The Conyers Controversy and Progressive Unity
A statement from the National Executive Committee of
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism
August 12, 2007
Perhaps the moment has arrived for reflective reconsideration of the conflict on the left over the recent sit-in at the office of Rep. John Conyers, Jr.
In contesting Rep. Conyers' decision not to offer a resolution to impeach George W. Bush, protesters and some of their supporters invariably described the congressman as another "good guy" Democrat. Given the quality and reach of Conyers' record and his distinctive political roots, that borders on willful ignorance.
From an auto worker family (John Conyers, Sr. worked at the Ford plant), Conyers embodies and represents the twin pillars of Detroit -- the African American community and the labor movement -- that historically have driven the radical and progressive dynamics of the Motor City and constitute the foundation for a resurgent progressive movement in the entire country.
The second most senior member of the House, Rep. Conyers' congressional service stretches from before the Watergate impeachment process to recent efforts to convene a commission to investigate impeachable offenses by the Bush administration. Conyers was a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus and is considered its dean. His major contributions to a progressive agenda include the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, the Motor Voter Bill of 1993, the Martin Luther King Holiday Act of 1983, the Alcohol Warning Label Act of 1988, and the Jazz Preservation Act of 1987. He is a principal author of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to protect voting rights of oppressed nationalities and citizens with disabilities. He is also the leading congressional voice for institutional reparations to the nation's African American community for the crime of slavery.
As a member of the Judiciary Committee, Conyers introduced the "Military Tribunal Authorization Act of 2002" to limit Bush's efforts to define military tribunals and proposed legislation to protect whistleblowers who report FBI malfeasance. He is the primary author of "End Racial Profiling Act" that bans racial profiling nationwide and introduced the "Hate Crimes Prevention Act" to place a range of hate crimes under federal investigative and prosecutorial jurisdiction.
Fighting for constituents under economic siege, Conyers has challenged Bush administration attempts to undermine worker safety standards, substitute flextime for overtime and virtually eliminate collective bargaining. He is currently formulating legislation to protect workers' pensions and health care from Enron and Worldcomm type bankruptcies. He is founder and chair of the Congressional Universal Health Care Task Force and under its banner has introduced HR 676, the Medicare for All Single Payer Health Care bill that is the legislative standard for the rapidly growing movement to provide medical services for all and take the profit out of health care.
In the global arena, Rep. Conyers has been an inseparable participant in the movement to end the Iraq war and bring US forces home now. Among a handful of House members he has spoken forcefully against the war at major peace rallies. He was signatory as a plaintiff in a lawsuit that challenged the House resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq as unconstitutional. Conyers has fought for fair US trade with Haiti and has worked hard to secure multilaterally funded economic aid for that nation severely victimized by the global system.
While Conyers has been justly criticized for questioning Jimmy Carter's characterization of Israeli actions towards the Palestinians as apartheid, Conyers practically alone has resisted the Israeli lobby's attempts to force Congress to march in lockstep in support of Israel and in implacable hostility to the Palestinians. Glen Ford, the prominent progressive African American journalist, recently stated that in the last few years a corporate-AIPAC offensive has intimidated a major segment of the Congressional Black Caucus. Ford went on to note that a recent AIPAC inspired bellicose resolution denouncing Iran was voted favorably by the entire caucus with only Conyers declining to vote for it.
Conyers, of course, is not purely above the hard political world of vote counting and deals. Neither he nor any other member of Congress could survive politically or achieve any meaningful legislative advances if oblivious at all times to the realities of partisan politics and the demands of party leaders. At times compromises and accommodations merit sharp criticism. But that cannot diminish the significance of Conyers' congressional role. He and Rep. Barbara Lee, represent the crucial conjunction of the movements for racial justice and peace, movements whose unity is absolutely essential to building a progressive majority.
More than a year ago, Conyers joined with 28 other House members to call for launching an impeachment process against George W. Bush. That stemmed from hearings on impeachable crimes that Conyers was forced by the then Republican controlled House leadership to conduct in a crowded basement room. As Rev. Lennox Yearwood (one of the sit-in protesters) noted: Conyers and his staff "wrote the book" on impeachment. With that awareness, one can reasonably question why the protesters did not ascribe some weight to Conyers' assessment that the current positioning of various forces in Congress would frustrate the chances for advancing impeachment.
Some on the left have contended that Conyers should have placed an impeachment resolution before the Judiciary Committee despite substantial obstacles and that such an act itself would focus a strong, inhibiting spotlight on Bush and his accomplices. That is a weighty argument but it does not account for the potential damage stemming from failure of the chair to win the support for impeachment by a majority of his own committee. Such a defeat would constitute a setback for a range of efforts to resist the unconstitutional acts of the Bush administration. Before the showdown on impeachment, Conyers pleaded for "three more votes" to advance the resolution. There is merit to the claims of critics of the sit-in that the protesters should have focused their efforts on attaining those three votes.
One of the most controversial aspects of the debate over the Conyers sit-in is the charge of racism directed at the protesters. The existence of racism is inseparable from its historical roots exemplified by the ideology and practice of institutional oppression. A protest directed against a relatively empowered African American politician is arguably not racist. But a statement by a prominent leader of the protest that Conyers "is no Martin Luther King" is racist. As many have noted, that statement is a crude reflection of the historic practice of empowered whites to arrogantly select and define Black leadership. By linking Conyers to King, the impeachment controversy was framed in racist terms -- terms that insulted both Conyers and King. The statement by another protest leader that Conyers "betrayed the American people" is more subtle in its negative implications, but perhaps no less racist. It reflects a historic posture of dominant white entitlement in commanding prescribed behavior from African Americans. The author of this declaration apparently had no interest in respecting or considering Conyers' estimate of the positioning of various forces on the impeachment issue not did she fully consider the congressman's record as a leading progressive voice on the issue before leveling the charge of "betrayal ."
Reverend Lennox Yearwood has eloquently explained his decision to sit in and court arrest at Rep. Conyers' office in terms of a moral compassion to demand impeachment of this immoral administration. There comes a time, Yearwood argues, when one must stand up to the best of friends and allies such as Conyers in advancing a vital cause. That viewpoint, represented also by others, is worthy of respect. Yet it is not fully immune to questions and reservations. Few, if any progressives, would argue against impeachment (nearly all would like to see the impeachment of the entire Bush crowd immediately), but on a tactical level, there is no consensus for it in the peace movement and among a broad range of progressives. The major antiwar coalitions have not prioritized impeachment, choosing instead to focus on efforts to end the war and occupation of Iraq and to prevent a war on Iran. The protest at Conyers' office represented the tactical priority of a segment at best of the antiwar and progressive movements, therefore limiting its moral authority.
The sit-in had to be weighed in moral and practical terms against the damage in relations, potential and real, among diverse progressive forces. Efforts to obliterate the divisions, cast along racial and ethnic lines, between peace and justice movements have been weakened. The image of predominantly white activists assailing a leader of antiracist legislation to eliminate racial profiling and hate crimes, to advance universal health care, to bring the troops home from Iraq -- has doubtlessly widened racial fissures as well as disagreements among left and progressive forces of varying racial and social backgrounds.
However, the Conyers controversy can be a catalyst for renewed determination to forge a progressive majority by uniting various movements. It can spark a heightened awareness of the need for peace and justice activists to not only speak to each others' concerns, but to act forcefully upon them. By building upon the conjunction of peace and justice exemplified by political leaders like John Conyers and Barbara Lee, by recognizing and acting upon the reality that rebuilding areas devastated by Katrina is inseparably linked to ending the Iraq war, by demanding justice for immigrants and for all working people, by working to prevent environmental catastrophe, by fighting the attempted legal assault on six Black teen agers in Jena, Louisiana, activists in all political arenas will be advancing a just, sustainable world. Such actions and commitments point the way to unity of all progressive forces that can in the coming weeks and months crystallize, consolidate and advance at the grass roots the demand for impeachment -- the arena where all progress begins and where all who work for justice and peace should be engaged.
Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and
Socialism
520 Eighth Avenue, 14th Floor NE
New York, NY 10018 (212) 868-3733
national@cc-ds.org
www.cc-ds.org