 Hello and welcome to creating a human rights culture which aims to promote a lived awareness of the interdependency and invisibility of human rights principles in our minds, hearts and bodies, that is, dragged into our everyday lives. What after all is freedom of speech to a person who is homeless and lives in a world at war? Therefore, it is dedicated ultimately to the application of the human rights triptych which in brief consists of the universal declaration of human rights at its center, the conventions, that is international treaties on the right and implementation measures on the left. Greetings. My name is Joseph Franca and welcome to another episode of creating the human rights culture which calls for a lived awareness of human rights principles in our minds and our hearts and dragged into our everyday lives. Today I am here with Senator Joe Comerford. Hello Senator Joe Comerford. I'm so happy that you could spend this time with me and with our viewers. I know you're very busy. It took us two months to get a time that all three of us could agree on. You've been in office for about two months, seven weeks and I'm so happy that you could come here. The viewers you may be interested to know that I met Senator Comerford at a recent gathering in the Human Rights Week it's called at the Jones Library, Amnesty International sponsors every annually, a human rights gathering on assembly and she was our keynote speaker. And I must say I was really rather impressed all the things that you have done and you spoke about and the things that you want to do to give people of this state over ever. Basic human rights to adequate shelter, homelessness is a problem, food security, I don't know the data exactly in Massachusetts but Children's Defense Fund had sent one out of three children goes to bed hungry at night in the United States or is that risk of being hungry? In the Hampshire-Frankwood-Whistler District 22,000 people are food insecure so that means they can't guarantee where their next meal is going to come from. Well that's terrible. Thanks for telling us that. Information is power and where is the outrage? I have no idea. Okay? Maybe we'll get some of our viewers made and get them to do something. Thanks for sharing that. So I also wanted to say that Senator Comerford and I were kind of kindred spirits. I teach as you know a professor of social work at Springfield College and I know you're a social worker, you have a master's in social work. Where did you study? Hunter College. Hunter College. Oh I know Hunter College. Yeah I'm a Brooklyner originally. Okay so we're kind of kindred spirits and there is an expression that I always say in my class is the International Federation of Social Work has said that from its inception social work has been a human rights profession, okay? So what I'd like to do today is go through some of the articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is now 70 years young, 70 is young everybody and believe me I know and talk about well anything you want to talk about, talk about what you've done to provide these rights, talk about what you're thinking of doing to provide these rights and also talk about how we could help you. I'd like to engage in what the United Nations calls a creative dialogue with you and our viewers to provide all of these rights that basically speak to human need. I'm going to go through each of the articles and you could give me any feedback. Okay, so let me begin to roast you, I'm just joking, I'm just hitting. It's okay if you want to roast me about human rights, this is a good topic Joe. Okay, well let's just talk and if it gets out to be roasting I'll roast you, if not I'd like to just engage in some kind of a creative dialogue how we can promote these rights and how we can implement them. Now the Universal Declaration of Human Rights consists of all sorts of stuff. We can't do everything today. It talks about human dignity, it talks about non-discrimination, it talks about freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion. Those are very important rights, delicious for the time being, maybe set our priorities on what are referred to as economic and social rights, though rights are interdependent. You really can't have freedom of speech if you're homeless, I mean it's hard to get your voice out or you're living in a world at war, so rights are interdependent. So it's a complicated issue, but let's at least emphasize here the economic and social rights. They are basically in Articles 23 through Articles 28 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, so we can talk. I don't know if you have any questions or comments right now, we can just go right into it. I think we should go right in. You know one thing for clarification for your listeners, for our listeners. Only about yourself. I just want to make sure that we're talking about the Hampshire Franklin Wooster State Senate District, right so that's 24 cities and towns, Amherst is at the base and it goes up the Connecticut and it goes right to Royalston and left to Coleraine, so up to Vermont and the New Hampshire border. So it's a very, very large district, 160,000 people in the district that I'll talk about. So when I referenced for example earlier the food insecurity number, it's the food insecurity number for our district, you know where I'm working as your state senator. Okay, alright thank you, thank you very much, okay, yeah I should have, yeah by the way is there anything else you want to tell us before I get into this? You know only that this is the greatest honor of my life to be able to serve this district is the greatest honor of my life and I'm really proud to be state senator for this region and you know frankly I've assembled an amazing team, so we're working every day for the people of this district. Okay and how can our viewers contact you? So I have an email or what? Yeah, you can reach me at Joe.commerford, so just my name, Joe.commerford.co. At masenate.gov, I'm on Facebook, I'm on Twitter, we have a Boston office, they can find through a mass.gov website and we're opening an office soon at the University of Massachusetts, so I'll be an Amherst on a regular basis. I'm in the district Friday through Monday and then often in Boston Tuesday through Thursday. Oh that's great, so that means I could have you on the show once a week for I'm just joking, I know your time's busy but it's great too. But yeah, I'm trying to really figure out the good prioritization. Okay, okay great, well thanks, so now you know. So let's get right into some of the articles, these are what are referred to as economic and social rights or positive rights, they talk about the obligations of government to provide these rights for other people. It's kind of a complicated issue, rights have corresponding duties but I don't want to get into that right now, I think the viewers will get the point. Article 23 says that everyone has the right to a job, the right to work, the right to choice of employment to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment. People have the right to equal pay for equal work. They have the right to just and favorable remuneration and shoring for themselves and their family and existence worthy of human dignity. Does that sound familiar viewers? Are you getting a salary that gives you human dignity? I don't know. And supplemented if necessary by other means of social protection. Now Eleanor Roosevelt, who was a sort of chief honcho around the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, she headed the United States delegation. And they asked her, well how do you define, how does the United States define the right to work? And Eleanor Roosevelt said, the right to work means a job that is socially useful, contributes to the development of the human personality. See, we are kindred spirits, okay. And also contributes to a person's purchasing power. And as many of our viewers know, Trump is bragging about how we have more jobs and everything. But the question is, are these jobs reasonably paid? Are they contributing to the development of the human personality? Are they socially useful? I'll stop talking. You're the one whose viewpoint we want to get hold of. What are you doing? Or how do you envision more jobs in Hampshire County or this area of the area that you represent? And what could we do? And what are some of your thoughts about how things exist right now? I had three initial thoughts. One is that in the last session, the legislature passed, which was a very important piece of legislation requiring a $15 minimum wage. Sounds good to me. It was very good. So that is going to be indexed over time. So brought in, phased in over time. Many people, including myself, would have had that a bit hastened, right? So that we wouldn't wait. But we will get to $15 an hour. We understand that that's a minimum wage. It's not necessarily a living wage for people. So part of the work of the legislature is as we continue to chip away at increasing that base wage to understand that for many places in our district, for example, that still will not provide a kind of living wage that someone can count on. Especially if they get ill. I mean, it has to be supplemented with some kind of health insurance. Sure. There's the cost of health care. So there's that, right? There's a piece of that. We now have to make sure that state contracts, where they have workers who need that increased wage, are getting the kind of federal and state infusion that they need to be able to pay their workers. So there's a piece of work to be done in this session. So I think about that. I think about all of the intersecting pieces of this puzzle about good jobs. And that includes health care and making health care affordable. Because on a very base salary, our individuals and families are having a tremendously difficult time affording health care, as is. We have a lot of celebration in the Commonwealth that we have such a high rate of care. And it's true. And that is something to be proud of. But what's true about our health care is that it's fragmented and costly. And sometimes it fails us when we need it most, right? So in addition to thinking about good wages, we have to think about the intersecting things, like health care. We have to think about public transportation, which is really lagging in our district especially, both in terms of rail and in terms of bus service. We have to think about things like education, the right to an education or workforce development training, that actually is intersecting with getting people the kind of job that they need and deserve. There's another piece of this declaration or this article that talks about the protections for workers. And one of those protections that exists currently, but I've filed a piece of legislation around, is the earned income tax credit. That's a very good thing, right? It says to workers, keep working. And we're going to give you a credit based on your work, essentially. But my legislation says, hey, why do we have a cap for elders? Elders are still working. They need to continue to work. And there's a gap between when we can currently accept EITC or the earned income tax credit, or apply for it, and when Medicare kicks in. And so mine would raise what's called the elder cap on the earned income tax credit. So there is that kind of net underneath a workforce that is getting older. So those are some initial thoughts. Initial thoughts sound great to me, thank you. And the last part of that article talks about collective bargaining. That workers have a right to organize. It says here, workers have a right to form and join trade unions for the protection of their interests. I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on that. Sure. You know, in the post-Janice world, so that's, of course, the Supreme Court decision that really took the nation by storm. In the post-Janice world, those of us who believe that when unions win, everybody wins, which is, I do, I believe that, need to be in solidarity with labor and organizing to ensure that labor, which is really under attack after Janice, continues to feel. Could you explain to the viewers what Janice is exactly? The Supreme Court decision. Which said exactly. Well, it said, basically. And when did it happen? I don't remember the date. Last year, I don't remember the exact date. Oh, it was last year. OK. It said, basically, union dues are not mandatory, right? So it's basically an opt-in. And so those of us, and so it really threatens the well-being of unions, right? To be able to continue to grow and be robust and provide services for members, provide that kind of organizing scaffolding that we need them to do, to demand things like fair work, fair work for a fair pay, and kind of worker safety and environmental safety legislation that they've led, other kinds of social good that unions have been at the vanguard around, including health care. So we need to be shoulder to shoulder with organized labor and protect the right to organize, protect the right to unionize here in the Commonwealth and continue to say that when unions win, everybody wins. Sounds good to me. Let's move on. OK. The next article, Article 24. And I'm sure our viewers are going to resound with this one. I think of this sort of, I think of my students, my poor students, because they got a class Saturday and Sunday on the weekends, and they're working full time. They're supporting families, and they're also dedicated. Article 24, everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitations of working hours and periodic holidays with pay. The statistic that I know is that it takes roughly three incomes to support a family. And it's very difficult for parents to spend time with their kids. They come home, and they're just very tired, and they love to read a story to their children. Believe me, I know this one. But you just get very tired. And so the right to rest and leisure has been seriously abrogated, I feel, in this culture. And we live in the Western Mass, which has all this nature and kayaking and canoeing and all this stuff. And maybe it is that some parents and some people don't really have time to be doing this. So I'm wondering what you thought about the right to rest and leisure. I just have to add that in Europe, in Europe's got its problems, believe me. France and Germany, while France has government mandated five weeks vacation time. In Germany, it's six weeks mandated. And I also tell my students, if they have a master's in social work every four years, they get a three or four month sabbatical. I think it's every four years. So there is more of an attunement to rest and leisure in Europe. But it still has its problems. So I just wondered about some of your thoughts on rest and leisure. I mean, it's related to the question before, but whatever. OK. You know, we know. I didn't know the statistic you just shared about taking three salaries. I have seen this on numerous occasions. So we do know that the amount of disposable income for families is shrinking. We know folks are having to work longer hours for plateaued wages. And then this has led to a real erosion on disposable time or free time. That threatens family well-being. It threatens civic well-being, because if folks are trying to put two or three jobs together to feed their families and take care of their responsibilities there, they have less time not only at home, but also to engage civically in organizing or in any kind of fabric, the fabric of a civic life. So that threatens democracy as well as our family structure. So it's one of the issues with wages not actually climbing with what it costs to live. Yeah, you're right. I think we all agree. And I think that's got to stop. Yeah, that's all part and parcel with actually having a federal and a state government that invests in the programs that are going to raise all votes. We've invested in tax policy and other kind of spending policy that actually benefits or disproportionately benefits the wealthiest among us. And all votes haven't been lifted. But we have to lift all votes. And that's partly we have to increase the wages of earners. Yes, right. So they don't have to have three jobs to support a family. It is pretty terrible. I'm going to move right on. Now Article 25 is actually a long one. And maybe we could stop and talk about each of these. I'll pause maybe and just talk about your thoughts. Article 25, everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family. By the way, Eleanor Roosevelt wanted non-sexist language. And they're talking of revamping this. And I mean, it is 70 years old. And people are talking about revamping, which is fine with me. Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, for example, which is a great group. Speaking of good girls gone bad, making a joke. Oh, well, it's a great group. They wanted to add a right to potable water on the declaration. But this is all we have. And I think it's great. So everyone has a right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family or herself, including. So I'll just read this. And we'll go through each one of these, all right? Including food, clothing, housing, and medical care, and necessary social services. And the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age, or other lack of livelihood and circumstances beyond his control. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same protection. You could respond in Toto, as they say. Or what do we go over each one of these? People have a right to food. Sure. And let's think about this in a big picture. OK, sure. Because what you're talking about there, those rights, those guarantees are really bedrock to policy, to social policy. Exactly. And they're also bedrock concerns to budget priorities, both in terms of tax priorities, how we're going to make the money, and then spending priorities, how we're going to spend it. What are we going to spend it all on? And so those kinds of assurances are really the work of government. You better believe it. But government needs to be pushed. They tend to be so reluctant. Right, well, and I would say that, you know, many of my colleagues in the state legislature are some of the better minds with whom I've ever worked. So they're good folks. But what you're getting at, which I believe in, is that nothing happens. Nothing happens in government without a broad people's movement pushing in. Exactly. And that I think lawmakers that are the most powerful and get the most done for their people, and I hope to be this kind of person, know that they have to reach across and actually pull people in and work in partnership on issues like education, health care, the environment, revenue, issues that are really going to be life and death issues for people. It's going to take that kind of mass outpouring of energy and demand for government to work in everyone's best interests, not just a wealthy few. That's the kind of demand that's at the heart of things like elder financial security. So elders are mentioned. Yes. So right now, Massachusetts has a very poor rating. We are second from the bottom, second only to Mississippi in an elder economic security index. Is that so? I didn't know that. Yeah, it's tragic. Excuse me, that means. That's very tragic. I didn't know that. That our elders cannot be guaranteed to live independently. Yeah, take it easy. So without great concern, that's the result of policy. That's the result of policy choices. So some of the legislation I filed goes right at that. Excuse me. Take it easy. OK, so that is responding to all of them. Maybe we can sort of piecemeal it down a little, even though we understand it's all budgetary, progressive taxation, things like that. But I don't know. Well, let's just see. Let's take food, for example. You mentioned it before. Again, the United Nations has said that the right to food means food that is nutritious, easily accessible, culturally appropriate, and reasonably priced. Do you think we have food like that? I mean, you go to the supermarket and I don't know. Or people are getting into the habit of eating junk food. And what could we do to make food more nutritious? So there are food system in Massachusetts is actually one of the more sophisticated in the nation. So what you're talking about here is enough food, in part enough food. So in Massachusetts, we have something called the Massachusetts Emergency Food Assistance Program, or MIFAP, which joins with USDA food in becoming some of the main staples in food banks. Then there's food policy, really looking at the way in which we, for example, support our farmers to grow more organic food or more kinds of food that are needed by both food banks and also consumers. And then we have the budgetary piece of this, where we look at the ways in which through the Department of Agriculture or other intersecting departments, we're actually incentivizing local agriculture, dairy and produce to be as robust as it possibly can to both support food banks, to support local businesses, and then ultimately to make its way or end schools, which is where a lot of our local produce and dairy goes, and then ultimately to make its way to a family's dinner table. So it's both about the quantity in creating a food system that helps those most affected by hunger and food insecurity. And then it's about supporting farmers. So we have a number of programs in addition to MIFAP and other budgetary allocations, including the Healthy Incentives Program, which says to folks who are receiving the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or food stamps, hey, if you go and you have food stamp money, we can give you extra money if you're, say, for example, at a winter farmers market. You can get more fresh stuff if you come to this market and use your food stamps. So there are all these initiatives at play all the time, except it's not enough, because people are still food insecure, people still face hunger even in a commonwealth like Massachusetts. Hopefully we can continue this discussion. OK, great to have you. What a pleasure. A pleasure, OK.