MOMocrats™

APEC Summit on Women & the Economy

Recently, I was privileged to be able to attend a part of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Women & the Economy Summit in San Francisco. The conference brought together women leaders, government officials, diplomats, and corporate innovators to discuss actions to improve the lives of women in the Asia-Pacific region, and by doing so, the world's economy. Recognizing that women are a vast, largely untapped resource for change and growth, the group spent a week in San Francisco working on plans for change.  This was one of several meetings around the Pacific Rim leading up to the APEC Summit in Hawaii in November that President Obama will attend.

The Conference Keynote was delivered by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Secretary Clinton has inspired a generation of women to enter political life to try to dismantle the political barriers that keep women from fully participating in economic growth.  Her speech was a call to action, for all nations to tap the power, creativity, and drive of women to help elevate all people, across all regions.

Although characterized by some in the media as a "call for equal rights," Clinton's vision was much broader than that.  In her speech, she stated,

Now there will be a temptation on the part of those observing or covering this summit, perhaps on the part of those of us attending it as well, to say that our purpose is chiefly to advance the rights of women, to achieve justice and equality on women’s behalf. And that is, of course, a noble cause to be sure and one that is very close to my heart. But at the risk of being somewhat provocative at the outset, I believe our goal is even bolder, one that extends beyond women to all humankind. The big challenge we face in these early years of 21^st century is how to grow our economies and ensure shared prosperity for all nations and all people. We want to give every one of our citizens, men and women alike, young and old alike, greater opportunity to find work, to save and spend money, to pursue happiness ultimately to live up to their own God-given potentials.

Secretary Clinton went on to give specific examples and data illustrating the issues that Summit attendees hoped to offer specific, concrete actions to resolve.  She went on to note that her husband is fond of saying that "we don't have a person to waste" in this effort, and she added, "We certainly don't have a gender to waste."

The full text and video of Secretary Clinton's speech can be found at the US State Department's website.

After the speech, the high-level diplomats and delegates from all the APEC countries convened in a closed-door session to work out the details that would become the San Francisco Declaration. The key elements of the Declaration that are required for economic empowerment of women are:

• Access to capital;
• Access to markets;
• Building capacity and skills; and
• Promoting women in leadership positions.

All twenty-one nations represented at the Summit unanimously adopted the declaration.

I was not able to stay very long at the Summit, but I was able to attend one Plenary Session moderated by Tina Brown of The Daily Beast and Newsweek.  Also on the panel were Ilene Lang, President & CEO of Catalyst, a research and advisory firm that specializes in promoting women in business; Blanca Trevino, CEO of Softtek, a global Information Technololgy firm based in Mexico; Romi Haan, CEO of Haan Corporation, an appliance and beauty products company in South Korea; Susan Fleishman, Executive Vice President of Commincations for Warner Brothers Entertainment; and Cherie Blair, wife of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and founder of the Cherie Blair Foundation for Women.

The Plenary Session was called "Women at the Top: How Diverse Leadership Benefits Everyone." It featured a candid discussion among these high-powered women of issues surrounding workplace diversity, being a woman leader in male-dominated industries, and work-life balance for women. The panel enthusiastically endorsed nurturing a work-life balance to promote creativity and productivity in the workplace. Romi Haan noted that she didn't want workers who were just successful on the job, but "successful in life" as well.  On the need for work-life balance and the issue of childrearing, Blanca Trevino commented, "Someone can always fill in for you at a meeting, but no other mom can fill in for you to help your daughter get ready for her first date."

Cherie Blair's foundation is leading the way in impoverished nations in encouraging women-owned businesses and entrepreneurship.  Their approach is to offer women in developing nations the tools needed to start and maintain their own businesses through "confidence, capacity and capital".  One of the innovations her foundation has initiated is a Skype-based mentoring program for women in developing nations to be paired with successful women around the globe, so they are not limited to the resources available locally.

The week-long Summit featured a number of other plenary sessions and workshops with equally impressive leaders in discussions on how to solve some of the most pressing problems and opportunities of our time.  The message of the Summit was that in a time of global economic crisis and concern, women may be the key to unlocking a new era of prosperity. The underlying message was "when women are successful, the world benefits."

--Glennia

Photos by Glennia Campbell.  All Rights Reserved.

This Week on MOMochat: Want More Women in Office? She Should Run, with The Women's Campaign Forum

When women sit at the table, the conversation includes topics that are near and dear to us: Education. Healthcare. Eldercare. Living Wages. Work-Life Balance. Reproductive Rights.

So it's a shame that so few women have seats in our nation's legislatures: According to the Women's Campaign Forum, we're ranked 87th in the world for the number of women in our national legislature. Even Cuba and Afghanistan have more female representation than us!

Next Wednesday, the WCF is holding its the She Should Run Inaugural National Conversation, a conference designed to address the "urgent need for women to advance in leadership across all sectors." We'll be hearing more about that on tomorrow's edition of MOMocrats MOMochat, when our special guest is Women's Campaign Forum President Siobhan "Sam" Bennett.

Bennett has served as the President and CEO of the Women’s Campaign Fund (WCF) and its affiliated programs The She Should Run Foundation and WCF PAC since March 2009.

Sam has lent her unique perspective as a candidate at the local and federal levels to broaden WCF’s impact on women leaders at all levels of government who support reproductive choices and options, and women who may run for office in the future.

Join Cynematic, Julie Pippert and Donna Schwartz Mills live tomorrow at 12:00 noon Eastern/11:00 Central/9:00 a.m. Pacific, or catch us on the podcast here.

Brought to you by Bubble Genius.

Netroots Nation Opens Today - and the MOMocrats are There

The sixth annual gathering of progressive voices opened this morning in Minneapolis, featuring Democratic stars like Senator Al Franken, Howard Dean, --- ... as well as MOMocrats Cynematic, Joanne Bamberger (PunditMom) and Sarah Granger.

Cyn and Joanne will be participating on a panel tomorrow morning at 10:30 AM (Central) with Krystal Ball and Anita Jackson (MomsRising.org) titled "Tiger Moms vs. Mama Grizzlies: Engaging Moms to Advance the Progressive Agenda." Below is the live stream from their session room:

Watch live streaming video from fstv3 at livestream.com

Sarah, who is an expert in issues like cyber-security, will be on Saturday's 10:30 AM (Central) panel titled "Cyberwar: Wikileaks, Stuxnet and the Proactive Progressive Response." Unfortunately, NN has not posted a link to the live stream from that session, but just about everything else at Netroots Nation can be viewed live here.

 

Has Meg Whitman Lost It?

Today's California Women's Conference included a 2010 election first: Governor Schwarzenegger conversing with Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown, the two people who are vying to replace him.

Matt Lauer moderated the discussion, which started out affably enough. Everyone paid tribute to their moms (this is, after all, the Women's Conference) and spouses. All the participants acknowledged the very real problems plaguing California right now: unemployment, education, Sacramento gridlock.

Whitman predictably blamed the GOP boogey-man "special interests," which is code for "unions" -- never big business. Brown talked about his days at a seminary a penchant for turning order into chaos (no, I didn't quite follow that either, but that's vintage Brown).

The bottom line is that no one really expected this session to be newsworthy. It turned out to be a delicious bit of political theater.

Apparently, Matt Lauer had other ideas. After all, the entire country knows that Whitman has spent a year - and a fortune - campaigning for this office.

The election is in one week. Lauer wondered if the candidates could be persuaded to get their campaigns and surrogates to pull all of their negative ads and spend the next six days just airing positive ones stating their qualifications and positions?

The audience exploded with applause, and if you've spent any time watching television here over the last few weeks, you'd understand why. This has been the meannest election cycle I can remember, and just when you think you've heard the nastiest ad a worse one comes along.

"Sometimes negativity is in the eye of the beholder," Brown said, almost making it a "define 'the'" moment. But then he relented. "If Meg agrees, we can talk about it."

Huge applause. Lauer looked expectedly at Whitman for a response.

"I will take down any ads that can be construed as a negative attack," she said. "But I don't think we can take down the ads that talk about where Gov. Brown is on the issues."

Um, well. Maybe that's what Brown meant about negativity being in the eye of the beholder. Because most of those issue ads distort Brown's stands and record.

Lauer persisted, to the point where the session was about to end. That's when Schwarzenegger pointed out that he and Maria Shriver were hosting this little party. "Don't schvitz about the time," he said.

But the session ended without agreement. Brown scored major points by being willing to pull the negative ads.

In conclusion, Schwarzenegger talked about despite California's problems, it is still the Golden State. Whitman concurred, saying that she moved here 30 years ago because she fell in love with California, and that we could have that state again.

Brown laughed. "That sounds like my next new ad," he said. "Meg moves to California 30 years ago. And who was Governor then?"

It would be positive.

Democrats, Independents, and Moderate Republicans: The Hard Right Wants You to Run for the Hills. Run to the Polling Booths Instead.

November 2010 is a referendum on Republican obstruction extremism.

Keep repeating this phrase when dangerous nonsense happens, like...

This weekend, when rodeo-clown Glenn Beck and his Neo-Westboro Baptist Church, sure to be given wall-to-wall coverage by the cable tv Nonstop Carnival of Evil/Stupid, arrive in Washington, DC. Last August, it was nonsensical "death panels" pushed by a cheeto-stained Facebooker that managed to get everyone into a stir. It's amazing the damage one mean person in her pajamas can do from the basement of her home in the outer reaches of Wasilla.

Let's face it, while August may be the "silly season," ever since about March, 2009, the hard right has done nothing but drag the GOP in a more conservative direction. Like bad cosmetic surgery that pulls too tight, any further right and the GOP's ears will meet behind its head like a clasp on a cheap purse--any further right, and Pol Pot will be wondering why he didn't think to burn some Qu'rans first.

Netroots Nation: MOMocrats Join MotherTalkers Rocking the Caucus

This week, I have the privilege of co-hosting the Parents' Caucus at Netroots Nation on behalf of the MOMocrats, along with Elisa Batista of MotherTalkers. This isn't your average mommyblogger conference panel. First, it's a caucus, more like an open discussion with all of the members. Anyone who's a NN10 attendee and a parent is welcome to come and speak. Second, we're discussing tough issues affecting parents with progressive views. And third, it's going to be a lot of fun.

What is the pay disparity between a single mother and a man? What percentage of fathers are primary caregivers? We've got a trivia contest, so bone up on your facts. Prizes will be given to those who answer the most questions correctly. (Hint: prepare for our trivia challenge by reading or viewing The Motherhood Manifesto, checking out MomsRising.org, and the Census bureau for info on parents and children.)

But more than that, it's a chance to talk to others who face similar concerns as parents, caregivers, and Americans. Learn about what's happening in Congress and at the White House regarding workplace flexibility, and global programs dedicated to helping educate women and girls.

So if you're in Las Vegas, please join me, Elisa, and the other MOMocrats (Joanne, aka Punditmom, and Cynthia, Cynematic) and MotherTalkers at the Netroots Nation Parents' Caucus in Miranda 5 at the Rio at 10:30 Friday morning. Kids are welcome too!

Widows of Our Veterans Will Stand Beside Glenn Beck

A few days ago, fellow MOMocrat Jaelithe forwarded all of us a story about Glenn Beck's involvement in fundraising for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation.  While at first glance this sounds pretty benign, it turns out that SOWF is using tax free donations to the organization to pay for Glenn Beck's latest rally at the Lincoln Memorial. 

As someone who is heavily involved in another non-profit organization dedicated to helping military families, I was absolutely floored that SOWF would align itself with such a polarizing individual and possibly put its non-profit status at risk by participating in a rally with Glenn Beck. 

Make no mistake, the event is billed as a rally.  And while the donation page for the event touts its compliance with IRS regulations and claims to be non-partisan, I find it difficult, if not impossible, to believe that politics will not be a part of any "rally" with Glenn Beck.  This is, after all, the man who seems to have dedicated his professional life to stamping out pretty much everything Democrats and progressives stand for.

I was also disturbed because my husband, who recently retired from the Navy after 20 years of active duty and reserve service, works for a small government contractor that donates to SOWF.  My husband and I are both horrified that he may be indirectly working to benefit a charity that aligns itself with the venom-spewing Glenn Beck; a charity that apparently has no problem alienating some of the very people it purports to support, if they happen to be progressives.

While researching this very disturbing topic, I discovered that a friend and fellow military spouse was already all over Glenn Beck and his shady fundraising activities.   So without further ado, please welcome guest poster Angela Jean. 

I am a military wife.

Each of you will already have a picture in your mind of a woman holding small children while embracing her husband as he heads out to war.

She will be holding back tears and one of the children will be clutching her leg, while holding an American Flag.

In reality, we know that the pictures are more diverse, that simplicity can’t define a military wife. But in our minds, the image is imprinted along side these words:

Pride, Honor, Sacrifice, Dedication, and Strength

Now, imagine those words being used to describe Glenn Beck.

How do you feel? Disgusted? Incredulous? Angry?

Maybe you understand how I feel.

Glenn Beck, standing beside widows of Special Operations Troops and Veterans from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, will stand at the base of Abraham Lincoln's feet to address the American people on August 28, 2010, the anniversary of Dr. King's I have a dream... speech. He calls the event “Restoring Honor.”

Standing before him will be a sea of Americans. They will all have something in common. All will be conservative to the core and will have traveled side by side with other Tea Partiers and 9/12ers, Oath Keepers and Secessionists. All will claim to be non-partisan, though they lie on the same end of the political spectrum.

Beck has a plan. It is actually called "The Plan," and it will address the course of our nation for the next 100 years. Like other malcontents before him, he believes he knows what is best for his own nation.

Why the Tea Party Convention "Delegates" Aren't

The National Tea Party Convention being held this week in Nashville, sponsored by the Tea Party Nation group run by Tennessee traffic law attorney Judson Phillips, has been calling its 600 convention attendees "delegates." If you've been following media coverage of this event, you may have seen news organizations (outside of Fox) printing the term in scare quotes as I just did, or referring to the Tea Party attendees as "so-called delegates." Why?

As a former delegate to the 2008 Missouri Democratic Convention, I can tell you exactly why.

Here is the Merriam Webster dictionary definition of the verb, to delegate:

1 : to entrust to another <delegate authority>
2 : to appoint as one's representative

At a traditional political convention, whether at the state or national level, the delegates in attendance have been entrusted with the authority to represent other members of the party. Though the selection process for political convention delegates varies from party to party and state to state — some convention delegates (like the Democratic Party's superdelegates) are appointed by party officials at the national, state, or local level; some are actually elected by party members at local meetings held before the convention takes place — the position of delegate is meant to be a representative one. As in, delegates undertake their duties with the explicit understanding that they have been invited to a convention not to represent their own personal interests, but to represent the interests of a group  — the interests of their city or township, for example, or, at the national level, the interests of their state.

Bob McDonnell's Republican Response to the SOTU: A Military Misstep

Last night, the MOMocrats hosted a live blog of the State of the Union address and the Republican response.  It was an inspiring speech by Obama and, I think, one of his best.  The Republican response, however, had me out of my seat hollering at the TV, and not in a good way.

The State of the Union is, I think, a marvelous example of how inspiring our political system can be.  I never fail to be moved when I hear the Congressional Cryer yell, "Madame (or Mister) Speaker, the President of the United States!"  It doesn't matter whether the President in question is a Republican or a Democrat; it's always a thrilling experience.  The State of the Union is required by Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which states, "He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient...." Since 1790, the State of the Union has been delivered approximately every 12 months.

All members of Congress, from both sides of the aisle, are present, as are some of the Supreme Court justices, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the President's Cabinet, with the exception of the designated survivor. (As an interesting side note, the designated survivor for last night's address was Shaun Donovan, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.)  While Congress invites the President to attend, it is typical for the White House to invite guests as well.  Last night, several military service and family members were in the box with Mrs. Obama and Dr. Biden. 

There are many perks to being President, one of which is having the military and military backdrops at your command.  This use of the military and its service members as props became much more common during the term of George W. Bush. The most prominent being Bush's landing on an aircraft carrier and then speaking with a huge "Mission Accomplished" banner in the background.

Make no mistake, the State of the Union, while definitely a political event, is not a partisan political event.  The Joint Chiefs of Staff and invited military guests attend as part of their service to our country.  The rebuttal to the State of the Union is another animal entirely.  It is completely partisan, begun only in 1966 and traditionally given by a representative from the party not currently occupying the White House.

Virginia Governor (of only 11 days) Bob McDonnell gave the Republican response from the Virginia capitol building in Richmond.  McDonnell had an audience of mostly regular people. (Oh, and some Virginia Republican legislators.  Bob apparently failed to invite any Democrats until about 2 hours before the drop dead RSVP time on the afternoon of the speech.)  There were even people behind McDonnell on risers as if it were a political rally.  The setting was a smart move on the part of Republican strategists.  It gave McDonnell and audience responding to him, giving the speech a much more "official" and emotional appeal than canned studio speeches given in the past.

The content of McDonnell's speech was not surprising.  It was rendered somewhat irrelevant by most of President Obama's speech, but that tends to be par for the course when you're responding to a speech you haven't yet read or viewed, with pre-loaded teleprompters.  Plus, I read the rebuttal before the State of the Union began, so I knew what was coming. No, what surprised me was the individual sitting behind McDonnell and to our left.

Do you see that guy in Army green behind McDonnell?  The individual in question is Staff Sergeant Robert Tenpenny, who apparently served with McDonnell's daughter in Iraq.

That's a problem.

California Congressional District 29: Congressman Adam Schiff's Health Care Town Hall

In case you were wondering, I attended the town hall held by my congressperson a little more than a week ago, and noticed no one in attendance packing heat. I joke here, but I take any vigilantism or talk of intimidating people with arguments made in the presence of a gun seriously. That's not reasoned debate, that's bullying.

Alhambra, CA. August 11, 2009.

The town hall was originally scheduled to be held inside a library, but so many people rsvp'd that it ended up being held outside on the blocked-off street outside the library. It garnered a lot of attention as it was one of the few scheduled in Los Angeles for the week of August 10, 2009.