I
suspect that there are some among us who rejoiced at the victory
of George W. Bush, and are eagerly awaiting the payoff that will
arrive in the mail this summer in the form of a check from the IRS
for approximately $300.00. That the rebate and the Bush tax cut in
general are to be paid for through cuts in Medicaid, children’s
programs and mass transportation, as well as a profound alteration
of the Social Security system, appears to be of little
consequence.
Bush’s
immediate reversion to conservative type was manifested in attacks
on organized labor, a weakening of the safeguards on the
environment and global warming, and an attempt to fast-track the
FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas). The fact that Bush has
dropped the mask of “compassionate conservatism” may even be
cause for rejoicing in some circles. Abraham Lincoln’s party,
the party of the union, is now solidly conservative. It hardly
needs be said that the transformation of this political party
began when the Democratic Party became the choice of African
Americans, Latinos and others as a result of the Civil Rights
Movement.
While
I am unalterably opposed to Bushism in any way, I do believe that
his election serves a useful purpose. If nothing else, it is a
wake-up call to both old warriors and young activists who may have
thought that the right to vote was sacrosanct. Florida, however,
gave proof to what had been suspected by some for awhile: the
Voting Rights Act has been systematically subverted almost from
the time of its enactment in order to dilute, if not discount, the
votes of African-Americans. So for me, the act of voting and
participation in national, and more importantly, local elections
(and especially the community school board elections) is not
simply a hard-won right, but, under current circumstances, an act
of defiance.
This
is a time when there is too little evidence of individual
commitment to the other. This is a time when there has been a
profound attenuation of the social compact and the ascendancy,
once more, of the claim that those who are poor deserve to be
indigent, that those at the bottom belong there, and that those
who suffer from an inadequate education are ineducable. This is a
time when our country is regressing to the ideology that “those
people” only need to try harder, work longer and find a pair of
bootstraps with which to pull themselves up the proverbial ladder
of success. This is a time when conventional wisdom holds that
government is intrusive and oppressive and serves as a crutch,
thus interfering with individual autonomy. This is a time when
private charity, philanthropy, religious institutions, for-profit
companies and any institution but government are promoted as the
solution to public problems. Thus, it is thought better to return
dollars to wealthy taxpayers and hope that private institutions
provide services that once were the responsibility of government.
In
times like these, the aggregate vote of like-minded individuals
becomes an act of collective defiance. In this spirit, the PSC has
endorsed and recommended candidates who have pledged to be strong
supporters of a public institution—the City University of New
York. Over the course of the last several months, we have
discovered that CUNY can draw tremendous grassroots support. Many
of these candidates are from CUNY and of CUNY and see the City
Council as a means to repay City University for the life it has
given them.
The
old guard is leaving the City Council. We can join with our
communities to cast an individual vote that resounds collectively
and results in the election of a CUNY-friendly City Council.
back
to PSC HOME page
other
CLARION
articles