Justice for Jazz Artists

Perhaps nothing is more emblematic of the city’s music scene than the jazz artist. And while the genre isn’t as popular as it once was, these talents are still in demand at many of the world-famous jazz clubs in Manhattan, like the Blue Note and the Village Vanguard. In fact, many of these clubs still turn tremendous profits. Yet, jazz musicians — freelancers who are paid per gig with no benefits — are second-class citizens in American Federation of Musicians Local 802, through which the bulk of the union’s symphony and Broadway members enjoy employer-paid medical benefits and pensions.

Jazz musicians have begun fighting back with a campaign to pressure the major clubs into signing collective bargaining agreements that would set a minimum payrate for jazz arts, create a pension plan and codify a process for dealing with disputes between artists and club owners. The musicians also want royalties for club recordings — if the clubs profit from streaming recorded performances, the musicians would get a cut. So far, the campaign has been limited to union activists leafleting clubs and letting jazz fans know about their plight.

The struggle began in the early 1990s, when jazz musicians formed a caucus within the union to address their unique issues. Broadway and orchestra musicians have more regular jobs and operate as part of a larger group, whereas jazz artists have to compete against each other and form their own style. “It’s been an every-man-for-himself environment,” said Todd Bryant Weeks, a Local 802 business agent. “They have to be independent.”

This type of work carries a great deal of economic insecurity. The Broadway and orchestra players have fairly consistent work, while a jazz artist can encounter dry spells. Weeks noted that clubs will hire band leaders, who in turn hire jazz artists who arrive to the show without knowing who they will be playing with or how much the other artists are getting paid.

The jazz artists’ caucus made some headway in securing contracts for performers at the Village Vanguard and for jazz instructors at The New School in the 1990s. A legislative plan to secure pension benefits was devised, in which Local 802 lobbied Albany to rescind a tax on club admissions, moving that money instead into defined pension plans. Then-governor George Pataki signed legislation that rescinded the tax but did not compel the club owners to use that money for pensions. “It became kind of a toothless law,” Weeks said. “This was sort of a dead end for us.”

In an article for the union’s website, Weeks noted that there was another component of the inequality between jazz musicians and players at bigger venues: jazz is historically performed by people of color. “From the days of traveling vaudeville and tent shows, through to the modern civil rights era and beyond, black musicians have been subjected to second-class lodgings and travel accommodations and abject racism, particularly in the Deep South,” he wrote. “Historically, jazz musicians are among the most abused of all professional performers in our history. Pit bands, especially ones made up of blacks, from whence many of the early jazz ensembles sprung, were often treated as a lower caste by more visible actors, singers and dancers.”

Now, the pressure is on the clubs themselves, many of which have plenty of money to throw around. The union claims, for example, that Blue Note has still turned a profit even during the economic downturn. Jazz artists note that without workers like themselves, who spend their lives honing their craft and practicing for hours each day, there would be no profits for the club owners or the service workers they employ.

Furthermore, the union argues that the clubs could easily meet these economic demands. For instance, Weeks said, it believes that a pension contribution could be as little as the cost of two drinks at a club, and that a place like Blue Note could pay the cost of pension benefits for three performers with one customer’s cover charge.

Local 802 estimates that it has around 500 members who play jazz, are older than 40, and don’t have a defined retirement plan. About 20 percent of the union’s 8,500 members are jazz musicians, although some of them have other gigs on Broadway. Weeks estimates that about 400 musicians are active in the campaign, but added that “many jazz artists are afraid of reprisals and will not come out publicly on this issue until we have reached critical mass.”

So far, no club has joined the union at the bargaining table. Various club owners told The New York Times that pension contributions would be too costly and impractical, and although they think these benefits are good ideas in theory, they aren’t tenable in the current economy.

“I think it’s a great idea philosophically, but the devil’s in the details,” Iridium owner Ron Sturm told the Times. “How do you do it?”

So far, the union hasn’t called for boycotts, but it is bringing the message to club patrons, who could put pressure on the owners. Local 802 organizes regular leafleting sessions outside clubs with the hope that jazz fans will realize that they have a vested interest in supporting performers.

“We encourage people to go in and support these clubs but also to send the message that they support [the campaign],” Weeks said. “They can also lobby their local City Council members or state representatives to get behind this issue.”

If progress is made with just one club, the union believes, jazz musicians can achieve some of their contract goals with little acrimony.

“If one club comes forward, we are looking for ways to celebrate that club,” Weeks said. “We can get the word out that if you are coming to New York, you should book at this club. And it will make the other clubs look bad.”

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it. The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance."

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either. Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest.

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection. Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it's illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it's illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor.

When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.
Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.

"Gasland" Director Josh Fox Arrested at Congressional Hearing

The Academy Award-nominated filmmaker Josh Fox was handcuffed and arrested Wednesday as he attempted to film a congressional hearing on the controversial natural gas drilling technique known as fracking, which the Environmental Protection Agency recently reported caused water contamination in Pavillion, Wyoming.

Fox directed the award-winning film, "Gasland," which documents the impact of fracking on communities across the United States, and is now working on a sequel.

Fox says he was arrested after Republicans refused to allow him to film because he did not have the proper credentials.

"We wanted to report on what happened [at the hearing]. I was not interested in disrupting that hearing. It was not a protest action," says Fox. "I was simply trying to do my job as a journalist and go in there and show to the American people what was transpiring in that hearing, so that down the line, as we know there will be a lot of challenges mounted to that [Pavillion, Wyoming] EPA report—and frankly, to the people in Pavillion, who have been sticking up for themselves and demanding an investigation into the groundwater contamination—and to make sure that people could view that in a larger forum than usually happens."  

K’naan to Mitt Romney: Don't use my music

No, they didn’t ask. “I have not been asked for permission by Mitt Romney's campaign for the use of my song,” said Somali-Canadian musician K’naan on Wednesday, after the politician celebrated his victory in the U.S. Republican Florida primary to the sound of the global hit Wavin’ Flag.

“If I had been asked, I would certainly not have granted it. I would happily grant the Obama campaign use of my song without prejudice,” said the musician in a statement, adding that he is currently looking into legal action to prevent any further use of the song.

K’naan’s initial response, on Twitter – “Yo @mittromney I am K’naan Warsame and I do not endorse this message” – was an embarrassment for the Romney campaign, but the situation isn’t unique: Earlier this week, Frankie Sullivan of the group Survivor and co-writer of Eye of the Tiger filed a lawsuit against Republican Newt Gingrich for using the power ballad at rallies as far back as 2009.
 ...

KBR Won't Face Trial in Convoy Driver Death Cases Court Rules

Halliburton Co. won’t face a jury on claims they sent unarmed civilian convoy drivers into an Iraqi battle zone in 2004, knowing the workers would be injured or killed, an appeals court ruled.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans today ruled the drivers’ claims were blocked by the Defense Base Act, a U.S. law that shields military contractors from lawsuits. The drivers were attacked and injured because of their role in support operations for the U.S. Army, which is covered under that statute, the judges said.

“Coverage of an injury under the DBA precludes an employee from recovering from his employer,” even if the worker claims the company was “substantially certain” the injuries would occur, U.S. Circuit Judge Priscilla R. Owen said in a 30-page ruling by the panel.

KBR, a Houston-based government contractor, was sued in 2005 by the families of seven drivers killed while working in Iraq for the largest U.S. military contractor. The company appealed a 2010 lower-court ruling that jurors could weigh the companies’ actions without second-guessing the actions of the Army.

Republicans rethink the caucus format

Top Republicans are calling for a review of the methods used in presidential caucuses after a series of vote-counting mishaps in three early states.

Maine on Tuesday became the latest state to fall victim to the caucus bug, with a local report noting that the state GOP declared Mitt Romney the winner of a close race without many localities reporting votes in the totals, including some that had submitted their results and some whose caucuses were set for later this month.

It was just the latest foible in what has been a very rough year for the caucus format.

Earlier this year, Romney was declared the winner of the Iowa GOP caucuses by eight votes after results from one precinct were lost until the wee hours of the next morning. After recounting the votes, though, the party said more votes were missing and that the true winner of its caucuses would never truly be known. Then, two days later, it declared Rick Santorum the winner.

And in Nevada, a smattering of problems with its caucuses has left the state GOP searching for answers as it pushes for relevance in the presidential process.

All of it has some suggesting that caucuses may not be a viable option going forward. Mostly, though, Republicans think it’s time to revisit how caucuses are run.

“Caucuses are still a viable option, but the operators need to understand that the results are going to generate a lot of publicity and that they have significance beyond the state line,” said former Republican National Committee general counsel David Norcross. “They need to set the rules and have a representative of each candidate informed and on hand for the count.”

Caucuses are inherently less organized than primaries, in large part because they are run by state parties and don’t have experienced state elections officials in charge.

Because of this, methods may not be the same at every caucus site, and the paper trail isn’t as reliable.

At the same time, party rules have effectively increased the importance of caucuses by pushing them to the front of the process. The Republican National Committee allows only four states to hold their contests before March, but that rule doesn’t apply to caucuses, which don’t technically have a direct impact on the allocation of delegates.

The result: Minnesota, Colorado and Maine have held February caucuses this year without paying any kind of penalty.

Given the increasing importance of caucus states, top RNC officials say its time for a review of the caucus process.

“The problems encountered in two or three caucuses does not call out for abolition of caucuses, but for better methods of implementing caucuses,” said Tennessee Republican National Committeeman John Ryder. “And I say this as someone who favors primaries — at least for my own state.”

Mississippi Republican National Committeeman Henry Barbour agreed, but noted that primaries have experienced problems too: “I think there is definitely a place for caucuses in the nominating process, but not without a transparent, accurate reflection of the vote count.”
 

Betty Carter, one of the world’s most outstanding jazz vocalists, sings:

Jazz ain’t nothing but soul

It’s the song of my people

It’s about ‘taters and grits.

She gives a clear description of what the sound of jazz means to blacks. The details of the song describes in vivid tones, just what just jazz music really is.

Florida Citizens Groups Take Voting Rights Battle to Court

The League of Women Voters of Florida, Rock the Vote and the Florida Public Interest Research Group claim that new GOP-sponsored voting requirements will hurt students, seniors, the disabled and minorities — groups that often vote Democratic in the state.

The GOP's efforts to narrow voting rights in Florida have now engendered legal resistance. The League of Women Voters and other civic groups, claiming that a new state law unconstitutionally “burdens their efforts” to simply register voters, filed suit in state court last week seeking to dismantle the new legislation.
 
Attorneys for the League of Women Voters of Florida, Rock the Vote and the Florida Public Interest Research Group argue that Florida’s new law 40 requires so-called “third party voter registration” organizations such as theirs to pre-register with the state and satisfy a number of cumbersome disclosure requirements before engaging in any voter registration activities. Under the law, they are now also required to continually submit updates about their organization’s status, an act the groups call “burdensome.”
 
"There is no indication that Florida's existing law was inadequate in addressing the state's interest in preventing voter registration fraud and ensuring the integrity of the registration process,” the complaint reads. “Furthermore, even if the state had discovered shortcomings in the existing law, the new law burdens far more speech and associated activity than is necessary to accomplish any legitimate government interest."
 
Some of their new responsibilities include tracking inventory and reporting every voter registration form they handle on a monthly basis; delivering to state election officials all completed voter registration forms within an “arbitrarily narrow and vague” 48-hour window; submitting all mandated forms electronically, and incurring fines ranging from $50 to $1,000 for violating the rules.
 
The groups claim that the law will disproportionally harm members of minority communities, who regularly rely on community-based groups to help them overcome barriers to registering to vote. It will also cause disparate harm to senior citizens, students, people with disabilities and members of low-income communities. Critics have pointed out the obvious political cynicism of Republican-controlled legislatures such as Florida’s enacting laws that will suppress voting among traditionally Democratic-voting groups, such as African-Americans. The Brennan Center for Justice estimates that as many as 5 million voters could be disenfranchised in the 2012 election — more than enough to tip almost any presidential election in favor of the GOP.
 
Florida — a key battleground state — has been in the spotlight for voter suppression tactics this year. Earlier this month, the NAACP found that Florida has one of the “most restrictive” felon disenfranchisement laws in the country — denying “the right to vote permanently to all individuals convicted of any felony offense.”
 
Injustice has a way of sparking resistance. That is now the case in Florida and other states where simple fairness and respect for democratic processes increasingly appear to be ignored in favor of turning back the clock to the pre-civil rights era.
 

Could jazz provide the Occupy Wall Street soundtrack?

The civil rights movement had a jazz beat. Now a new generation of players wants to meld politics and protest



In the late ’50s and ’60s, during the peak of the civil rights movement, marches and meetings had a jazz soundtrack. Masterworks like Max Roach’s “Freedom Now Suite,” Charles Mingus’ “Fables of Faubus” and Sonny Rollins’ “Freedom Suite” were equal parts incendiary and innovative — brilliant music that reflected their times with precision and passion. As that era gave way to the heyday of Black Nationalism, political themes continued in the vibrant jazz of musicians like Archie Shepp, Sunny Murray and Julius Hemphill, among others.

Yet by the ’80s, fight-the-power odes died down in jazz, especially as rap and hip-hop emerged to carry the flag. Jazz veered toward easy listening instead. “I think jazz went through a period in the 1980s and 1990s where it was trying very hard to be ‘America’s Classical Music,’” says composer and bandleader Darcy James Argue. “The intentions behind this were laudable. The movement clearly succeeded in increasing respect for jazz in elite circles — but it also defanged the music by stripping away the social and political context, or by trying to frame it in broadly inoffensive terms.”

Argue is one of the most prominent of a growing number of jazz musicians whose work features overtly political themes. They are reflected in major shows upcoming on both coasts. In November, “Brooklyn Babylon,” an evening-length work featuring music by Secret Society, Argue’s 18-piece band and visuals from graphic novelist Danijel Zezelj has its world premiere as part of the Brooklyn Academy of Music’s Next Wave series. This weekend, renowned trumpeter Leo Smith presents his “Ten Freedom Summers,” an epic work that traces the civil rights movement from the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education to the passage of the Civil Rights Act, at the REDCAT Center in the Walt Disney Complex in Los Angeles. The music will be recorded for Cunieform Records for release in 2012.

Some of the top jazz recordings of the last 18 months have been by artists focused on politics. The Marcus Shelby Jazz Orchestra released “Soul of the Movement: Meditations on Dr. Martin Luther King” (Porto Franco) in January. Saxophonist Howard Wiley‘s 2010 album “Twelve Gates to the City” (HNIC) was inspired by his interviews with inmates at the Louisiana State Penitentiary, which is built on what was once a plantation. Other top political jazz albums include Mark Lomax‘s “The State of Black America” (Inarhyme) and “For Which It Stands” (Sunnyside), by the quartet Cloning Americana.

These recordings span a wide variety of jazz styles — from lush big-band arrangements to intimate trios — but they share musical common ground in their themes of dismay, anger and reflection. Note that all of the recordings have been released on independent and sometimes artist-run imprints. During the last decade, the major jazz labels, especially Blue Note and Verve — once a vital support system for bold artists — have mostly turned to other styles of music. Norah Jones helped keep Blue Note afloat, while Rhett Miller, Chris Isaak, Blues Traveler and Teddy Thompson have made albums for Verve.

In many ways, Argue is emblematic of the post-millennial jazz musician. He built a following for his group via his blog, where he posts political and musical commentary (in a delightful bit of jazz obsessiveness, he refers to orchestral jazz as “bigband,” yes, one word) as well as MP3s of their performances. He used the website to fund his Grammy-nominated debut recording, “Infernal Machines” (New Amsterdam). He writes politically charged pieces that are also musically innovative; his harmonies cross sections. Rather than hard-charging battalions of trombones and saxophones, his music is more delicate. For instance, a piece might highlight harmonies created by flute, bass trombone and electric guitar.

Brooklyn Babylon’s themes range from the gentrification of Brooklyn to the story of an artist who gets so lost in his work that he loses touch with what’s happening in his community. Argue says that he and Zezelj felt like the character in their work as they watched  Occupy Wall Street, a movement they passionately support, grow while they are on the sidelines working on this piece. “It’s hugely inspiring and absolutely relevant to the kinds of issues we are dealing with in Brooklyn Babylon.”

Argue agrees that jazz has had no choice but to take a turn toward the political. “After a decade of senseless wars and massive inequality, capped off by global economic collapse,” he said, “it’s become increasingly hard for anyone, including jazz musicians, to feel like they are somehow above the fray.”