The Communist Party USA will not run a candidate for president, will not support progressive third-party bids but will instead throw its support behind the Democratic Party in an all-out effort to defeat President Bush and the Republican Congress, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

The giveaway of the party's plan, reports the online intelligence newsletter, is a frequent call for a ''united front'' to defeat Bush by major figures and spokesmen. This is the language employed by the party in the past when it has supported liberal candidates and issues not necessarily under party discipline, says G2 Bulletin.

As far back as April 17, Joelle Fishman, chairwoman of the party's political action committee, wrote in a report to the national board that Communists should not field a candidate of their own in 2004.

''Our presidential campaigns in the past were a great opportunity to project our program, and I'm sure we will find ourselves at that point some time in the future,'' she wrote. ''At this moment, we will convey our program best by working with all out might to build the broadest possible coalitions, fronts and networks that can defeat the undemocratic, imperialistic Bush war machine. This is our responsibility to our own class here and internationally.''

Fishman also mentioned discussions with the Green Party and other ''left'' organizations in which the Communists have argued against presidential and congressional candidates by third parties, adding, ''one united push is required to defeat the Republican stronghold.''

''The discussion will require a special approach with groups like the Campus Greens and the Peace and Freedom Party in California,'' she continued.

At a June 29 meeting in New York, the national committee approved a resolution making the defeat of Bush and the Republican majority in Congress the ''number one priority.''

''Discussion is also taking place within the Green Party about whether to run a presidential candidate this year,'' said a report to the national committee this summer. ''A section of Greens have come to agree that the defeat of Bush is the number one issue.''

However, not all of the Democratic presidential candidates energize the Communists. While the party has not yet weighed in on the candidacy of Gen. Wesley Clark, officials speak and write critically of Sen. Joe Lieberman, ''who has played an enabling role of the Bush administration by leading on compromises that undercut stronger Democratic proposals, especially in foreign policy.''

The party is also leery of John Edwards and Richard Gephardt because of their association with the less-progressive Democratic Leadership Council.

The party has nothing but praise for Sen. John Kerry, Bob Graham, Howard Dean, Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley Braun. But, judging from the accolades and laudatory comments, Dennis Kucinich, the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is by far the favorite Democratic candidate. His co-chairwoman is Barbara Lee, D-Calif., who has a career-long history of associations with Communist Party and extremist groups and individuals.

Lee is a long-time friend of Communist Party militant Angela Davis, a former Communist Party presidential candidate, and succeeded another radical from the city of Oakland, Rep. Ron ''Red'' Dellums. Lee paid her establishment political dues – first as an aide to Dellums and later as a California assemblywoman and state senator. However, less known is Lee's service on the national coordinating committee of the ''Committees of Correspondence,'' an organization that splintered from the Communist Party USA in 1991. Davis, the three-time Communist Party candidate for vice president of the United States, served by her side.

''The field of Democratic presidential hopefuls is not monolithic,'' explained a report by Fishman to the CPUSA national committee June 28. ''Rep. Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Rev. Al Sharpton are playing a radicalizing role Sharpton is campaigning for constitutional amendments to guarantee the right to vote, to education and to health care. Kucinich has pledged his first act as president will be to repeal NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and the WTO (World Trade Organization). He has introduced and co-sponsored legislation to form a Department of Peace, to abolish the death penalty and to end pre-emptive military policy, among many others.''

''It will take an extraordinary united all-people's front with a movement on the ground to defeat the Bush right-wing agenda in 2004,'' explained a report to the CPUSA national committee June 28, again written by Fishman. ''It can be done with the combination of the labor vote, the women's vote and African-American and Latino vote, combined with the youth vote, the peace vote, the environmental vote, the senior vote, the farm vote, etc., all of whom are pledged to work as they never have before.''

Kucinich's Progressive Caucus is a socialist-leaning bloc of about 60 votes or nearly 30 percent of the minority vote in the lower chamber. Until 1999, the website of the Progressive Caucus was hosted by the Democratic Socialists of America.

Following an expose of the link between the two organizations in WorldNetDaily, the Progressive Caucus established its own website under the auspices of the Congress. Another officer of the Progressive Caucus, and one of its guiding lights, is avowed socialist Rep. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent.

The Democratic Socialists of America's chief organizing goal is to work within the Democratic Party and remove the stigma attached to ''socialism'' in the eyes of most Americans.

''Stress our Democratic Party strategy and electoral work,'' explains an organizing document of the DSA. ''The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture and help integrate you to the milieu of the young liberals.''

Nevertheless, the goal of the Democratic Socialists of America has never been deeply hidden. Prior to the cleanup of its website in 1999, the DSA included a song list featuring ''The Internationale,'' the worldwide anthem of communism and socialism. Another song on the site was ''Red Revolution'' sung to the tune of ''Red Robin.'' The lyrics went: ''When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there'll be no more lootin' when we start shootin' that Wall Street throng. ...'' Another song removed after WorldNetDaily's expose was ''Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?'' The lyrics went: ''Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We'll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie.''

In the last three years, the Progressive Caucus has been careful to moderate its image for mainstream consumption. ''The members of the Progressive Caucus share a common belief in the principles of social and economic justice, non-discrimination and tolerance in America and in our relationships with other countries,'' the group's statement of purpose explains. Most of the members of the Progressive Caucus, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, opposed authorizing the war on Iraq. In fact, most Democrats in the House opposed the war resolution. Then House Minority Leader Gephardt and 81 other House Democrats supported the move.

Action

Articles

	Home Page
	Archive
Categories:
	Current Issues
	Press Releases
	National Meetings
	Analysis
	Struggles

Readings

	Classic Selections

Connect

	Join Today
	Make Donation
	Contact the CPUSA
	Building the Party
	Web Links
	Ask the Party...
	Ref Ctr for Marxist Studies

Who we are

	Literature
	Socialism USA
	CPUSA Constitution
	FAQ's

Site info

	Welcome to this new site

The 2004 Elections are Pivotal to Save Our Country and the World

Archive

Front Page

Author: Joelle Fishman, Chair, Political Action Committee, CPUSA

First published 07.05.2003 14:06 by {article_topic_desc}

Report to National Board, CPUSA
April 17, 2003

These remarks are meant to open up our first National Board discussion on the 2004 Elections. They are not complete, but rather set out some ideas to develop a framework.

Bush Administration and Congressional Republicans are Vulnerable

Some are saying that the never-ending war policy may render Bush unbeatable in 2004. In reality, the Bush administration and the Congressional Republicans are very vulnerable. Their defeat is of the greatest importance for the future of our country and the world.

While the number of favorables for Bush in the polls are up now, under the surface is opposition to nuclear first strike, opposition to unilateral action, opposition to the policy of preemption, and dissatisfaction with the Bush economic policy.

Deep cuts in basic necessities at the local level caused by the Bush tax cut to the rich, military spending and the economic downturn are giving rise to a new level of political involvement. Every issue relates to the presidential and congressional elections.

The Bush administration and the Republican majority in Congress continue to represent the most extreme right-wing corporate elements. Their seizure of the presidency and control of both branches of Congress is a serious threat to democracy and democratic rights. The broadest unity is required to defeat them.

The Bush team is targeting four states that Gore narrowly won and six states that Bush narrowly won. All in all, Bush can only count on about half the electoral votes he needs to win at this time. As well, the Democrats can count on states that equal about half the electoral votes they need. This election is very much in play.

As high as we said the stakes were in 2000, they couldn't be higher today. Clearly, Bush will continue to play the "patriotism" card and the "terrorism" card as he seeks further imperialist ventures. Embracing Bush on this will not win the Democrats the election.

There are splits even within the Republicans about Bush's war policy. On Monday, Lawrence Eagleburger, secretary of state under George Bush Sr., warned that if Bush were to go into Syria and Iran now, "even I would feel he should be impeached. You can't get away with that sort of thing in a democracy."

Several legislative initiatives are underway, which can help change the debate. HR-141, introduced by Barbara Lee with 21 co-sponsors, opposes the Bush policy of preemption, thereby providing an opening for broad forces to challenge Bush foreign and military policy.

The ACLU is organizing its first-ever four-day legislative lobby in Washington DC in June around issues to repeal the USA Patriot Act. Rep Charles Rangel, after being called unpatriotic for opposing the war, announced legislation to "provide generous higher education and health care benefits, for the troops after their discharge, their spouses and children ..."

Pressure from the grassroots in support of these and other initiatives to stop the Bush war policy will clarify the debate for the 2004 election, and can become an important voter registration and get out the vote infra structure. Voices4Change has just announced a call for a register-for-peace voter drive with a goal of three million new voters.

The National Youth and Student Peace Coalition’s lobby day on May 6 is kicking off their electoral strategy around the demands placed in the "Books not Bombs" actions held in March. Voter registration and get out the vote by newly activated youth from the peace, student labor support and campus affirmative action struggles is also a powerful force that could contribute toward winning this election.

In Southern California, Illinois and elsewhere, the Neighbors against the War formations are holding conferences to develop a common approach at the grass roots. This is an excellent vehicle to build voter registration and participation from the bottom up.

The first public appearance by all nine Democratic candidates for president took place last Wednesday at the Children's Defense Fund national conference. The candidates had met with the AFL-CIO earlier in the day. The audience was a multiracial mix of professionals and grass-roots activists. Their strong favorites were those candidates who spoke against the war.

The "debate" exposed Bush's demagogy and thievery in using the name "No Child Left Behind" for a bill that sounded good but had no funding or implementation. My first observation is that people are becoming politicized (which Sam had raised in reference to the anti-war actions).

Many of the child care and preschool workers, were angry because of TANF regulations and cuts in funding. Many were from states and rural areas that Bush carried: Mississippi, Oklahoma, the Carolinas, Florida, Arkansas. From the floor came the idea that "We can change the election ... child care in every community, connected to parents....".

Farm and rural areas must be fought for in this election. The special approaches Lem Harris was in the midst of helping our party develop should be examined and carried forward.

My second observation is that the horrible crisis in funding that every town and state is facing is pushing communities toward grass-roots organizing. The president of the National Conference of State Legislators (Oklahoma State Senator Angela Monson) and the Mayor of Cleveland, Ohio (Mayor Jane Campbell) described the horrible choices they are confronting. Both recognized that the Republican agenda is to destroy government's ability to fund entitlements. Their message was that grass-roots organizing is critical; not to allow one to get pitted against the other; and get out the vote.

Eighteen months from now, unemployment will probably be as high, the economic indicators will probably be as bad, and state and city finances will probably be even worse. In the battle over what happens to state programs, the connection to the military policy and tax policy of the Bush administration brings the focus to the 2004 elections.

The Bush program cannot be defeated on the basis of viewing each issue as separate. Along with peace, the budget fight; affirmative action; labor rights; reproductive rights; civil liberties; immigrant rights and environmental protection are all threatened by the overall policy to defund government, privatize social services, and dominate the entire world for corporate profit.

Bush and the Congressional Republicans are especially vulnerable on the economy. Organizing efforts are underway, which are laying the groundwork for the elections.

Healthcare is a major issue as cities and states are going bankrupt trying to pay Medicare, Medicaid, and insurance premiums for workers and retirees. A coalition of the AFL-CIO and health care groups, called "Put Families First," is organizing local protests against federal cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, calling for Congress to" help by sending some of working families' federal tax dollars back to their states to protect health care for our families."

A passionate battle against budget cuts to human needs and tax cuts to the wealthy was played out on the floor of the House last month with dozens of amendments offered by Democrats from the Progressive Caucus and Black Caucus that were dramatically voted down one after another along party lines.

The amendments were aimed at stopping $265 billion in entitlement cuts over ten years. $165 billion of these cuts – 62 percent of them –would come from low-income programs, including Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). These are the largest low-income entitlement cuts in recent history.

In the Senate, divisions in the Republican ranks forced Bush to back down on the enormity of the tax cut to the rich, although the compromise is still huge and unconscionable. The Bush proposal is a tax cut for the rich and a disguised tax increase for the rest of us, as well as the dismantling of government, meaning higher local taxes, higher tuition at state schools, etc. It is also notable that Bush lost the vote on drilling in Anwar in the Republican-controlled Senate.

In the 2004 elections, Bush and the Congressional Republicans must be made to answer for the suffering those votes are causing millions of people. The level of corruption and brazenness in seeking more tax breaks for corporations and wealthy individuals leaves the Republicans vulnerable.

The Bush administration's arrogant decision to weigh in against affirmative action at the Supreme Court also leaves them vulnerable.

The outpouring of opposition, especially many young people who declared themselves "the new civil rights movement," will certainly make its voice heard in the 2004 elections.

Candidates

Of the nine Democratic candidates for president, three are linked to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), with the most conservative being Joe Lieberman, who has played an enabling role for the Bush administration by leading on compromises that undercut stronger Democratic proposals, especially in foreign policy.

John Edwards, who is attracting big money donations ($7.41 million to date), and Richard Gephardt are also part of the DLC. We need to develop our assessment of the DLC.

John Kerry opposed the war before it began and opposes the policy of preemption, as did Bob Graham. Howard Dean made opposition to the war on Iraq a central part of his platform, although his peace stand is limited. The centerpiece of his campaign is health-care reform. It surprised some that he was able to raise $2.6 million to date with opposition to the war on Iraq as his starting point.

Dennis Kucinich, the chair of the Progressive Caucus, is a true peace candidate with a 100 percent labor voting record. His presence has already served to shift the debate. At the Children's Defense Fund (CDF) he was the only one to support their program of $20 billion for child care.

Al Sharpton was most enthusiastically received at the CDF for sharply condemning the Bush administration and opposing the war. Carol Moseley Braun also opposed the war.

Within the labor and people's organizations there are bound to be different first choices for presidential candidate, based on different estimates of who can defeat George Bush. We should become involved in this discussion to help shape the issues and determine the outcome.

Where the candidates stand on the issue of preemption can help isolate the most conservative. The ability to pull out the vote at the grassroots, and to build a united front in the general election will be affected by the choice of Democratic candidate.

The AFL-CIO has indicated to state labor federations and labor councils that they should not endorse any candidate at this time. Different unions are carrying out their own processes. AFSCME is holding a special conference in Iowa next month to be attended by the congressional district chairs of the PEOPLE (political action) committees to hear from and meet with each of the nine candidates.

John Sweeney and others from labor are scheduled to participate in the America's Future conference in June of progressive Democrats, organized around the Wellstone campaign slogan, "Stand Up, Keep Fighting."

The situation is fluid. We may find ourselves in organizations which have made different endorsements. Certainly, the more exposure the most advanced candidates get, the greater the pressure for a more progressive choice.

Helping Kucinich be a part of the mix and overcome the fact that he is not well-known nationally, will make it possible for his candidacy to more effectively influence the debate.

Probably the biggest contribution we can make now through the primaries is to organize locally and push issues to the fore and register voters.

The Immigrant Rights Freedom Ride could be a great mobilizer for the elections, as it travels across the country. The Bush administration continues to target the Latino vote.

Holding back from the Freedom Ride, as we understand some Democrats are doing, leaves the door wide open for Bush's demagogy to prevail.

On the other hand, joining the freedom ride (with Congressman John Lewis), and taking a principled stand for immigrant rights could help galvanize many communities, as well as labor to participate enthusiastically in voter registration and get-out-the-vote activities. The Cesar Chavez holiday campaign has also proved to be an important vehicle to win the Latino community away from Bush, and to build Latino-labor unity.

Independent politics

In many ways, I think our 2000 electoral position continues to have validity in the 2004 campaign. The war on Iraq, carried out in the face of millions of protesters world-wide, and the war on people's needs and rights in our own country, verify our tactic of broad unity against the extreme right wing.

Some say that there is no significant difference in foreign policy, citing, for example, Clinton's war against Yugoslavia. We need to develop our approach to the extent of differences both between Democrats and Republicans and within the Democratic Party on these questions.

The need to build up the number of labor/pro-labor members of Congress, and of state and local elected bodies is more important in light of the frontal attack on the labor movement and the state and local economic crisis.

There are other forms with which we support at the local level, such as the Working Families Party, which has played an important role in New York, and with those Greens who accept a coalition approach. There are now 177 Greens elected to local offices throughout the country. We should discuss how local labor, peace and justice candidates can emerge at the local level.

By not fielding more of our own for elected office at the local level – on whatever ticket – weakens our united front policy. With more Communists running for office, we would learn a lot and we would contribute working class elected officials with a broad outreach approach.

We should prioritize discussions within each district to search for possible local candidates, and then help to make needed resources available. However, I do not think it makes political sense to field a Communist Party candidate for president in 2004. I am raising the issue, because it has come up.

Our presidential campaigns in the past were a great opportunity to project our program, and I'm sure we will find ourselves at that point some time in the future. At this moment, we will convey our program best by working with all our might to build the broadest possible coalitions, fronts and networks that can defeat the undemocratic, imperialistic Bush war machine. This is our responsibility to our own class here and internationally.

There are a number of forums being organized "on the left" to discuss third party candidacies, some by the Greens and some by others.

Where we participate in such discussions, we should argue for local candidates in selected districts on third party tickets, but not at the Presidential and Congressional level where one united push is required to defeat the Republican stronghold.

This discussion will require a special approach with groups like the Campus Greens and the Peace and Freedom Party in California.

In summary:

• The Bush administration and Republican Congress are vulnerable and can be defeated with a broad, coalition, grass roots approach focused on the issues. We should find every way we can to bring together forces and issues around peace and the economic crisis.

• Every struggle is connected to the 2004 elections.

Organizing in coalition on the issues, including such forms as peoples assemblies or town hall meetings, can allow the peoples forces to mold the candidates and produce the best primary results.

• Our tactic of broad, united front to defeat the extreme right-wing applies to the 2004 elections, and should be expanded

• We should contribute to independent politics through grass roots organizing, supporting labor candidates, and fielding our own candidates on whatever line is appropriate.

These ideas are meant to spark an opening discussion on our work in the 2004 elections.

Between now and the national committee meeting, we should prepare materials on the election calendar and other practical mechanics.

The work and activity of the whole party for the next 18 months should center around the defeat of Bush and the Republican majority in Congress. Discussions should take place now on the situation in each district including to identify targeted congressional races.

| Printer-friendly page | Send this article to a friend |

CPUSA: cpusa@cpusa.org
235 West 23rd Street
New York NY 10011
ph: 212-989-4994

Related websites:
People's Weekly World
Political Affairs
Young Communist League

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.