Support Green Mass Group!

Donate today to help cover our 2012 costs
if you'd like to see GMG survive & thrive!


Fundraising Thermometer

Menu

- Home
- About GMG
- Contact
- F.A.Q.
- How to use GMG
- Policy
- RSS Feed
- Diaries

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


Event Calendar
February 2012
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* * * 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 * * *
<< (add event) >>

Facebook
Green Mass Group on Facebook



Towards a just & healthy democracy in the Commonwealth... and beyond!

The Republicrat Convergence: House Speaker pledges "NO NEW TAXES"

by: shirleykressel

Sat Jul 30, 2011 at 21:25:03 PM EDT


(Hot damn! Sounds like someone who's clearly unbought and unbossed. - promoted by eli_beckerman)

What heartless conservatives would balance a $1.9 billion state budget shortfall by service cuts to the needy, without any effort to take back the tax favors so long showered upon the rich and well-connected?  Was it the Tea Party extremists?  The right-wing fringe of the Republican Party?  No.  "No new taxes" was this year's pledge by Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo, leader of the  dominant Democratic Party.  And DeLeo's stance was supported by other Democratic legislators -- and by newly reelected Democratic Governor Deval Patrick.  

The 2012 state budget as passed was a disaster for children, students, seniors, the disabled; for families, schools, communities;  for anyone who needs state services.  

But not everyone is feeling the pain.  There was no cutback in the corporate welfare budget, a $2.2 billion "black box," as Auditor Suzanne Bump called it.  Despite ample evidence that business subsidies are ineffective in creating jobs, these so-called "tax expenditures" have, in the last five years, been growing at twice the rate of the service budget, with virtually no oversight or accountability.  A bill attempting to establish some basic disclosure of who is getting this money and what the impacts might be is languishing in the Joint Revenue Committee.  Legislators busy cutting health care and education don't seem to even want to know what's being done with the money they're giving to their business friends.

shirleykressel :: The Republicrat Convergence: House Speaker pledges "NO NEW TAXES"
Clear alternatives to the DeLeo/Patrick approach were on the table.  The Act to Invest in Our Communities, a bill sponsored by sixteen legislators, would have filled the purported budget gap by raising taxes on high-income (half-million per year or more) earners while modestly reducing taxes for the bottom sixty percent.  Supported at a packed State House hearing by respected economists and hundreds of community advocates, this bill was entirely ignored in the voting, even by its sponsors.  

Nor was any consideration given to the Green-Rainbow Party's proposal to halve the corporate tax-break budget, saving $1 billion annually, and to establish a single-payer health insurance system, reducing health costs by $1.5 billion annually.  Indeed, rather than crippling our economic future with massive job-killing cuts, the state could save billions and invest in long-term growth by implementing long-standing recommendations, from the Green Party and from recognized economists, for a more visionary economic and social policy program. Such a program would embrace sustainable energy at fair prices, localized agriculture and manufacturing, green-economy education and job creation, demilitarization, and ending the costly, cruel and futile drug wars.

The DeLeo/Patrick cuts are falling especially hard on the poor and on those who are being pushed from the middle class into poverty.  The Mass Budget and Policy Center (http://www.massbudget.org/documentsearch/findDocument?doc_id=141) identifies the following FY12 cuts from FY11 levels - and these compound three previous years of service reductions that have pushed many state agencies to the brink of collapse:

Early Education and Care: cut by $14 million
Chapter 70 K-12: cut by $82 million
Higher Education: cut by $64 million
Environment & Recreation: cut by $5 million
Health care: cut by $318 million
Human services (children, youth, families, elders, disability): cut by $12 million
Infrastructure, Housing, Economic Development: cut by $102 million
Law & Public Safety: cut by $136 million
Local aid: cut by $65 million (may be restored -- but would still be 33% below FY09's original budget)

Further, in an alarming sign of things to come, the budget discussions have adopted a tone that scapegoats public sector workers and their unions.  Collective bargaining for health care is already being curbed, and teachers' rights are under attack by the government-funded charter-school movement.

But most important: None of this slashing was necessary.

In what should be a major scandal, the Boston Globe - after the budget was settled -- released the state news that tax revenues for this year rose by $2 billion - more than enough to close the whole "budget gap" with no service cuts.  This windfall was not a surprise.  It had been had been accumulating for months before the budget vote, as reported for April by the  Department of Revenue and the State House News.  As the Globe reported, the numbers were already way up in June; indeed, the Department of Revenue, releasing the figures, cited "a state economy that grew noticeably stronger over the past 12 months."  

Yet, Patrick's administration quickly downplayed this revenue bonanza, saying it might not come again next year and the money should be squirreled away in the "rainy day" fund - which would fill it to its highest level of the decade.  Obviously, it's not raining for the administration and the Legislature.  But it's raining hard on millions of people who are struggling in a high-unemployment economy to make up for the failure of the Commonwealth to maintain its services.

Why is the Democratic Party leadership enacting cuts beyond those any Republican has yet achieved?  It is NOT because there's a shortage of money.  Money is available, and it is flowing freely to the wealthy and well-connected in nepotism, tax breaks, regulatory indulgences, contract favors and other forms of corruption.  What we have is neither a "taxing problem" nor a "spending problem," to cite the current false dichotomy bandied about by politicians.  It is a problem of values.  

We have a single-party government that has two heads but one heart. Across the country,  Democratic politicians are striving  -- ever more successfully -- to prove they are better servants of the rich and the corporations than the Republicans could ever hope to be.  The ethics, economic theories and social goals of both major parties are shaped by the same campaign donations and lobbying pressures from corporations and a small but powerful cadre of super-rich individuals.  Democrat strategists feel that they can take the entire progressive electorate for granted, because betrayed progressives have no place to turn.  Democratic Party unity is achieved by bogeyman politics, scaring people to vote for the lesser of two evils.   And the Republicans play their role to perfection, always announcing a more outrageous right-wing proposal as soon as the Democrats accept a compromise on their previous proposal.  Both parties have engendered popular distrust, and have taken to the subterfuge of labeling their candidates as "outsiders."  

It has taken years of betrayal and disillusionment, but people are beginning to see that its time for a third - or really, a second - political party.  Nothing will come of progressives' yammering at their elected officials to pass this or that piece of legislation, however meritorious a particular bill might be.  No significant changes are being achieved, that way, and any small victories are drowned in the massive tide of social and economic havoc wrought by the best candidates money can buy.  Democrats still talk - occasionally -- about taking care of working people; but in their actions they stand on the side of privilege.  All but 6 legislators voted to approve this year's disastrous budget, with Democrats and Republicans standing arm-in-arm, putting a victorious face on it for their constituents and praising each other's bipartisan spirit.

After years of Clintonian "triangulation" and other ideological surrenders to the Republicans in the name of "bi-partisanship" and "reinventing government" and "tough love" for the poor,  Democrats have forgotten why they exist.  They stopped "feeling your pain" a long time ago.

The budget fiasco is part of a bigger picture: We are losing our hard-won democracy as big money becomes ever more powerful and democratic institutions are undermined to empower business interests. People who have been working in good faith within the system, and for years dutifully voting for the "lesser of two evils," are realizing that the system has abandoned them, and they are turning away from it. We need to plant the seeds for a democratic and social revival, with a new generation of candidates, elected with public campaign financing, beholden to no one but the voters.

Independent candidates appeal to those frustrated with the mainstream parties, but as "lone wolves" their effectiveness is limited and their platforms often idiosyncratic. The Tea Party is a popular mobilization, but a phony one, corporately funded and manipulated.   The Republicrats have created immense barriers to third parties. However, the Green-Rainbow Party, (the Massachusetts affiliate of the Green Party of the United States), now eligible for ballot status, is a legitimate progressive flag-bearer; its principles (see the "Ten Key Values," at http://www.green-rainbow.org/1... commit  to social equity, economic justice and environmental protections, and to government that is, in former Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm's words, "unbought and unbossed." As the two party duopoly self-destructs, Greens can and should step forth, bringing the leadership toward a sustainable social compact that Democrats have proven they cannot provide.  

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
When will you [all] announce your candidac[ies]? (0.00 / 0)
I can offer something of a defense of Democrats nationally, but's damn hard to counter this. It's freaking disgraceful.

But: what you offering by way of an alternative? Yeah, "Greens can and should step forth." But the fact is, they don't. Fact is, we all can't vote for Mark Miller in the Berk 3rd. Fact is, Greens have also demonstarted that they are unable to provide what you're after either.

The first half of this is excellent and deserves wide reading. But the conclusion leaves me cold. Talk is cheap.

So, two questions: how many candidates for state legislature/senate does the GRP anticipate running next time around?

Last time, it was all of two, and both at the other end of the state. Will we see a few dozen spirited, FUNDED campaigns, or is all this just whistling in the wind? Because I've heard this over and over and over again from the Greens for yars--hell, I've written similar stuff myself--and at the end of the day... well, I don't have to spell it out.

And: looking at the names of the posters who regularly lambaste the state Democrats on here--Patrick, Eli, John Andrews--what's YOUR excuse for not running? (This Democrat would likely back any of ya). Because if YOU folks don't, nobody will.

Seriously, Eli and Shirley--if either of you run, and you allow non-district folks to play, I'll work my ass off for you. My sometimes deep-seated disagreement with you is nothing compared to my respect for your integrity and the common sense you'd bring, I don't care what party you're from. Please think about it. And while runing for legislature would probably be another classic melodramatic GRP suicide ... start local. If you're going to criticize our elected officials non-stop in the contemptuous terms you do, I think you ought to put some skin in the game. Maybe governing isn't as black-and-white as punditry (though, in truth, the issue Shirley describes comes pretty close)?

This means dealing with local business people--banks, commercial developers, hardcore politicos, municipal unions, and hordes of irate taxpayers, etc. It's not nearly as much fun as hanging in basements talking relocalization with your fellow travellers. But you'd do some real good, and it would be a start.

(Turnabout is fair play. So: you can expect my own announcement next year.I'm starting small. But I've promised a few folks I will. And, honestly, each and every one you should be on your Town Meeting, if not Select Board, and on various town commissions. If you put the same effort into making a name for yourself while taking genuine responsibility for your community (and,no shit, there's little glory and a lotta hell in town management) that you do theorizing and ball-busting, well, the sky'd be the limit.  


We are here! We are here! (Horan hears a who?) (0.00 / 0)
MIchael -- thanks as always for the challenge and keeping us on our toes. I certainly agree on the need for Green-Rainbow party members to have "skin in the game" by running for local office and, if fortunate enough to be elected, serving as elected officials. Not an easy thing, as you know!

Government can be run for the better, Greens can help make that happen, and serving provides much needed experience, insight, and credibility.

I'm serving my 9th year on my local school committee --- every year our legislature gives me a budget ax as a gift -- and my spouse is likewise is serving her 3rd year on our town select board. I'm also serving a 3rd year on our local educational collaborative, and have been on the cultural council and energy committee. And I've used these experiences to inform the policies I've advocated for in races for state rep and state auditor.

I agree, we absolutely do need more Greens to step forward at both the local and state level. But it's wrong to say we aren't already here. Greens do step forth, even though as a party,  we are small in number. Although there need to be many, many, more, there are Green-Rainbow party members already serving (or who have already served) on local boards and commissions across the state. These are usually non-partisan races, so it isn't always noticed.

But as much as I acknowledge the need for still more Greens to run for and serve in local elected office, I don't see how you can both scold the GRP for only running two state rep/senate campaigns last year and lambaste running for legislature as a "classic melodramatic GRP suicide" in the very same post. Consecutive posts, maybe, but seriously, the very same one?  Your question can't really be, "why aren't you committing suicide?" can it?

Of course, it isn't suicide. And it's not melodramatic. It's needed.  

"We are so happy to have a seat at the table that we ignore the meal being served." Jeff Crosby, president of IUE-CWA Local 201 in Lynn, Mass.


I can live with this (0.00 / 0)
"thanks for keeping us on our toes [you miserable bastard...]."
Actually, it's good for you. It was always hard, as a Green, debating; even on BMG, we often got little more than dismissive nods, condescending strategy tips, and benign neglect. Now you've got a Democrat that actually takes you seriously. Let the wires rock.
Unfortunately, because they haven't been taken seriously, places like GMG and GRP FB become boring rafters full of cheerleaders. KOS and BMG are brimming over with critiques of Democratic policies, leaders, and candidates--would that Greens were as open to, and as full of, dissent!  The circle-the-wagons mentality hardly reflects the individualism and balls of so many party members. (Seriously, one thing about being where I am now--I feel I can breathe again, can speak freely and PUBLICLY about my party's ideology, policy, leadership, you name it. And god knows I have been. But I was never a good cheerleader.)

sigh so, somebody's gotta do it, right?    

In re your other remarks, let me clarify: I haven't looked back at what I wrote, but I definitely didn't mean to suggest that running for state legislature was suicidal. I have no doubt but that any number of experienced Greens could put up a damn good fight. And sooner or later one WILL win.
I meant the gubernatorial and a POTUS run. Children's crusades, lambs led to the slaughter. Sorry for the confusion. I know I'm not always logical, but if I was suggesting what you say here, the problem was with my language, not my logic.

My complaint is simply--if you are going to criticize NATIONAL politics, you have to offer an alternative. Your focus is local and state, and I'm down with that--I'm pleased to see that at least one former state candidate (Purcell) is looking to polish his credentials with a local run. But the stuff I've been reading suggesting that Greens should not vote for a Democrat where no Green is running is downright abhorrent to me, reckless, irresponsible, and downright juvenile, and believe me, I'd be squawking about that were I still in the Party (of course, the response to my squawking is why I'm not). I agreed with much of the twin critiques recently published by the GRP co-chairs, but ultimately, I was left with  ... so what? WhaddYOUgot? And I'm met with silence each time I ask.

If you continue to develop candidates who serve at the levels you have, and work their way up--you know, like do some time in the State House before running for governor?; and focus on state matters, leaving GPUS to issue those knee-jerk half-assed pronunciamentoes on stuff they don't half understand; and always but always offer an alternative (remember how I used to scream "for every NO, a YES?") you will be taken seriously. And you'll get nothing in the way of argument from me.

In the meantime, I'd suggest making common cause with good Democrats. And asking them to do the same. Sheesh, "Green" and "Democrat" are just labels. Stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus. They're not religious credos, and they're not part of anyone's identity (I hope). Parties are just temprary strategic vehicles, nothing more, nothing less. If I find one that offers more promise for getting to my goals than did the Greens or do the Democrats, I'll jump ship again.

Because, quite frankly, you ain't gonna get nowhere on your own. And neither, ultimately, are we.

BTW, you really ought to be Party Chair. And to start expanding your own political horizons ... I descry a seat somewhere between School Board and Auditor...    


[ Parent ]
from rag tag to boring cheerleader (0.00 / 0)
I'm getting tired of the name-calling

[ Parent ]
a chance to prove me wrong (0.00 / 0)
Which label is innacurate?

I'll withdraw the "cheerleader" when I see the kind of vociferous dissension and self-critique on here (and FB and elsewhere) that I find on BMG and DailyKos. Frankly, all I see on here is Greens-R-Great and Democrats Suck--I NEVER see Green candidates criticized, never see Green policies debated (can you show me other examples outside my arguments about HCR and casinos? Even as Chair I dissented publicly--but I simply don't see that--though Eli can probaly recall some other examples). I DO see that, in spades, all over Democratic threads. Doesn't mean Democrats don't ultimately vote for lamers, but I find the non-stop cheerleading as dull as you do my labels.

So prove me wrong. What disappoints you about your current candidates, your leaders, the Green platform, current initatives, your rhetoric, etc? And why aren't you, like BMGers and Kossacks using this forum to discuss and debate your OWN Party--rather than simply, uh, cheerleading?


[ Parent ]
posting policy (0.00 / 0)
Green Mass Group exists in part because the political discourse has been so badly damaged by manipulative forces who gain by divide-and-conquer techniques. We want to honor everyone's contribution to the political conversation, so we ask that you avoid personal insult, and treat each other with respect. The internet represents a wonderfully democratizing technology, but it has also emboldened people to behave anti-socially. Our basic goal is to create an online community (ie, create a pleasurable and nurturing environment for our readers) for Green dialogue in Massachusetts.


[ Parent ]
from a master of vitriol himself... (0.00 / 0)
Hmmm. What if I suggested that the GRP was made up of "psychopathic," "scared shitless," "corrupt," "self-interested" "greedy bastards" and "hypocrites" engaged in "dumb-shit stuff?"

I don't think that language is respectful at all.

And it's yours.

Nor do I care. You can call me and my party anything you want. Politics isn't about freaking "nurturing"--that's new-agey politics-as-therapy.

There was no personal insult in what I wrote. I described the GRP as "rag tag." It may be innaccurate--frankly I think it's spot on and entirely germane to the conversation in which it appeared, but it's hardly personal. I suggested that what I read on here is largely "cheerleading" for the GRP. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not; but I also suggest that it's not personal, and that it's a relatively accurate description.

If we can't be honest about our feelings and use what language we each believes best suits our purposes and best describes what we are trying to highlight, I don't see the point. And your own invective suggests you agree.

It is interesting to me, however, that these Guidelines were never once cited amidst all the gleeful Democratic Party bashing that goes on here (as well it should!). "Cheerleading?" Hmmm.


[ Parent ]
for the humor at least... (0.00 / 0)
I'd appreciate links! And they might help to secure my reputation as a master of vitriol.

I posted that policy as a reminder -- to all of us, myself included -- about what we're trying to do. For way too long I've felt that the testosterone-heavy back-and-forth here at GMG was NOT what I was aiming for. I found the re-hashing of personal gripes and the endless navel-gazing (I'm guilty as charged!) tiresome.

Yes, you also have thoughtful critiques, important criticisms, etc. But you sound like you've placed the Green-Rainbow Party and the Democratic Party on some sort of equivalence-based comparison. My how the Democratic Party can tolerate robust criticism of its programs! What a healthy forum for self-criticism and debate! Your criticisms of the GRP seem to always come down to criticisms of small handfuls of people (making your criticisms often appear personal), and most tiresome is your focus on the current co-chairs being out-of-touch with everyday Americans like yourself. They are not the Green-Rainbow Party, and neither are they as out of touch as you dream.

Circle the wagons? How about a circular firing squad?  


[ Parent ]
nothing wrong with testosterone, either (0.00 / 0)
Probably needless to say, I wrote a long-winded point-by-point rebutttal, or at least clarification; but to what end? Simply put, you've lost me here. Debating what is and isn't "tiresome" in your view--as self-appointed arbiter elegantarium--is the most tiresome exercise of all. You seem to making one point very clear when you state--"I've felt...not what I was aiming for": that is, that this is your blog. Well, truth be told, you've earned it. But I ain't interested in being talked down to like that. That privelege, Eli, you haven't fucking earned.

I found your remarks creepily redolent of the STFU I received at the hands of your illustrious chair*  a comment that basically said "this is MY party." Hell, I suppose he's earned it too.

But just as I immediately lost complete interest in a party that tolerates stuffed-shirt autocrats and the way they diss those who believed most fervently in and worked hardest on its behalf, I'm not interested in a blog that goes after its loyal contributors based on style and subject.   They're both of a piece; they both represent an assertion of power (you are of course infinitely more genteel in the way you proceed), and a claim to a kind of authority that rubs me entirely the wrong way. Kinda sucks; I'll miss this place, just as I very much miss the Party.

But there's balm in Gilead,including the knowledge that, yes,Democratic blogs brim over with "robust criticism" of Democratic programs (and candidates and strategy) and serve as VERY "healthy forums for self-criticism." There's more of that in any SINGLE thread on Kos and most threads on BMG than in two years' worth of writing on GMG. Funny, isn't it, that, historically, the further to the left you move, the more you find that the greatest dissenters really don't much care for dissent from within their own ranks?

I leave you now with a far nicer, more refined, more nurturing,and infinitely more agreeable, in every sense of the word, space now. All together now...

Bye bye.It was fun for a while.  

*(of course it's freaking personal. It's a vendetta, and it ain't over. However, one pt of clarifiaction: it's only one of  your co-chairs that I truly detest.Still respect and admire the other. Even if I hold fast to the idea that both are very VERY much out of touch.)  


[ Parent ]
nothing wrong with nurturing (0.00 / 0)
Nurturing is not new-agey. It's very old-agey.  

[ Parent ]
What's up with Jill Stein? Anyone know if she plans on running? (0.00 / 0)
I think she'd make a great match up against Scott Brown.  She's bright, thinks quick on her feet, and has experience campaigning.  I'd like to see her push Brown on his EPA vote.  

Anyone hear anything?


Obama Extends The Patriot Act
http://www.latimes.com/news/na...


About
Green Mass Group is an online forum for Green thought and collective action in Massachusetts. It is a community forum for justice, sustainability, democracy and health in the Commonwealth and beyond. Read more

Quotes
"Now, is this the deal I would have preferred? No. I believe that we could have made the tough choices required - on entitlement reform and tax reform - right now, rather than through a special congressional committee process. But this compromise does make a serious down payment on the deficit reduction we need and gives each party a strong incentive to get a balanced plan done before the end of the year. Most importantly, it will allow us to avoid default and end the crisis that Washington imposed on the rest of America."
--President Barack Obama on the debt ceiling "deal"



"Despite Democratic control over the White House, despite Democratic control over the Senate, despite overwhelming opposition from the American people, a small minority of the members of the Republican-controlled House have successfully pushed an extreme right-wing agenda onto the American political landscape. It is an ideology which believes that despite the fact that the rich are getting richer, the middle class is shrinking, and poverty is increasing, all - all of the burden for deficit reduction should rest on working people."
--Independent Senator Bernie Sanders on the debt ceiling "deal"


Then and Now

Then...

"Last year Evergreen, a Massachusetts company, agreed to establish their first-ever United States based manufacturing facility here in Massachusetts. They did so, or are doing so, at Devens. They have now agreed and chosen to triple their size at Devens. Their next phase of expansion, right here in Massachusetts, a signature company in a signature sector, and we congratulate all of the folks at Evergreen and look forward to continuing to work with you... We made a personal commitment to Evergreen for the sake of Evergreen, but also because we wanted to show that there are ways in which state government, in working together with private industry and with the utility companies, could begin to create a different kind of environment, a different kind of business climate here, to grow that sector, and it is happening. It's happening. Evergreen is one of the most prominent examples, but there are a whole host of examples."
--Governor Deval Patrick, April 7, 2008, boasting about state investment in Evergreen.

and Now...

"Evergreen Solar Inc. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection yesterday, completing a stunning reversal of fortune for a high-flying alternative-energy company that once seemed to herald a new era for the Massachusetts economy... At its peak, Evergreen employed roughly 900 people locally and attracted more than $50 million in state support, as its stock price soared above $100 a share.
Yesterday, Evergreen's stock closed at 18 cents. The company shuttered its manufacturing plant in Devens earlier this year and now has only 85 employees left. Massachusetts is one of its top creditors, owed $1.5 million in rent."
--Erin Ailworth, Boston Globe, August 16, 2011


Connect with us


Find GMG on Facebook

Blog Roll
We recommend
AlterNet
The Automatic Earth
Club Orlov
Common Dreams
CounterPunch
Democracy Now!
Energy Bulletin
Green Change
Green Horizon
Green Party Watch
Mass Greens
No Supper Tonight
The Oil Drum
Open Media Boston
The Sanctuary
Sustainability by Design
Sustenance
techPresident
Truthdig
Web of Debt
YES! Magazine

Third Party Politics
Ballot Access News
Free & Equal
Independent Political Report
Poli-Tea

MA Politics
All Politics is Wicked Local
Blue Mass Group
Bob LeLievre's Blog
CommonWealth Unbound
Gold Mass Group
Mass Roundup
MassBeacon.com
Mass Politics Blog
Planet Valenti
Red Mass Group


Important Links
Massachusetts
Alliance for Democracy
Alternatives for Community and Environment
Bioneers by the Bay
Boston Workers Alliance
Center for Popular Economics
The Crash Course
Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative
The E.F. Schumacher Society
Greater Boston Peak Oil & Climate Change Meetup
Green Justice Coalition
Green-Rainbow Party
Massachusetts Budget & Policy Center
Massachusetts Coalition for Healthy Communities
Massachusetts Global Action
Massachusetts Green Jobs Coalition
Massachusetts Jobs with Justice
Massachusetts Peace Action
New Economics Institute
Northeast Organic Farming Association - Mass.
Nuestras Raices
ONE Massachusetts
Peacework Magazine
PV Sustain
Secure Green Future
Small Planet Institute
Stop the Wars Coalition
Student Immigrant Movement
Students for a Just and Stable Future
Time Trade Circle
Transition Massachusetts
Traprock Center for Peace & Justice
United for a Fair Economy
United for Justice with Peace

New England
Gund Institute for Ecological Economics
New England United

National
Business Alliance for Local Living Economies
Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy
Grassroots Economic Organizing
Green America
Green Party of the U.S.
The Greens/Green Party USA
Institute for Local Self Reliance
Institute for Policy Studies
New American Dream
Post Carbon Institute
Progressive Democrats of America
Slow Money Alliance
The Story of Stuff
Transition US
US Solidarity Economy Network

Global
350.org
African Greens
European Greens
Federation of Green Parties of Americas
Global Greens
New Economics Foundation


check to have links open new windows
Powered by: SoapBlox