHAME
What disturbs me most about that video is the fact that the officer who threw the flash bang grenade was close enough to see that they were trying to help the woman on the ground. The other thing that disturbs me is the grenade lands right next to the woman which means she likely suffered shrapnel damage. The reason why they are called "less than lethal" and not "non-lethal" is because they still have the ability to kill someone or cause serious bodily harm. I really hope she was ok.
I'd love to see a few thousand Occupy Oakland people just mad rush this handful of military wannabe's and stomp each one of them a bloody mud puddle azzhole!
No. This blog isn't supportive of calls to violence nor do the OWS protestors need people supporting them with calls of violence. If the movement can't be done peacefully then the movement is not worth the cause. There is never a reason to resort to violence.
And this is why liberals never win....because the elites (financial and political) in this country certainly won't hesitate to use violence whenever it suits them.....and if there is ANY coverage of outcry by the corporate controlled media, the authorities will say that the powerless (protesters, poor, minorities) started it and it'll all get swept under the rug....I'm not saying I hope violence breaks out, I would never hope that but I believe that those who have the knee-jerk reaction of "violence is never the answer" are going to be the first to be victimized by it from the other side, since they are ill-equipped to deal with it...
Ah yes because if the protestors just start beating the police back that will solve everything and completely legitimize the movement? I am sure our well equipped, non-sensationalist media will be more than happy to take the side of the protestors when they are throwing things at the police and acting out violently. Yup yup. Oh wait no- the media will cast them as villains, the public will stop supporting them, and the movement will die. Now I see why liberals lose- because we have allowed people who are anarchists to take over our movements instead of standing on our liberal principles and preventing anarchists from controlling our movements.
Pretty disgusting video. They only way to fight this is to be non-violent. Otherwise it becomes a battle of disgusting video's from both sides. In that fight the 99% will lose.
We must remember we are the victims here. The clearer that we make that the more support we gain. This is a battle ideas not a war against the police.
The 1% are the target not the police. They are only pawns.
Just read an article about the Occupy in Albany NY. The Police REFUSED to remove the protestors. Gov. Cuomo (I'll remember this) and the Mayor ordered the Police to remove the protestors. The Chief refused, saying let the Police handle police work and politicians handle politics. They monitored and left the people alone, since they were peaceful. The tide is turning!
@Pat P11111: 100% agree. That is the whole point. We make people join us by showing that we are not out to cause trouble, we are out to fight for justice and not just our justice, but justice for everyone. Remember the police are the 99%. We cannot blame them when they have to obey their orders, but if we continue to meet them w/ peace and compliance it makes it harder and harder for those who can control the orders to justify such actions. That is the way you win. Remember always:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flower_Power_demonstrator.jpg
The Mouzer,
I liked the link. I recently saw this picture which is probably my favorite.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/gallery/2010/nov/14/ten-best-protests
Go 99%
In one place in The Tactics of Social Democracy, Marx speaks of passive resistance being the main type of "fighting" to be used. After all, he points out, it is the other side that has all the weapons. Marx was hardly Gandhi or MLK on this point, but he did recognize that those fighting entrenched power aren't going to win by going on the offensive.
Violence is always present in every revolution. Violence is easy. The trick is, to make sure all the violence is perpetrated by the opposition.
I'd like to see any evidence supporting anything the Police Chief or the Mayor said that the protestors were doing.
Me too. I was there and there were parents with children and dogs, the elderly, nurses with health signs. We got there about 5pm and Ogawa Park was totally surrounded by riot geared storm troopers. The OWS camp was destroyed by the OPD with box cutters (didn't we have some terrorists do that 10 years ago?) The crowd marched from the library to the Plaze. After about an hour they threw tear gas and something with a concussion to it. 56 years old and uninsured, we left shortly thereafter. There was no reason for this. These campers were sleeping yesterday morning when the storm troopers rousted them out. In some instances the OPD destroyed everything that person has in life. Why rip up their tents with boxcutters?
Mayor Quan, you are now showing how a group peacefully practicing their First Amendment rights with the whole world watching, is quickly being turned into an angry group. Shame mayor, shame OPD. This is the USA, not Syria. I think.
Sadly, it wouldn't surprise me. I have seen such idiots in the past, turning what were tense but still peaceful moments into confrontationa. Why? I have no idea. Trying to "spark the revolution"? Thinking it is "cool to throw at the pigs"? Loaded and rowdy? Who knows?
We were there and saw one paint balloon thrown and that was right after the first gassing. No rocks, nothing hard.
I'm sorry, I missed the whole "throwing rocks & bottles" by the Occupy crowd - but it did kinda remind me of the whole Tahrir Square police incident!!
It's also very reminiscent of the WWI veterans' (aka the Bonus Army) protests during the Great Depression. Hoover ordered the clearing of the Bonus Army's encampment outside DC. During the 'clearing out' WWI vets were gunned down and at least one baby died from the use of tear gas.
Since violence from the various police departments around the nation is escalating, is this what we're going to see in very near future?
Part of why I am scared by bloggers cheering the idea of violence against the police is because all protests are inherently emotional and therefore unstable. It only takes a tiny spark for a protest to go from peaceful to deadly. I do not want these protests to start turning into violent crackdowns by the police similar to those going on in Syria and Yemen and Iran. What is more, w/ how cooky our Republican politicians have been I do not want to give them any sort of justification to start implementing fascist pieces of legislation. The last thing we need is a national curfew put into place or some other measure that will result in violence.
There is cause for violence sometimes, but it is certainly not now.
From Rabbi Rami Shapiro's blog (rabbirami.blogspot.com) comes a Dr. Seuss story, Yertle the Turtle. This story explains the what and why of the Occupy demonstrations. Please take time to find the text if you don't have the book. Rabbi Rami's interview is Oct 4, 2011 on his blog. I thank all the "Macks" in the street. A story for the masses.
I do not believe her predecessors, Messrs. Brown or Dellums, would have permitted this. What is this woman thinking? Is she thinking? No wonder she is "embattled" and she has only been in office since January!
Are you high? Dellums would've slept right through this, just like he slept through the massive protests surrounding the murder of Oscar Grant. And it was under Mayor Moonbeam that anti-war protesters were assaulted with rubber bullets and oh yeah, the Riders scandal. Or do you not really know anything about Oakland's former mayors and are just name dropping?
Oakland hasn't had a mayor that actually cared about the city in over a decade, and it's obvious.
The incidents you refer to were much more localized. Both Brown and Dellums would know, as they were better politicians than the present Mayor, the difference between local news and national resonance. #OWS, wherever located, has gained a reputation for being peaceful and a night time attack on what are perceived as peaceful protestors brings her nothing worth having and opens Oakland, unfortuantely, to escalation beyond the peaceful.
It would have been better had she slept and let the protestors sleep too.
Jerry Brown was in his second term as Mayor of Oakland when a similar event transpired. OPD opened fire with "non-lethal munitions" against peaceful anti-war protesters at the Port of Oakland. See the story at: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0407-07.htm. They even fired on longshoremen who weren't part of the protest and were just waiting to go to work. In total, over 60 people were injured and, in the end, it cost the City (or rather its taxpayers), a pretty penny. http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2005/02/02/17193921.php
The cops should be standing with the protesters, after all OWS are there to stop the laying off of thousands of cops. It seems that are cops are being used for the political agenda of the right. They have allowing themselves to be used as pawns in the political arena, when they should be protecting the OWS protesters. I can see violence erupting if the cops keep provoking peaceful protesters. We are becoming a 3rd world were those in power will use the bullying power of law enforcement. Tell the cops enough is enough of the stronge arm tactics. I would like to know who is ordering these stronge arm tactics and why?
The police don't have a choice, follow orders or lose the job. The only positive thing that comes out of these forced evictions is the media coverage of OWS. And that draws more attention to the fairness issue as well as keeping it the dominant political topic. No doubt, the congress people on the supercommittee are watching these events. Their report is due in late November and when it is published, it will most likely stoke the civil unrest.
Mike, that's what I'm confused about - if the protestors are being lawful and their removal would be unlawful, isn't it a police officer's job to uphold the law, no matter what is ordered? I mean, they're called "law enforcement" for a reason, not 'union busters'.
Cities have various ordinances that restrict using parks and other public places like camping in a park, sleeping on sidewalks, etc. These ordinances also restrict public demonstrations in various ways. The OWS is technically violating these ordinances while exercising their first amendment rights. But these violations are benign when they occur during night hours. Businesses and government offices are closed. It is essentially fixing a problem that does not exist since these ordinances are designed to protect the public from crime.
Drew, I'm sorry to have to tell you that the main job of the police is to protect the interests of the privileged and the powerful. And they most certainly have been used as union busters in the past. Historically, what has been happening in Oakland is the norm, not the exception.
Instead of 'Medic' they should scream "Somebody call 911"
Many of the Occupy folks are veterans. In the middle of the chaos it wouldn't be surprising for them to resort to what they are trained to do. Calling "medic" would be understandable under the circumstances.
It's one thing to disagree with Occupy, but to tell blatant lies on national TV is an outrage... NEWT on the Early Show said, "Occupy Wall ST. the protesters were violent drug users AND that he knows some are ANTI SEMETIC."
WTF?
I know here in Boston, we have a "cool your jets" down tent. That's were you can go to calm yourself down if you get in to a heated debate with someone who is opposed to your views. Violent.. NO.
I heard we sided with the Nazis and the KKK. Not sure who started that but it's all over FOX news comments!
I am worried when protesters let their anger and emotions get the better of them. When under attack our response is to flee or fight and tear gas can actually cause a physical reaction that triggers those responses. That's why police are to only use that as a last resort and only if lives are in danger.
I'm sure the folks at Occupy LA, with their, Sadar tent, would have been a tad worried with all those "anti-Semites" around them! Since they weren't I guess we're still fit company for our Jewish brothers and sisters.
There have been a lot of videos circling the YouTubes showing people w/ anti-Semitic views. There are videos of people chewing out Jewish individuals for 'causing the crises' and what not. The problem is a lot of these videos show things like people holding up signs that say "WallStreet Nazi's!" which is no more indicative of antisemitism than what the Tea Party protestors have done and continue to do (hell it's no more anti-Semitic than your average Hannity, Limbaugh, or Beck broadcast). Most of what I have seen are feeble attempts to label the protests badly when there isn't much to harass. That isn't to say there aren't racist people showing up- I am sure there are- or that there aren't violent people showing up- I am sure there are. It is to say if those people are showing up they are doing so in such small numbers that it's been very hard for any reliable source to get information on them. And that is especially interesting considering the media's desire for sensationalism. What this tells me is the claims TPers made about how racist signs were "few and far between" were in fact more prevalent (perhaps than said protestors realized?) and in OWS' case they actually are few and far between. I also have a hard time believing the legitimacy of a lot of YouTube videos. Even those that I am more willing to believe I still hold reservations about because I would prefer it if a more reliable outlet was able to get the information. Hell I'd even be more relaxed if I knew the video I was seeing was shot by stringers- at least then I'd know it's someone who has some journalistic integrity.
Getting good video that isn't slanted is always hard whether it be the media or the protesters making the videos. In NYC the police have their own observers with cameras so the only story told isn't just the protesters.
Last night was an unusual case where the local media covered from in the air and on the ground. There were also OWS observers who were filming at other angles. The situation with the young woman can be seen in multiple videos from multiple sources and multiple angels which makes it all the more compelling. All show the same thing.. a young woman down.. people trying to help.. and a flash bang grenade shot into the middle of the group.
Yeah it's a catch-22 situation for sure. It's hard to tell when video comes up that is legitimate and when video comes up that's propaganda. I am especially nervous because Fox News has been caught several times sending reporters out in plain clothes w/ the expressed mission of starting crap w/in the crowd. You know so they could film how "uncivilized" the OWS protestors really are. Of course all the videos I have seen also show a movement that is acutely aware of Fox News and their propaganda efforts, so that is at least encouraging. At the same time not all YouTube videos are honest or unbiased, either. So it becomes hard to tell who to trust. So far I haven't seen a whole lot of compelling evidence of racism, bigotry, or anything else at the OWS protests that would indicate something bad. I have heard a lot of stories- everything from OWS protestors throwing things, to rapes, to rats, to them smearing poo on the walls of public bathrooms....but nothing that's very substantive.
On top of what has already been said on this subject, from what at least some in the right-wing media have said, the antisemitic charge is payback for the attention paid to all the racist signs at teabagger pep rallies.
In reaction to there being no arrests after Wall Street crashed the economy for 99% of us, people protesting the basic unfairness are met with mass arrests when they peacefully protest.
Wall Street caused Trillions in loses for all of us. Why are they not held accountable?
Why are the 99% persecuted for using the right of peaceful assembly? Why does our government champion these rights overseas but not at home?
That is a big reason OWS is out there. Come one down and see. You might just realize you are the 00% too.
I'm not to sure what the 00% is. :)
I am the 99% though.
So would I. Why haven't we seen any video of these alleged attacks against police? And if there Were attacks against the police, why did they happen? What did the police do to spur these alleged attacks that nobody seems to have any evidence of? So far,Occupy has been peaceful and it has been Police who have sparked the violence..Hmmmm...Something Stinks in Oakland...
First Amendment rights in Oakland seem to have a curfew.
Don't blame the Police for "doing their job" - I hate that phrase but think it is appropriate in this context. If we are taking sides then we are "fighting" [a battle]; that does not have a substantial reason for aggression [on either side].
Jambay, I'm sorry but when the protester stood over a severely injured man and turned to the police and begged "help him he's hurt" and they did nothing.. that's on them.
When the policeman lobbed the flash grenade into the small group of protesters who had run back to help the wounded man.. that's on him.
There are orders you have to obey to keep your job and there is the right thing to do that doesn't impact your job. In the above instances they choose poorly.
Since the Republican Party and some Democrats only think about ways so President Obama isn’t re-elected and only are concerned about how they can keep the rich happy. Please tell your Republican Senators and Congress people, and especially those certain Democrats that are only helping to support the rich, to resign from their political position, since we cannot afford to wait when people need to get back to work. Families are forced to live on the streets as they are thrown out of their homes, just due to the loss of their jobs. Families are struggling just to survive from pay check to pay check. We cannot afford to wait, when there is excess burdens put on people. Tell them to Resign!!! Resign so we can put someone in office that can properly handle our economic crisis.
I'm sorry, Deb, but your suggestion simply is wasting effort and breath. They won't resign because they want to make the United States into an Autocracy for their own and their bosses benefit. They have been working at this too long and too diligently to give up now even if their game is out in the open.
I do have one question. A few days ago there was an article about the English ALEC being investigated for improprieties. Not a word since. Anyone know where that is going? Is anyone in the US paying attention?
The thing in the UK that you are referring to has only just begun. Give it some time. And, so far, unlike the case of News Corp phone hacking in the UK, there has yet to be any spillover to the US. Of course, ALEC and the British group are only allied entities, not a single organization.
Flash bangs? It sounds like an infantry assault in a combat zone. Tear gas canisters can be picked up and thrown away, but flash bangs are a real hazard.
Please, Rachel. We need your voice desperately -- people are going to be hurt unless public opinion can be mustered to force the police to allow peaceful assembly. Certain other media outlets have given short shrift to the #OccupyOakland movement. Suspisciously so, it seems, given the level of violence involved... Please use your platform to help us bring attention to the #OWS movement in Oakland and the accessive force being used by the police out here. Yes, demos are inconvenient. THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE FOR. However, law enforcement have gone too far.
Wow, kind of close to Castro Valley, too. Just sayin'.
It was loud and bright. The tear gas and the flash bangs were brutal. One girl got hit by one and when people went to help her they threw another one into that crowd. That one is on video. There was NO REASON for all of this. People were sleeping in there tents yesterday morning when they attacked and started this.
So, if you are a "Wall Street Protester" you may camp out and obstruct City Hall, @!$%# and piss in the street, obstruct people trying to conduct business or go about their daily business etc. However, if you are homeless or just out for a laugh you may not.
As I understand it the police had already given several written directives to the protesters stating they were breaking several laws and would have to disband and remove themselves from the area. These directives war ignored.
The police moved in and, perhaps, in response to aggression and refusal to obey instructions became themselves aggressive.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances"
Nowhere does it say "citizens shall have the right to break any law, for the common good, they wish"
Also, no petition for a redress of grievances has been presented to the government (unless of course the government is now the media)
There are effective avenues to redress grievances, expensive lawyers for one (unfortunately), shouting and disrupting order is not one of them how many millions were in the streets for the Iraq war?
As soon as we get a good fire, earthquake or an uproar in a poedophile's life style trial the media will be off and running, the politicians will resume business as usual and nothing will be changed.
Laws were created for a reason if they are not used, just like voting, you get what you deserve. Bankers and politicians use them to very good effect...for THEIR own good.
Read that first amendment thing you copied again. See the "Congress shall make no law...."?
That's a pretty critical point. You say OWS doesn't have the right to disobey laws. Well the whole point of civil disobedience is.. well.. disobedience. Particularly against laws that infringe on citizens right to assemble. That includes laws like curfew, trespassing on public lands (you know the ones we pay for with taxes?) and public buildings.. those belong to US, the people.. and to YOU.
So yeah.. we're gonna be in the way cause that's what's needed to get the attention we need for the people of this country and our governments to listen to what we are trying to say.
Wall Street broke laws and trashed our economy. Why weren't those laws enforced.
That is the basis for these protests. That is highlighted with every protestor arrested and by every banker not arrested.
Go 99%
Congress has NOT enacted any laws that prevent citizens from peaceably assembling to have there grievances addressed.
Oakland City has enacted laws, for the protections of it's citizens, that do not allow: using the streets as toilets nor outdoor kitchens nor campgrounds because of the attendant health risks to all it's citizens.
These are not laws preventing people from assembly..
If you wish to assemble and protest you may, as many times as you wish, within reason where you wish.
You do not have the right, however, to infringe the rights of others nor break legally in-place laws to protect others from your acts.
If, in any OWS encampment, a woman was raped or a murder committed would you expect the police to follow the law and arrest the guilty or would that infringe the guilty parties right to protest?
You may have, temporarily, got the attention of the government but what have you asked them to do? Whom have you asked? Who is your legal council? The financial institutions acted within laws, already in place. To stop a recurrence one has to change the law itself, for that you need a lawyer: that's also the law!
Congress is debating women's rights, and have been since being convened. You, and many others thought you had their attention, and "sent a message", to redress unemployment and corruption. To quote the oracle Palin "How's that going for you"
Bankers etc broke many laws and profited immensely.
How, exactly, are encampments in city public spaces going to change a single thing they and their government stooges have done or will continue to do.
They work within laws, created in part by themselves, the only way to stop them is to work within the law and force them to stop their disgusting practices. Some AG's are trying, maybe supporting them would be rather more effective.
So far no OWS encampment has issued any concrete set of specific grievances on any subject nor how they wish them to be remedied and by whom. It is rather unlikely "Wall Street" would fine itself, nor ban certain practices that's where the thing you disagree with comes in ...the law of the land. There also does not appear to be a concerted effort to be specific on what is actually being protested.
If one wants something one has to ask for it.
Mortond, I am not going to argue with you or try to reason with you. I will simply tell you that you are wrong and deserve to be scornfully ignored. Goodbye.
to clarify on the point that MeedingMonk made...
If you think that reason is the answer about protesting then you're missing the point.
Again, to clarify. Please take some time and read the articles of the constitution, the bill of rights , not just the declaration of Independence.
It's sad that when you do a "search" on rights and speech you can't find the original quote: "...with the freedom of speech I shall regain all other..." Thank you.
Retain, sorry, not regain. my bad.
and misspelled MeddlingMonk too. All of which is beside the point.
"Take away all my freedoms; yet give me [the] freedom of speech and I shall win them all back."
Why were my posts removed? I just included several links of KTVU showing the Occupy Oakland raw footage. Maybe that was it? I'm very disappointed in the blog moderators.
I'll at least re-include my letter to the mayor, less the links:
I was born and raised in Oakland, CA and I know for a fact that disbanding peaceful protests with rubber bullets, tear gas, 500+ officers and at least one helicopter is a waste of city and state resources as well as morally and constitutionally reprehensible.
My grandfather was an Oakland police officer for many years, so I have a great deal of respect for the officers and the law. But there is something wrong with our system that needs to be addressed and the disenfranchised are expressing that through a civil and peaceful protest to get attention to that fact.
Attacking these people does not endear the police or the city of Oakland to the public. I suggest you take a page from the Wisconsin protests or other cities where you keep the order rather causing disorder through violence against the peaceful. There are plenty of violent crimes to address in the city of Oakland and I think your dwindling resources are better spent there.
I offer congratulations on winning the lottery to hire more police officers from the COPS program, but I will not be donating to them this year because of your actions. I will also be sending a letter to Senator Barbara Boxer and the COPS program expressing my distaste to the actions of the city of Oakland and to say that you are undeserving of any additional funding above basic police services.
I invite you to read about and watch the events taking place in the plaza. Public opinion is not on your side. The statement given by the police is a bold face lie. I suggest you deploy cameras to your police officers so they may attempt to defend their actions. Continued escalation by the police will only make the protest stronger.
Sorry, my bad. I posted on a similar topic, and not this one. Links were still removed though. I also made a correction about the law 647(e) (not 647e) in my posting.
Newsvine randomly eats links. It just happens. If you want to be certain that a link sticks, remove the http:// from in front when you paste.
Mayor Quan has been notified of a recall effort. Her City Attorney resigned soon after her election. Her Police Chief resigned a couple of weeks ago. Murder rates are up and gangs seem to control both East and West Oakland. And on top of all that, the Alameda County Grand Jury reported on deep corruption in Oakland's Building Department. See "Terriorized by Oakland CEDA" on Facebook and auditoaklandceda.com.
In all of the videos I've seen of what happened in Oakland I have not been able to see any evidence of the protesters throwing anything at the police. It is surprising that with all the different people using video cameras there is nothing that shows what the police claim, protesters throwing rocks and bottles at them. It seems very odd that there isn't any evidence to support their claim.
I have family in Oakland, and they tell me that a recall campaign is being launched against the mayor right now.
I have family in Oakland, and they tell me that a recall campaign is being launched against the mayor right now.
America has a "one person one vote law"
However, in Oakland and SF they have a "one person can vote for three people with one vote law"
Supposed to save money, not sure who's money and who gets the money saved.
OK what's the name of that law?
It's called Ranked Choice Voting.
An example of an existing law being changed, to hopefully, cure low-turnout and expensive and multiple rounds of voting (to determine tied results)
The new system was not understood, by the voters, and is a perfect example of allowing changes to a system that works, for no good reason.
Increasing voter turnout, at the ballot box not a city park, would likewise have solved the problem with little expense.
With the possible recall of Jean Quan, obviously any savings; if any; will be negated.
Another example of rushing to judgement and applying a bandaid to a severed head.
The system needs changing, but will only be changed by law. If a stupid law is created it can also be removed or amended.
We are well on our way to one set of laws for one segment of the population and another for the leftovers.
If these discriminatory laws are not challenged, in Congress and the courts, they will be enforced in ways not to the liking of all the so called protesters out there.
Telling a TV news reporter gets you 15 minutes of fame but doesn't start the legal system rolling to actually change anything.
The existing system will, therefore, remain the same.
I believe that is called a democracy.
....Ranked Choice Voting has nothing to do w/ low voter turnout it has to do w/ preventing run-off elections. How is this law discriminatory or unfair?
Needs a Martyr.
for all that has been said about OWS (movement, people, etc.), I was still surprised by http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/issues/we-the-people. Have fun.
bad link - use without the "period" :) http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/issues/we-the-people