thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Washington’s Lone Voice In Congress Praises 'Historic' Vote For Statehood

As soon as I got in the majority here , and that was only this term , I have been able to get the votes , guaranteed the votes , for D.C. statehood .
Indeed , when I say guarantee , it takes 218 votes .
We now have 226 co-sponsors .
That ’ s very unusual for a bill to have that many co-sponsors ahead of a vote .
So on Friday , the 26th of June , we are guaranteed passage of the D.C. statehood bill for the first time since the city was created 219 years ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our history .
Imagine being the only democratic country in the world whose citizens of their nation ’ s capital don ’ t have the same rights as others .
Don ’ t have , in our case , two senators .
Don ’ t have a voting representative , though I vote on some matters in the Congress , and they hear me speak in the Congress on that final vote .
I think when you put that beside the fact , and perhaps this is a salient fact , that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taxes paid to support the government of the United States .
Not No .
8 or 10 .
No .
1 in federal taxes .
[ Editor ’ s note : District residents pay more federal taxes per capita than those of any other state . ]
The residents of this city pay more in [ total ] federal taxes than the residents of 22 states that already have two senators [ as well as ] voting members of Congress .
Most Americans don ’ t know that we have a budget of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a budget larger than the budget of 14 states .
And that we have a AAA bond rating , which is in excess of the bond rating of 35 states .
If you want to look at so-called qualifications to be a state , the District of Columbia is overqualified and , I must say , overdue .
Well , we see some of that in real time .
We see it every year because Republicans introduce bills to overturn D.C. legislation .
Imagine that .
If you lived in a state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what state you live in , and the Congress of the United States didn ’ t like some of the bills you passed , or Congress said , “ We don ’ t like that , ” and tried to wipe it out .
I spend a good deal of my time simply trying to preserve what the democratic legislature in my own city has done with respect to local matters having nothing to do with the federal government .
The intervention into the affairs of our city has been a lifelong issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ third-generation Washingtonian .
By the way , that means that nobody in my family has had the same rights for three generations .
And I say three generations because my own great-grandfather Richard Holmes was a runaway slave from Virginia .
Beginning with Richard Holmes , nobody in my family has had the same rights as other American citizens .
We ’ re about to see that begin to change on this coming Friday , with the passage of our D.C. statehood .
One of the things pushing this bill forward and getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the actions of President Trump in reaction to the George Floyd protests around the White House and the deployment of federal troops onto district streets .
What did you think about the deployment of those federal forces onto district streets ?
Where might that rank in the ways the federal government has intervened against the will of district residents in the past ?
It ’ s important to have control over your National Guard and over your own police because they are very practiced in demonstrations here in the District of Columbia .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the district has to go to the president to get control of the National Guard ― I have a bill that could get that done even without statehood ― you see one way in which our inequality puts even the nation , much less the city , at risk .
There are so many ways in which not having full autonomy deprives the city and the nation of what it needs just to run safely , quite apart from the freedom associated with being a state .
The white people who live in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same views as African Americans , not only on statehood and autonomy , but also on other issues as well , just like people who live in other states .
People tend to think concurrently or about the same way in many states , even though there will in many states — particularly Southern States — be differences between African Americans and the majority population .
I ’ m encouraged by the prospects of this bill in the Senate because the polls , as I speak now , are showing that Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the majority in the Senate .
So what Mitch McConnell believes will be in the minority , if he survives his election .
And what the president says will also be last year ’ s comments .
They will have to reckon with a different Senate , a different House , and the president is in a struggle for his life .
Well , there is an effort to have the bill passed without a filibuster .
It needs only a majority vote .
It could well [ pass ] .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you look at what ’ s happening in the Senate today , nothing is happening except action to confirm judges .
I mean , I ’ ve been in the Congress too long to play down what it takes to get a bill through the Senate .
But , yes , bills do get through the Senate if there ’ s enough of a push from the public and if the Senate changes its political complexion .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The House is set on Friday to do something for which Washington’s sole nonvoting delegate in Congress has pushed for decades: pass legislation that would admit the District of Columbia as the nation’s 51st state.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) spearheaded the first vote on district statehood in 1993. It failed, and the issue has been dormant ever since. The fact that similar legislation, which she also sponsored, is expected now is a “historic” moment for both the city and the nation, she told HuffPost.
Advertisement
Norton was elected in 1990 as the second elected delegate to the House from Washington since the position was created by Congress in 1970.
The 1993 vote on district statehood failed as a majority of Democrats and all but one Republican voted against it. When Republicans took control of Congress the following year, there was no movement on the issue. When Democrats briefly gained a majority in the House from 2007 to 2011, they didn’t pass the measure, either.
Now, 226 House Democrats — a voting majority — back Norton’s bill. In the Senate, a companion bill has the support of 41 Democrats and independents who caucus with the party.
Pressure to pass the legislation increased after President Donald Trump ordered an array of federal forces and the district’s National Guard — which he, not the city, controls — to seize and hold city streets with force during the George Floyd protests.
Advertisement
HuffPost talked to Norton about Friday’s vote, Trump’s use of federal force in the city, the bill’s prospects in the Senate and whether it can pass there with a simple majority vote to avoid a filibuster.
Why is this vote for district statehood so important?
Well, it’s important to know that as a freshman, when I first came to Congress, I was actually able to get a vote on statehood, but the Democrats were controlled largely by Southern Democrats, and that did not succeed. For most of my term, I’ve been in the minority.
As soon as I got in the majority here, and that was only this term, I have been able to get the votes, guaranteed the votes, for D.C. statehood. Indeed, when I say guarantee, it takes 218 votes. We now have 226 co-sponsors. That’s very unusual for a bill to have that many co-sponsors ahead of a vote. So on Friday, the 26th of June, we are guaranteed passage of the D.C. statehood bill for the first time since the city was created 219 years ago.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton holds an American flag with 51 stars in her Washington office on Feb. 18. Congressional Quarterly via Getty Images
Why does this vote matter so much in the history of Washington?
This is a salient moment in our history. Imagine being the only democratic country in the world whose citizens of their nation’s capital don’t have the same rights as others. Don’t have, in our case, two senators. Don’t have a voting representative, though I vote on some matters in the Congress, and they hear me speak in the Congress on that final vote. I think when you put that beside the fact, and perhaps this is a salient fact, that the district is No. 1 in federal taxes paid to support the government of the United States. Not No. 8 or 10. No. 1 in federal taxes. [Editor’s note: District residents pay more federal taxes per capita than those of any other state.]
Advertisement
The residents of this city pay more in [total] federal taxes than the residents of 22 states that already have two senators [as well as] voting members of Congress. Most Americans don’t know that we have a budget of $16 billion. And that’s a budget larger than the budget of 14 states. And that we have a AAA bond rating, which is in excess of the bond rating of 35 states. If you want to look at so-called qualifications to be a state, the District of Columbia is overqualified and, I must say, overdue.
With all of those overqualifications, how do you feel and what have you seen about how the federal government treats the district and its residents differently because of its current status and its lack of statehood?
Well, we see some of that in real time. We see it every year because Republicans introduce bills to overturn D.C. legislation. Imagine that. If you lived in a state, and I don’t know what state you live in, and the Congress of the United States didn’t like some of the bills you passed, or Congress said, “We don’t like that,” and tried to wipe it out. I spend a good deal of my time simply trying to preserve what the democratic legislature in my own city has done with respect to local matters having nothing to do with the federal government.
The intervention into the affairs of our city has been a lifelong issue for me because I’m a third-generation Washingtonian. By the way, that means that nobody in my family has had the same rights for three generations. And I say three generations because my own great-grandfather Richard Holmes was a runaway slave from Virginia. Beginning with Richard Holmes, nobody in my family has had the same rights as other American citizens. We’re about to see that begin to change on this coming Friday, with the passage of our D.C. statehood.
One of the things pushing this bill forward and getting a lot of attention right now is the actions of President Trump in reaction to the George Floyd protests around the White House and the deployment of federal troops onto district streets. What did you think about the deployment of those federal forces onto district streets? Where might that rank in the ways the federal government has intervened against the will of district residents in the past?
Advertisement
Well, the president’s intervention into the George Floyd protest is a running real-time case of why the district should have statehood. We did not even have control over our own National Guard when the president virtually created a riot when he tried to walk over to St. John’s [Episcopal] Church.
It’s important to have control over your National Guard and over your own police because they are very practiced in demonstrations here in the District of Columbia. Federal police are not. And when the district has to go to the president to get control of the National Guard ― I have a bill that could get that done even without statehood ― you see one way in which our inequality puts even the nation, much less the city, at risk. There are so many ways in which not having full autonomy deprives the city and the nation of what it needs just to run safely, quite apart from the freedom associated with being a state.
The recent protests and district statehood can be tied together in another way, as the district would be the only state in the union with a plurality Black population. Black people have been greatly underrepresented in Congress. What would it mean for the country for there to be a plurality Black state where the majority of elected politicians are Black?
Yeah. The district is about, in population, half minority, half white. The states tend not to have as large a percentage of African Americans. I don’t think you’ll make much difference to the way things are governed here, but the district has always had a large African American population.
Interesting to note that for most of its 219 years of existing, the district has been a majority white city. Only in the 1970s did it become majority Black. And, as you can see now, that’s fading.
Advertisement
The white people who live in the District of Columbia tend to have the same views as African Americans, not only on statehood and autonomy, but also on other issues as well, just like people who live in other states. People tend to think concurrently or about the same way in many states, even though there will in many states — particularly Southern States — be differences between African Americans and the majority population.
Ahead of a historic vote on district statehood, Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser commissioned #MuralsDC51, a project to create 51 statehood, Black history and social justice murals across the city's eight wards. mpi34/MediaPunch/MediaPunch/IPx
In the past, the opposition to statehood has been explained in constitutional terms. Now, Trump says that it would be “very, very stupid” for Republicans to let the district become a state because it would elect two Democratic senators. And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has called district statehood “full bore socialism.” I was wondering what you make of these arguments.
Well, I’m not surprised. But do consider that statehood has always been a political issue. We make the case in constitutional terms, as you indicated as well, that states have to come in, as people may not understand, by majority vote.
And the Constitution does give the Congress full control over the district, which gives the Congress the power to say what the capital is. And without going into all the constitutional niceties, that’s not the issue, and as you have indicated, that’s not the issue that Republicans are raising.
Advertisement
The president, when he says, “You would have to be crazy to give the district statehood,” what he means is they wouldn’t vote for me. And he’s right about that, pure and simple. So it’s a political issue. Statehood has always been a partisan issue. States get in based on the politics of the moment.
Right. And based on what McConnell said, it seems like this bill will have a difficult time passing the Senate right now. What do you think of its prospects there? And what do you think of its prospects next year if the Senate is not run by McConnell?
I’m encouraged by the prospects of this bill in the Senate because the polls, as I speak now, are showing that Democrats have a very good chance of taking over the majority in the Senate. So what Mitch McConnell believes will be in the minority, if he survives his election. And what the president says will also be last year’s comments. They will have to reckon with a different Senate, a different House, and the president is in a struggle for his life.
So there could be a majority of Democrats who would support this. But that wouldn’t necessarily get it over a filibuster. Do you think that this could pass without a filibuster? Or should it?
Well, there is an effort to have the bill passed without a filibuster. It needs only a majority vote. It could well [pass]. And almost every bill incurs a filibuster. If you look at what’s happening in the Senate today, nothing is happening except action to confirm judges. I mean, I’ve been in the Congress too long to play down what it takes to get a bill through the Senate. But, yes, bills do get through the Senate if there’s enough of a push from the public and if the Senate changes its political complexion.
Advertisement
You said that you’re a third-generation Washingtonian and that you were born here and have been advocating for this for decades. What would it mean for you personally to see this bill pass on Friday?
Historic is an overused word, particularly by members of Congress like me. But there’s no way to see the first vote to make the nation’s capital the 51st state as anything but historic. When you think about history itself and how for 219 years American citizens have been in this country and ever since there’s been an income tax state paid federal taxes without the same rights as other Americans ― and other Americans wouldn’t tolerate this. There’s no way to look at it except in its historic context and see it as a turning point in the history of our country.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Facebook Ad Boycott Gains Steam As Companies Join 'Stop Hate For Profit'

More corporate advertisers are pulling ads from Facebook for the month of July , joining the Stop Hate for Profit boycott organized last week by the Anti-Defamation League , the NAACP , Color of Change and other civil rights groups .
The campaign urges advertisers to “ hit pause on hate.
” Advertising agency Goodby Silverstein & Partners on Wednesday said it , too , will join the protest , and it encouraged its 45 clients — which include big names such as BMW , Frito-Lay , Hewlett–Packard and PepsiCo — to participate as well .
“ For years , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Facebook to change , ” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt told HuffPost of the campaign .
“ They have not .
What matters to Facebook is profits .
So if they see what a one-month pause would mean to their bottom line , then maybe they will get the message and act.
” Stop Hate for Profit issued a list of product recommendations for Facebook to better moderate content that targets people because of their race or religion .
It also released data enumerating how often identity-based hate is posted on the platform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zuckerberg , are no longer simply negligent , but in fact , complacent in the spread of misinformation , despite the irreversible damage to our democracy .
Other recommendations : Notify advertisers when their ads are shown next to content that ’ s later removed for misinformation or hate ; increase moderation of private groups that often harbor and promote extremist ideologies ; and release an audited transparency report proving the company is actually following through on its word .
“ It is clear that Facebook and its CEO , Mark Zuckerberg , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in fact , complacent in the spread of misinformation , despite the irreversible damage to our democracy , ” NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said in a statement .
“ Such actions will upend the integrity of our elections as we head into 2020.
” Facebook has long struggled to curtail violent and extremist content on the platform even though such content violates company policy .
In May , a study conducted by the watchdog group Tech Transparency Project found that white supremacist groups are “ thriving ” on the platform .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and told HuffPost the company is “ making progress keeping this activity off our platform , ” including removing much of the content before it is even reported .
However successful the boycott may be in applying political pressure on Facebook , without a critical mass it ’ s unlikely to significantly affect the company ’ s bottom line .
Facebook generated more than $ 70 billion in revenue last year , almost all of it from ad sales .
Leaked audio of the call obtained by the Financial Times revealed that Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Neil Potts , acknowledged what he euphemistically referred to as a “ trust deficit ” with consumers .
Potts used the term when asked by someone on the call , “ Why as advertisers we should risk our brands ’ reputation by staying on your platform ?
” Another asked how the company is “ reconciling the loss of faith in Facebook as a trustworthy source of information.
” “ We have reached out to Facebook on numerous occasions in good faith , asking them to mitigate hate on their platform , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ However , we have been met with , at worst , silence and , at best , unfulfilled promises .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More corporate advertisers are pulling ads from Facebook for the month of July, joining the Stop Hate for Profit boycott organized last week by the Anti-Defamation League, the NAACP, Color of Change and other civil rights groups. The campaign urges advertisers to “hit pause on hate.”
The list of participating companies has grown in recent days to include The North Face, Patagonia, Arc’teryx, outdoor retailer REI, Ben & Jerry’s, Eileen Fisher, Eddie Bauer, Magnolia Pictures, Upwork, HigherRing, Dashlane and Talkspace. On Thursday, Verizon (HuffPost’s parent company) also joined the boycott.
Advertisement
Advertising agency Goodby Silverstein & Partners on Wednesday said it, too, will join the protest, and it encouraged its 45 clients — which include big names such as BMW, Frito-Lay, Hewlett–Packard and PepsiCo — to participate as well.
“For years, we ― and others ― have called on Facebook to change,” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt told HuffPost of the campaign. “They have not. What matters to Facebook is profits. So if they see what a one-month pause would mean to their bottom line, then maybe they will get the message and act.”
Procter & Gamble left the door open on the possibility of joining the boycott but wouldn’t commit to any concrete action, Marc Pritchard, the company’s chief brand officer, told Ad Age Wednesday.
Stop Hate for Profit issued a list of product recommendations for Facebook to better moderate content that targets people because of their race or religion. It also released data enumerating how often identity-based hate is posted on the platform.
Advertisement
“Facebook and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, are no longer simply negligent, but in fact, complacent in the spread of misinformation, despite the irreversible damage to our democracy.” - NAACP CEO Derrick Johnson
Other recommendations: Notify advertisers when their ads are shown next to content that’s later removed for misinformation or hate; increase moderation of private groups that often harbor and promote extremist ideologies; and release an audited transparency report proving the company is actually following through on its word.
“It is clear that Facebook and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, are no longer simply negligent, but in fact, complacent in the spread of misinformation, despite the irreversible damage to our democracy,” NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson said in a statement. “Such actions will upend the integrity of our elections as we head into 2020.”
Facebook has long struggled to curtail violent and extremist content on the platform even though such content violates company policy. In May, a study conducted by the watchdog group Tech Transparency Project found that white supremacist groups are “thriving” on the platform.
A Facebook spokesperson disagreed with that characterization and told HuffPost the company is “making progress keeping this activity off our platform,” including removing much of the content before it is even reported.
Advertisement
Other persistent issues include organized disinformation campaigns and policies that look the other way on political deceit.
However successful the boycott may be in applying political pressure on Facebook, without a critical mass it’s unlikely to significantly affect the company’s bottom line. Facebook generated more than $70 billion in revenue last year, almost all of it from ad sales.
Nevertheless, in what may be a sign of growing unease, top Facebook executives on Tuesday held a conference call with around 200 advertisers seeking to address their concerns.
Leaked audio of the call obtained by the Financial Times revealed that Facebook’s head of trust and safety, Neil Potts, acknowledged what he euphemistically referred to as a “trust deficit” with consumers.
Potts used the term when asked by someone on the call, “Why as advertisers we should risk our brands’ reputation by staying on your platform?” Another asked how the company is “reconciling the loss of faith in Facebook as a trustworthy source of information.”
Advertisement
Facebook told the Financial Times that the call was part of a normal routine conversation with advertisers.
“We have reached out to Facebook on numerous occasions in good faith, asking them to mitigate hate on their platform,” the ADL’s Greenblatt said. “However, we have been met with, at worst, silence and, at best, unfulfilled promises.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Former GOP Candidate Carly Fiorina Says She Won't Vote For Donald Trump Again

Former Republican presidential contender Carly Fiorina said she will not vote for President Donald Trump in November .
“ I ’ ve been very clear that I can ’ t support Donald Trump , ” the former Hewlett-Packard CEO , who ran an unsuccessful bid for the GOP nomination in 2016 , said in a new episode of The Atlantic podcast “ The Ticket ” released Thursday .
She said she hopes that “ Biden understands that this moment in history calls for him to be a leader , not a politician.
” When pressed on whether she would vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Well , it ’ s not ’ til November is it ?
I ’ m not voting for Trump .
It ’ s a binary choice .
So if faced with a binary choice on a ballot , yes.
” Later in the interview , Fiorina described Biden as “ a person of humility and empathy and character.
” Fiorina voted for Trump in the 2016 election , even after they clashed during the GOP debates and he attacked her looks in an interview with Rolling Stone .
Last year , Fiorina described @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to our republic ” and said his impeachment — for threatening the Ukrainian president — was “ vital.
” At the time , though , she was still cagey on whether she would vote for him again .
“ Honestly , it depends who the Democrats put up , and I won ’ t go any further than that , ” she told CNN ’ s Poppy Harlow in December .
“ For me , character matters .
Character is destiny for a party , for a nation , for a president .
@ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Republican presidential contender Carly Fiorina said she will not vote for President Donald Trump in November.
“I’ve been very clear that I can’t support Donald Trump,” the former Hewlett-Packard CEO, who ran an unsuccessful bid for the GOP nomination in 2016, said in a new episode of The Atlantic podcast “The Ticket” released Thursday.
Advertisement
But Fiorina appeared to stop short of fully endorsing Trump’s likely opponent, presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden.
She said she hopes that “Biden understands that this moment in history calls for him to be a leader, not a politician.”
When pressed on whether she would vote for Biden, Fiorina responded: “Well, it’s not ’til November is it? I’m not voting for Trump. It’s a binary choice. So if faced with a binary choice on a ballot, yes.”
Later in the interview, Fiorina described Biden as “a person of humility and empathy and character.”
Fiorina voted for Trump in the 2016 election, even after they clashed during the GOP debates and he attacked her looks in an interview with Rolling Stone.
Advertisement
Last year, Fiorina described Trump’s behavior as “destructive to our republic” and said his impeachment — for threatening the Ukrainian president — was “vital.”
At the time, though, she was still cagey on whether she would vote for him again.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Police Foundations And Their Corporate Donors Give Cops Secret Slush Funds

Ann Hermes/The Christian Science Monitor via Getty Images The Operation Shield Video Integration Center ( seen here in January 2015 ) allows Atlanta police to monitor surveillance footage from public and private sector cameras .
It 's part of a joint effort between the Atlanta business community , the Atlanta Police Foundation and the Atlanta Police Department .
Set up as private charities that generally donate to their local police departments , these foundations are a way for law enforcement to raise and spend large sums of money without the public ’ s input or oversight .
Their donors tend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and police departments admit openly that foundations allow them to make acquisitions the taxpayers won ’ t cover .
But the details of how exactly police foundations spend their money are rarely public .
And because they ’ re private nonprofits , they don ’ t have to report the names of their donors or where the money goes .
When reporters and advocacy groups have pried information loose , they often find that a police foundation is supported by a small group of powerful interests .
( The overwhelmingly white , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Police Foundation “ reads like an invite list for a party you ’ re not invited to , ” Gothamist , a New York City news site , once put it . )
They also find that police use these off-the-books budgets to expand some of law enforcement ’ s most questionable surveillance capabilities .
Even though the departments in cities like New York and Los Angeles have budgets that dwarf the amount of money they receive annually from foundations , the private funds are a key way that police quietly acquire controversial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stingrays , which indiscriminately hoover up cellphone data by imitating cell towers , and license plate readers that automatically log passing drivers .
One of the best-known examples involves Palantir , a data analytics company launched with CIA funding to develop spy software .
In 2007 , the Los Angeles Police Department acquired Palantir software as a gift from the Los Angeles Police Foundation , ProPublica found ; Target Corp. contributed the $ 200,000 to make the purchase .
The workaround allowed the LAPD to avoid public hearings and elected officials ’ questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ budget .
In Atlanta , the police foundation was integral to funding a vast network of security cameras that cover the city as well as a monitoring hub where police watch the footage in real time .
The Atlanta City Council made a small initial purchase of video cameras .
But it ’ s the foundation that has paid to upgrade the monitoring center and that encourages businesses , campuses and office parks across the city to purchase their own cameras compatible with the city ’ s surveillance hub .
Having spent just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ budget , The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports , the Atlanta Police Department gained surveillance capabilities that would have cost it an estimated $ 300 million .
For critics of arrangements like these , the issue is not that the equipment in question isn ’ t useful to police .
( Although when it comes to video surveillance , the evidence that it has reduced overall crime is questionable . )
It ’ s that police foundations are turning private interests into public priorities .
Those who experience the brunt of policing are not the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foundations or socialize with law enforcement leaders at annual galas , Boghosian said .
“ Immigrants , lower-income neighborhoods , persons of color — these are the communities that have traditionally been targeted , the ones who disproportionately suffer.
” We don ’ t know a lot about the dynamics of that because there ’ s no transparency around what the foundations are doing .
Chris Dunn , legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union The general reputation of police foundations is so positive and inoffensive that many major corporations — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of America , to name a few — count themselves as donors .
But over the years , watchdog groups have noticed that some corporate donors also happen to benefit from lucrative law enforcement contracts .
In some cases , police foundations have made gifts of equipment or technology to police departments that lead to long-term contracts for the foundation ’ s donors .
The New York City Police Foundation helped build a citywide surveillance hub that runs on IBM software .
The technology giant has been a corporate sponsor of that foundation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One potential conflict arose after a federal judge in 2013 ordered New York City to put 1,000 body cameras into use , according to Politico .
Before the NYPD could put out a request for proposals , the police foundation gifted the department with several dozen body cameras made by VieVu and Taser — two of the foundation ’ s corporate sponsors .
The NYPD then tested those brand cameras before selecting from dozens of corporate bids for the contract on 1,000 cameras .

The Operation Shield Video Integration Center (seen here in January 2015) allows Atlanta police to monitor surveillance footage from public and private sector cameras. It's part of a joint effort between the Atlanta business community, the Atlanta Police Foundation and the Atlanta Police Department. Ann Hermes/The Christian Science Monitor via Getty Images
Protests across the country against police brutality are starting to chip away at once-sacrosanct law enforcement budgets. But one significant source of police funding remains mostly untouched: private police foundations, which influence law enforcement efforts largely out of sight of the public.
Set up as private charities that generally donate to their local police departments, these foundations are a way for law enforcement to raise and spend large sums of money without the public’s input or oversight. Their donors tend to be name-brand corporations and local businesses, and police departments admit openly that foundations allow them to make acquisitions the taxpayers won’t cover.
Advertisement
“It funds things the city can’t fund,” a spokesperson for the New York City Police Department said in 2017 of the city’s foundation, and “provides us flexibility to do things quickly.”
But the details of how exactly police foundations spend their money are rarely public. And because they’re private nonprofits, they don’t have to report the names of their donors or where the money goes. When reporters and advocacy groups have pried information loose, they often find that a police foundation is supported by a small group of powerful interests. (The overwhelmingly white, wealthy board of the New York City Police Foundation “reads like an invite list for a party you’re not invited to,” Gothamist, a New York City news site, once put it.) They also find that police use these off-the-books budgets to expand some of law enforcement’s most questionable surveillance capabilities.
“It is packaged as ‘we’re giving back to the community,’” said Heidi Boghosian, an attorney and civil liberties advocate whose 2013 book “Spying on Democracy” examined how private funding helps expand the reach of law enforcement. “But the lack of oversight over where the money goes is huge.”
Crucially, she said, police foundations have played a substantial role in enabling the expanded use of surveillance technology that would be controversial if its scope and cost were debated in public.
Advertisement
Even though the departments in cities like New York and Los Angeles have budgets that dwarf the amount of money they receive annually from foundations, the private funds are a key way that police quietly acquire controversial tools. Foundations have helped police purchase Stingrays, which indiscriminately hoover up cellphone data by imitating cell towers, and license plate readers that automatically log passing drivers.
One of the best-known examples involves Palantir, a data analytics company launched with CIA funding to develop spy software. In 2007, the Los Angeles Police Department acquired Palantir software as a gift from the Los Angeles Police Foundation, ProPublica found; Target Corp. contributed the $200,000 to make the purchase. The workaround allowed the LAPD to avoid public hearings and elected officials’ questions and to not dip into its own budget.
In Atlanta, the police foundation was integral to funding a vast network of security cameras that cover the city as well as a monitoring hub where police watch the footage in real time. The Atlanta City Council made a small initial purchase of video cameras. But it’s the foundation that has paid to upgrade the monitoring center and that encourages businesses, campuses and office parks across the city to purchase their own cameras compatible with the city’s surveillance hub. Having spent just a few million dollars from its own budget, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports, the Atlanta Police Department gained surveillance capabilities that would have cost it an estimated $300 million.
“A lot of these wealthy donors ... have elite motivations.” - Heidi Boghosian, an attorney and civil liberties advocate
For critics of arrangements like these, the issue is not that the equipment in question isn’t useful to police. (Although when it comes to video surveillance, the evidence that it has reduced overall crime is questionable.) It’s that police foundations are turning private interests into public priorities.
Advertisement
The surveillance project overseen by Atlanta’s police foundation has been heavily financed by the city’s business leaders. One of the first neighborhoods that plugged its video cameras into the surveillance network was Midtown, which is home to many corporate headquarters, law firms and high-rise hotels.
“A lot of these wealthy donors ... have elite motivations,” Boghosian said. “They may have a vested interest in protecting property” ― chiefly their own.
But there’s a long history of police taking the directive to guard property as a cue to suspect and surveil people of color.
Those who experience the brunt of policing are not the ones who have money to donate to foundations or socialize with law enforcement leaders at annual galas, Boghosian said. “Immigrants, lower-income neighborhoods, persons of color — these are the communities that have traditionally been targeted, the ones who disproportionately suffer.”
Who disproportionately benefits from police foundations is another matter.
“We don’t know a lot about the dynamics of that because there’s no transparency around what the foundations are doing.” - Chris Dunn, legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union
Advertisement
The general reputation of police foundations is so positive and inoffensive that many major corporations — Amazon, Starbucks, Target, Bank of America, to name a few — count themselves as donors. But over the years, watchdog groups have noticed that some corporate donors also happen to benefit from lucrative law enforcement contracts.
In some cases, police foundations have made gifts of equipment or technology to police departments that lead to long-term contracts for the foundation’s donors. The New York City Police Foundation helped build a citywide surveillance hub that runs on IBM software. The technology giant has been a corporate sponsor of that foundation and its annual gala for years.
“We don’t know a lot about the dynamics of that because there’s no transparency around what the foundations are doing,” said Chris Dunn, the legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
A police foundation may have bylaws on avoiding donor conflicts of interest, but they’re not enforceable by the public. “You can’t really figure out what’s happening inside the foundation,” Dunn said.
One potential conflict arose after a federal judge in 2013 ordered New York City to put 1,000 body cameras into use, according to Politico. Before the NYPD could put out a request for proposals, the police foundation gifted the department with several dozen body cameras made by VieVu and Taser — two of the foundation’s corporate sponsors. The NYPD then tested those brand cameras before selecting from dozens of corporate bids for the contract on 1,000 cameras.
Advertisement
From the outside, it looked like the foundation’s donors had an inside track: Taser and VieVu were the two finalists, and VieVu won the contract.
A decade ago, as Los Angeles and the surrounding county were bidding out a $600 million contract to update its emergency communications network, Motorola donated $164,000 to the city police foundation and added a former police chief, William Bratton, to its corporate board. Motorola won the contract.
When reporters for ProPublica drew the connection, even the Los Angeles foundation’s founder was critical. “If you are taking money from Motorola and all of a sudden Motorola is providing you with your radios, those are major concerns,” said former LA police chief Bernard Parks. “You should shy away from those relationships.”
The NYPD, the New York City Police Foundation, and the corporations that have links to both firmly maintain that the foundation and its donors don’t have special influence over that city’s contracting process. But for outside watchdogs, there’s simply no way to assess the truth.
“It is so widespread and so well-funded,” Boghosian said. “But it’s flying below the radar of accountability.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Maxine Waters Rips Trump For Focusing More On Dead Confederates Than COVID-19 Toll

“ One would hope that the president of the United States would rise to the level of leadership that our country needs in confronting the deadly uptick in coronavirus cases in America , ” the California Democrat said .
“ Instead , we are left with Donald Trump , an incompetent and heartless man who is more focused on saving statues of slaveholders , Confederate generals , and racists than protecting the health of living and breathing Americans.
” Waters issued her harsh attack after the nation tallied its highest number of new cases in a single day since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new infections were reported by state health departments Wednesday .
The previous single-day record of 34,203 was set on April 25 .
Texas , where the number of COVID-19 patients has more than doubled in two weeks and hit nearly 6,000 new cases on Thursday , suspended business re-openings in a desperate bid to stem the skyrocketing spread of the virus in the state .
Florida Gov .
Ron DeSantis ( R ) also said Thursday that his state will not be moving to its next re-opening stage , as new cases there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The United States remains the epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic , with more than 2.4 million cases ” and a death toll surpassing 120,000 , Waters noted .
“ My home state of California [ as well as ] Arizona , Texas , and Florida have seen their coronavirus cases skyrocket in the past two weeks.
” As the danger rages , Trump ’ s “ negligence and lack of care for the American people is contemptible , ” Waters said .
Trump said earlier this week that he would soon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public statues and monuments from being pulled down or vandalized .
He said he hoped to impose jail time of up to 10 years for damage to statues and monuments on federal property .
The push for removal from public spaces of statues honoring various Confederate political and military leaders has intensified as part of the widespread demonstrations against racial injustice sparked by the police killing of George Floyd on May 25 in Minneapolis .
In a few cases , protests have included the toppling of various statues .
Trump and Waters , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , have a history of trading barbs and insults .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“One would hope that the president of the United States would rise to the level of leadership that our country needs in confronting the deadly uptick in coronavirus cases in America,” the California Democrat said. “Instead, we are left with Donald Trump, an incompetent and heartless man who is more focused on saving statues of slaveholders, Confederate generals, and racists than protecting the health of living and breathing Americans.”
Advertisement
Waters’ older sister, Velma Moody, died last month of COVID-19.
Waters issued her harsh attack after the nation tallied its highest number of new cases in a single day since the outbreak. Across the nation, 38,115 new infections were reported by state health departments Wednesday. The previous single-day record of 34,203 was set on April 25.
“The United States remains the epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic, with more than 2.4 million cases” and a death toll surpassing 120,000, Waters noted. “My home state of California [as well as] Arizona, Texas, and Florida have seen their coronavirus cases skyrocket in the past two weeks.”
As the danger rages, Trump’s “negligence and lack of care for the American people is contemptible,” Waters said.
Advertisement
The White House did not respond to a request from HuffPost for comment.
Trump said earlier this week that he would soon issue an executive order aimed at protecting public statues and monuments from being pulled down or vandalized. He said he hoped to impose jail time of up to 10 years for damage to statues and monuments on federal property.
The push for removal from public spaces of statues honoring various Confederate political and military leaders has intensified as part of the widespread demonstrations against racial injustice sparked by the police killing of George Floyd on May 25 in Minneapolis. In a few cases, protests have included the toppling of various statues.
Trump and Waters, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee, have a history of trading barbs and insults.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--George Floyd Died A Month Ago. There Have Been Protests Every Day Since.

Thursday marks one month since Floyd , a Black man and 46-year-old father of five , was killed when Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes .
Every day since , people across the country and around the world have marched in the streets to demand justice for him and other Black victims of police violence .
Just this week , organizers in New York City held nine different events in one day throughout four boroughs .
At least 100 people camped out in front of City Hall on Tuesday , calling for a $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York City Police Department ; they have vowed to stay outside the building until the city budget meeting on June 30 .
In Minnesota , organizers have held marches every single day and have planned a vigil for the one-month anniversary of Floyd ’ s death .
Protests are scheduled to continue in Minneapolis through the Fourth of July , according to Facebook .
Protesters and organizers have already made progress in the fight against systemic racism , both within and outside of police departments .
These victories are bittersweet ― it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and overdue .
The fight for reform is also far from over .
But the fact that so much changed in one month highlights how historic this moment is .
“ Many of us recognize this moment as one to push even harder for transformation , ” Scales said .
“ We know there are many new people finally listening to what we have been saying all along and now , it ’ s time for solutions until we are transformed.
” In Minneapolis , Chauvin was charged with second-degree murder , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s death have been charged with aiding and abetting .
Six police officers in Atlanta were charged after a video went viral showing cops using a stun gun and dragging two Black students from a car during protests .
And in Buffalo , New York , two cops were charged with shoving a 75-year-old protester to the ground .
The protester ’ s head hit the ground so hard that he fractured his skull and was in the hospital for two weeks .
The police department in Louisville , Kentucky , has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions : The police chief was fired and two officers were placed on administrative leave after David McAtee , a Black chef , was shot and killed when police responded to a large gathering after a curfew .
One of the three officers in the city who executed a no-knock search warrant at the home of Breonna Taylor , a Black EMT , was also fired .
Taylor was shot at least eight times and died in her hallway after police barged into her home unannounced .
The Louisville City Council has since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bans no-knock search warrants .
Floyd ’ s death has also brought renewed attention to police violence against Black women and Black transgender people , and we have seen more attention and urgency paid to past police violence and killings .
More than 2 million people have signed a petition urging Colorado lawmakers to reopen an investigation into the killing of Elijah McClain , a 23-year-old Black man who died nearly a year ago when an Aurora cop put him in a chokehold .
Even the death of Taylor , the EMT from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national attention for two months ; it became part of the public discussion about police brutality after Floyd was killed .
The calls to defund the police and invest in communities of color have also led to some changes across the country .
In Los Angeles , the city council introduced a proposal to redirect at least $ 100 million to $ 150 million from the LAPD ’ s budget to disadvantaged communities .
In Minneapolis , a veto-proof majority of city council members pledged to “ begin the process of ending ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promised to invest in a “ new transformative model for cultivating safety.
” And in New York City , Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a proposal to cut the police department ’ s budget and shift some of that money to programs that will help communities of color .
Police reform is now a topic of discussion in Congress , which in itself is a big step forward .
However , most Republican lawmakers have not gotten on board with many of the police reform proposals put forward by Black Lives Matter and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presumptive nominee Joe Biden , are also shying away from demands to defund the police .
Some schools are finally cutting ties with police departments , acquiescing to the long-held belief by many organizers that policing schools does not actually keep children safe .
The Minneapolis public school board voted earlier this month to end its relationship with the city ’ s police , and board members for the school district in Oakland , California , unanimously voted this week to eliminate its police department .
The superintendent of Portland , Oregon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ discontinuing ” the use of police officers in schools in the state .
Others are using this moment to topple monuments of Confederate leaders , of which there are over 1,700 in the U.S. People have ripped down monuments in states including Alabama , Pennsylvania , North Carolina and Virginia , the former capital of the Confederacy .
Lawmakers in many states and cities — and even Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi — have called for Confederate statues to be removed .
The tech , media and sports industries are all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own ranks .
NASCAR announced that it would ban the display of the Confederate flag at all its events , and the NFL commissioner admitted the league was wrong for not allowing players to peacefully protest police brutality during the national anthem .
Additionally , several TV shows , including “ Cops ” and “ Live PD , ” were canceled due to their depictions of police brutality .
Although this progress has been hard-fought and well-earned , there is much more work to be done .
Many issues still remain : Chauvin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s death still may get off ; none of the Louisville cops who killed Taylor have been charged in her death ; we have yet to see if city council members from across the country will actually follow through on their promises to divest from police and invest in communities of color .

Gianna Floyd, the 6-year-old daughter of George Floyd, sat on the shoulders of her father’s close friend earlier this month and declared: “Daddy changed the world!”
Gianna was right.
Thursday marks one month since Floyd, a Black man and 46-year-old father of five, was killed when Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes. Every day since, people across the country and around the world have marched in the streets to demand justice for him and other Black victims of police violence.
Advertisement
Tens of thousands of people have protested in over 100 cities in the United States. Protests also erupted around the world, including in Berlin, Paris, London, Toronto and São Paulo, sparking a renewed global reckoning over white supremacy, racism and police brutality. Every single day, people have swarmed the streets to chant “Defund the police!” and “Black lives matter!”
Just this week, organizers in New York City held nine different events in one day throughout four boroughs. At least 100 people camped out in front of City Hall on Tuesday, calling for a $1 billion cut in funding to the New York City Police Department; they have vowed to stay outside the building until the city budget meeting on June 30. In Minnesota, organizers have held marches every single day and have planned a vigil for the one-month anniversary of Floyd’s death. Protests are scheduled to continue in Minneapolis through the Fourth of July, according to Facebook.
Protesters and organizers have already made progress in the fight against systemic racism, both within and outside of police departments. These victories are bittersweet ― it took brutal deaths to get them ― and overdue. The fight for reform is also far from over. But the fact that so much changed in one month highlights how historic this moment is.
“We know there are many new people finally listening to what we have been saying all along and now, it’s time for solutions until we are transformed.” - Kailee Scales, managing director of Black Lives Matter Global Network
Advertisement
“We are heavy with the continued loss of lives like Raymond, Dominique, Tony, Riah, Toyin,” said Kailee Scales, managing director of Black Lives Matter Global Network, naming other Black people who have been killed recently. “Yet this global public outcry for justice leaves us hopeful for change.”
Public opinion has also made a shift: Over the last two weeks, U.S. voters’ support for Black Lives Matter has increased nearly as much as it did over the previous two years, The New York Times reported.
“Many of us recognize this moment as one to push even harder for transformation,” Scales said. “We know there are many new people finally listening to what we have been saying all along and now, it’s time for solutions until we are transformed.”
The most basic sign of justice is that some individual officers have been held accountable for their actions.
In Minneapolis, Chauvin was charged with second-degree murder, and the three other officers involved in Floyd’s death have been charged with aiding and abetting. Six police officers in Atlanta were charged after a video went viral showing cops using a stun gun and dragging two Black students from a car during protests. And in Buffalo, New York, two cops were charged with shoving a 75-year-old protester to the ground. The protester’s head hit the ground so hard that he fractured his skull and was in the hospital for two weeks.
Advertisement
The police department in Louisville, Kentucky, has also held some officers accountable for their actions: The police chief was fired and two officers were placed on administrative leave after David McAtee, a Black chef, was shot and killed when police responded to a large gathering after a curfew. One of the three officers in the city who executed a no-knock search warrant at the home of Breonna Taylor, a Black EMT, was also fired. Taylor was shot at least eight times and died in her hallway after police barged into her home unannounced. The Louisville City Council has since passed Breonna’s Law, which bans no-knock search warrants.
Floyd’s death has also brought renewed attention to police violence against Black women and Black transgender people, and we have seen more attention and urgency paid to past police violence and killings. More than 2 million people have signed a petition urging Colorado lawmakers to reopen an investigation into the killing of Elijah McClain, a 23-year-old Black man who died nearly a year ago when an Aurora cop put him in a chokehold. Even the death of Taylor, the EMT from Louisville, didn’t receive much national attention for two months; it became part of the public discussion about police brutality after Floyd was killed.
The calls to defund the police and invest in communities of color have also led to some changes across the country. In Los Angeles, the city council introduced a proposal to redirect at least $100 million to $150 million from the LAPD’s budget to disadvantaged communities. In Minneapolis, a veto-proof majority of city council members pledged to “begin the process of ending” the city’s police department and promised to invest in a “new transformative model for cultivating safety.” And in New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a proposal to cut the police department’s budget and shift some of that money to programs that will help communities of color.
Police reform is now a topic of discussion in Congress, which in itself is a big step forward. However, most Republican lawmakers have not gotten on board with many of the police reform proposals put forward by Black Lives Matter and other groups. Many Democrats, including presumptive nominee Joe Biden, are also shying away from demands to defund the police.
Protesters rallying in Las Vegas on May 30. Protests against police brutality and racism have taken place around the world after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May. John Locher/AP
Advertisement
Some schools are finally cutting ties with police departments, acquiescing to the long-held belief by many organizers that policing schools does not actually keep children safe. The Minneapolis public school board voted earlier this month to end its relationship with the city’s police, and board members for the school district in Oakland, California, unanimously voted this week to eliminate its police department. The superintendent of Portland, Oregon’s public school system also said he was “discontinuing” the use of police officers in schools in the state.
Floyd’s death has also forced many to acknowledge America’s history of slavery and racism. Many have finally learned that policing was first created to return enslaved people to white slave owners.
Others are using this moment to topple monuments of Confederate leaders, of which there are over 1,700 in the U.S. People have ripped down monuments in states including Alabama, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Virginia, the former capital of the Confederacy. Lawmakers in many states and cities — and even Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi — have called for Confederate statues to be removed.
The tech, media and sports industries are all facing a reckoning over racism in their own ranks. NASCAR announced that it would ban the display of the Confederate flag at all its events, and the NFL commissioner admitted the league was wrong for not allowing players to peacefully protest police brutality during the national anthem. Additionally, several TV shows, including “Cops” and “Live PD,” were canceled due to their depictions of police brutality.
Although this progress has been hard-fought and well-earned, there is much more work to be done. Many issues still remain: Chauvin and the other officers involved in Floyd’s death still may get off; none of the Louisville cops who killed Taylor have been charged in her death; we have yet to see if city council members from across the country will actually follow through on their promises to divest from police and invest in communities of color.
Advertisement
And one major issue lingers: What happens when no one is filming these incidents of police brutality and racism? How many times has there been no video?
This is not the time to rest, Scales said, because communities of color deserve reinvestment.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Yes, The Government Mailed Stimulus Checks To Dead People. It's Not A Big Deal.

The seemingly alarming statistic quickly made the rounds Thursday on the Internet and on cable news in scary-sounding headlines .
The New York Times even alerted its readers with a widely seen push notification to mobile devices .
The underlying reaction to the news was clear : The government sent over a billion dollars to dead people ?
Talk about waste and incompetence !
The $ 1.4 billion paid to deceased people accounts for a fraction ― 0.5 % ― of the estimated $ 269 billion the Internal Revenue Service has distributed to Americans so far via economic rebate payments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its response to the coronavirus pandemic .
And while $ 1.4 billion certainly is a lot of money , it represents a relatively small error rate for one of the most ― if not the most ― successful new program the government set up in a matter of weeks to respond to the health crisis .
At the time , Congress and the administration were under extreme pressure to get the money out the door as quickly as possible to help millions of Americans who suddenly found themselves unemployed and were facing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That the program didn ’ t work perfectly is the result of a tradeoff Congress and the IRS made in a race to get checks in people ’ s mailboxes .
The alternative ― lengthier delays in aid to those suffering to ensure fewer snafus ― would have been a worse outcome .
According to the GAO , the IRS was aware of the problem as the legislation was being drafted , but the agencies determined that it “ did not have the legal authority ” under the law to deny payments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ return for 2019 , even if they were now deceased .
Treasury Department officials , meanwhile , told GAO they were unaware of the problem but took steps to correct it upon learning that payments had been made to decedents .
And here ’ s a key point ― there ’ s no data yet on how many of the checks mailed to deceased people were actually cashed .
The GAO recommended in its report the IRS take steps to notify ineligible recipients to return payments .
The economic rebate payments of up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the most efficient parts of the government ’ s response to the coronavirus .
The Paycheck Protection Program , which gave small businesses loans to keep workers on payrolls , was plagued by problems early on , mostly due to lack of sufficient funding and its reliance on the nation ’ s largest lending institutions .
The book is still out on whether it worked as well as intended , given the continued high unemployment rate and the millions of Americans filing new jobless claims every month .
The stepped-up $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave people laid off due to coronavirus a tremendous lifeline and a boost in capital .
But their distribution was also bedeviled by huge delays , thanks to haphazard regulations on the state level .
The portion of the CARES Act that deserves the most scrutiny ― and alarming headlines ― is the controversial $ 500 billion fund in aid to corporations , states and cities that could be leveraged to reach as much as $ 4.5 trillion .
Hardly any of the funds have yet to be dispersed by the Treasury Department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group of inspectors general ― government watchdogs who focus on specific agencies ― warned Congress that previously unknown Trump administration legal decisions could substantially block their ability to oversee the program .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A new report from the Government Accountability Office, a top watchdog of federal agencies, found the Trump administration mailed more than 1 million coronavirus stimulus checks ― totaling some $1.4 billion ― to recently deceased people.
The seemingly alarming statistic quickly made the rounds Thursday on the Internet and on cable news in scary-sounding headlines. The New York Times even alerted its readers with a widely seen push notification to mobile devices. The underlying reaction to the news was clear: The government sent over a billion dollars to dead people? Talk about waste and incompetence!
Advertisement
The real story is a little more complicated and not as outrageous as it seems.
The $1.4 billion paid to deceased people accounts for a fraction ― 0.5% ― of the estimated $269 billion the Internal Revenue Service has distributed to Americans so far via economic rebate payments that Congress approved in March as part of its response to the coronavirus pandemic.
And while $1.4 billion certainly is a lot of money, it represents a relatively small error rate for one of the most ― if not the most ― successful new program the government set up in a matter of weeks to respond to the health crisis.
At the time, Congress and the administration were under extreme pressure to get the money out the door as quickly as possible to help millions of Americans who suddenly found themselves unemployed and were facing deadlines to pay rent and other bills.
That the program didn’t work perfectly is the result of a tradeoff Congress and the IRS made in a race to get checks in people’s mailboxes. The alternative ― lengthier delays in aid to those suffering to ensure fewer snafus ― would have been a worse outcome.
Advertisement
According to the GAO, the IRS was aware of the problem as the legislation was being drafted, but the agencies determined that it “did not have the legal authority” under the law to deny payments to those who had filed a tax return for 2019, even if they were now deceased. Treasury Department officials, meanwhile, told GAO they were unaware of the problem but took steps to correct it upon learning that payments had been made to decedents.
And here’s a key point ― there’s no data yet on how many of the checks mailed to deceased people were actually cashed. The GAO recommended in its report the IRS take steps to notify ineligible recipients to return payments.
The economic rebate payments of up to $1,200 per eligible person were one of the most efficient parts of the government’s response to the coronavirus.
The Paycheck Protection Program, which gave small businesses loans to keep workers on payrolls, was plagued by problems early on, mostly due to lack of sufficient funding and its reliance on the nation’s largest lending institutions. The book is still out on whether it worked as well as intended, given the continued high unemployment rate and the millions of Americans filing new jobless claims every month.
The stepped-up $600 unemployment benefits that expire in July gave people laid off due to coronavirus a tremendous lifeline and a boost in capital. But their distribution was also bedeviled by huge delays, thanks to haphazard regulations on the state level.
Advertisement
The portion of the CARES Act that deserves the most scrutiny ― and alarming headlines ― is the controversial $500 billion fund in aid to corporations, states and cities that could be leveraged to reach as much as $4.5 trillion.
Hardly any of the funds have yet to be dispersed by the Treasury Department. And earlier this month, a group of inspectors general ― government watchdogs who focus on specific agencies ― warned Congress that previously unknown Trump administration legal decisions could substantially block their ability to oversee the program.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Colorado Appoints Prosecutor To Investigate Elijah McClain's Death

DENVER ( AP ) — Colorado ’ s governor appointed a special prosecutor Thursday to investigate the death of Elijah McClain , a 23-year-old Black man who was put into a neck hold by police in suburban Denver last year .
Gov .
Jared Polis signed an executive order directing state Attorney General Phil Weiser to investigate McClain ’ s death and possibly prosecute those involved .
McClain ’ s name has become a rallying cry during the national reckoning over racism and police brutality following the deaths of George Floyd and others .
“ Elijah McClain should be alive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his family to take this step and elevate the pursuit of justice in his name to a statewide concern , ” Polis said in a statement .
He said he has spoken with McClain ’ s mother and was moved by her description of her son as a “ responsible and curious child ... who could inspire the darkest soul.
” Police in suburban Aurora received a call about a suspicious person wearing a ski mask and waving his arms as he walked down a street on Aug. 24 .
Police say McClain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when officers confronted him and tried to take him into custody .
One of the officers put him in a specialized hold that cuts off blood to the brain , something that has been banned in several places in the wake of Floyd ’ s death May 25 under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer and the global protests that followed .
Paramedics gave McClain a medication to calm him down , and he suffered cardiac arrest on the way to the hospital .
His family said he sustained a brain injury @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The attorney general said in a statement that the investigation will be thorough and “ worthy of public trust and confidence in the criminal justice system .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
DENVER (AP) — Colorado’s governor appointed a special prosecutor Thursday to investigate the death of Elijah McClain, a 23-year-old Black man who was put into a neck hold by police in suburban Denver last year.
Gov. Jared Polis signed an executive order directing state Attorney General Phil Weiser to investigate McClain’s death and possibly prosecute those involved. McClain’s name has become a rallying cry during the national reckoning over racism and police brutality following the deaths of George Floyd and others.
Advertisement
“Elijah McClain should be alive today, and we owe it to his family to take this step and elevate the pursuit of justice in his name to a statewide concern,” Polis said in a statement.
He said he has spoken with McClain’s mother and was moved by her description of her son as a “responsible and curious child ... who could inspire the darkest soul.”
Police in suburban Aurora received a call about a suspicious person wearing a ski mask and waving his arms as he walked down a street on Aug. 24. Police say McClain refused to stop walking and fought back when officers confronted him and tried to take him into custody.
One of the officers put him in a specialized hold that cuts off blood to the brain, something that has been banned in several places in the wake of Floyd’s death May 25 under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer and the global protests that followed.
Advertisement
Paramedics gave McClain a medication to calm him down, and he suffered cardiac arrest on the way to the hospital. His family said he sustained a brain injury and was taken off life support.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--Obama Praises LGBTQ Community For Proving 'Protests And Politics Go Hand In Hand'

Former President Barack Obama is set to join Cynthia Erivo , Taylor Swift and other luminaries this week in a virtual celebration of LGBTQ Pride Month .
Pride Live released a teaser video for its third annual Stonewall Day program featuring a portion of Obama ’ s taped remarks .
In it , the former president draws a line from the 1969 Stonewall uprising , seen as the symbolic start of the modern LGBTQ rights movement , to last week ’ s Supreme Court ruling protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination in the workplace .
“ We ’ re almost 51 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the Stonewall Inn stood up for their rights and set off one of America ’ s defining victories for civil rights , ” he says in the clip , viewable below .
“ All that progress is worth celebrating and reflecting on.
” “ The struggle and triumph for LGBTQ rights shows how protests and politics go hand in hand , how we ’ ve got to both shine a light on injustice and translate those aspirations into specific laws and institutional practices , ” he adds .
Pride Live launched Stonewall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the anniversary of the 1969 Stonewall Inn uprising in New York City ’ s Greenwich Village .
This year ’ s event also marks the fifth anniversary of the Supreme Court ’ s 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide .
In addition to Erivo , Obama and Swift , the starry program will be hosted by transgender model Geena Rocero and feature appearances by Chelsea Clinton , Ellen DeGeneres and George Takei , among others .
Still , organizers are conscious of the fact that this year ’ s event comes amid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis and the ongoing protests against police brutality and racial inequality .
“ COVID-19 , and the recent events that have placed a national and global spotlight on the need for fair and equal treatment for all people , has impacted so many around the world and the LGBTQ+ community has not been immune , ” Dr. Yvette C. Burton , the president of the Pride Live board of directors , said in a statement .
“ Our hopes are Stonewall Day can assist our beneficiaries in continuing their work and service to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ program will be streamed live on Logo ’ s Facebook and YouTube on Friday .
Organizers say proceeds from the livestream will benefit LGBTQ organizations most affected by the coronavirus pandemic .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former President Barack Obama is set to join Cynthia Erivo, Taylor Swift and other luminaries this week in a virtual celebration of LGBTQ Pride Month.
Pride Live released a video for its third annual Stonewall Day program featuring a portion of Obama’s taped remarks. In it, the former president draws a line from the 1969 Stonewall uprising, seen as the symbolic start of the modern LGBTQ rights movement, to last week’s Supreme Court ruling protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination in the workplace.
Advertisement
“We’re almost 51 years since the night when the patrons at the Stonewall Inn stood up for their rights and set off one of America’s defining victories for civil rights,” he says in the clip, viewable below. “All that progress is worth celebrating and reflecting on.”
“The struggle and triumph for LGBTQ rights shows how protests and politics go hand in hand, how we’ve got to both shine a light on injustice and translate those aspirations into specific laws and institutional practices,” he adds.
Pride Live launched Stonewall Day two years ago in commemoration of the anniversary of the 1969 Stonewall Inn uprising in New York City’s Greenwich Village. This year’s event also marks the fifth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
Advertisement
In addition to Erivo, Obama and Swift, the starry program will be hosted by transgender model Geena Rocero and feature appearances by Chelsea Clinton, Ellen DeGeneres and George Takei, among others.
Still, organizers are conscious of the fact that this year’s event comes amid a less-than-celebratory Pride Month given the COVID-19 crisis and the ongoing protests against police brutality and racial inequality.
“COVID-19, and the recent events that have placed a national and global spotlight on the need for fair and equal treatment for all people, has impacted so many around the world and the LGBTQ+ community has not been immune,” Dr. Yvette C. Burton, the president of the Pride Live board of directors, said in a statement. “Our hopes are Stonewall Day can assist our beneficiaries in continuing their work and service to the community.”
The full Stonewall Day program will be streamed live on Logo’s Facebook and YouTube on Friday. Organizers say proceeds from the livestream will benefit LGBTQ organizations most affected by the coronavirus pandemic.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--NASA's D.C. Headquarters Renamed For Mary W. Jackson, Depicted In 'Hidden Figures'

NASA this week unveiled plans to rename its Washington headquarters in honor of Mary W. Jackson , the space agency ’ s first Black female engineer .
“ Mary never accepted the status quo , she helped break barriers and open opportunities for African Americans and women in the field of engineering and technology , ” NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in a statement on the agency ’ s website .
“ NASA facilities across the country are named after people who dedicated their lives to push the frontiers of the aerospace industry , ” Bridenstine said .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greater need to honor the full diversity of people who helped pioneer our great nation.
” Our headquarters building in Washington , D.C. , will be named after Mary W. Jackson , the first African-American female engineer at NASA .
She started in @ NASAaero research and later moved into the personnel field , working to ensure equal opportunity in hiring and promotion .
pic.twitter.com/eMandeaMyv — NASA ( @ NASA ) June 24 , 2020 Jackson , who began her career as a mathematician , was recruited by the National Advisory Committee for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which was succeeded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA ) seven years later .
That same year , she was promoted to aerospace engineer .
The Virginia native , who died in 2005 at age 83 , was featured prominently in Margot Lee Shetterly ’ s 2016 book , “ Hidden Figures : The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Who Helped Win the Space Race.
” The book was adapted into the hit 2017 film “ Hidden Figures , ” starring Taraji P. Henson , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who played Jackson in the movie , happily responded to the news on Twitter .
The street in front of the Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters is named Hidden Figures Way .
Jackson ’ s daughter , Carolyn Lewis , said the family was “ honored ” by the tribute .
“ She was a scientist , humanitarian , wife , mother , and trailblazer who paved the way for thousands of others to succeed , ” Lewis said in a statement , “ not only at NASA , but throughout this @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
NASA this week unveiled plans to rename its Washington headquarters in honor of Mary W. Jackson, the space agency’s first Black female engineer.
“Mary never accepted the status quo, she helped break barriers and open opportunities for African Americans and women in the field of engineering and technology,” NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine said in a statement on the agency’s website.
Advertisement
The new name takes effect immediately.
“NASA facilities across the country are named after people who dedicated their lives to push the frontiers of the aerospace industry,” Bridenstine said. “The nation is beginning to awaken to the greater need to honor the full diversity of people who helped pioneer our great nation.”
Our headquarters building in Washington, D.C., will be named after Mary W. Jackson, the first African-American female engineer at NASA. She started in @NASAaero research and later moved into the personnel field, working to ensure equal opportunity in hiring and promotion. pic.twitter.com/eMandeaMyv — NASA (@NASA) June 24, 2020
Jackson, who began her career as a mathematician, was recruited by the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) in 1951, which was succeeded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) seven years later. That same year, she was promoted to aerospace engineer.
The Virginia native, who died in 2005 at age 83, was featured prominently in Margot Lee Shetterly’s 2016 book, “Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Who Helped Win the Space Race.”
Advertisement
The book was adapted into the hit 2017 film “Hidden Figures,” starring Taraji P. Henson, Janelle Monáe and Octavia Spencer. Monáe, who played Jackson in the movie, happily responded to the news on Twitter.
The street in front of the Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters is named Hidden Figures Way.
Jackson’s daughter, Carolyn Lewis, said the family was “honored” by the tribute.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--House Passes Police Reform Bill

House Passes Police Reform Bill

The bill would ban chokeholds for federal police and the use of “ no-knock ” warrants — which enable law enforcement to enter a property without notifying the owner ― in federal drug cases , and would make federal money for state and local governments contingent on establishing similar policies .
The legislation would also establish a national registry of police misconduct .
It would end the practice of qualified immunity , which prevents citizens from suing individual officers in civil courts .
And it would forbid money going to police departments that have not implemented policies to eliminate racial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those changes , and many have made it clear they absolutely won ’ t go along with ideas like ending qualified immunity .
Republicans have their own bill ― written in the Senate by Black Republican Tim Scott of South Carolina ― that differs in a number of ways from the House bill .
Scott ’ s bill would ban chokeholds meant for “ incapacitation ” but would allow them when federal guidelines authorize deadly force , such as when someone is holding a gun .
The House bill would simply ban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights violation .
On Thursday , a number of Black representatives referenced having “ the talk ” with their children — instructing them to do whatever the police say and to prioritize their safety at the expense of their rights .
“ I had to have the talk with my two sons .
And I knew what to say , word for word , because my father had the same talk with me decades ago , ” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries ( D-N.Y. ) said .
“ And nothing has changed.
” Instead of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ procedural and political complaints with the policing bill .
They argued that , if Democrats were serious about producing a measure that could pass the GOP-controlled Senate and get President Donald Trump ’ s signature , they would have allowed amendments to the House bill and wouldn ’ t have blocked the Senate from taking up Scott ’ s bill in that chamber on Wednesday .
“ If we voted on this section by section , I believe there are sections where there would be an overwhelming bipartisan majority for some necessary and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There ’ s other parts where , if we just worked together and made some changes , we ’ d likely get to yes on a lot of these.
” Other Republicans were more direct in their criticism .
Many said reforms like ending qualified immunity would lead to a rash of police resignations , and many just made general comments about how all lives matter .
Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler ( D-N.Y. ) detailed how Democrats had offered the bill 18 days ago , asked Republicans if they would support the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and asked to see the amendments Republicans planned to offer before the Judiciary Committee markup so that they could potentially work with them on specific language to address their concerns .
“ If there were a serious and good faith effort to enact legislation , the White House would seek to work with both sides of the aisle , and both sides of the Capitol .
That has not happened thus far , ” Nadler said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― Exactly one month after George Floyd was killed in police custody, House lawmakers returned to the Capitol on Thursday to pass a sweeping police reform bill in Floyd’s name.
The bill ― the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020 ― passed largely along party lines, 236-181, with all Democrats and three Republicans voting yes, and 180 Republicans and independent Justin Amash of Michigan voting no.
Advertisement
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that the House was honoring Floyd’s life “and the lives of all those killed by police brutality, and pledging: Never again.”
Pelosi said the legislation would fundamentally transform the culture of policing to address systemic racism, curb police brutality and bring accountability to police departments.
“It will save lives,” she said.
But, as Republicans repeatedly reminded Democrats on Thursday, the bill is highly unlikely to become law.
The measure is a collection of a number of policing proposals composed by the Congressional Black Caucus and written in conjunction with Black Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Kamala Harris (D-Calif.).
Advertisement
The bill would ban chokeholds for federal police and the use of “no-knock” warrants — which enable law enforcement to enter a property without notifying the owner ― in federal drug cases, and would make federal money for state and local governments contingent on establishing similar policies.
The legislation would also establish a national registry of police misconduct. It would end the practice of qualified immunity, which prevents citizens from suing individual officers in civil courts. And it would forbid money going to police departments that have not implemented policies to eliminate racial profiling.
Republicans take issue with some of those changes, and many have made it clear they absolutely won’t go along with ideas like ending qualified immunity. Republicans have their own bill ― written in the Senate by Black Republican Tim Scott of South Carolina ― that differs in a number of ways from the House bill.
Scott’s bill would ban chokeholds meant for “incapacitation” but would allow them when federal guidelines authorize deadly force, such as when someone is holding a gun. The House bill would simply ban chokeholds and classify them as a civil rights violation.
Scott’s bill would require all law enforcement agencies to report their use of “no-knock” warrants to the attorney general. The House bill would outright end “no-knock” warrants.
Advertisement
And Scott’s bill wouldn’t address qualified immunity at all.
“That bill has about as much teeth as a newborn baby,” Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.), a former chairman of the CBC, said on the House floor Thursday in reference to the Senate measure.
“There is a difference of policing in this country, and we’re just asking to fix it,” Richmond added.
“That [Senate] bill has about as much teeth as a newborn baby.” - Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-La.)
On Thursday, a number of Black representatives referenced having “the talk” with their children — instructing them to do whatever the police say and to prioritize their safety at the expense of their rights.
“I had to have the talk with my two sons. And I knew what to say, word for word, because my father had the same talk with me decades ago,” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said. “And nothing has changed.”
Advertisement
Instead of addressing these issues, Republicans focused on procedural and political complaints with the policing bill. They argued that, if Democrats were serious about producing a measure that could pass the GOP-controlled Senate and get President Donald Trump’s signature, they would have allowed amendments to the House bill and wouldn’t have blocked the Senate from taking up Scott’s bill in that chamber on Wednesday.
Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas said there was a lot of agreement in the bill, and when he first read the legislation, he was “pleasantly surprised.”
“If we voted on this section by section, I believe there are sections where there would be an overwhelming bipartisan majority for some necessary and crucial reforms,” Crenshaw said. “There’s other parts where, if we just worked together and made some changes, we’d likely get to yes on a lot of these.”
But, Crenshaw said, while the bill doesn’t defund the police, it would lead to less policing.
Other Republicans were more direct in their criticism. Many said reforms like ending qualified immunity would lead to a rash of police resignations, and many just made general comments about how all lives matter.
“White lives matter. Hispanic lives matter. Asian lives matter. Native American lives matter. Quite frankly, all lives matter. Police officers’ lives matter, too,” Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) said.
Advertisement
Those sorts of arguments didn’t warrant much of a rebuttal from Democrats, but Democratic leaders did address arguments about process, countering that Republicans were the ones uninterested in a bill becoming law.
Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) detailed how Democrats had offered the bill 18 days ago, asked Republicans if they would support the legislation if they adopted their amendments, and asked to see the amendments Republicans planned to offer before the Judiciary Committee markup so that they could potentially work with them on specific language to address their concerns.
But Republicans wouldn’t share the text, and the Trump administration has yet to reach out to try and work with Democrats.
“If there were a serious and good faith effort to enact legislation, the White House would seek to work with both sides of the aisle, and both sides of the Capitol. That has not happened thus far,” Nadler said.
The bill will now wait for Senate action, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has made it clear he won’t take up the House bill.
Advertisement
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) suggested the Senate pass its bill and that the two chambers go to a conference committee to work out their differences. He said that the House bill’s lead author, Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Karen Bass (D-Calif.), had told him she was more interested in a bill that could become law than a political messaging device.
As it stands now, however, Senate Democrats say Scott’s bill is unworkable and that their concerns can’t be addressed by amendments.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-25--The Supreme Court Rulings On LGBTQ Rights And DACA Are Really Popular

The Supreme Court ’ s recent decisions on protecting LGBTQ people in the workplace and maintaining the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program are both popular with the American public , a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds .
Approval for the Supreme Court itself is also up modestly , with the judicial branch seeing newly bipartisan goodwill .
Last Monday , the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ employees from discrimination at work on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity .
Then , last Thursday , the court ruled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearly 650,000 undocumented young people from deportation .
Both rulings are well in line with popular opinion .
A 69 % majority of Americans say they support laws that protect gay , lesbian , bisexual and transgender people against discrimination in the workplace , with just 21 % opposed .
A 57 % majority support allowing undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children to stay in the country , with 29 % opposed .
( Other recent polls have found even broader support for both DACA and nondiscrimination laws . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , 46 % to 35 % .
Underlying that positive impression is a newfound partisan consensus : Nearly identical shares of Republicans ( 54 % ) and Democrats ( 56 % ) currently say they approve .
( Those who identify as political independents hold the lowest opinion of the court . )
The agreement between Democrats and Republicans marks a significant shift from polls taken over the past few years , when one party has tended to be notably warmer than the other toward the judicial branch .
In 2015 , after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Affordable Care Act , Democrats broadly approved of the Supreme Court ’ s performance , while Republicans mostly disapproved ; in 2018 , those views had more or less flipped , with Republicans about three times likelier than Democrats to approve .
It ’ s not clear how much current opinions of the Supreme Court are influenced by the most recent decisions .
Only 54 % of Americans say they were following the latest set of rulings even somewhat closely , and just 17 % that they were following the rulings very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that issues relating to the Supreme Court will be very important in deciding their vote for president this year .
The balance of partisan interest in the Supreme Court has also shifted over the years .
In June 2018 , voters who backed Hillary Clinton were 11 points likelier than Donald Trump voters to say that issues relating to the Supreme Court would be very important to their vote in that year ’ s midterms .
Now , Trump voters are 10 points likelier than Clinton voters to call the Supreme Court a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
A 57 % majority of Americans say they trust the Supreme Court about as much as the other branches of the government , with 27 % trusting it more and 16 % trusting it less .
A 43 % plurality say it has about the right amount of power , with 29 % believing it has too much power , and just 6 % that it wields too little .
The public is divided on the court ’ s ideology , with 21 % calling it too liberal , 24 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s about right , and another 28 % unsure .
Use the widget below to further explore the results of the HuffPost/YouGov survey , using the menu at the top to select survey questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroups .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Supreme Court’s recent decisions on protecting LGBTQ people in the workplace and maintaining the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program are both popular with the American public, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds. Approval for the Supreme Court itself is also up modestly, with the judicial branch seeing newly bipartisan goodwill.
Last Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects LGBTQ employees from discrimination at work on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Then, last Thursday, the court ruled to keep DACA in place, shielding nearly 650,000 undocumented young people from deportation.
Advertisement
Both rulings are well in line with popular opinion. A 69% majority of Americans say they support laws that protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people against discrimination in the workplace, with just 21% opposed. A 57% majority support allowing undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children to stay in the country, with 29% opposed. (Other recent polls have found even broader support for both DACA and nondiscrimination laws.)
Americans currently approve of the Supreme Court, 46% to 35%. Underlying that positive impression is a newfound partisan consensus: Nearly identical shares of Republicans (54%) and Democrats (56%) currently say they approve. (Those who identify as political independents hold the lowest opinion of the court.)
The agreement between Democrats and Republicans marks a significant shift from polls taken over the past few years, when one party has tended to be notably warmer than the other toward the judicial branch. In 2015, after the court preserved a major part of the Affordable Care Act, Democrats broadly approved of the Supreme Court’s performance, while Republicans mostly disapproved; in 2018, those views had more or less flipped, with Republicans about three times likelier than Democrats to approve.
Results of a June 2020 HuffPost/YouGov poll on the Supreme Court. Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
Advertisement
It’s not clear how much current opinions of the Supreme Court are influenced by the most recent decisions. Only 54% of Americans say they were following the latest set of rulings even somewhat closely, and just 17% that they were following the rulings very closely.
Forty-two percent of voters say that issues relating to the Supreme Court will be very important in deciding their vote for president this year.
The balance of partisan interest in the Supreme Court has also shifted over the years. In June 2018, voters who backed Hillary Clinton were 11 points likelier than Donald Trump voters to say that issues relating to the Supreme Court would be very important to their vote in that year’s midterms. Now, Trump voters are 10 points likelier than Clinton voters to call the Supreme Court a very important factor in the upcoming presidential election.
A 57% majority of Americans say they trust the Supreme Court about as much as the other branches of the government, with 27% trusting it more and 16% trusting it less. A 43% plurality say it has about the right amount of power, with 29% believing it has too much power, and just 6% that it wields too little.
The public is divided on the court’s ideology, with 21% calling it too liberal, 24% too conservative, 27% saying it’s about right, and another 28% unsure.
Advertisement
Use the widget below to further explore the results of the HuffPost/YouGov survey, using the menu at the top to select survey questions and the buttons at the bottom to filter the data by subgroups.
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted June 18-20 among U.S. adults, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology are available here. Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors. YouGov’s reports include a model-based margin of error, which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling. If these assumptions are wrong, the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate.