tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN December 13, 2016 10:04pm-12:01am EST
next panel from aba health care policy analyst talking about the policy analyst talking about the lawsa suicide and terminally patients take their own -- physician assistant suicide andym terminay patients take their own lives. >> do you want to start first or do you want me to? i'm just going to say hello and we'll get started. vv:zvp÷ú
>> on the÷úzv aba and -- we nowe five states that havesstatutes and in one case that has case law supporting the right of a terminally ill adult to take hic or her own life through the use of aid and dying drugs. i practiced in california but not exclusively in california. my clients are throughout the countryzv but certainly more ar on the west coast.
so the trend setter was oregon and we have someone here from compassion and choices in it, you can also chat with him. so the first was called the act. it took effect in 1998÷ú and it was a voter initiative. and interestingly, the oregon law was actually considered by the united states supreme court becauseu! then attorney general ash kroft was trying to prosecute both pharmacies and physicians who were participating and that's the zv magic, participating -- who are participating under the oregon law. and the supreme court determined that the controlled÷ú substance act could not be used to delegit mate a state standard of health care, kind of a states right issue. i dent think the supreme court was interested in commenting on the substance of the law. but that kind of got it interesting. followed by that, was
washington, also voter initiative, that took effect in 2009. vermont, 2013 andu! that was actually through legislation and the governor actually made the issue part of his campaign platform before thezv 2012 election. that was noteworthy. montana very interestingly, has this right under case law and you might disagree with the statement, but the court case says there's little difference between removing life support and taking aid and dying drugs. i think there areu! people who would disagree with that statement. there have been many efforts to codify that or to over turn it in montana but so far none of us have succeeded. and that brings us to california and, by the way, in november colorado also voted to pass this lawht to the next, and i'll be talking to the trade association about the california experience next year. california has an option act. it only took effect in june and
at its heart, like all the other statutes i mentioned, it allows azv terminally ill patient to e his or her life by obtaining drugs from a participating position. pretty much every word÷ú in tha sentence accept the conjunction have a specific meeting. it's the most recent and i will say probably the most second to most recent andp i'll say most refined of the laws. the same organization that put forward the oregon law also put forward washington and vermont recently, colorado and we keep on -- they keep on removing it. it's becoming a more and more refined law. so very interestingly, you must administer the drug.p this is not, which can happen somebody gets a little bit too much. there are ways that people can÷ control drug intake, i presented with the physician who can
describe that. it's very much about self administration. you must have an affirmative÷ú conscience and physical act of administering and adjusting the drug. and you must have an express sbebt, sbept, kind ofu! the norl consent dialogue. you must be mentally competent, so in my space working with seniors think about who that might ÷úexclude, people with al sorts of dementia and your agents cannot request the drugs for you, so your spouse, partner for you, so your spouse, partner ora cannot request this from you, it has to come from you directly. in california and this is an extremelyko indicative of the other state, you must be a resident that's a lot easier than it sounds. you can die in california more quickly than you can get married or ymdivorced, as long as you c show that you have some kind of i.d. like a voter i.d. or driver's license or couple other forms, your resident.zv there's no time requirement. you must be resident, you must
be 18 and must be able to understand the nature of the decision. and the benefits and the disadvantages, which are pretty evident. and you must be diagnosed with those terminal disease that was reasonable certaintyzv is expecd to cause your death within 6 months. we all know that's an art, not a science. there's a book written by his experience in hos spice. i think he lived for two-and-a-half to three years after being declared hospice eligible and the book has some kindof funny title like not dead yet or still alive or something. and apparently he continued to entertain all kind of lit -- until his death. so there's quite a lot of procedure in this and i think it reflects the tremendous tension between the supporters of this law and the contractors. the detractors included two, maybe, obviousand maybe one less obvious group.
certain organizations such as catholic health care organizations were opposed to it. the veteran's hospital and other governmental hospitals were opposed to it. and there's actually a federal law that prohibits the use of federal funds to fund any kind of -- i think they use the word assisted suicide. assisted suicide. it goes back to 1997. 3 q! surprise you, was certain parts of the disability rights movement. and the feeling among those groups that oppose the law was that it was bringing us maybe one step closer as the society to lose the nation and that was unacceptable to him. that was a fear they had. so in exchange of having a very -- well, to address÷ú the balance, to address the tension between these two groups very large amount of processing you have to go through. just to give you the highlights
days apart for the drugs. you have to make a written request and it must be witnes[ee by two witnesses and certain obvious people cannot be one of those witnesses, people who stand to benefit from from your will, spouses, and so on. you then need to go to cast potentially three characters, doctor, number one, your attendingp physician, he or she must confirm diagnosis, your capacity, your residency and your informed consent. must tell you you have the right to change your mind. must tell you there are other % options. and the doctor can recommend that not -- but not require you to tell your family of your plan, to have someone present with you and not to consume the drugs in a public place. and this has created a kwan drink for a loot of my clients, the residents are notmy require to tell them that they plan to
take these drugs. a big part of my practice is trying to get my clients to have anzv environment of open disclo sure and open discussion because you want people to tell you that they have these plans. unlike a hospital where you go in for a÷ú few days and leave. this is home for my client's client and that makes a very big difference. if you get through dr. number one, doctor number two is consulting physician, goes through all the same steps. those doctors, if they sense any kind of mental health issue have to recommend you go to mental health specialist. if i went to the doctor today and found out i have six months tklive. i'm pretty sure i will feel a whole bunch of emotion. i'm surety sure one of them will be depression including anxiety, fear and confusion. i don't think they're really necessarily focusing on that group. but there are people who have chronic depression. there are peoplev: who are bipor and who have psycho sees and
maybe they're not on their medication right now and maybe they're not going to make a sound decision &nause of the magnitude. once you go through all of those steps, you're able to get the prescription and then the question from my clients and the question for your clients will be, will we participate in this act. so what does that word mean. statutes and probably the most important term in the statute. it means, essentially, are you going to prescribe the drug, handle the ymdrug, deliver it, dispose of it, receive it, have any touch -- have your hands on any part of the chain oftáutk of the drug and will you be present at the moment. that's what boils down to it. there are some other details, that's the hwart of it. so you can diagnose that you can give people information about it if you're a doctor. you can tell them what their prognosis is. but the real key is are you going to, as a health care
provider, let your -- if you're a company, let your employees and your let÷ú contractors be present at the moment of ingestion and are you going to handle the drugs. and just to give you a sneak preview, most of my clien( are not participating. i'll explain more when we get to the q and a why that is. the other interesting part of this law is that there's a÷ú provision protecting you, whether you participate or not. so if you're a physician or a hospital or school nursing facility or farmist or hospice agency or another health care provider, you can let your employees or contractors÷ú participating, provided you give them notice and tell them the consequences that could be disciplined up to and including termination. if you are anym individual and u want to take these drugs, and of course, the act, it is not considered suicide, assisted suicide or homicide. why÷ú is that so important?
insurance is a very big issue. it does not invalidate your life insurance, health insurance or any other kind of insurance. they cannot discriminate on you dpens your plans or the rescind your position. so that's all very essential. so it's kind of a kind of a -- you can participate. you cannot participate as an employer, i tell me clients if you don't participate, you have to give kind of disclose sure and acknowledgment to your people. so the last point i want to make is that there are very interesting utilization data coming out of these, because every state is required to maintain these u!data. just to tell you a couple of the highlights, this is basically an old person's law. most of the people who are taking these drugszv are over 6 most of them have cancer. they might have copd or another various serious illness. for the most÷ú part they're telling their family in the 90
to 95%, they're telling their family, interestingly the vast majority are whiteht people are college degrees, which might have something to do with how information gets conveyed. and the other interesting thing is almost everybody is dying at home, so that also reads as interesting issues when you represent hospitals asútf where this is going to take place. medicare will not pay for these drugs. medicare the safe portion, depending on your state, and$ @% oregon the state component stays for it. california has set aside money for it. but medicare will pay for somebody end of life counseling that you get from your physician, i'm going to turn this over at this point and he's going to talk more about the philosophical issue involved. >> thank you,zv very nb÷úmuch.
>> i work÷ú in my capacity, primarily, addressing questions around ethnics committee. while there are a lot of questions in health care related ethnics both critically. there are many questions i'm going to speak at 10,000 level and then drill this down to the --÷ first thing we have to keep in mind, we provide counselzv to people. individual clients and my
presujts we're speaking about organization, some of which are hr' nature x some of which are -- industry and health care, which are an expression of religious teachings. they're not businesses orzv socl service agents, but rather also other religious committees within the christian continuum of the other rely jougs communities. dealing with an population in contrast to short term hospital stay stays, so providing advicep we have to be aware of the identity of the client and how the identity is reflected in its culture and it's represented in
practices especially i will say in the last 15 or÷ú 20 years, tremendous shift in the identity of attorney, professionally from being council, to their÷ú clien on matters that include values to largely a commercialym operational model it's very clear and on the other hand, morally it is suicide andht sel ki ki killing how we -- reflectsa i think, in our understanding of the identity of the clients with whom we are interfacing and what
and with that our step children, who we're all familiar from legal training around due process, right to privacy, and matters along thosezv lines÷ú a they emergent or are they product. and what is the underlying moral and intentionality behind, in this case, an intervention whether it's medication or counseling or some matter÷ú lik that those are the two dominant elt cal zvapproaches.
it fairs to appreciate. in our÷ú culture today. shab our world. you also fa loss fer who had nom always stellar career, but they argued that the words we use house our identity. we should grasp to what is the frame of reference,÷ú the storyr the narrative our clients and that way we're able to affirm ov help shape or correct what the implications are of that story, or good implication, like we have with informed consent, we all encounterzv when asked or something as simple as blood draw or other implications, which require, in my opinion, a more sophisticated and mored8 reliable form of moral analysis.
and makes a very good point, when we we are involved in counseling or zvclients. we have not only the need to grasp the client's point of view, but we need to know it and know what this÷ú implications a so that full disclose sure to any person interesting into that relationship of health care÷ú results. and the full disclose sure, for example, with the nursing home was a ppplicant should occur before thatzv patient or reside appeared. why? because then one has a relationship of integrity. and that is counsel to organization and enables us to speak honestly to the client, how they market their services, what services are÷ú provided, wt services are not provided and how the services are under written. and knowing that a person then can exercise atonmy or their
dignity and making a determination as to whether they want to be involved with÷ú thatf there's some generic setting. but the reality is, certainly, since caring for the -- activity women are involved÷ú with more than men. that is an encounter. it's a set of relationships and who are these people we are relating to,ym whom we are entrusting ourselves or our family members. so we want to know their story. we want to know the implications, how it gets÷ú drilled down into what our patients are going to encounter, why does that become important. living in a diverse society, different organizations then
through their culture express theirzv value in different ways÷ what is an example, we hear frequently individuals say, i want everything zvu!done. >> to the patients or residence, what is -- if the approach is taken with and the life care, some might choose the position that pam is indicating, others might say, no, that is not what we are about. and so in doing that, they're living out with integrity the story the employers are passing out to their associates or to
share either their services or servicesym by -- any of these vings -- and i can tell you, teaching situation we had 300 residents and other nursing students, they're uncomfortable, as we allare, in dealing with the news. and then how do i work through it. how dowe coach our colleagues in medicine because we are examples, exemplars, large in lightijt our education, took large numbers of the society and who hasn't had to case, if not to think about this to articulate and not÷ú imposing point of view, but working with the person, the physician or a nurse to grasp what is the connection betweenu! their own personal story, what's important
in life and the story of their employer, also significant. i implications, if, for example, the home organization decides to take posture that is contrary to that of the nomination, denominational position, decided to contrary to this, to the ut censoring behavior. what would be an example of censoring behavior, if the organization had a church÷ú pension plan, that status can be resolved and that would have significant implication. there would be implications least, that's where it comes from, if those recognition occur. so -- i think wesfirst want to be aware of what the story, that drains the culture of the organization that was which whom we are representing, so it'kú very important to know that
there is no generic nursing home set up. there is no generic practice of medicine as much,sindividual persons are involved in that. secondly, we want to make sure that we're able to articulate, uz different approaches in addressing matters as they come up, otherwise, it will be standing in the dark, we try to have an÷ú educated conversation with the client. the third aspect, is to appreciate because there is diversity, there will be facilities that wish to÷ú acqui with these types and there are others with integrity, as a matter of free exercise or religion, i will argue, freedáp of association, which is not to go down that path for seasons it pertains to their own integrity. i think we're going to see ako t more discussion around this as matters go forward, several things, she noted have statutes on this. massachusettszv did not.
i think we're going to see more and more conversation going forward as to what direction health care is goingç to take o this topic, rumors enter into is very critical period. so, thank you.zv >> thank you. >> you -- before we get into some of the points that we've have gotten here, i want to ask you, you mentioned a little bit some of the demographics of÷ú individuals who have used medication under some of the existing laws. can you talk a littlezv bit abo the of the medications. >> yes, i can. a lot of us believe that california being the bigd8 clou populace state that it is will change things dramatically. and you'll see a big up surge. if you look at the data, in oregon, if you go back to 1998,
so with 18 plus years, there were÷úym 1,500. >> of which 132 were used. when you look at the entire state of oregon. it's not thatmy frequent. the other really interesting for me as a long term care ÷ú÷úatto. i can explore why that is if we have time. vermont is a very small state. i think in the first year they collected data. there were maybe 20 some odd
we expect california will open us and it will be -- much bigger part dialogue, we do expect x5jtáhu)s& go up. it's not being used willie nilly, it isn't relatively isolated thing, sti> i think it's important information to brain our discussion. you noted that you were seeing some friends at your practice @% and noted that many of the -- your clients are opting out of participating. can youhebplain a little bit about data. you seem to -- more inúslcular entities versus religious entities or a little bit of a mixed bag. >> it's a mixed bag and i'm always surprised. so let me start with the fact that, among the hospitals we're seeing that a number of
hospitals and catholic hospitals are opting out. we've had a one secular opt out we've had a one secular opt out and a lota physicians are saying, i feed to opt out i can't do this. it's mixed with pharmacies. the world in which i live is the orld. as i mentioned before, one of the really important distinctions, is people come into a residential care facilito or. it's raising really interesting issueur# the provider, for
example, a catholic organization. there it has the option not to participate. if it tries to prevent the resident fromg# storing and takg these drugs, it will get cited by our regulatory body. it's a little bit rare. the implication is that you taking the drugs, it's very ambiguous. the reality is, if you don't participate and are still÷ú nursing, say, that people cannot keep control substances at their bedside, you're kind of shutting down the operation, but what's q%9 evangelical clients say, you know, i'm going to turn a blind eye. if their doctor wants to come in or their friend wants to come in and give their drugs to them, don't ask, don't tell, that surprised me. what i'm finding is mostu! of m clients, you know, getting to your narrative about the secular
these are the organizations that they're focused on, maybe that's a sign how much they've become in society, i'mu! not a philosopher, that makes sense to me. what i'm finding is, they don't want to be the chain of custody of the drugs. they want toko prohibit their stamp from having any role in the handling of the drugs and even being present duringp ingestion. what's the liability risk, what's the exposure, being in the room when someone takes the drug. for the most part÷ú it's symbol statement, we as an organization of particular face don't want to condone this behavior, but, you know, the clients pointed out. if thwemployee is in the room, he or she might be tempted to help the person with the administration, which will have them engaged with homicide,÷ú
essentially. the other point, when someone takes these drugs, even though they're not suffering, there -- and it can be a very jarring experience for an employee who might not be prepared from an emotional power of that moment. then again i've had some real surprises, for example, one client said, nobody can participate and nobody can handle drugs and nobody can be pre3f8á except our pastor, and another client said, nobody can be present and nobody can help with the drugs except our medical director because our medical director is thñ attending physician for 90% of our residents and we don't want to put them through the extra ÷ú hardship.p
>> do you have any comments to : that. we probably the attorneys want the experiences that are coming out of belgium and holland and the netherlands and their experience, especially dealing with children and what constitutes operationally in their jurs prudenfrom a -- i cao her practice, because their own experience to validate the authenticityzv of that.
they'll hap to be under protest after probably court order, it would be significant -- it would be significant change for the presidentu! to get the health ce in the states which take care often. and i think makes a good point on how the statute is designed for the individvrs to adjust medication. we also know that as we get dwsh as we age, it's not as significant as many people÷ú strokes and they have the mechanism and then the con none drum cited of the nurse or nurse's aid or it comes upym an that, in turn, was involved in location by professional clause and con stance clause is that manyñv states make an accommodation to people goodwill who are opposed to abortion. and now, they in many are being cut back by this very concerted campaign to drive and this is the part from our conversation. i think the movement tl
health care is a commercial business product. and the application of the atonmy model is carried ymover. i'm sure we as attorneys are seeing 40 years of the movement from being a person whose advocacy around how to enhance just and fairness in a commune tearian way, largely reduced÷ú commercial and how it's a product to be bought and sold. and this is something, i think, we're going to have to deal with an attorney in a much broader sense in the topic that we're looking at today. so that's really all i wanted to say in response. out remark. >> you had mentioned the catholic church -- are there catholic ethical directives on point or÷ú directives imply the
stance of the church with regard. >> that's a very good question. in this country, catholic health care ministries, we see them as ministries not a social service agency. they are to -- foreign activity to be identified with all the attending legal implications around the k atus, et cetera. they have been to be recognized by the local regional and local regional bishop seek that they are in compliance÷ú with the national -- the religious directives. they have six parts, parts five, deals with the question and they are categorically clear that there is to be known, advancements and we're not talking about, but there's to be no advancements or self killing. but on the other hand they're very strong emphasis andko this
isn't very clear around the provision of hospice care and the information that ended doctor/patient relationship. we like our ministry experience guided by the positions over a lawsuit and they're not following the direction, notu! much a patient refuse an intervention, which will be coming up with this type of conversation, but to demand intervention, such asym demandi efforts, so there's been a great push within the catholic health ministries of this country in the last five years, especially, to advance early open transparency about what the care is and top advance in conversation with the patient or their decision maker, what is appropriate on this life. and that's, in÷ú part, part sixf the directives deals with the questions we alluded to today over cooperation.
so the ministry would be very hesitant, i would think, to be involved with in a partnership in a care elementwith any organization that embraces dying or other progress like that, aside from the+d& q%=91 hospi hospice. >> thank you. one of the things i want to make sure that we talk about before we open up are q and a ÷úhere, that we're -- where providers do opt out, what alternative care options are you÷ú seeing that provide. when you talk a little bit about the care,÷ú i would like remark on that, if you will, myplease. >> shouldn't we get deep in our relationship with agencies in our area. i said absolutely.
i á at this point with hos spice care. it focuses on symptom management and pain management at the end of life. there's a social element. there's a lot of emphasis on the mending relationships and the family agrees and one of the reasons in my mind, that only two-thirds of the drugs prescribed are used are people flying hospice care and they're able to manage their anxiety and a lot of their symptoms. absolutely critical one. it's also important for my clients who are in nursing c1rñ they have a legal obligation to provide comfort care. they can provide it or arrange it so if they don't want to provide zvit. they can have a hos spice agency or home health agency, for example, come in. but the point is, you start getting into academic÷ú distinctions you might say we're not going to be present during ingestion, but ten minutes later you will be involved when it
comes to htcare. and that person is protected from any kind of bad consequence. we have, as best practice, told our clients, you should also tell your employees, volunteers, contractors, that they likewise do not need tosparticipate in comfort care. if they have issues of conscience or faith with being there during ingestion, they're there during ingestion, they're going 0 have aa issues ten minutes later. so clients are either providing or arranging care, but i'm counseling them to make it very clear to your employees and others, something we need to participate in. >> within the system, my day job before i have to, with present
health in chicago. >> well, starting in key i don't clinic. to nurse from ed, from any other facility, that patient evaluateo around what they're calling the score, after ascertains whether it's the -- it is a pointzv of conversation. depending on that, then we have proactive ethics in the medical record, provider has ÷ú preidentified predicaments they have given the emphasis. when those appear, that sets off ié the electronic medical record process of consultation on ethical concerns such as early aggressive assertive plans of
care conversation or family, whether reasonable prospects post diagnostic test so that one of the great that come out÷ in the literature is -- around this topic is the fear of aban -- abandonment, i think for one reason around, much of t0ef medication is troops come forward who have another service to support that patient and so, having these concerted coordinated programs trying to figure out who is the attending physician who is consulting in the division or role have÷ú coordinated and those are types of measures we have picked up on the concerns that were right. >> this has been a really fascinating experience. i will be dealing with the ceo,!
coo, kr fo of the organization. that person is not the board. the person is not the line÷ú staff. i've spoken to resident ymbodie. >> sometimes speak to executive director or ceo who has confident that the board will take a particular view, only to later have to amend the direction. in v -- in very general terms, what has been interesting to me, the caregivers of often people are of deep faith.
and a lotsof them have deeply held religious relieves and very imposed of personally want to opt out and in zvcontrast, the executive team may be more the executive team may be more secular. in contrast again, the board of directors is looking at liability and financial issues. so i often see that the people who raise the conscious issue the most are the people who don't have a seat at the table, the caregivers, except to tell their supervisors. the executive team can go either way the board is generally thinking about liability. >> last question for both of you. what advice would you give to attorneys as they council their clients about navigating through these choppy waters and applying these statutes? >>. >> well, i'll say what i said earlier, the attorneys should know well the culture of the
organization of whom they are representing. we re-present to a larger world the perspective of the client. the current situation of society. it's important to encourage the client if they're an organizational arrangement or a service going into someone's home like a home care. what their -- the -- how to develop educational programs for employees. as to what they are getting into. so there is full disclosure, it's a question of integrity and transparency, to build trust in the workforce. but also, to have education programs for the community as
part of the best sense of the word, marketing, so an individual coming knows what they are going to receive, and what they may not receive, not so much in the immediate future, but pam makes a good point, years down the road, and then the third part, there would be disclosure statements, so there's a consistency of messaging by a provider, physician or nurse. also, some notices, perhaps simple, short statements i've travelled one this morning. saying this is about what frames of -- that i think would be important to pass on. >> i agree with everything father grogan has said. don't assume.
don't use your client's political pred legislation or faith as short hand for how your client might feel about the subject i'm a very big fan of disclosure and training, i talk about that with clients. you know, we have a little bit of a dark joke with marketers. they don't really like any recommendation, but get it right up front. i like what you have said about integrity, that's the most important thing can you do. >> we have a couple minutes here.
>> in thinking about the liability issues in terms of the person who's assisting in the suicide, euthanasia, it seems odd we have the schedule penalty which requires an individual to kill someone and yet we don't allow physician assisted suicide. i'm wondering what your thoughts are about that interesting dichoto dichotomy. >> we have on the one hand the state legitimated killing of
your -- that's one type of situation, you're citing, how s is. are you asking what is the distinction between the two? or how to harmonize philosophically? >> yeah, more in that vain and then in terms of i'm interested how the individuals actually inject the cocktail or whatever in terms of executing another individual under capital punishment. they're free from liability i'm
also interested in that aspect. >>. >> i will repeat an argument i heard this is a public act, consequent upon a bad deed, whatever we want to call it, the precipitating cause. and as a result the people through the government have decided that a proportionate penalty for that bad deed involves state killing. akin to why are we involved in another state killing. another vehicle or police officer having capacity of force. they deal with the public order this arrangement is not -- and this is apart from how anyone feels about it, this is not an
account of government. the practitioner takes accountable for what they do. >> to go back to my point about two forms of ethics. there's a step child. and in that, we often hear about pragmati pragmatism, what's the outcome, it doesn't matter how we get to the outcome. in the point you well raised, what is the distinction? there's death in both, they occur by persons who are occasioned to do it. it's a governmental action and on the other side, it's more if we can use the word private. the awkwardness is, attorneys are licensed to practiced, we are officers of the court, so we have some type of relationship with the government. i don't want to go off on that, because i don't know what that is. that is how i would try to
harmonize it in my mind. i'll defer to pam if she wants to -- >> nothing to add. >> good morning, thank you for being leer today. my name is john patterson. i'm a staff at the nation's largest nonprofit improving care at the end of life. the district of colombia has passed the medical aid and dying law, we have another jurisdiction on the map soon. physician assisted suicide isn't the term used. physician aided death isn't the term being used right now. it's medical aid and dying. i wanted to bring up -- you mentioned the importance of the educated conversation and in religious institution, you talked about how they can opt out of participating in the law. which is the handling of
medication, prescribing of medication, administering medication, and what not. they also treated giving information the physicians at those facilities, being able to give information as participating in the law. do you find it problematic that religious organizations are restricting the ability for patients to get information about medical aid and dying as a process, and what has -- or how has that played out of facilities that you either worked for, counciled for and what advice would you give to those facilities who are treating the information alone as a conscience based objection. >> thank you. i've actually presented on comparisons among the different laws, the statutes vary on this issue. in those states where the organization for reason of conscience can withhold the information, it's a right that was negotiated as part of the messy legislative process i respect that's the way it was
resolved. i think it's an ostritch head in the sand when you think about how easy it is to get information. i respect my clients rights to say we feel so strongly about the issue, we don't want to give information. my advice is also frequently, you want them to get correct information. and there's a lot of misinformation out there. would it be in your best interest to be the source of that information. that's one of the reasons i'm speaking to one of my clients resident bodies. >> illinois has a statute change in the conscience clause statute, taking effect january 1, in that statute, it says that the individual provider is to give information as to a procedure they're not applying for moral reasons, it's expected
that service could be provided. and the question arises, is that collusion and an immoral act that many would see as tainting their integrity. and an imposition on their freedom of speech. this is corporate practice of medicine, on the other hand, the physician can go practice elsewhere if they want. the information is out there. anyone can get it readily, and all, but on the other hand, the service, whether it's religious or secular, i do believe there should be some acknowledgement that if we have a diverse society, we're going to have different approaches, if we buy into a commercialized view of medicine, the customer patient either themself or through an agent can take their business
elsewhere. >> i think this is going to be a major issue going-forward. our conversation today has been a civil conversation, from people who have two very different points of view on the topic. >> please join me in thanking our panelists and thank you to all of you. [ applause ] i do think you can learn from failure. i think that if the next president wants to aspire to be like somebody, they probably want to aspire to be washington or lincoln. you can't re-create the country and you can't have the civil war. what do you do next? aspire to be james monroe? i don't know. you can aspire not to be james buchanan. >> sunday night on q & a.
james buchanan's presidency. in his latest book, worst president ever. the legacy of the least of the lesser presidents. >> i think the differentiation of good presidents and bad presidents. they were decisive men you can't come to the top of the ladder and not be decisive, buchanan was a waffler. james polk hated him for being a waffler. he always went back and forth on decisions. you're my adviser, you have to tell me what to do, that's how he was as president. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. c-span student documentary contest is in full swing, we're asking students to tell us what's the most important issue for the new president and congress to address in 2017. joining me is ashley lee, she's
a former student cam winner of 2015 for her documentary help for homeless heroes. ashley, tell us about your student cam documentary? >> yes, my partner and i produced a documentary where we cover the issues of homeless veterans on the streets of orange county, california. they have given their all for our country. the fact that they are now living on the streets, not having family or anyone to care for them was not okay. we decided we are going to talk about this issue within our community and we decided to make a c-span documentary about it. >> i encourage all seniors in high school. i encourage all juniors in high school and middle schoolers to raise your voice, your generation deserves to be heard in the government, and if there is a better place to speak these
issues this is it. >> i think my advice for the students who are on the fence of starting this documentary is to really look into your community and see what is affecting those who are around you. they are the one who you love. they're the one who you see the most. they're the one who uses around every day. if there's an issue that you see happen every day on the street, that's probably where you can start. be a part of this documentary because you want to be a voice for your community. >> if you want more information on our student cam documentary contest, go to our website, studentcam.org. anti-gun violence activists met on the campus of american university in washington saturday, to talk about approaches to solving the problem. topics included police department transparency, the mill tarization of police work,
domestic violence laws and the role of social media, this part of the day long event is 2 1/2 hours. >> good morning. >> good morning. >> thank you so much for being here. we are working at the intersection of gun violence prevention and criminal justice reform. i'll talk a little bit more about the work we're doing and how i come to this space, i want to make sure we have enough time for these fantastic panelists we have here today to talk about the work they're doing and have more of a conversation with all of you here today. i want to spend a couple minutes also laying a little bit of ground rules with these conversations. we're going to talk about some
really tough stuff. there are people here that are not only victims of violence, but also survivors of violence, so we want to make sure that we're making sure that everybody knows that there is -- this is a safe place, if you do need to leave, we absolutely understand that as well. a couple other things i wanted to lay out there as well. we want to make sure people are listening actively and being respectful of opinions that people have not only on opinions, but whenever we're asking questions as well. also want to make sure we're speaking from our own experience, i have to tell myself to do this all the time instead of saying i'm speaking for all black people, sometimes i do that. we want to make sure we're not afraid to challenge different ideas and focus on what are the ideas we can work together on. participate fully. i hope others will share their stories. i think it's important to hear how we're interconnected.
you can look at my facebook and twitter to know i'm not going to agree with most people on things, it's really to have a deeper understanding of the work that is ahead also be aware of your body language and how we approach people. it can come off. just in general, we know and we hear every day on the news about the 33,000 people who day every single year from gun violence. a lot of the stories we don't hear about are the people who are left behind after that gun violence happens, and also what happens before a gun is shot in a lot of our neighborhoods. for the last four years, there's been a large national coalition after sandy hook. to particularly address
policies, to reduce firearms in our country a lot of these organizations have worked very well, to make sure we understand these different intersections, one of the things we want to walk out of here today is making sure we have a deeper understanding of how we can work together and not -- i don't want to -- i want to make sure this isn't a conversation that devolves into -- this organization doesn't do this, but it does do this. and come up with some innovative ideas. everyone is trying to make change, we have a lot of work ahead of us. given the current administration coming in. i'm going to ask the panelists to talk about what brought them here, if they have an organization that they work with on gun violence prevention and then we'll get into some questions. >> good morning. >> my name is nardine jeffries, i live here in washington, d.c.,
what brought me to the table was my only child was murdered here in washington, d.c., march 30th, 2010, in what is known as the massacre, it was a mass shooting. i say that because a lot of people don't know that it was a mass shooting, it was the worst mass shooting in d.c.'s history in two decades, because we're talking about people that look like me and not necessarily you, it's not reported on that manner. it was on the brink before sandy hook happened, charleston nine, aurora and all these other shootings, i wanted to bring that -- just make that point that the media does play a huge piece in the division and separation, and obviously the racism between how they tell our stories or not. i started a nonprofit called
stop killing innocent people. i work with everyone in the gun violence prevention movement. coalition to stop gun violence. i've done things with almost everyone. i'd like to say i'm included in an exclusion. because as amber said, we're not here to talk about who does what and who doesn't do what. i know there's a lot of things that are done and you're invited to. it's more of an annual type of thing. what happens the 11 other months out of the year we're going to try to figure out how to work better in that space. that sums up who i am, and why i'm here i worked on some legislation called the south
capital street tragedy, memorial act. which is in most of the schools here in d.c., that is a comprehensive piece of legislation that talks about mental health, trying to be more proactive as opposed to reactive, there are a lot of agencies here in the district that in my opinion are allowing too many families to fall in large craters, they're not rendering the services they're supposed to provide to these families and i'm working to make that crater a smaller space. i know we're not going to be a flawless society, but i know we can do a lot better than we've been doing. >> i'm a core organizer of black lives matter d.c., and i'm also the founder of qdc for me. a lot of the work we do in black lives matter, actually there's a network of chapters that we're
actually a part of that was started by the founders. 44 chapters, d.c. is one of them. here in the district my project is to keep d.c. for me. that is to combat both police brutality, police murder as well as intracommunity violence. a lot of times is a lot of work on dispelling myths, the black on black crime that doesn't really exist. talking and working with moms and families of those who have been murdered by police. really challenging the ways in which our society is complicit in all of these murders. it's from us as individuals, to institutions, to elected officials, schools, agencies,
all of those things, and so really attack that by political education. why is it we feel like abolition is a big bad thing. who told us that policing with guns was the only way that others could keep us safe? do we understand what the difference between safety and security is and how then do we address intercommunity violence in a way that doesn't patholo pathologist black people or people of color. but also, talks about a community change in the way that we view each other, that no one is disposible, and we start look ago at that from birth. and all of the systems and the ways we treat people, the systems that are set up, that we interface with every day, from education, to hospitals, health care, all of those things that are at the core of the community violence that we face and
lastly, the other things we do is direct action. so whether it be shutting down things or people part of that is to remind people, there are people every day whose lives are disrupted. if you can get to home or work a little easier or quicker, just know there's a mother that can hardly get up out of the bed because her life has been disrupted. or children who can't continue to go to school on a regular basis, because their mother or father was murdered generally they probably are seeing that video over and over again looking at the intersection of all of these things, making sure we talk about one, we talk about the other. you can't vilify, which is something that happens to us all the time. it feels like, people only think
black lives matter when police are killing them. we're talking about a system of policing. there's not good officers and bad officers, all of them take the oath to protect the system they work for, so if we're not looking at that system, if we're not looking at the ways drugs and guns really came into our communities and the ways in which we actually keep them there. with a lot of people who make a lot of money off of that, the people on the streets seeing the carnage are not receiving the support they need to be able to do that work. >> hello, everyone. i'm a student here at american university and i'm a member of students for justice in palestine, here at american university. thank you.
and so we are a grassroots organization that is all over the country and we focus on supporting palestinians and the right to palestine soev earnty and self-determination, we do this through education and having teachings and different workshops on campuses, but also through the bds movement. so this is economically targeting israel to -- and u.s. and other businesses from disrupting -- what our goal is is to disrupt their complicity in the occupation. and so if you're wondering, what does this have to do with gun violence, palestinians are victims of gun violence, it may not be the traditional sense, it may not be the same way we traditionally discuss it, but there are definitely a lot of
ways in which gun violence affects palestinians. i'm going to look a little lit at an amnesty international report. some ways are unlawful killings by idf soldiers, over 120 palestinians have been killed in the last year by gun violence and this has included children. and a lot of times in the nighttime, separating children from their families. another method is extra judicial killings, in addition to that, there are executions that are happening, unlawfully. and sometimes there is settler violence. settler violence are stettlers attacking palestinians from the settlements. and i have one example. palestinian fidel al-kwasami was
shot and killed in the city of hebron right in front of an idf soldier and no action was taken. this is a recurring trend, part of a system of violence, and system of occupation. one way that the u.s. is connected to this, is we -- our government gives $3.8 million every year to the israeli government for arms and that includes anything from helicopters, to bullets to guns, you name it. that is one -- we saw in 2014, this is where our taxpayer dollars went. it was to the murder of thousands -- of over 1,000 palestinians, many of which were children. the last method that i think most people probably are most connected to is the training of
police forces. in the west bank, so a lot of police departments, i'll give you a list of states, d.c., baltimore, does anyone remember when freddie gray was murdered last year? raise your hand if you do. >> so the baltimore police department was trained in the west bank, and they're taking these tactics and applying them on black citizens, people of color here, and people of color abroad. this is a problem, and this is why intersectionality is so important. other areas that have been to the west bank include florida, pennsylvania, new jersey, connecticut, new york, massachusetts, north carolina, georgia and washington state. this is why it's important for all of us to continue working on this as national organizations because it's touching every part
of the united states. when we stop the killing of palestinians, we're stopping the killing of black lives here, and undocumented folks in a lot of dinner communities. thank you for coming here, and we hope to keep this discussion going past today. >> good morning, my name is marian gray hopkins, i'm here for gun violence on the perspective of police brutality. i'm a survivor, my son was a victim. my son gary hopkins jr. was murdered by the police november 27th, 1999, 17 years ago, and this still continues to plague our country. after 28 hours or less, a person of color is murdered across this country. many if not most unjustly by law enforcement. i'm here today to -- let's talk about what it is that we can do to overhaul the corrupt system
that we're dealing with today. many talk about, you know, as mentioned, already, good cops, bad cops, if you're dealing with a corrupt systemic racist issue, then we need to attack it from that aspect. i am also a member of a is a roarty of sisters that didn't pledge to be a part of, there are many mothers across this country that wake up every day with pain, emptiness and we skpaekt and demand change. we know it's going to require all of us to be a part of it, i am the president and co-founder of the coalition of concerned mothers. i'm also a member of the prince george georges people's coalition. i'm a member of the maryland coalition for justice, and that is also an organization that's looking across the state of
maryland at police brutality, not only are we looking at it at a local level. i'm working with an organization onus inc., and i am the family's person that deals with -- i'm sorry, deals with the families across the country and we're looking at legislation that could address police brutality on a professional dialogue. how could we get the support we need. there are solutions out here, but they're overlooking them, we talked about the dollars that comes out of this issue. along with police brutality, the organization, the coalition of concerned mothers, we look at mass incarceration, we look at the school to prison pipeline, when we talked about intersectionali
intersectionality, there are many pieces of the puzzle we need to look into. thank you. >> my name is robert disney, i'm the organizing director for the brady campaign. just very quickly, the way that gun violence has personally affected me, my niece and nephew were students at columbine when that shooting happened, and my brother-in-law was a member of the littleton police department that responded. he was on the s.w.a.t. team, we had that incident and then when i was much young er about eight years old, my great uncle who by all accounts was a horrible, horrible human being, molested his daughter and boat his wife and also had guns.
on the day after christmas, he beat his wife, his wife took off with her daughter to the neighbor's house, they called the police, the police showed up said, clifford, you know, they knew him, you're having a rough day? yeah, yeah, i'm having a rough day. well, okay, you have to give us your i.d., he reached behind to pull out what they thought was his i.d., it was a gun, and he -- it still gets me. he shot and killed one of the officers and wounded another one. so that's something that is a very dark cloud that's over our family. it's nothing that we can ever fix, but we've come to peace with the victim's family, so
anyway, it's -- i've only been in the movement for 2 1/2, 3 years, but it is something that has affected my family. with the brady campaign we focus on three areas of gun violence prevention. the brady background check law is the reason that our organization got into the business with jim and sarah brady, they were amazing folks, jim brady was shot during the assassination attempt of president reagan. and it took them the rest of their lives in trying to fix the gun violence problem. they -- it took them six years and seven votes to pass the brady background check -- the bill into law that was unfortunately prior to the advent of the internet and the proliferation of gun show sales,
so we are now focused on fixing that because upwards of 40% of all gun sales are now done in a right manner where there is no background check. anyone at any point, no matter what they want to do with that gun, they can get their hands on one. the problem with brady background checks, there's a structuralized racism within that. because minority communities are much more targeted by the police, they're many members of those communities are much more likely to be prohibited purchasers of weapons, and so there's a problem, we don't quite know how to fix that, that's why we're here today, to talk about that with you folks, and so i'll be interested to
hear what you guys have to say. the second campaign we work on, that i'll talk to you a little bit about, it's called the stop bad apple's gun dealer campaign. it's all premised on the fact that by atf data, 5% of gun dealers across america provide 90% of the guns used in crime in any given year, 84% of all gun dealers across the country will not have a single crime gun traced to their shop, not a single one. on the other hand, there are other gun shops like chucks in chicago, that will have thousands and thousands of guns traced to their shop. we don't know what the problem is because the corporate gun lobby has done a good job of preventing the federal government from effectively dealing with the issue. and this campaign is designed to pick up where the federal government has failed so we're
going to the states, municipalities, we're working in chicago with a really fantastic coalition that's been working on this issue, the specific issue for more than a decade, we're also deeply involved in l.a., where we've gotten the city council to issue their own crime gun trace report, which will tell us who are those bad apple gun dealers responsible for this crime. so those are the two campaigns that are most applicable. we also do a lot of public health and safety, which i won't touch on, because i don't want to take up time on that. but it's certainly the brady -- the three campaigns are certainly not going to solve the problem of gun violence, we believe that it will -- it has the opportunity, we have the opportunity to significantly cut gun deaths in america, if we
focus on it, and i'm just -- i want to say that i'm so thankful for the opportunity to be on the panel with all of you today. you have an amazing wealth of experience. >> thank you guys so much for sharing your stories. i'm going to ask a couple questions and then make sure we leave time for the audience to also ask questions. i started working until d.c. about 17 years ago, working on the hill, where it was drilled in my head that policy in d.c. was the most important thing that could ever happen on the face of this earth. and then i left and was a community organizer for seven years where they said, the people in d.c. are the worst people on earth and policy is not the way to go. there's a push and pull especially when you live in this city, when people say we must go to the hill, and focus on these one or two bills. that will change everything. some organizations may or may not get funding from private
citizens and not get any money from the state or government. so my question to the panel is, do you believe -- and there's no right or wrong answer? policy and organizing and our philosophy is that we need to do a little bit of both, but don't need to focus solely on just policy. i think especially for the gun violence movement, it's been so heavily focused on one to two of these federal bills. how do we -- i guess a two part question. if you don't believe it needs to be one or the other. and how as a -- as we talk about intersections, how do we move past that, how do we focus on the organizing aspects and make sure we're thinking about both aspects? i'm going to just throw it out there. >> i'll start. i think they both play a dual role, in that mobilizing and organizing folks in the masses, help toward policy changes, when
you're out there, and we've been on the hill, as i talked about, we're working on national legislation. it's urleia. uniformed reporting law enforcement information act. it's something we've been trying to push on the hill that would address what we're missing in law enforcement today that is accountability and transparency. when we walk the halls of the hill we're getting push back to something we know could make a huge difference to eliminate. not eliminate, but reduce the number of murders we're having across this country every single day. we went in a small group, and whenever we go there's a small group. i feel if we had organized and mobilized large numbers of people, they would see this is an issue that's important to all of us, as i sit here today and i have -- i didn't go into details
about my son's story, just know that he was unjustly murdered. it could be any of us in this room, don't sit back and think, because you hear the small numbers of folks across this country the high profile, and there's some here, terence sterling, you have alonzo smith, rapheal brisco, you hear the folks that are here, but again, i deal with mothers every single day, this is a huge huge issue, it's not the michael browns it's not the trayvon martins, it's not the sandra blands. i can go through numbers, rolling through my phone, know that any of us in this room predominantly, though, it would be the african-american population that would be impacted by this, it could impact any of us. and so yes, we need to organize and we need to address policy because we have to attack this
on every single front. one thing will not work. so we need to deal with it in every form and fashion that we possibly can. everything that we've talked about today, and will talk about, we need to look at and see if we can get the changes necessary. thank you. >> yeah, i think we need both. i also believe in the importance of knowing your lane. i've had to learn that. a lot of people want to know how i would answer this question. i do policy as my 9 to 5. from my point of view there is a place for policy and legislation. that's immediate relief, these are the things that we know specifically in d.c. these are the specific -- we need to fund the act. we need to not -- to make sure
that peter nushin is not the chief of police. there are certain things we can do in the next year or the next five years, there are times when people need to say, this is wrong we're not going to invest in it or allow it to continue. if you have. if your house is urn abouting, you don't stay in it just because you don't have your next house. if you know something is that wrong, you can't continue to do it and have it be okay. when you look at the landscape and think things are ready to happen in 41 days, that sucks, that's really bad, but at some point there comes a critical shifting of the scales as maybe at this point there's some stuff that's about to happen, that policy is not going to work for, or work fast enough, or some people just really don't care that it's a policy.
i think that it definitely takes both, we need to look at how people do policy, and realizing that's organizing as well. getting people together and calling and going to offices and all of that, is organizing, we're not knocking on necessarily the doors and the halls of congress. so -- >> so a follow-up question to that is, what role do you think that social media has played either talking about the intersections of gun violence and a lot of the different issues we're talking about in either instigating some of these issues or how have you used it as an organizing tool to address the solutions that are happening on the ground. >> i can speak to that as a
student, organizer, millennial. it's been good to communicate across the world quickly, it's useful for international organize i organizing sao we're in contact with students. we have campaigns where we bring palestinian students to share about their experiences living under occupation to the united states. it's also useful because it's more widely accessible than coming and meeting face to face for some people. sometimes that's what people can do, and we appreciate all organizing in all forms, and it it's. in the effort of being inclusive, it's definitely a strong point. in terms of intersectionality, this is a way where organizations like the ones up here are able too come together and communicate, and also,
quickly share information and development developments in our movements, this is really important, because it's keeping us informed and -- always informed and on our toes and access this information and share it, whether it be our fellow organizers or campus administration or our leaders in governme government. >> i think it's very, very important, i think it has heightened the awareness of what's happening across this country. this has been an ongoing issue for the black community for hundreds and hundreds of years, we're seeing it play out through social media. i think using this as a tool to heighten awareness is very important, we haven't gotten our just do, even though it's playing out in the media, it's playing out in social media, but i think that people will be able to see that this is an issue, and then more people will
galvanize and come out together in order to make necessary change. i think it's definite ly heightened awareness across the country. >> i just had three instances, that i think social media is the most amazing thing that's happened to our society in our generation. and there are three instances that popped into my head. first of all, within hours of the orlando shooting, we were down there organizing, within two days of that, we worked with the quality federation and hrc and a couple other organizations in orlando. we had more than 10,000 people show up to a vigil, that was only possible because of social media. when -- on day 4 after the orlando shooting i was setting up, we use this platform called
mobil commons, who sends texts to people who are subscribers and ask them to take direct quick action. we ask them to contact -- lobby their member of congress to have them actually do something in response to orlando with that, we send out a text, it has a link, you click the link and you get a phone call and it connects you straight to your elected official officials. more than 176,000 people took advantage of that link, that's because i just hit return on my laptop. like that's insane to me. on the other hand, we have president-elect -- i won't even say his name, coming into the white house. and i blame social media, and the proliferation of fake news because of that. so it's both the most amazing opportunity for us, and also something that is sending our country down a very dark path.
nonwhite folks in the gun violence movement. the point of the article was that it's certainly significant and important that we care about sandy hook and the children who were killed there but we also have to recognize that there are thousands of other children and young men and women who are around the country. the article never concluded what we can do with to bridge the p gap -- suggested it's a failure of the gun violence so far. that we can't sort of overcome the myopic. in our effort, we're an interfaith network. they have a project dealing with
police accountability, youth engagement, it goes under the rubric of do not stand idly by. those words come out of the bible, thou shalt not stand idly by while your neighbor's blood is said. we're going to make sure our temple belongs to the network. we're going to make that a priority to make sure that while we focus about the policies, background checks and federal issues. you want to keep that accountability issue. we're all at this together.
it's not just folks in sandy hook and forget about the other folks involved in this problem. you conserceive there is a disconnect. >> i can talk about this very quickly. it's why our coalition was started. i will give a quick stat in 2012. there were 6,000 african-american men, one being trayvon martin, the other being jordan. who was killed because his music was too loud. healing communities in crisis, that directly addresses a lot of what you just brought up, one of the things, and i'm glad robert
is here from the brady campaign a lot of his organizations have been trying to be more inclusive in the work they do. up until probably last year after charleston, we all had a big organizing meeting to directly address the fact that out of the national gun violence, they'll get more than millions, hundreds of millions of dollars a year. there was not one person of color that was an executive director. they were 100% led by white men. 100%, there was not representation of people of color anywhere in the national leadership. does that mean that people of color couldn't come to the meetings? no. we were there at the meetings, but we weren't represented in the leadership divisions. that's something hopefully we can get into where is the money, where are the people supporting.
i know we like to talk more about that it's been definitely addressed. there has been a lot of really great movement from reports, funding, shifting of how we prioritize our work. so. >> a big part of that that we talk a lot about, is that folks don't want to -- or don't believe it's important to address anti-blackness. white supremacy, and the perceived -- a perceived notion of criminality when it comes to violence in black communities. so that there's this kind of unsaid, even sometimes unconscious belief that -- they live in a violent society, they were probably doing violent things or that's just a bye product of where they live. without looking at that's again looking at the systems and stuff, when i have talked about groups, it's been a real big challenge to say, we can't start
talking about it if while i'm talking about it, your micro aggressions of who does and doesn't what kind of deaths are more important. i'm from colorado, i was born and raised in colorado. i remember being in my class the morning of columbine and i would say a third of my class left in tears because they're watching. they had just graduated. we were freshman, looking and saying, my idea of gun violence in colorado, i don't go to movie theaters and such, i mean, big things -- things that are normal, these are the things that i think about. when i'm in d.c., i hear gunshots at night, i still don't think about it the same way, i'm clear about the systems that are happening, and i know that the fbi will sit forever and ever and ever and talks about what makes a school shooter or what makes a --
>> what are the other things they need to be looking at. to say just -- and then these deaths are used as a way to take that conversation nationally. they're not doing anything. and then when you're talking about sandy hook or even here in d.c. when we're talking about the south capital massacre, the only time you see it on the news is when there's a council person there, and it's disgusting. because the fact of the matter is, these are the same people who now want to walk-through over at south capital, they have these walks with the police department, where they want to look at where people are hanging out, and all that. none of that has anything to do with what happened at that site. they want to find where they can further criminalize people who may not be doing anything. instead of looking at the
programs, instead of looking at -- and there's no support for families, i want to say that, there's no support for families built into the government, especially here in d.c. there is none. which we were talking about resources, and i'm sorry if i'm taking a lot of time, but one of the things -- and you don't know this yet, we're getting ready to fund-raise for coalition of concerned mothers, you have mothers who are in some ways, the children who have passed away, been murdered were caretakers they were people who took care of their mothers, their families so you have people who lose houses. you have other mothers who are putting their own money in to make sure that mothers are okay. we talk about resources, those organizations and mothers, they're not 501c-3s. they shouldn't have to go out and find a physical sponsor.
sometimes that is what the nonblack community can do. i think it's not always about guilt, i think sometimes it is like, what can you give? that's something that we don't have as organizers in the community organizations, and that can make all the difference in the world, because the mothers are the experts. so i just wanted to lift that up. >> do you mind if i say something really quickly? >> i feel like this is one of the -- kind of the reason why we're here today, and i think it would be good to spend more time on it if we can, but that's up to you. >> i think one -- another reason for a division between communities of color -- a lot has to do with the methods in which groups organize. there's nonprofits in those
organizations as my sister mentioned, but also the way we organize doesn't always mean we're putting in names specifically on x issue. an organization may deal with a lot of issues. the coalitions may include students in palestine. it may be an organization teaching asian-american children to focus on trauma survivors, these are different things that organizations -- one organization might focus on. it may not have the same name that ends in gun violence. i think this is part of the issue. organizations that focus on issues of intersectionality, and realizing intersectional organizing doesn't just mean having an organization from
these communities under the name of ending gun violence, it may be working with organizations that deal with education and deal with food recovery, deal with environment -- et cetera, so i think again, that's one reason of division, and i think if we start having more inclusive spaces such as this, and also recognize the intersectionality of the issues, not just who they affect, but the intersectionality of issues themselves, so the prison industrial complex, military industrial complex. school to prison pipeline, a broken immigration system. we might be able to understand more holistic solutions for these issues, a lot of solutions to ending gun violence affect other issues. >> any other questions?
>> i was just wondering, because -- it seems at least from what i'm able to see on social media. there are areas of the population that get caught, and the south is one of them. it feels like -- i'm wondering, how have you guys seen that play out. am i just wrong in that there are certain areas that have been left out 1234 how are you guys working in those more difficult populations to make that change? >> so for a movement, black lives, it's interesting you said that, they have their first southern regional convention next week, so part of the way that that changes and they absolutely -- the south is always left out when it comes to movement work, and i think that
first it's being able to say that, and be honest about it. the second is to change the entire landscape of how we talk about that. we had this call the other night, we were talking about resources and equity, that's very different than equality. if we have resource, we're not just going to cut it into the five regions, each one of us is going to take something extra and give it to the south. there is a long -- a history now of years of being without resources, so i -- we have to give more. and by resources, i don't just mean money, i mean the amount of time we go into the communities. the issues that we all stand behind, there's no blm in louisiana, but we've been going to baton rouge for the last three months. and we raised $10,000, we've been going down there, now, the police know we were down there, they watch us with shotguns, a lot of that is because people haven't been there in a long
time. it's intentional, and it's looking at who is doing the work, there's not necessarily big huge organizations you know the name of, people never stopped organizing in the south. it is changing the culture, you have to keep saying it and doing it, and you have to be intentional and honest about it, that we assume that the civil rights movement and the fact that we're all sitting in this room means that the south is good. like they don't need us any more, and that's not the case. >> it's kind of a response to what you're saying, but yes, definitely the south has been overlooked there are mothers in the south that have been affected by gun violence. being murdered by law enforcement what they're finding is a division in the south, i don't have the answer, we need to have a conversation about. there is a buyout of people, that the government there will give monies to organizations so that they can overlook these issues.
we need to talk about, how do we get to that group of people that we know the government is buying out or selling out to the highest bidder. especially in texas, they're ruthless. they started off and they were rallying about police brutality, the next thing you know, they're giving them funding for issues that black on black crime for example, and that's very very important. it takes the issue away, and waters down the issue, you have officers killing people of color in texas, for example, and nobody's addressing that issue. we need to look at those as we're talking about, how do we solve these issues. that is a big issue in the south. the sellout and the buyout of the people that can make a difference. >> and -- >> do you want to say one last thing? >> i can be really really quick. i think there's student organizing, it has a more loose and less beholden to state law
framework that has been a way to bridge a gap in organizing in the south. so i know there are a lot of chapters for students for justice and palestine. it also united students against sweat shops and organizations on campus. i myself went to a conference in austin, texas, and i think that's important, holding our -- like you said, the black lives matter movement is having a conference in the south, i think it's important to do that, all of our organizations are using tactics that came from the civil rights movement. making sure we're honoring that history by continuing to support the communities, and i think one way that would be very helpful is actually through policy, and making sure that organizing spaces are open, because a lot of times there are state laws that are affecting people's ability to organize. >> we're running out of time. i want to be respectful of the
fact that we need to go to breakout groups after this. i will say, i'm from texas, was born and raised there, you're right. there's a lot of work -- even though we don't consider ourselves the south in texas, which is so bizarre, definitely a lot of work, hopefully there's some folks here that are looking at spending some time and resources there, we can have that conversation as well throughout the rest of today. i want to close up, but ask all the panelists to say one thing as we leave here today that you want folks to know about how they can be involved directly in the work that you are doing. so i'll start with nardyne. >> my website is www.skipdc.org. that's one way to reach out. and honestly, i just want to say, it's not even about one organization. it's about us as a whole. you know, i think -- i didn't say a lot because it's a hard time for me. my daughter would have been turning 23 years old december
23rd, and that's the reality that i have to live with. i want people to understand that this is not a black thing, it's not a white thing, it's not a gang thing, it's not a poor thing, when you're looked at less than human, which most people look at people of color in that sense, i hear it all the time. how do we engage the urban community? how do we dialogue? i'm human, we're all human, if you cut me and cut you, your blood is the same color as mine. we breathe the same polluted air, i think when people start looking at other human beings as such, we can move forward and do better. if people of privilege would stop thinking because your color excludes you from -- or other people from being a part of the human race, that's what we are. how do you dialogue with another human being? you open your mouth and you say hello, and you start the dialogue, i think that's what it's going to take for all of us to get on the same page.