Friday, August 16, 2019

Editorial: Hateful Words and Guns

The Trump White House went on full-tilt distraction mode after a gunman shot up a Walmart in El Paso near the Mexican border Saturday, Aug. 3, apparently trying to kill as many Mexicans as possible, in response to Trump’s repeated claims that immigrants were invading the US.

The shooter, identified as Patrick Crusius, reportedly drove more than 600 miles from a Dallas suburb looking for Mexicans and he found them teeming in the El Paso Walmart taking advantage of a state sales tax holiday to do their back-to-school shopping. Crusius allegedly killed 22, including 13 American citizens, eight Mexicans (most if not all of whom were in the US legally), and one German. The shooter wounded at least 24.

Before the shooting, the 21-year-old suspect apparently posted a manifesto that railed against a “Hispanic invasion” and laid out a plan to divide the US into territories based on race. He praised the Australian gunman who killed 51 Muslims at two mosques in New Zealand this past March, and Crusius wrote that he feared the growing Hispanic population in Texas will soon make it a solidly Democratic state, which he argues would all but assure repeated Democratic presidential victories. Sound familiar?

“The Democrat party will own America and they know it. They have already begun the transition by pandering heavily to the Hispanic voting bloc in the 1st Democratic Debate,” the manifesto says.

Early the next morning, in Dayton, Ohio, Connor Betts, 24, showed up in an entertainment district, wearing body armor, with an AR-15-style gun with a 100-round double-drum magazine, and opened fire. Nine people, including his sister, were killed and 27 were wounded. But the motives of Betts, who was killed in a firefight with police at the scene, were unclear. He was a registered Democrat who had supported Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Antifa, a militant group that protests far-right ideology, but neither Sanders nor Warren have called for militant activity and there was no sign of violent activity before Betts started shooting, and the day before his Twitter account “liked” several tweets about the El Paso shooting .

A week earlier, in another mass shooting in Gilroy, Calif., on Sunday, July 28, a gunman with an assault weapon and a bulletproof vest apparently snuck into the Gilroy Garlic Festival by cutting through a wire fence and killing three festivalgoers and wounding 13. The shooter, Santino William Legan, 19, carried out the attack with a 75-round drum magazine and five 40-round magazines. Police say he purchased the AK-47-style semi-automatic rifle legally in Nevada but, as an assault rifle, it was banned under California law.

Trump on Aug. 5 condemned “racism, bigotry and white supremacy” in a statement about the El Paso and Dayton massacres, but the Great Misleader didn’t acknowledge how his own anti-immigration rhetoric was echoed in the El Paso shooter’s manifesto and apparently has inspired other attacks on Latinos and Muslims.

Trump started his campaign in 2016 calling for a crackdown on Mexican immigrants, saying Mexico was “not sending their best.” Mexican immigrants, he said, “are bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” In rallies held since 2017, Trump has used inflammatory words, such as “predator,” “invasion,” “aliens,” “killers,” “criminal” and “animals” more than 500 times while discussing immigration, USA Today reported after analyzing Trump’s remarks at 64 rallies since 2017.

The Gun Violence Archive, as of Aug. 12, recorded 9,094 deaths and 18,071 injuries due to gun-related violence so far this year, including 257 cases of “mass shootings,” where at least four people were wounded. The FBI reports 32 “mass killings,” where three or more people were killed in a single incident, in 2019 through the Dayton massacre.

Though the motives of many gunmen may be hard to determine, one thing that facilitates their massacres is the easy access to weapons of war.

There is a groundswell of public support to reinstate the assault weapons ban, which stopped the proliferation of semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines from 1994 until 2004, when George W. Bush allowed it to lapse, but the National Rifle Association exists to maintain that easy access of civilians to weapons of war.

The Trace, which reports on guns in the US, noted in its NRA Campaign Spending Tracker that, in the 2018 election cycle, the NRA spent $5,362,861 supporting 265 candidates and $4,369,083 opposing 71 candidates in congressional races across 44 states. The NRA also donated $30.3 million to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. Over the past decade, the NRA spent more than $100 million on political races. And where the money came from remains a secret.

If Congress can’t ban assault weapons, perhaps they could at least require people to obtain liability insurance for people they might injure, as a condition of owning an assault weapon.

The Insurance Information Institute noted in a May 2018 Background on Gun Liability that insurers rarely offer any separate gun liability insurance policy. Most individuals have some property and liability coverage for firearms in their standard homeowners’ policy. Additional liability coverage is available through a personal umbrella policy. A few policies cover losses from accidental shootings in excess of the homeowners’ coverage.

However, when there is liability insurance, it only covers accidental shootings and, in some cases, acts of self-defense. No insurance company covers criminal or other intentional shootings. But those are the incidents that sent wounded survivors to hospitals in Gilroy, El Paso and Dayton, with little recourse but to rely on their own insurance or charity to pay for their medical care.

Other sorts of coverage may be “triggered” by active shooting incidents, including general liability, business interruption and property insurance, the institute noted. Workers comp insurance is implicated in shootings in the workplace while commercial general liability insurance coverage might be implicated in shooting in a shopping center or a movie theatre.

Several states — including California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and New York — have considered requiring that gun owners purchase liability insurance, but none have enacted such a bill.

US Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, D-NY, since 2013 has introduced the Firearms Risk Protection Act, which, would prohibit a firearm purchase by or sale to a person who is not covered by a qualified liability insurance policy that would cover the purchaser specifically for losses resulting from use of the firearm.

US Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., is sponsoring a bill to reinstate the assault weapons ban. If it had been in place, Cicilline told the New York Times, both the El Paso and Dayton gunmen would not have been able to buy their weapons. Still, many Dems who remember that they lost the Democratic majority in Congress in 1994 after passing the assault weapons ban remain skittish about reinstating it.

But don’t kid yourself. The only way to get control over the assault weapon crisis is to vote Democratic for president and Congress. It’s particularly important for Democrats to regain control of the Senate. If Moscow Mitch McConnell remains Senate Majority Leader, we might see some feints at expanding background checks, and minor reforms on the edges, but as long as young, disturbed white men have ready access to assault rifles and extended magazines, we’ll continue to see a numbing increase in the numbers of massacres, whether racially motivated or just reflecting discontent and grievances. — JMC



From The Progressive Populist, September 1, 2019

Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us

Copyright © 2019 The Progressive PopulistPO Box 819, Manchaca TX 78652

Selections from the September 1, 2019 issue

COVER/Bill Curry
Are the Democrats divided? No — they’re poised to win big if they don’t screw it up


EDITORIAL
Hateful words and guns


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR 

DON ROLLINS
Toni Morrison: Prophet with a sharp pen


RURAL ROUTES/Margot McMillen
Don’t count on trees to capture carbon


DISPATCHES
Most Americans think white nationalism poses threat to US;
Gun control support rises, one mass shooting at a time;
Trump tops 12,000 lies;
NH GOP gov vetoes bipartisan redistricting plan;
Big bank: writing on the wall for oil industry;
Trump will ban poor immigrants;
Trump tariffs cost US households $500 each
White House violated law with plan to move hundreds of USDA workers;
China tries to teach Trump economics ...


ART CULLEN
Time to change is now


PABLO PRATT
The value of community college


JILL RICHARDSON
You don’t save money by forcing people to go hungry


JOHN YOUNG
GOP, religious right wedded in moral rot


BOB BURNETT
The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming!


DR. SANJEEV K. SRIRAM
Republican attacks on the Social Security 2100 Act are an assault on public health


ANDREA GERMANOS
Bolstering call to expand Social Security, new reporting reveals how corporations are offloading pensions


GLORIA OLADIPO
Trump’s new coal rules will bury rural America


WILLIAM MINTER
The Green New Deal must be global


TOM CONWAY
Trump’s lies to labor


GENE NICHOL
Missing Barbara Jordan


HAL CROWTHER
No turning back: Trump crosses the Rubicon


HEALTH CARE/Joan Retsinas
Incremental: The verboten word


SAM URETSKY
Mule-headed Republicans


BOOK REVIEW/Heather Seggel
Making the news


WAYNE O’LEARY
Why Trump may win


JOHN BUELL
Neoliberalism from table to gut


KENT PATERSON
Trump-AMLO ‘lovefest’ jeopardizes Mexico’s fourth transformation


JASON SIBERT
Populists on right and left struggle with globalists


FR. DONNELL KIRCHNER
Is the old order passing away?


ROB PATTERSON
‘The War’ is still going on


SATIRE/Rosie Sorenson
Trouble right here in River City


MOVIE REVIEW/Ed Rampell
The Rock gets back to his roots as Samoa gets the Black Panther treatment: South Seas cinema stars in action series spin-off


BOOK REVIEW/Seth Sandronsky
Rethinking the GDR


and more ...

Thursday, August 15, 2019

Real reason for new Trump policy not to admit poor immigrants is to “make America white again.” Won’t work since no non-poor European would want to come here

By Marc Jampole

The proposed Trump Administration rule to deny entry into the United States to immigrants who would likely need public assistance—the so-called means test—is an incredibly dunce-headed policy change for the simple reason that it will not accomplish its objective. 

The objective—unstated, but understood by everyone—is to keep non-Europeans AKA non-whites out of the United States. But this mean-spirited attempt to make America white(r) again will never work. Why would anyone from Europe want to come to the United States? Sure, taxes are a little lower in the United States, but most “white” countries offer cradle-to-grave healthcare; inexpensive and sometimes free college and vocational training schools; great unemployment and employee benefits; and decent pensions. In the 21st century, there is more socio-economic mobility in virtually all other “white countries,” meaning someone from the middle class has a better chance of getting rich in Europe than in the United States. Only the very rich in European countries could possible find the United States an attractive place to live. For everyone else already in the middle class, it just doesn’t make any sense.

Odds are that the effect of the new rule may thus be to increase the number of middle class coming from autocratic countries in Africa and the Middle East, plus the overspill of educated workers in India and the Far East. In other words, more non-whites, albeit with more financial means than refugees from Central America and Syria.

The meanness and small-mindedness of the new policy are closely intertwined with the racism of Trump, Steven Miller and others supporting it. Racism creates a lesser class of humans. Because they are “lesser,” we don’t have to apply the same rules of jurisprudence or civility to them. We can treat them with cruelty, because they are no longer “poor people,” whom the Jewish and Hebrew bibles tell us to cherish and protect. No, they aren’t poor people, because they aren’t people at all, but something other and inferior. The difference between the goodness of a “poor person” and the badness of a “poor other” was underscored when Ken Cuccinelli, acting director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, made the contrast between the poor Italians—his ancestors—who once came to the United States with nothing and our current stock of immigrants. 

Like establishing the tariffs against China, pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris Accord and publicly hammering the Federal Reserve Board, adding a means test to the requirements for immigration to the United States strikes a heavy blow to the American economy. The economy depends on a supply of workers at every level, and for a long time—certainly since the end of slavery—immigrants have supplied large numbers of our lowest paid employees. Many farmers are already complaining about not having enough workers to pick crops. Recent reports also highlight a growing shortage of home health workers in many metropolitan areas. Impoverished immigrants are a major part of the workforce serving the construction, home care, home cleaning, agricultural and hospitality industries. That’s a pretty large chunk of the economy that will suffer from worker shortages and increased labor costs. Note that many of these jobs consist of doing things that most people don’t want to do—hauling debris away from construction sites; changing great grandma’s catheter; picking grapes and lettuce in hot fields; cleaning the vomit off the walls and floors of hotel rooms left by binge-drinking guests.   

As usual for the Trump Administration, this new policy not only is not based on facts, it goes against what we know to be true. Studies show that immigrants end up contributing more to the American economy than the cost to process and care for them. What they pay in taxes far outweighs what the country spends on social welfare spending for immigrants. To be sure, every year, a group of recently arrived immigrants cost their local and the federal government money. And there must be some number of immigrants who never successfully integrate into our economy and remain a burden on American society all their lives. But overall, immigrants—rich ones and poor, both legal and undocumented—are essential to the American economy.

One common theme underlies many Trump economic actions such as trade policies, support of dying industries like coal instead growth industries like solar and wind power, cutting the flow of immigrants, and giving the wealthy a tax break paid for by cutting programs and deficits. That theme is shrinkage. All will tend to shrink the base of the economy. Our current economic leadership is the most ill-informed since at least the Hoover Administration. Their headlong rush to lead us into a severe recession is mind-bogglingly dim-witted.

They are, in short, stupid people blinded by their prejudices.

That is, unless Trump, Mnuchin, Ross, Kushner, et. al. are secretly buying up puts, selling stocks short and loading up on cash to take advantage of a crash of financial markets. 

Idiots or traitors? Doesn’t that always seem to be the final two choices when considering what Trump and his entourage do? 

One thing that we can be sure of though: whatever the goal, the motive and driving principle behind Trump is usually racism.