Search Results
Please enter search terms in the box below.   This search is site wide including Retiree Advocate issues from January 2025 forward for pre 2025 issues of the Advocate please go to the Advocate Archives

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents September 2025 We Remember Michael Righi Mike Andrew, Karen Richter, Robby Stern Michael Righi, member of the Retiree Advocate Editorial Board, veteran activist, and retired economics professor, died in July. His passing is a huge loss for PSARA and the Retiree Advocate, and a person- al loss for his many friends in and out of PSARA. PSARA sends our deepest condo- lences to Bobby Righi, an equally great activist, writer, and friend. Below, some PSARA leaders who worked closely with Michael share memories of him. Mike Andrew: I don’t remember when I met Michael Righi. He was the kind of person who, once you talked to him a couple of times, you felt like you’d always known him. It may have been in 2012, when I first started working for PSARA, or it may have been before that, in the context of economic or climate justice organizing. He was passionate about both. In any case I was delighted to find out that we shared a political pre-history in the New Communist movement in the 1970s. Michael was wicked smart, but not a show-off about it. He was wickedly funny too. And he was more than willing to turn his droll sense of humor against billionaires and the politicians who abetted them. “Every billionaire is a policy failure,” was one of his favorite taglines. As editor of the Retiree Advocate, I appreciated his ability to take complex economic issues and explain them in simple – but not simplistic – terms any reader could understand. And all in 750 words! I know our readers appreciated it too, because every one of them, without exception, when they heard that he’d died, exclaimed “Oh no! What will we do without his articles?” I also appreciated the fact that Michael – and Bobby too – would pitch in to help with whatever was needed. He could explain cryptocurrency, carry a banner in a march, set up chairs for an event, or stick mailing labels on the latest issue of the Retiree Advocate . He was completely selfless that way. I last saw Michael at Tim Wheeler’s book reading on July 26. I was expecting to see him again a few days later to plan the new issue of the Retiree Advocate. It didn’t work out that way. I’ll miss him. Karen Richter: Michael was a generous and caring person and great friend. His articles in the Advocate helped so many of us understand the complexities of economic justice issues. He had a great sense of humor and was a talented cook. He made the best pizza and paella I ever tasted. Michael was always there when we had rallies, demonstrations, and marches no matter what. He always showed up to help with everything – our mailing parties, membership meeting, concerts you name it he was there. He was one of the best people I've ever known. I will miss him dearly. Robby Stern: Michael was one of the most decent and thoughtful men I have ever known. He was a good and beloved man with an outstanding sense of humor. He played a very important role in our collective work and was someone I was always glad to see and spend time with. As a member of the Retiree Advocate Editorial Board, his good humor, insights, and compassion were consistently present in our deliberations. He helped to make the meetings fun and productive and was a very significant part of creating a quality newsletter month after month. He and Bobby have been an amazing couple and served as a model of lifetime progressive activism. It was always a delight to interact with the two of them at street actions, fundraising events, PSARA meetings and other events supporting the movement for social and economic justice. Michael was both incredibly funny and at the same time determined to provide his good thinking on what we could do in that moment in the fight to create a more just world. As a progressive economist, his monthly articles in the Retiree Advocate were clear and easily readable, not an easy thing to do when discussing economic issues. He helped many of us better understand what forces were at work in our economy that sharply tilts in favor of the very rich and powerful and the avaricious multinational corporations. He also wrote with underlying compassion about how it should be as opposed to how it is. He was an ever-present activist in our efforts to change how the economy works as well as fighting for worker, climate, racial, and gender justice. We will miss Michael enormously and will honor him by carrying on the work he chose as his lifetime mission. Michael will live on in our hearts, our memories, and our thinking about what we should do next to resist autocracy and fascism and build a better world. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents April 2026 War Is a Racket, by Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler, USMC Mike Andrew War Is a Racket is not a new book. In fact, it’s almost 100 years old. It’s still a timely book, though; more so now than ever. Its author, Smedley Butler – US Marine Corps Major General, two-time winner of the Congressional Medal of Honor for actions in combat, law-and-order Public Safety Commissioner of Philadelphia in 1924 and 1925, Republican candidate for US Senate from Pennsylvania, anti-New Dealer – was the unlikeliest pacifist ever. That’s why War Is a Racket is still intriguing. How did this professional soldier become an anti-militarist? Butler was considered the front-runner for Commandant of the Marine Corps in 1930 but was passed over for promotion due to his reputation for contrariness. He then retired and began to write and lecture about war profiteering by big business. In 1931 he ran for US Senate as a progressive Republican, but was defeated by the incumbent Republican, James Davis, who ran on an anti-immigrant, pro-eugenics platform. As a candidate, Butler spoke in favor of immediate payment of the veterans’ bonus. World War I vets had been promised a “bonus” for their service, but that benefit came in the form of US bonds that didn’t mature until 1945. In the midst of the Great Depression, with many of them out of work, veterans began demanding immediate payment of their bonuses. In June 1932, some 43,000 “bonus marchers” descended on Washington, DC, to demand their payments, setting up encampments in Anacostia Flats. On July 19, Butler toured the camp and spoke to the marchers, telling them they’d been good soldiers and had a right to assemble and lobby Congress “as much as any corporation.” On July 28, DC police shot and killed two marchers. When the remaining marchers began to resist police, the Hoover administration ordered Gen. Douglas MacArthur to disperse the demonstration, which he did with tear gas, bayonets, and a cavalry charge. Fifty-five veterans were wounded and 135 arrested. Butler, like many ordinary Americans, was shocked by the disproportionate use of force. He declared himself a “Hoover-for-Ex-President” Republican. In the 1932 election, Franklin Roosevelt soundly defeated Hoover for the presidency, sweeping into office with huge Democratic majorities in the US House and Senate. Butler was not a fan. Even FDR, he thought, was too cozy with big money. Shortly after the election, when the country was getting its first taste of the New Deal, Prescott Bush – yes, the father of George H. W. Bush – approached Butler with a proposal. Bush asked Butler to meet a bond salesman, Gerald P. MacGuire. According to Butler, he met MacGuire twice in secret. At the meetings, he said, MacGuire told him that a group of businessmen, backed by $3 million, a private army of 500,000 veterans, and J. P. Morgan's bank, planned to over-throw Roosevelt and establish a fascist dictatorship. Butler was asked to lead the coup. Gen. Hugh S. Johnson would then be installed as head of state. Butler spilled the beans to the New York Times . When the story broke, the US House established a special committee to investigate. Butler testified in a private session and the committee reported that “[t]here was no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution..." and that the "committee was able to verify all the pertinent statements made by General Butler, with the exception of the direct statement about the creation of the organization. This, however, was corroborated in the correspondence of MacGuire with his principal, Robert Sterling Clark….” However, there were never any follow-up investigations and never any criminal indictments as a result of Butler’s testimony. In 1935, Butler published War Is a Racket. It’s still in print. Order it through your favorite bookstore or a library near you. While you wait for it to be delivered, enjoy this quote: "War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes." Mike Andrew is the Executive Director of PSARA and Editor of the Advocate < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents December 2025 We Remember Linda Warren Sadly, we have to report that Linda Warren, wife of our long-time PSARA Executive Board member Mike Warren, passed away on October 23. PSARA members will remember her accompanying Mike to all the PSARA events. She was, as Mike said, “always there.” If we were fortunate enough to sit by her at PSARA sing-alongs, we remember she had a lovely voice. When she attended Smith College, she sang in their Glee Club, touring Europe with them. Later, Linda sang in the choirs of Blessed Sacrament Catholic Church, Seattle First Baptist Church, and Temple De Hirsch. She even joined a medieval madrigal group, Pastime Singers. Linda earned a BA in psychology from Smith College, a Masters in Social Work from the UW, and worked for more than 40 years as a dedicated social worker at Harborview and Highline hospitals. Through this work, she met Mike, and eventually they married. Deepest sympathies to Mike and all the Warren family. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents March 2026 Advocate Editorial Cartoon < Back to Table of Contents

Join Us for Our Summer BBQ Tuesday August 19th, 12:30– 3:00 pm Seward Park, Shelter #3 5900 Lake Washington Blvd S, Seattle All PSARA members, families and friends are invited to our August potluck barbeque in Seward Park along the shores of LakeWashington. Come and relax in the presence of old growth trees and visit with friends and make new ones. PSARA will provide some veggie, beef and chicken burgers, sausages and drinks. Members should bring a pot- luck dish to share. If you would like to drink something other than carbonated and plain water please bring it along. But note that alcoholic beverages are not permitted. Also not permitted is amplified sound but you can bring along your acoustic guitars and other musical instruments if you would like to play and sing. Tim Wheeler is bringing copies of his new book No Power Greater, the Life and Times of George A. Meyers (see Mike Andrew’s book review in the May Advocate.) He may also bring his autoharp and lead us in a few songs. Robby Stern has offered to lead a walk through trails in Seward Park’s forest which contains some old growth trees. So, bring walking shoes and binoculars. Seward Park is filled with a variety of birds. Perhaps we can encourage some of PSARA’s birders to go along for the walk and identify some for us. We’re looking forward to seeing everyone in person for a relaxing, fun- filled afternoon in the park. Directions for finding Shelter #3 are below: BACK TO THE ADVOCATE

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents February 2025 PSARA 2025 Legislative Agenda PSARA Board PSARA is a multi-generational grass roots organization advocating for all people, and seniors in particular, to be able to live their lives with economic security, dignity, and respect. Health Care PSARA believes that comprehensive, affordable, accessible, and culturally appropriate health care is a fundamental human right. Promote Leveling the Playing Field in Medicare SJM 8002 Protect against healthcare program cuts and advance immigrant health equity Support efforts to advance universal healthcare SJM 8004 Ensure quality affordable health care for nursing home workers (WA Essential Worker Healthcare Program) Strengthen and protect WA Cares Housing and Homelessness PSARA supports keeping people housed, building more low-income housing, and preventing homelessness in the first place. Ensure reasonable and more predictable rent increases by passing rent stabilization Invest $500 million in the Housing Trust Fund RA supports legislation that promotes healthy families and workplaces. Extend job protection in the Family & Medical Leave Program to ensure low wage earners can return to their jobs after leave to care for themselves or family members Extend unemployment benefits to striking workers and undocumented workers Build economic security for low-income families by creating the Washington Future Fund Program (Baby bonds) Climate and Environmental Justice PSARA supports the right of all people to live and work in a clean and healthy environment. Divest Washington State Investment Board (WSIB) funds from fossil fuels (No Coal Act) Add a Green Amendment to the Washington State Constitution Improve solid waste management outcomes by reducing use of plastic wrap and containers Fiscal Reform and Revenue PSARA supports a state budget that is transparent, pays a living wage to state workers, and provides services that help our people, economy, and environment thrive. Prevent devastating budget cuts by providing new progressive revenues such as a wealth tax that taxes extraordinary financial assets < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents January 2026 Report from PSARA’s Second Annual Public Discussion in Tacoma Dan Grey Threats to Traditional Medicare - The WISeR Project. Threats to Social Security The Tacoma Chapter of PSARA hosted its second annual public discussion, entitled “Social Safety Net Under Attack: Fighting to Save and Improve Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare.” The well-attended event was held on Saturday, December 6 at the beautiful campus of Evergreen State College in Tacoma. Barb Church shared a moving land acknowledgment on behalf of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians. Lynne Dodson spoke about the proud history of this college in Tacoma, thanks to its first president, the late Maxine Mimms. Lynne also spoke about the mission of PSARA and recognized the co-sponsors for the event, including Pierce County Labor Council, University Place Indivisible, Indivisible Tacoma, and Indivisible Gig Harbor, as well as newly elected Tacoma City Councilwoman Latasha Palmer. The three featured panelists from the PSARA Board were Pam Crone, Anne Watanabe, and Robby Stern. Pam started by speaking about the dangers to Original Medicare beneficiaries due to the WISeR project. Washington is one of 6 states in the WISeR ((Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction Model) program. The pilot program expands prior authorization in original Medicare and reimburses artificial intelligence (AI) contractors based on how much money they save the Medicare Trust Fund, i.e. by denials of care. WA Representative Suzan DelBene has introduced HR 5940 to stop WISeR. Her bill is called “Seniors Deserve Smarter Care Act.” Pam reported that WA Senator Patty Murray will also be introducing a Senate bill to stop WISeR. We were all encouraged to ask Senator Maria Cantwell to support efforts to halt WISeR even before it begins in January 2026. Anne then spoke about the well documented, devastating cuts that Trump "Big Beautiful Bill" has for Medicaid in our state. Anne added to the discussion of WISeR and compared it to a home invasion robbery where the effects are dire and immediate. The longer-term goal of privatization of Medicare is comparable to “termites who work 24/7, and you know what they’ve done when the house collapses.” All spoke to the need to “level the playing field”, by making coverage in Original Medicare on par with Medicare Advantage plans including, dental, vision, hearing, pharmacy, and by ending copays, and the need for Medigap supplemental policies. Robby rounded off the discussion, speaking about the threats to Social Security. Closing of Social Security regional offices has left field offices without guidance and much needed support. Recent policy is to shift in-person support to phone support with agonizingly long wait times. Robby spoke about the long-desired effort to “Scrap the Cap” so that wealthy employees, who make more than the current wage cap of $176,100, would continue to pay the same tax rate on their multimillion dollar incomes as those of us with much less income. Robby reminded us that, last year, PSARA helped move Washington State Senate Joint Memorial 8002 (in support of Original Medicare), sponsored by Sen. Hasegawa, to the State House, where it died in the House Rules Committee. Given that there is no fiscal note or cost to this measure, we were encouraged to let House Speaker Jinkins know we want the measure approved by the House and sent to the US Congress as the will of the people of our state. Robby credited Connecticut Representative John Larson with introducing the “Social Security 2100 Act” in Congress. While no action will occur before the new Congress is sworn in in January, 2027, we can let our Washington Congress members know of our support to strengthen and preserve Social Security. Following questions and answers, Dan Grey, a PSARA Tacoma chapter member and volunteer for Radio Tacoma, interviewed Anne and Robby. Their 28-minute interview can be heard on the radiotacoma.org website click here for the direct link to the broadcast. Dan Grey is a member of PSARA in Pierce County. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents July 2025 The Long-Term War on Social Security Steve Bauck In last month’s Retiree Advocate, Steve Kofahl described the devastating impact of staffing cuts and rules changes on Social Security beneficiaries. While newly implemented, they are part of long-term attack on Social Security. In 1983 the Cato Institute produced an article titled “Achieving a Leninist Strategy”. It called for “guerrilla warfare against both the current Social Security system and the coalition that supports it.” The long-term goal was to shift the $1.5 trillion we pay into Social Security each year out of Social Security and into IRA or similar private accounts. Their strategy has had considerable success in reducing confidence in the fiscal soundness of Social Security. An April 2025 poll by the AP and University of Chicago found that 52% of those surveyed were not confident that Social Security benefits would be available when they need them. The Social Security staffing cuts have nothing to do with reducing the federal deficit or debt. Social Security is completely self-funded. Administrative costs, including staffing, come from the contributions we make into Social Security. Currently administrative expenses for Social Security amount to a miniscule 0.9%. Were administrative expenses to be raised back to 1.26% where they have historically been, SSA could have the full staffing it needs to adequately serve the public and it wouldn’t impact the federal budget at all. But the cuts do serve the purpose of eroding confidence in Social Security’s ability to deliver benefits to those who have earned them. They are also likely to cut costs by deterring deserving beneficiaries from accessing their benefits. Similarly, the DOGE theft of Social Security personal data in the name of rooting out fraud has nothing to do with saving billions in fraudulent Social Security payments. DOGE has not been able to demonstrate that there is fraud because it is almost nonexistent in Social Security. A recent Social Security oversight report found an “improper payments” rate of 0.3%. They noted that only a sliver of that low rate is due to fraud. The focus on fraud reinforces the idea that Social Security is an entitlement program giving benefits to undeserving beneficiaries who haven’t earned them and that the federal government isn’t competent to administer the program. The data is also being used as a weapon by declaring people to be dead and thus denying them access to employment, banking and virtually all economic activity in the country. When we first start working, we don’t know when we are going to retire, how long we will be retired or what financial resources we will have. We also do not know if we are going to become disabled and unable to work (only a third of workers have disability insurance be- side Social Security Disability) or if we will die young and leave dependents without a source of income. Social Security is not a retirement savings program, it is an insurance program. Our contributions are pooled to ensure that all covered workers have a monthly benefit in all these situations. Although by law Social Security can never go bankrupt, there is a future funding issue. In 1983 the stagflation of the 1970s caused a funding crisis for Social Security. It was solved primarily by benefit cuts. Projections indicated that the changes would take care of all future needs. What was not anticipated at the time was the theft of wages over the past 40 years. Almost none of the gains in productivity have gone to workers. Currently the Social Security Trust Fund surplus built up to provide for the surge of baby boomer retirement is projected to be depleted in 2033. This is not a new issue. It has been known for over 30 years. There will need to be either a 21% cut in benefits or an increase in revenue. Overwhelming majorities of Americans favor increasing revenue over benefit cuts. The most obvious source of additional revenue is to “Scrap the Cap” and make those who have received most of the gain in productivity pay their fare share. Currently wages above $176,100 are not taxed for Social Security. Had the cap been eliminated 30 years ago when the looming funding issue was first identified it would have solved the entire problem. It would still solve a large portion of the problem and is essential to any realistic plan to avert benefit cuts. We need to counter the assault on Social Security by exposing the lies that have eroded confidence in Social Security’s future and insist that the rich pay their fair share by scrapping the cap. Steve Bauck is Co-Chair of PSARA's Social security Task Force and a member of PSARA's Executive Board. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents April 2026 Honoring Jesse Jackson Cindy Domingo Today, as we face a crisis in our democracy of monumental proportions, the passing of Jesse Jackson forces our nation to remember the type of movement that must be built to regain political power for working people in this country. Coming to power in the 1980’s, Jackson brought us to the realization that the progressive movements must vie for power in the electoral arena. Jackson built an inside/outside structure in relationship to the Democratic Party, which had a long-term impact for the participation of people of color and working people. Jackson’s vision was first reflected in his 1984 Presidential election campaign. He then went on to become a major player and candidate in the 1988 Presidential election. He used his powerful oratory and organizing skills to build an organization that reflected one of his most important campaign themes, multiracial unity. In Nikhil Pal Singh’s book, Climbin' Jacob’s Ladder: The Black Freedom Movement Writings of Jack O’Dell , O’Dell, one of the key visionaries of the National Rainbow Coalition, stated that, “The Rainbow Coalition is a mass political movement, which should seek to provide a center of social authority, political judgment, and activist training as an alternative to the organs of mainstream governance and the two-party system.” O’Dell emphasized the necessity of building and maintaining an independent organization, “capable of effecting a basic realignment in US politics, in favor of Peace, Justice and Progress.” Because of Jackson’s and the Rainbow Coalition’s power base, Jackson was able to negotiate the rules within the Democratic Party and at the national convention. These changes altered the race and class representation and participation at national and local levels, elections of state delegates to state party conventions and the National Democratic conventions, and the construction of party platforms at all levels that represented a peace and justice peoples’ agenda. For many of us who participated in the Washington State Rainbow Coalition (WSRC) in the 1980s, it was our first foray into the electoral arena besides registering and casting our votes. Many in the WSRC joined the Democratic Party through participation in their legislative district party structure. By 1988, the WSRC had 1,000 members, strategically positioned in seven of the eight Washington State Congressional districts. At that time, Washington had a caucus system, through which people met by precinct to debate issues and positions, and elected people to vie for delegate positions for the national Democratic Convention, supporting a presidential candidate. At the caucus level, resolutions, positions on issues, and platforms were also discussed and voted on. For the WSRC, this was where our independent progressive movement impacted the process; our positions on major issues facing the US working class were debated, voted on, and passed onto the next level. At the Washington State Democratic Party Convention in 1988, the WSRC passed a resolution calling for a two-state solution to the Palestine/Israel conflict. The issues taken up by the WSRC are reflected in the founding convention of the WSRC in 1989. These included platform priorities on Washington State budget and taxation, Rainbow Coalition positions on foreign policy, the politics of AIDS, and many other issues that remain relevant today. Many WSRC members became delegates to the 1988 National Democratic Party Convention, where Jesse Jackson gave his famous speech about how his grandmother made a quilt from scraps of clothes to form a beautiful quilt. Jackson likened that quilt to the multi-racial, multi-class movement that was needed to win the 1988 election and political power for working people. I have such great memories of seeing my sister-in-law and other WSRC members on national television in the front rows as Jesse Jackson gave that speech. At Jesse Jackson’s funeral, former President Barack Obama gave credit to Jackson for his historic 2008 presidential victory. Kamala Harris also stated that she would not have been elected as vice president without the work that Jackson had done decades before. In Washington State, Seattle’s first Black mayor, Norm Rice, served two full terms from 1990-1997, acknowledging that his victory was due to the influence of Jackson and the WSRC. Rice hired a number of WSRC leaders, including Charles Rolland, who later became the first African American to become Chair of the State Democratic Party. Other WSRC members went on to run for political office with a progressive platform, even after the WSRC disbanded. The 1988 Jackson presidential campaign and the Rainbow Coalition opened the door for working class people to run for office, a door that can never be closed again. Today, as we see the Trump administration move to cancel or steal the 2026 midterm elections, we must remember the power unleashed by Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition. Free elections are a central component of our democracy and we must stand up and protect our right to vote! We hope you will attend Standing for Democracy’s and Free Washington Project’s April 8 webinar at 5:30 pm on protecting the 2026 midterm elections. Go to www.freewaproject.org for details and to register. Cindy Domingo is a veteran activist with LELO (Legacy of Equality, Leader-ship & Organizing) and APALA (Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance). She is PSARA's Co-VP for Outreach. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents October 2025 A Fake Drug War Against Venezuela Cindy Domingo In less than a month, three boats off the coast of Venezuela have purportedly been bombed by US naval forces now stationed off the coast of Venezuela. The first boat sank on September 2, allegedly carried eleven people, and it was unclear whether any survived. Reports in the media suggested that the bombing may have been an artificial intelligence film as well as questions whether the boat may not have been a drug smuggling operation since high speed drug boats carry few passengers in order to carry more drugs. The story quickly left the media pages until the latest boat sinkings in mid-September. These boat bombings have followed a heightened build-up towards war against Venezuela since August of this year. On August 7, the bounty for the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro increased from $25 million to $50 million, with US Attorney General Pam Bondi accusing Maduro of collaborating with foreign terrorist organizations to smuggle drugs into the US. It was during the first Trump administration in 2020 that a bounty was placed on Maduro for $15 million and then in January 2025 it was raised to $25 million. On August 8, the US military deployed eight warships, 1,200 missiles, 10 F-35 fighter jets, a nuclear submarine off the coast of Venezuela and some 4,500 military personnel including 2,200 Marines and amphibious assault crews. These moves were followed by the bombings of the small boats. In addition to Maduro’s bounty, increased financial sanctions, lesser bounty rewards and travel visa restrictions have been levied against others in Maduro’s administration and Venezuelan state oil and transportation officials. These provocations under the guise of a drug war come even as there is little evidence that Venezuela and President Nicolas Maduro are involved in any drug smuggling. Juan Gonzalez, former senior director for the Western Hemisphere at the US National Security Council, has stated clearly that there is no credible evidence that Maduro directs any narco-gangs. Furthermore, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2025 report notes that only 5% of drugs going to the US pass through Venezuela; that in fact the country has consolidated its status as a territory free from coca leaf cultivation or drug production, as well as free from international criminal cartels. Yet Trump continues to push the narrative that Maduro is the head of a cartel called “Cartel of the Suns” and the attack on Venezuela is part of his War on Drugs. Trump’s real purpose is “regime change” in Venezuela, a strategy that was implemented in 2019 when Trump and other countries proclaimed Juan Guido as President of Venezuela even though not one person in Venezuela voted him into office and Maduro had won in the national presidential elections. And the real reason for regime change is the US wants control of Venezuela’s oil resources, the largest deposit of oil in one country in the world. Venezuela’s oil resources have been a lifeline to Cuba and lays the basis for important trade with China and Russia. The US war against Venezuela has been met with resistance in and outside Venezuela. In response to the warships, Maduro mobilized Venezuela’s popular militia that reportedly counts for 4.5 million members with its purpose to defend the country’s sovereignty. On September 1, Maduro was quoted by Al Jazeera that the US is “seeking a regime change through military threat…Venezuela is confronting the biggest threat that has been seen on our continent in the last 100 years…If Venezuela is attacked, we would immediately move to armed struggle in defense of our territory.” Maduro continued to state that he would declare Venezuela “a Republic in arms.” The September 1 issue of Venezuelan newspaper Ultimas Noticias reports that governments of 80 nations have repudiated the presence of US warships in the Caribbean and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), an alliance of 33 countries, convened an emergency session to address the crisis. The 10 countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our Americas (ALBA-TCP) have unanimously condemned the US deployments. The Presidents of Mexico, Columbia and Brazil have been outspoken about the US military aggression as well as they know they are also targets of Trump’s manufactured War on Drugs and plans for regime change. Cindy Domingo is PSARA's Co-VP of Outreach and a veteran activist with LELO (Legacy of Equality, Leadreship, organizing), APALA (Asian Pacific Ameri- can Labor Alliance), and Standing for Democracy. < Back to Table of Contents

The Retire Advocate < Back to Table of Contents January 2026 US House Returns to the 1950s with “Anti-Socialist” Resolution 86 Dems join GOP to Condemn the “Horrors of Socialism” Mike Andrew On November 21, the US House of Representatives voted 285-98 to pass a resolution titled “Denouncing the Horrors of Socialism.” The text starts off with lurid – and historically inaccurate – charges of death, devastation, and ruin allegedly flowing from socialism, and ends with the declaration that “Congress denounces socialism in all its forms, and opposes the implementation of socialist policies in the United States.” It’s as if Congress went to sleep on November 20, 2025, and woke up on November 21, 1950. The resolution was introduced by Maria Salazar, representing a district including parts of Miami and surrounding suburbs, and cosponsored by 63 other Republicans. Rep. Salazar is the daughter of Gusanos who fled Cuba after the revolution. Given her family’s origins, it’s easy to see where this passage comes from: “[T]he Castro regime in Cuba expropriated the land of Cuban farmers and the businesses of Cuban entrepreneurs, stealing their possessions and their livelihoods, and exiling millions with nothing but the clothes on their backs…” In simple language, “the Cuban revolution took away my family’s property and wealth, therefore I hate socialism.” But that happened 66 years ago. Why this resolution, and why now? Rep. Mike Simpson, Republican from Idaho, offers a clue. "Now more than ever, with newly elected leaders like Zohran Mamdani in New York, it is crucial we remain vigilant against this failed ideology,” he said in a press release after the vote. “America has always been the guiding light of freedom, and socialism is far from that founding principle.” Beyond smearing popular democratic socialists like Mamdani, it’s clear that the Trump administration is preparing for war against Venezuela – which was specifically condemned in the resolution – and ratcheting up tensions with China. So this document also serves to justify future US military actions against those “horrible socialists.” The House roll call indicates that 86 Democrats teamed up with Republicans to vote Yes on this measure. Among them were senior leaders like Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Katherine Clark, and Jim Clyburn, along with a long list of pro-business suburban Democrats such as Pete Aguilar, Ami Bera, Gil Cisneros, and Josh Gottheimer. In the Washington State delegation, both Republicans voted Yes. They were joined by three Democrats – Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, Kim Schrier, and Marilyn Strickland. Three Democrats voted No – Pramila Jayapal, Emily Randall, and Adam Smith. Two more Democrats – Suzan DelBene and Rick Larsen – did not vote, along with 52 other Representatives. Many of the most senior House Democrats are apparently still hostile to bold, progressive young candidates like Mamdani, and Seattle’s Katie Wilson, and still afraid of their rising popularity. At the same time, many Democrats seem to agree – at least tacitly – with Trump’s “America First” foreign policy. That means that we have some work to do. Our elected representatives should understand that it’s not acceptable to join with the far right and vote for right-wing propaganda pieces like this resolution. And if they don’t understand it now, they should be made to understand. They should also understand that candidates like Mamdani and Wilson didn’t win their races because they tricked the voters into casting ballots for sinister socialist schemes. They won because they offered practical ways to make people’s lives better – free bus service, publicly-owned grocery stores, more social housing. Most people think Hakeem Jeffries will become Speaker after the 2026 Congressional elections. Let him make people’s lives better. Then he can condemn socialism all he wants. < Back to Table of Contents

Play Video Facebook Twitter Pinterest Tumblr Copy Link Link Copied Return to Oral Histories Main Page An Interview With Frankie Manning (From the April Retiree Advocate) "Before we integrated hospitals, the majority of Black people who died in the hospital died because the Black hospitals and wards were not well equipped..." By Angie Bartels From the time she was a child, a question gnawed at Frankie Manning’s mind. She was too young to express it, and besides, those things weren’t talked about at that time, but nonetheless, she wondered why “you would have people cook your food, but they couldn't sit at the table and eat with you.” Her grand-father was the last member of his family born into slavery, and what she did un-derstand from him and her parents was that all people had value, not because of the color of their skin, but because they are human beings. Ms. Frankie was born in Caldwell, Texas, a small town near College Station, which is home to Texas A&M. She was one of 10 children and grew up in the 1940s and 50s in this largely rural area when much of the United States was segregated. “And of course, all of health care was segre-gated. My family had lots of animals, and we grew all our food during those times. One of the things I learned is to take care of animals. And I was surprised as a teen-ager when I went to a hospital where one of my teachers was having her first child. I saw the conditions, and I thought it was fascinating that people treated humans less than we did our animals. It was one of the things that influenced my decision to become a nurse. The rest of my life is history, because I spent the last 60 years working as a nurse and nurse manager.” Ms. Frankie attended St. John School of Nursing in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and gradu-ated in 1960. She quickly realized that all Black people were segregated into one part of the hospital called the Black wards – one for men and another for women. All of the Black patients were mixed in together regardless of diagnosis, whereas on the white wards, patients were divided into areas such as Med-Surg, Labor and Delivery, Infectious Disease, Mental Health, and so on. On the Black wards, there was absolutely no privacy. When the ward filled up, patients were discharged. “I noticed on my very first night at work that everything about the Black wards equipment, while the Black wards had old rusty things. Even the linen was sub-standard, and there was never enough of it on the Black wards. The supply closet was very limited, and you had to borrow. The white wards had separate clean and soiled utility rooms, while these rooms were combined into one on the Black wards, creating a high risk for infection and contamination. The big one was that a patient right out of surgery could be placed in a room with somebody who had an infection. That did not happen on the white wards – we always separated them out. You had to work twice as hard on the Black wards because of lack of resources. “I've known great nurses, no matter what color they are, great doctors, no matter what color they are. And much of this has nothing to do with color as much as it has to do with how human beings are valued. And I can tell you, before we integrated hospitals, the majority of Black people who died in the hospital died be-cause the Black hospitals and wards were not well equipped. They certainly weren't staffed well at all. You would have acute care wards in Black hospitals run by nursing assistants or LPNs, because there weren't enough nurses who would work on the Black wards, there weren’t enough nurses period.” Ms. Frankie chose to work on the Black wards because she knew she was a good nurse, and she wanted to give Black people the same quality care that the whites received. She said that Black people in the community often received little or no medical care at all. There were few Black doctors and nurses, and many people who did go to the hospital died. So there was little incentive or trust in the system. Those who survived their hospital stay often came home with secondary problems, such as infections that were contracted in the hospital. “When I went to Dover, Delaware, in 1962, I was the first RN who worked on the Black ward. All the rest were LPNs. So the standards for providing care to Black people were very poor. We had a staph outbreak, and it was primarily with our babies. We were taking the newborns out of the nursery to be with their mothers in the ward. The mothers were in the same ward as people with all kinds of infec-tions. The babies were coming back into the nursery with staph. We even had a baby who died. So that motivated us to change. I was in charge of the newborn nursery at the time. I said to the admin-istration 'We are not going to take the babies out to the ward,' because once I learned what we were doing, that there was an infant who died because of this, it made no sense to me. The chief of pedi-atrics agreed with me, and that caused a big stir in the hospital. But we moved the Black mothers over onto the white mater-nity ward, and after a couple of months, people stopped talking about it, and the babies got to be with their mothers." Ms. Frankie loved working with veter-ans. By 1965, when the Medicare Act was passed by Congress, she was working in a US military hospital in Japan where patients were not segregated by race. The Medicare Act required hospitals to desegregate in order to receive Medi-care reimbursement. Over a period of just a few months, hundreds of hospitals throughout the United States closed their Black wards and integrated their Black patients into the general hospital population. Ms. Frankie went on to have a very prolific career in nursing and nursing leadership. “We cannot eliminate Medicare or Medicaid. We have to make health care accessible to everyone, regardless of the sickness or ability to pay. My vision for an improved health care system would be one that is not so fragmented. When you’re in the hospital you see one doctor, the hospitalist; when you’re discharged, you have to go to many specialists. It’s crazy and so expensive! And we have to figure out how we can provide mental health care just like we provide care when someone cuts their leg, for instance. It’s unfortunate that we don’t treat many people beyond the emergency room. We have the knowledge and the resources to help our brothers and sisters. We can fix this, but unfortunately, it’s a matter of economics.” Ms. Frankie Manning, RN, BSN, MNA, worked over 60 years as a nurse, nurse manager, and adjunct professor at the University of Washington, Seattle Pacific University, and Seattle University Schools of Nursing. She is currently retired and a longtime member of PSARA. Angie Bartels is PSARA's Membership VP. This is one of a series of interviews she's doing with PSARA members.