thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-15--Why These Sexual Assault Survivors Support Defunding The Police

But for survivors themselves , the debate is more complicated .
Some went to the police for help and received it ; most who reported crimes saw their perpetrators walk free .
Many didn ’ t go to the police at all , fearing they would face victim-blaming questions and get little help .
Some were assaulted by the very people they ’ d have to report crimes to .
“ The criminal system is built to punish .
It ’ s not built to support the victim in any way , ” Thomas Shim , co-founder of # WhyIDidntReport @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as you report , you have to retell your experience over and over again to complete strangers who often victim-blame .
In the name of ‘ I ’ m just doing my job , ’ they ’ ll ask you things like ‘ What were you wearing ?
’ ” Police also may fail to take reports seriously , especially from members of marginalized groups or people not stereotypically thought to be victims .
Black women and non-binary people are “ hyper-vulnerable ” to sexual violence , according to the ACLU , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be believed .
And an estimated 1 in 6 men have been victims of sexual violence , yet their stories are often brushed off .
“ Maggie , ” a 25-year-old from Iowa , told HuffPost she was raped several times by her then-partner over the course of a few months .
She never reported it to police because of threats from her partner , although she did report the abuse to her school after the last assault , which she says was the most severe .
I frequently thought about filing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing so .
However , my partner regularly used threats and coercion to prevent me from involving the police .
While initially after the last incident of rape , he expressed remorse and even encouraged me to seek help , later on , he began to regularly use suicide threats if I mentioned filing a report… In addition , one of his favorite tactics was to try to convince me that he would be repeatedly raped in prison if I reported .
Because I loved him and because I did not want him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I eventually chose not to pursue police involvement because I feared for his safety both inside and outside of prison .
Despite it being used as a threat , I often think about how my abuser ’ s commentary about prison rape is not without truth .
While that threat will forever haunt me , it has taught me an important lesson about how the criminal justice system so often reinforces and perpetuates violence .
I support abolishing and defunding the police .
My answer would likely have been different several years ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement was a supportive mechanism for survivors .
As many other people do , I believe there is significant work to be done to develop systems of community accountability and community public safety , but it has become clear to me that police were never about providing safety .
“ Alex , ” a 25-year-old from Denver , told HuffPost she was sexually assaulted by a guy friend while she was at college .
Alex , who is Black , said she didn ’ t report her assault because she was afraid that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would face consequences far worse than his actions due to racism in policing .
She also decided not to report because she felt pressure to ensure the representation of the Black community at her school was not affected .
Many Black students at our university had already had issues with the police racially profiling them and harassing them .
While what [ my attacker ] did to me was wrong and illegal , I don ’ t think it should come with any risk of endangering his life .
Additionally , because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ society , I always hesitate to incite police interactions with Black people as I ’ m afraid of both perpetuating the narrative of our criminality and putting their lives in danger .
Within our sphere of influence , my attacker was also someone who was frequently pointed to as an example of “ Black Excellence ” and has been instrumental in many efforts to improve the experiences of Black students on our campus .
At the time , it was a cost-benefit of him being investigated and punished for his behavior , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was seen .
While I know ultimately he doesn ’ t singlehandedly represent Black students and alumni of our university , I don ’ t think it would help us in our efforts towards racial justice either .
I ’ m a strong supporter of defunding the police and making significant other changes to our criminal justice system .
Our current systems don ’ t work for survivors of crime or their assailants .
I didn ’ t report in no small part because I don ’ t want to perpetuate a broken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As a survivor , I think I have a stronger sense that the system doesn ’ t work for anyone except for those in charge of it .
We shouldn ’ t have survivors who aren ’ t willing to go to the police because they know they won ’ t be treated with dignity and respect .
We shouldn ’ t have survivors who see their attackers be given punishments either too lenient or too harsh for their crimes , entirely because of who that attacker is .
As a survivor who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I know the system is broken on both sides .
Tara Burns is a 38-year-old sex worker and sex workers ’ rights advocate living in Alaska .
She was sex trafficked and assaulted at a young age and now documents instances of violence against sex workers , including acts of violence perpetrated by police .
Lane Lofaso , a 17-year-old from New York , told HuffPost he was in a sexually and emotionally abusive relationship for a year , starting when he was 15 years old .
He said he plans to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t report because I didn ’ t think I would be believed without evidence .
Society is full of abuser sympathizers and judges that blame survivors for their clothes , alcohol consumption , or being in a relationship ( and I was in a relationship with him at the time ) ; I knew that I didn ’ t have a case .
Additionally , even though I knew that physical evidence is gone in three days , it took me more than three days to comprehend what happened and tell my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police are the answer , especially without proper education .
After all , 85 % of federal funding for domestic violence is dedicated to law enforcement ; it should be redistributed to directly help survivors , an example would be helping them cover medical or legal expenses .
It ’ s been six years and I am still working with doctors ; I would have loved an emergency grant or further support .
Riley Reed , a 20-year-old from Chicago , was sexually assaulted two separate times .
Reed disclosed the assaults to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police , knowing the process of reporting can oftentimes be just as traumatic as the initial assault .
I didn ’ t go forward with a police report because I didn ’ t want to have to go through a long , arduous process… I didn ’ t want to feel victimized or be scrutinized with so many different questions… I didn ’ t feel like I had obvious evidence .
Women especially are made to feel like it ’ s our fault and we brought it on ourselves .
I fully support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need other resources that can help people in many different dangerous circumstances .
The police don ’ t have the proper training to deal with trauma .
The people that helped me the most through my process were counselors .
People that are equipped with proper knowledge should be sent to deescalate or help situations that police so often fail to do .
“ Sabrina , ” a 45-year-old woman from New York City , said she has been sexually assaulted multiple times , but the most traumatic was when she was sexually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported the abuse to the police but , looking back , she felt she was not in control of that decision because she was so young .
Tani Ikeda , a survivor from Los Angeles , told HuffPost she was sexually assaulted when she was younger and entered into a four-year process with law enforcement and the criminal justice system to try to hold her rapist accountable .
“ Clare ” is a 30 year-old-woman living in California .
Growing up in Michigan , she was sexually and physically abused by her mother @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She did not report the abuse but neighbors frequently called police for noise complaints .
Cassandra , an 18-year-old from Maryland , was raped by a classmate on New Year ’ s Eve in 2018 when she was 16 years old .
She didn ’ t report her assault because her perpetrator used a condom and because she didn ’ t leave any marks on him .
She also didn ’ t feel like she truly understood what happened to her until she left for college .
I think we should focus on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being reactionary and buying into a system that often perpetuates more harm instead of actually helping .
My experience has helped me realize that our prison system and justice system is flawed in such a way that it doesn ’ t achieve meaningful justice .
My rapist ― if he had been charged , tried , and locked up ― would have eventually gotten out with no better understanding of consent or what he did to me .
He ’ d probably have lingering feelings or resentment towards me and the justice system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against me .
What I ’ ve realized is that rape is about power and entitlement .
That feeling of entitlement never leaves when the punishment is simply prison time .
Furthermore , within the prison system , sexual assault is commonplace .
Prisons conduct strip searches , in addition to rape being prevalent in prisons .
I personally believe that true justice is not achieved by perpetrating the same harm done to you onto the perpetrator and continuing the cycle of violence but rather promote healing and discussion .
All I want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what my rapist has done .
I just want to be able to continue on with my life knowing that he knows what he did to me was wrong and he won ’ t do it again .

As the rallying cry to “defund the police” reverberates across the country, some critics have claimed that women will be irrevocably harmed if police budgets are downsized, pointing specifically to sexual assault survivors. The argument, steeped in misogyny and antiquated ideas of what a victim looks like, uses crimes (largely but by no means exclusively) committed against women to justify the continued overfunding of police.
But for survivors themselves, the debate is more complicated. Some went to the police for help and received it; most who reported crimes saw their perpetrators walk free. Many didn’t go to the police at all, fearing they would face victim-blaming questions and get little help. Some were assaulted by the very people they’d have to report crimes to.
Advertisement
These survivors don’t want more police. They want more help.
HuffPost spoke to more than a dozen survivors of sexual assault about the debate over defunding police. While their views don’t represent those of all survivors ― nearly 434,000 people are sexually assaulted every year in the U.S. ― they said police often ended up retraumatizing them instead of helping them find justice.
“The criminal system is built to punish. It’s not built to support the victim in any way,” Thomas Shim, co-founder of #WhyIDidntReport, told HuffPost. “As soon as you report, you have to retell your experience over and over again to complete strangers who often victim-blame. In the name of ‘I’m just doing my job,’ they’ll ask you things like ‘What were you wearing?’”
One look at the statistics, and it’s easy to see why many survivors don’t report their assaults to law enforcement. Out of every 1,000 sexual assaults, 995 perpetrators will walk free. Survivors who do decide to press charges against their attackers are usually in for a long and expensive legal battle that can end with a prosecutor deciding not to pursue a case or a contaminated, untested rape kit.
Just last week, retired Memphis Police Department officers admitted to throwing thousands of rape kits into a nearby landfill in the 1990s, and many of the kits were for prosecutable cases within the statute of limitations.
Advertisement
Police also may fail to take reports seriously, especially from members of marginalized groups or people not stereotypically thought to be victims. Black women and non-binary people are “hyper-vulnerable” to sexual violence, according to the ACLU, but not as likely as white women to be believed. And an estimated 1 in 6 men have been victims of sexual violence, yet their stories are often brushed off.
“The criminal system is built to punish. It’s not built to support the victim in any way."” - Thomas Shim, co-founder of #WhyIDidntReport
Cops are also perpetrators of sexual assault: Between 2005 and 2013, over 1,200 police officers were arrested for sex crimes, but those were only the ones against victims who were brave enough to report. Law enforcement officers also have a storied history of actively targeting more vulnerable people, like sex workers.
Social services that could receive a reallocation of funding from downsized police budgets are the very types of services survivors need when they report: mental health, addiction and other trauma-informed services.
Many survivors told HuffPost they’d like to see transformative justice ― an alternative method of addressing harm by relying on community members instead of police. Transformative justice is about communal healing and prevention. Incarceration does the opposite; between 3% and 9% of male inmates reported experiencing sexual violence while incarcerated ― that’s more than 180,000 men.
Advertisement
“If I wanted a process of accountability for the abuse I had experienced and to prevent this person from hurting other people, my only option was to lock my rapist up,” said Tani Ikeda, a sexual assault survivor and founder of Survivor Love Letter. “As someone who had family members suffering from PTSD from incarceration, I wanted to search for other solutions.”
The majority of survivors Shim speaks to through his work support defunding the police, but a few ― the “lucky and privileged” who had good experiences with the police ― are not always on board with the movement, he said.
“They’ve had experiences where the police actually helped them find their perpetrator and punish them. That’s amazing. We completely understand where they’re coming from because, again, they demanded justice and they got that,” he said.
The best way to understand how sexual assault survivors feel about defunding the police is to listen to them. In their own words, this is how survivors feel about the movement.
Warning: Some readers may find the below content triggering. These stories have been lightly edited for length and style.
Advertisement
“Maggie,” a 25-year-old from Iowa, told HuffPost she was raped several times by her then-partner over the course of a few months. She never reported it to police because of threats from her partner, although she did report the abuse to her school after the last assault, which she says was the most severe.
I frequently thought about filing a police report and often came close to doing so. However, my partner regularly used threats and coercion to prevent me from involving the police. While initially after the last incident of rape, he expressed remorse and even encouraged me to seek help, later on, he began to regularly use suicide threats if I mentioned filing a report… In addition, one of his favorite tactics was to try to convince me that he would be repeatedly raped in prison if I reported. Because I loved him and because I did not want him to harm himself or be harmed, I eventually chose not to pursue police involvement because I feared for his safety both inside and outside of prison. Despite it being used as a threat, I often think about how my abuser’s commentary about prison rape is not without truth. While that threat will forever haunt me, it has taught me an important lesson about how the criminal justice system so often reinforces and perpetuates violence. I support abolishing and defunding the police. My answer would likely have been different several years ago, back when I believed that law enforcement was a supportive mechanism for survivors. As many other people do, I believe there is significant work to be done to develop systems of community accountability and community public safety, but it has become clear to me that police were never about providing safety.
“Alex,” a 25-year-old from Denver, told HuffPost she was sexually assaulted by a guy friend while she was at college. Alex, who is Black, said she didn’t report her assault because she was afraid that her attacker, a Black man, would face consequences far worse than his actions due to racism in policing. She also decided not to report because she felt pressure to ensure the representation of the Black community at her school was not affected.
Many Black students at our university had already had issues with the police racially profiling them and harassing them. While what [my attacker] did to me was wrong and illegal, I don’t think it should come with any risk of endangering his life. Additionally, because of the criminalization of Black bodies in our society, I always hesitate to incite police interactions with Black people as I’m afraid of both perpetuating the narrative of our criminality and putting their lives in danger. Within our sphere of influence, my attacker was also someone who was frequently pointed to as an example of “Black Excellence” and has been instrumental in many efforts to improve the experiences of Black students on our campus. At the time, it was a cost-benefit of him being investigated and punished for his behavior, and how that would change how our community was seen. While I know ultimately he doesn’t singlehandedly represent Black students and alumni of our university, I don’t think it would help us in our efforts towards racial justice either. I’m a strong supporter of defunding the police and making significant other changes to our criminal justice system. Our current systems don’t work for survivors of crime or their assailants. I didn’t report in no small part because I don’t want to perpetuate a broken system that profits on BIPOC bodies. As a survivor, I think I have a stronger sense that the system doesn’t work for anyone except for those in charge of it. We shouldn’t have survivors who aren’t willing to go to the police because they know they won’t be treated with dignity and respect. We shouldn’t have survivors who see their attackers be given punishments either too lenient or too harsh for their crimes, entirely because of who that attacker is. As a survivor who understands the flaws of the penal systems, I know the system is broken on both sides.
Tara Burns is a 38-year-old sex worker and sex workers’ rights advocate living in Alaska. She was sex trafficked and assaulted at a young age and now documents instances of violence against sex workers, including acts of violence perpetrated by police.
Police have only ever compounded the trauma of sexual assaults for me. No one has ever gone to jail for sexually assaulting me, whether I was sex working at the time or not. As an advocate for sex workers trying to report violence for the last five years, it has been a struggle to get police to even take reports at times. No one has ever gone to jail for sexually assaulting or sex trafficking any of the survivors who I have supported in reporting. I’m absolutely for defunding the police and redirecting funds to more effective strategies.
Lane Lofaso, a 17-year-old from New York, told HuffPost he was in a sexually and emotionally abusive relationship for a year, starting when he was 15 years old. He said he plans to report his abuser soon.
Defunding the police is something that should happen immediately. The money is not going to any of the right places, and officers are not trained properly to handle sexual assaults and speaking to victims/survivors. My experience as a survivor definitely impacts my feeling and opinion on defunding the police and I’m glad that it does. Personally, I don’t think I will ever get justice. Sexual assault causes lifelong trauma and nothing will ever fix that. But the closest thing to that is making sure the perpetrator is punished and that’s where law enforcement comes in.
Amanda Thomashow, a 31-year-old from Michigan, was sexually assaulted by former Michigan State University and USA Gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar during a 2014 medical exam. At the time, she filed a Title IX complaint with MSU but the school concluded Nassar’s conduct was not sexual in nature. Her Title IX complaint was one of the few breadcrumbs that later led to Nassar’s downfall.
My experience as a survivor has only informed me more on how important it is that we take funds away from the police and redistribute them into community services and education. My experiences with the police have been nothing but negative and terrifying. Those experiences only carried out my trauma longer than was necessary and it’s been very clear that they only care about my cases and the harm that’s been done to me if they can prosecute, put somebody in jail or get a fine out of them.
Maya Siegel, a 20-year-old who founded the survivor-centered organization Space to Speak, told HuffPost she was raped by a boyfriend at 14 and later sexually assaulted by a different perpetrator at 18. She decided not to report to police because she was afraid of being victim-blamed.
I didn’t report because I didn’t think I would be believed without evidence. Society is full of abuser sympathizers and judges that blame survivors for their clothes, alcohol consumption, or being in a relationship (and I was in a relationship with him at the time); I knew that I didn’t have a case. Additionally, even though I knew that physical evidence is gone in three days, it took me more than three days to comprehend what happened and tell my parents. I don’t think police are the answer, especially without proper education. After all, 85% of federal funding for domestic violence is dedicated to law enforcement; it should be redistributed to directly help survivors, an example would be helping them cover medical or legal expenses. It’s been six years and I am still working with doctors; I would have loved an emergency grant or further support.
Riley Reed, a 20-year-old from Chicago, was sexually assaulted two separate times. Reed disclosed the assaults to a professor but did not report to police, knowing the process of reporting can oftentimes be just as traumatic as the initial assault.
I didn’t go forward with a police report because I didn’t want to have to go through a long, arduous process… I didn’t want to feel victimized or be scrutinized with so many different questions… I didn’t feel like I had obvious evidence. Women especially are made to feel like it’s our fault and we brought it on ourselves. I fully support defunding the police. I think we need other resources that can help people in many different dangerous circumstances. The police don’t have the proper training to deal with trauma. The people that helped me the most through my process were counselors. People that are equipped with proper knowledge should be sent to deescalate or help situations that police so often fail to do.
“Sabrina,” a 45-year-old woman from New York City, said she has been sexually assaulted multiple times, but the most traumatic was when she was sexually abused as a 9-year-old. Her family reported the abuse to the police but, looking back, she felt she was not in control of that decision because she was so young.
In some ways, the urgency to go to the police (on my stepfather’s part) was as traumatizing as the actual attack. My mother did not want to call them. I did not want to call them. We did it because he definitely felt we should. What followed: The police blamed my mother, threatened to report her to CPS, I had to go to a hospital for an exam which was absolutely terrifying. I’m curious to know more about the details [of defunding the police]. But if it means reducing budgets and redistributing those funds to the community, then absolutely yes [I support it].
Tani Ikeda, a survivor from Los Angeles, told HuffPost she was sexually assaulted when she was younger and entered into a four-year process with law enforcement and the criminal justice system to try to hold her rapist accountable.
It felt like a secondary violence to have my memories scrutinized by police who asked me clinical details about my assault, like a crime scene from which they were extracting evidence. The way I dressed, the accuracy of my memory, my creative online poetry, and even my smile ― all became evidence that I was at fault for my own rape. How can we practice transformative justice in our everyday lives and relationships? In a society that devalues human life, we can build more relationships that are based on curiosity and joy rather than gaining social status and career advancement. We center our own pleasure so what looks good on the outside also feels good on the inside. In elementary school, children who misbehave are given timeout. When we become adults, they go to prison. Instead of looking for people to punish, I am deeply invested in undoing the generational cycles of harm in our community through each of us working on ourselves.
“Clare” is a 30 year-old-woman living in California. Growing up in Michigan, she was sexually and physically abused by her mother’s boyfriend for 12 years. She did not report the abuse but neighbors frequently called police for noise complaints.
I was questioned by the officers a few times, always in front of my abusers where I did not feel safe to tell them the truth or ask for help. Every time I see articles and posts about abolishing or defunding the police, I’m frustrated that this didn’t happen earlier, that I wasn’t saved, and that the system failed me over and over again. I could have been spared if trained social workers had been involved. The police didn’t save me from being molested and assaulted over and over again for twelve years. People argue that if we defund the police, who will be there to protect women from being raped on the streets? But they neglect the fact that it’s already happening, and it feels like each one of these people are saying that my pain, our pain, doesn’t matter, that it isn’t enough of a reason.
Cassandra, an 18-year-old from Maryland, was raped by a classmate on New Year’s Eve in 2018 when she was 16 years old. She didn’t report her assault because her perpetrator used a condom and because she didn’t leave any marks on him. She also didn’t feel like she truly understood what happened to her until she left for college.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-15--Public Land Is Getting Big Play In 2020 Elections In The West

In the nearly two years since , the Trump administration has continued its pro-industry agenda ― gutting conservation laws , rolling back protected sites and nominating an anti-federal land zealot to run the Bureau of Land Management .
And with the November election just three months away , Trump allies up for reelection in Western states have , once again , found themselves the target of TV ads calling out their records and linking them to the president ’ s anti-conservation legacy .
On Thursday , Montana Gov .
Steve Bullock ( D ) rolled out a six-figure ad buy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , whom he is running to unseat in November , for previously indicating that he would vote to confirm William Perry Pendley as director of the Bureau of Land Management .
A conservative lawyer with extreme anti-environmental views and a long history of advocating for the sale of federal lands in the West , Pendley is among Trump ’ s most controversial nominees .
“ Twenty years ago , this man sued the state of Montana , trying to get rid of the public ’ s right to access our rivers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court and won , ” Bullock says in the ad , referring to a failed lawsuit that Pendley ’ s former law firm , the right-wing Mountain States Legal Foundation , filed in 2000 challenging a state law that ensures recreational access to rivers and streams .
Bullock defended the legal challenge as an attorney in the Montana attorney general ’ s office .
Daines has since walked back his public support for Trump ’ s pick , telling the Bozeman Daily Chronicle last week that he has “ serious concerns ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direct questions ” at his confirmation hearing , which has not yet been scheduled .
Daines has also found himself the target of a new $ 1 million ad campaign from the League of Conservation Voters Victory Fund .
The ad , also released Thursday , highlights the senator ’ s 2015 vote in favor of an amendment to a Senate budget resolution that conservation groups argued was the first step toward the future sale or transfer of federal lands .
Daines ’ office did not respond to HuffPost ’ s request for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to E & E News this week , Daines ’ spokeswoman Julia Doyle dismissed the ads as “ nothing more than a desperate attempt by Steve Bullock to distract from the fact that Steve Daines recently achieved the greatest win for our public lands — a win that no senator has been able to achieve for decades.
” Daines and Sen. Cory Gardner ( R-Colo. ) , two of the most at risk of losing their seats , helped champion through Congress the Great American Outdoors Act , a major public lands package @ @ @ @ @ @ @ park infrastructure and permanently funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund , a decades-old conservation program .
Trump , who signed the bill into law earlier this month and is using it to greenwash his conservation record , has given full credit to Daines and Gardner ― neither of whom have particularly notable environmental records .
Many see it as an election-year political stunt .
But like Daines , Gardner is a new face in the decadeslong fight to secure full , permanent LWCF funding .
While a member of the House of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favor of an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have drastically cut the LWCF ’ s already low funding .
In 2015 , Daines voted against reauthorizing the program .
Gardner will face off in November against John Hickenlooper , the former Democratic governor of Colorado and 2020 presidential contender .
Hickenlooper has run Facebook ads slamming Gardner for not signing on to the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act , or CORE Act , which would protect approximately 400,000 acres of public land in the state .
And in a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ’ s unprecedented rollback of public land protections ― he ’ s the only president in U.S. history to strip protections from more federal acres than he ’ s protected ― and challenged the incumbent senator to oppose Pendley ’ s nomination .
A 2019 Colorado College survey found that voters in eight western states strongly oppose Trump ’ s actions on public lands , including 60 % disapproval for removing national monument protections .
A 2017 poll by the Center for American Progress found that 64 % of Trump voters oppose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Trump administration has maintained it opposes the sale and transfer of federal lands , even as it has repeatedly hosted key figures of the land transfer movement .
Along with his newfound support for the Land and Water Conservation Fund ― a program his administration tried for years to slash funding for ― Trump has taken to comparing himself to President Theodore Roosevelt , despite having a record that in no way matches up to that of the 26th president .
While Roosevelt protected over 230 million acres of federal land , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 37,000 acres while working to strip away protections for some 35 million acres , according to an analysis from the left-leaning Center for American Progress .
“ Greg Gianforte doesn ’ t care about that , ” John says .
“ In Washington , he wrote bills to strip protections from nearly 700,000 acres of public lands ...
He sued the state to take away your rights to access a popular fishing site just ’ cause he didn ’ t like seeing regular folks near his giant mansion on the edge of @ @ @ @

LOADING ERROR LOADING
PREVIOUSLY: In the 2018 midterm elections, several Democrats in Western states notched key wins after campaigning on the promise of protecting America’s public lands and maintaining federal control over resources. The victories were widely celebrated among conservation groups as a direct rebuke of President Donald Trump’s relentless push to strip protections and open land up to fossil fuel development.
Advertisement
In the nearly two years since, the Trump administration has continued its pro-industry agenda ― gutting conservation laws, rolling back protected sites and nominating an anti-federal land zealot to run the Bureau of Land Management. And with the November election just three months away, Trump allies up for reelection in Western states have, once again, found themselves the target of TV ads calling out their records and linking them to the president’s anti-conservation legacy.
“The issue has always loomed large, and this year more than any other it is front and center because of the actions of the Trump administration,” said Mike Saccone, an adviser to the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund.
On Thursday, Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) rolled out a six-figure ad buy knocking Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), whom he is running to unseat in November, for previously indicating that he would vote to confirm William Perry Pendley as director of the Bureau of Land Management. A conservative lawyer with extreme anti-environmental views and a long history of advocating for the sale of federal lands in the West, Pendley is among Trump’s most controversial nominees.
“Twenty years ago, this man sued the state of Montana, trying to get rid of the public’s right to access our rivers and streams. I took him on in court and won,” Bullock says in the ad, referring to a failed lawsuit that Pendley’s former law firm, the right-wing Mountain States Legal Foundation, filed in 2000 challenging a state law that ensures recreational access to rivers and streams. Bullock defended the legal challenge as an attorney in the Montana attorney general’s office.
Advertisement
“Two decades later, Sen. Daines said the same guy who wants to sell off our public lands should be in charge of America’s public lands,” Bullock continues in the ad. “No senator from Montana should stand for that.”
In a November interview with E&E News, Daines said he would back Pendley, who has served as the bureau’s acting director since last July, thanks to a series of questionable ― some say illegal ― extensions by Interior Secretary David Bernhardt. Trump officially nominated Pendley for the director post in June.
Daines has since walked back his public support for Trump’s pick, telling the Bozeman Daily Chronicle last week that he has “serious concerns” and pledging to ask “very strong and direct questions” at his confirmation hearing, which has not yet been scheduled.
Daines has also found himself the target of a new $1 million ad campaign from the League of Conservation Voters Victory Fund. The ad, also released Thursday, highlights the senator’s 2015 vote in favor of an amendment to a Senate budget resolution that conservation groups argued was the first step toward the future sale or transfer of federal lands.
Advertisement
Daines’ office did not respond to HuffPost’s request for comment Friday. But in a statement to E&E News this week, Daines’ spokeswoman Julia Doyle dismissed the ads as “nothing more than a desperate attempt by Steve Bullock to distract from the fact that Steve Daines recently achieved the greatest win for our public lands — a win that no senator has been able to achieve for decades.”
Rewriting Records
Vulnerable Western Republicans have prioritized securing conservation wins ahead of the 2020 election.
Daines and Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), two of the most at risk of losing their seats, helped champion through Congress the Great American Outdoors Act, a major public lands package that directs billions toward fixing crumbling national park infrastructure and permanently funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a decades-old conservation program. Trump, who signed the bill into law earlier this month and is using it to greenwash his conservation record, has given full credit to Daines and Gardner ― neither of whom have particularly notable environmental records. Many see it as an election-year political stunt.
Gardner’s campaign has so far released three TV ads touting his work on the Great American Outdoors Act. In one, Gardner says that for five decades Congress “raided” LWCF to spend the money on “everything but the environment.”
“They’ll never be able to do that again,” he says, standing alongside a babbling stream.
Advertisement
But like Daines, Gardner is a new face in the decadeslong fight to secure full, permanent LWCF funding. While a member of the House of Representatives in 2011, Gardner voted in favor of an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have drastically cut the LWCF’s already low funding. In 2015, Daines voted against reauthorizing the program.
Gardner will face off in November against John Hickenlooper, the former Democratic governor of Colorado and 2020 presidential contender. Hickenlooper has run Facebook ads slamming Gardner for not signing on to the Colorado Outdoor Recreation and Economy Act, or CORE Act, which would protect approximately 400,000 acres of public land in the state. And in a recent Facebook video, Hickenlooper linked Gardner to Trump’s unprecedented rollback of public land protections ― he’s the only president in U.S. history to strip protections from more federal acres than he’s protected ― and challenged the incumbent senator to oppose Pendley’s nomination.
Saccone said that the Great American Outdoors Act is “a great win for conservation, but it doesn’t exist in a vacuum.”
“You can’t call yourself a conservation champion based on one bill alone,” he said. “Voters are smart.”
Gardner has so far avoided taking a stand on Trump’s controversial public lands chief. Meanwhile, he is running new Facebook ads touting his close relationship with Trump ― ads that have appeared nationwide with the exception of his home state of Colorado, as HuffPost reported.
Advertisement
A Key Issue Out West
Trump and his Republican allies in Congress may finally be waking up to just how unpopular their public lands agenda is among Western voters.
A 2019 Colorado College survey found that voters in eight western states strongly oppose Trump’s actions on public lands, including 60% disapproval for removing national monument protections. A 2017 poll by the Center for American Progress found that 64% of Trump voters oppose privatizing or selling off public lands. The Trump administration has maintained it opposes the sale and transfer of federal lands, even as it has repeatedly hosted key figures of the land transfer movement.
Along with his newfound support for the Land and Water Conservation Fund ― a program his administration tried for years to slash funding for ― Trump has taken to comparing himself to President Theodore Roosevelt, despite having a record that in no way matches up to that of the 26th president. While Roosevelt protected over 230 million acres of federal land, Trump has protected via executive action less than 37,000 acres while working to strip away protections for some 35 million acres, according to an analysis from the left-leaning Center for American Progress.
President Donald Trump holds up the Great American Outdoors Act after signing it Aug. 4. Jonathan Ernst / reuters
Public lands are also emerging as a key issue in the Montana gubernatorial race.
This month, Montana Conservation Voters Action Fund launched an ad campaign targeting Rep. Greg Gianfote (R), who faces Lt. Gov. Mike Cooney (D) to succeed Bullock as governor. The ad features a man named John talking about the importance of public lands to his small business.
Advertisement
“Greg Gianforte doesn’t care about that,” John says. “In Washington, he wrote bills to strip protections from nearly 700,000 acres of public lands ... He sued the state to take away your rights to access a popular fishing site just ’cause he didn’t like seeing regular folks near his giant mansion on the edge of the river.”
Along with drafting two bills in 2018 to roll back wilderness protections and filing a lawsuit in 2009 against the state to block river access on his property near Bozeman, Gianforte supports transferring control of federal lands to states. He voted for the Great American Outdoors Act, but did not sign on as a co-sponsor.
Cooney has attacked his opponent for his public lands record.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-15--Why Kamala Harris' Rise Is So Remarkable

But like most women of color — Harris is both Black and Asian American — she has had to work harder to get to where she is than white men in comparable positions .
One example : the current president , who ’ d never held public office prior to his election .
This dynamic was made plain at the start of the Democratic presidential primary when Harris ran against a one-term congressman , the mayor of a small city and several rich guys with no political experience , nearly all of them white .
They get little benefit of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Black women surveyed by Lean In say they need to provide more evidence to prove they ’ re competent at work , compared to 28 % of white women and 14 % of all men .
About the same percentage of Black women say that their judgment is questioned in their area of expertise , versus 39 % of white women and 29 % of all men .
Getting the job is harder , too .
That was one of a myriad of anecdotes Moore shared .
She also recounted the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clearly wasn ’ t comfortable working for her .
Or the time a male colleague had a noose in his cubicle for decoration , and when she complained , human resources said “ he didn ’ t mean anything by it , ” she said .
“ That was in New York City in 2007 .
It wasn ’ t 50 years ago in Kentucky.
” No one said Tim Kaine was chosen because he ’ s a man .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
As the sexist and racist attacks against Kamala Harris pile on, there’s one line of criticism that is particularly ripe for debunking. That’s the idea that Harris, Joe Biden’s running mate for president, is some kind of “affirmative action hire,” chosen not on her merits but as a “box-checking exercise for the ‘woke’ crowd,” as Fox News’ Laura Ingraham put it.
The implication here is that Harris isn’t qualified for the role. Of course that’s absurd.
Harris has more than a decade of experience at the highest levels of government, including as San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general and as a senator from the most populous state in the country. She’s proven herself on the national stage, especially in her role on the Judiciary Committee, where she won plaudits for her skillful questioning of Trump appointees.
Advertisement
Presumptive Democratic vice presidential nominee Kamala Harris participates in a briefing on the coronavirus during a campaign stop in Wilmington, Delaware, on Aug. 13, 2020. REUTERS/Carlos Barria
But like most women of color — Harris is both Black and Asian American — she has had to work harder to get to where she is than white men in comparable positions. One example: the current president, who’d never held public office prior to his election. This dynamic was made plain at the start of the Democratic presidential primary when Harris ran against a one-term congressman, the mayor of a small city and several rich guys with no political experience, nearly all of them white.
The reality is: The deck is stacked against women of color, and particularly Black women, in this country. The ones who make it to the top, like Harris, overcome an astonishing array of obstacles.
“Gender played a role in the selection of both Kamala Harris and Tim Kaine. But only in Harris’ case was there speculation that she was unqualified.”
Advertisement
That’s true in politics, where Black women, despite some recent incredible gains, are still woefully underrepresented. There’s never been a Black female governor in the U.S. There have only been two Black female senators, one of whom is Harris. If Biden and Harris win, there might be no Black women in the Senate next year.
To understand better what Black women are up against, look at the American workplace, a maze of bias and discrimination that can leave all women feeling burned out, beaten down and disheartened.
For Black women though, it’s worse. “I don’t think people understand how constant and numerous the barriers facing Black women are at work,” said Raena Saddler, a vice president at Lean In, the women’s advocacy group.
Black women have a harder time getting hired, getting promoted and face more outright discrimination, notes a report Lean In released this week.
They get little benefit of the doubt from colleagues. Forty percent of Black women surveyed by Lean In say they need to provide more evidence to prove they’re competent at work, compared to 28% of white women and 14% of all men. About the same percentage of Black women say that their judgment is questioned in their area of expertise, versus 39% of white women and 29% of all men.
Advertisement
Black women are more likely to say their competence and judgment have been questioned at work, as Lean In's survey demonstrates. Lean In
One in four black women has heard someone express surprise at work at their “language skills,” compared to 1 in 10 white women, according to the survey.
Black women at work are also often stereotyped as “angry.” That perception, while incorrect, means they’re more likely to get poor evaluations from supervisors, according to a recent study by the Academy of Management highlighted by Lean In. Those bad reviews hold them back.
The “angry woman” attack is a favorite of Donald Trump, who just this week accused Harris of being angry and “a mad woman” at the 2018 Senate hearing for Brett Kavanaugh. Of course, it was Kavanaugh whose anger was on full display back then.
Advertisement
“Kamala Harris has worked harder. She’s done everything – Local office, statewide office, federal office, now being named to the highest office. The best schools. Everything,” said Glynda Carr, CEO and co-founder of Higher Heights for America, a group that advocates for Black women in politics. “And still the perception of her, for many, is ambitious, angry and nasty.”
For Black women to get ahead in politics, Carr said, “We have to work longer and harder than our counterparts who are less qualified, less experienced.”
The issue has to do with people’s perception of what a leader looks like, she added.
The myths about anger and competency lead to constant pressure to prove yourself, which means it takes more work and more experience to get promoted or rise up to the top.
And, no surprise, fewer Black women get the nod up the ladder: Only 1.4% of C-suite roles (the top “chief” slots at companies) are held by Black women, though they make up 7.4% of the U.S. population. White men hold 68% of those jobs, and they make up 35% of the population. There are no Black female CEOs in the Fortune 500.
Black women rarely make it to the top leadership roles at U.S. companies. LeanIn
Advertisement
Lean In found that the problem starts right away. Companies might hire a number of women of color for entry-level roles, but then fail to promote them at the same rate as men.
For one survey, the group looked at men and women getting promoted for the first time to management. For every 100 men promoted to manager, only 58 Black women advanced, according to the findings.
“That’s a massive gap,” Saddler said. “All these people were talented and bright enough to be hired in the first place, and no one has ever managed before. You’d have to see men as inherently qualified to be managers. Unlikely. Or there’s massive bias and racism here.”
Getting the job is harder, too.
Forget about promotions; just landing a job is harder for Black women.
Claudine Moore, a Black woman who’s worked in marketing and public relations for decades, told HuffPost about the time that she had to interview with around 15 different people to get a senior manager role at one agency.
An average candidate would have three or four interviews, said Moore, who now runs her own marketing and media firm and teaches at New York University, but when you’re considered a “diversity” hire, there’s more thorough vetting, she said.
Advertisement
Still, she jumped through those hoops and got a job offer. Or so she thought. After the offer was in place, Moore was asked to take one last meeting with a manager at the company. A formality, she was told.
“When I walked into his office, as soon as he saw me, the blood drained from his face,” she recalled recently. “I knew he didn’t want me to have the role.”
Moore remembers the interview feeling combative. He questioned her background in a way that made clear that he doubted her experience. “So you really worked at this agency?” she remembered him asking. “Almost disbelief.”
Soon after that, the company called her back. It was rescinding the offer. “People don’t really believe these situations happen until these things play out in front of their eyes,” she said.
That was one of a myriad of anecdotes Moore shared. She also recounted the time she inherited a white male assistant who clearly wasn’t comfortable working for her. Or the time a male colleague had a noose in his cubicle for decoration, and when she complained, human resources said “he didn’t mean anything by it,” she said. “That was in New York City in 2007. It wasn’t 50 years ago in Kentucky.”
Advertisement
“All the companies I’ve been with, you’re treated a lot harsher than everybody else,” she said.
No one said Tim Kaine was chosen because he’s a man.
In spite of all these obstacles, and the true grit and determination it takes to overcome them, when Black women do succeed at work and in politics, their achievements are often discounted, the Lean In report points out. Often, their peers, or tiresome Laura Ingraham types, won’t give them credit for their work.
Colleagues might say, “She only got the promotion because she’s Black,” the Lean In report notes. Or because she’s a woman.
“When these comments go unchallenged, they can prevent Black women from receiving the credit they deserve for their hard work and achievements,” the report notes.
That’s what’s happening with Harris. It likely didn’t help that Biden explicitly announced he would choose a woman as a running mate back in March, because it created the perception that gender was the only factor in his choice.
But it’s worth digging in here: Candidates for years have only chosen men as running mates (with two prior exceptions). Did they only get picked because they were men?
Advertisement
When Hillary Clinton was preparing to announce her choice for vice president, she never came out and said, “I will choose a man.” But it was understood that the first woman running for president on a major party ticket would choose a guy as a running mate to balance out the ticket. (Similar to how Barack Obama was expected to choose a white person as his running mate.)
No one went around arguing that Tim Kaine was unqualified for the role and was picked only because he was a man. Candidates have long chosen running mates as counterpoints to their own identity.
This is worth underlining: Gender played a role in the selection of both Harris and Kaine. But only in Harris’ case was there speculation that she was unqualified (when arguably, she is more prepared).
But in the political realm at least, things are changing, Carr said. She points to the rising power of Black female voters, something everyone finally woke up to in 2017 when Black women in Alabama helped defeat Roy Moore in his run for Senate.
“America woke up and said thank you, Black women, for saving democracy,” and Black women “stood a little taller” after that, realizing their power, Carr said.
Advertisement
Now more are running for office. A record number of women of color are slated to run for Congress in 2020.
“All these women have created this moment for Kamala Harris,” she said. “They led boldly, they jumped over man-made barriers.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-15--Trump Refuses To Say Whether Kamala Harris Is 'Eligible' To Be Vice President

President Donald Trump , who earlier amplified a racist conspiracy theory about Sen. Kamala Harris ’ citizenship , refused Saturday to say whether the California-born senator was eligible to become vice president .
Pressed by a reporter to answer a question on the topic , Trump said only that it was “ not something that bothers me.
” “ I have nothing to do with that , ” he said on whether Harris — a natural-born U.S. citizen with immigrant parents from Jamaica and India — should be allowed to run for vice president .
“ I read something about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he is a brilliant lawyer , ” Trump added , referring to law professor John Eastman , who wrote a controversial Newsweek op-ed that questioned whether Harris was entitled to birthright citizenship .
( She was . )
“ It ’ s not something that bothers me , ” Trump said , adding : “ It ’ s not something that I ’ m going to be pursuing .
...
If she had a problem , you would ’ ve thought she would ’ ve been vetted by Sleepy Joe.
” REPORTER : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to run and be vice president based on the fact she was born in Oakland ?
TRUMP : `` So , I have nothing to do with that .
I read something about it ... it 's not something that bothers me . ''
pic.twitter.com/Oq3CCluSvn — Aaron Rupar ( @ atrupar ) August 15 , 2020 Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden named Harris as his running mate on Tuesday , and she is the first Black and first Asian American vice-presidential contender on a major party ticket .
Her citizenship and eligibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But Trump ’ s campaign has magnified the racist rhetoric in Eastman ’ s op-ed ― and Trump himself has questioned whether Harris meets the “ requirements ” to be vice president .
President Trump on claims that : Kamala Harris is n't eligible to run for Vice President because she 's an anchor baby : `` I heard it today that she does n't meet the requirements ...
I have no idea if that 's right .
I would have assumed the Democrats would have checked that out . ''
pic.twitter.com/H887X43GJK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 13 , 2020 Trump ’ s refusal this week to condemn the birther lies about Harris has echoes of the fringe conspiracy theories he once pushed about Barack Obama .
Trump , whose own mother was an immigrant from Scotland , has repeatedly questioned whether Obama ― America ’ s first Black president ― was truly a U.S. citizen .
Obama was born in Hawaii to a white American mother and a Black Kenyan father .
As with Harris , Obama ’ s citizenship and eligibility for the presidency have never been in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national leader of the grotesque , racist birther movement with respect to President Obama and has sought to fuel racism and tear our nation apart on every single day of his presidency , ” Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates told NBC News Thursday .
Bates added : “ So it ’ s unsurprising , but no less abhorrent , that as Trump makes a fool of himself straining to distract the American people from the horrific toll of his failed coronavirus response that his campaign and their allies would resort to wretched , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump, who earlier amplified a racist conspiracy theory about Sen. Kamala Harris’ citizenship, refused Saturday to say whether the California-born senator was eligible to become vice president.
Pressed by a reporter to answer a question on the topic, Trump said only that it was “not something that bothers me.”
Advertisement
“I have nothing to do with that,” he said on whether Harris — a natural-born U.S. citizen with immigrant parents from Jamaica and India — should be allowed to run for vice president.
“I read something about it, and I will say that he is a brilliant lawyer,” Trump added, referring to law professor John Eastman, who wrote a controversial Newsweek op-ed that questioned whether Harris was entitled to birthright citizenship. (She was.)
“It’s not something that bothers me,” Trump said, adding: “It’s not something that I’m going to be pursuing. ... If she had a problem, you would’ve thought she would’ve been vetted by Sleepy Joe.”
REPORTER: Will you say Kamala Harris is eligible to run and be vice president based on the fact she was born in Oakland?
TRUMP: "So, I have nothing to do with that. I read something about it ... it's not something that bothers me." pic.twitter.com/Oq3CCluSvn — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 15, 2020
Advertisement
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden named Harris as his running mate on Tuesday, and she is the first Black and first Asian American vice-presidential contender on a major party ticket.
Her citizenship and eligibility for the role are not in question. But Trump’s campaign has magnified the racist rhetoric in Eastman’s op-ed ― and Trump himself has questioned whether Harris meets the “requirements” to be vice president.
President Trump on claims that :Kamala Harris isn't eligible to run for Vice President because she's an anchor baby: "I heard it today that she doesn't meet the requirements...I have no idea if that's right. I would have assumed the Democrats would have checked that out." pic.twitter.com/H887X43GJK — CSPAN (@cspan) August 13, 2020
Trump’s refusal this week to condemn the birther lies about Harris has echoes of the fringe conspiracy theories he once pushed about Barack Obama.
Trump, whose own mother was an immigrant from Scotland, has repeatedly questioned whether Obama ― America’s first Black president ― was truly a U.S. citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii to a white American mother and a Black Kenyan father. As with Harris, Obama’s citizenship and eligibility for the presidency have never been in doubt.
Advertisement
An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 6, 2012
Biden’s campaign roundly condemned Trump this week for parroting the birther conspiracy theories about Harris.
“Donald Trump was the national leader of the grotesque, racist birther movement with respect to President Obama and has sought to fuel racism and tear our nation apart on every single day of his presidency,” Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates told NBC News Thursday.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-14--Will Indian-American Voters Turn Out For Kamala Harris?

Before winning her Senate seat in 2016 , Harris served as San Francisco ’ s district attorney and then as @ @ @ @ @ .
Like many Black voters , some South Asians say they are wary of the @ @ @ @ @ that disproportionately sent people of color to jail .
During her campaign for president , @ @ @ @ @ marijuana convictions she pursued and for arresting the parents of truant students , who were @ @ @ @ @ issues .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Rati Gupta, an actor and writer who lives in Los Angeles, wasn’t expecting to be so emotional about Kamala Harris.
But on Tuesday, when presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden named Harris, the daughter of an Indian mother and Jamaican father, as his running mate, Gupta said he was brought to “legit tears.”
Advertisement
The selection of the California senator “wasn’t a surprise to me at all ― she’d been rumored to be a top contender ― but hearing the words ‘first Indian American woman’ or ‘first South Asian woman’ on repeat really got to me,” Gupta told HuffPost.
Sometimes, she said, “you don’t know how much you need something until you get it, and this made me realize how much I’ve needed not just more women, but more women who look like me, in power in this country.”
Her excitement had nothing on her mother and aunt’s reaction. The family group chat went wild over the news.
“My mom and aunt started looking up articles about her family and found photos of her in a sari,” she said. “There were a lot of heart emojis, and a debate over what good familial title to use for her since we’d heard Kamala herself doesn’t like being called ‘auntie.’”
Advertisement
Harris isn’t just the first Black woman on a major party ticket. She’s also the first Indian American. And her selection comes at a time when both political parties are itching to make inroads with the nearly 2 million eligible Indian American voters.
The Biden-Harris ticket starts out with an advantage; according to the Pew Research Center, Indian Americans are the most likely to be Democrats of any Asian origin group, with 50% identifying as Democrats and just 18% as Republican.
“We are the fastest-growing population in the South and Sunbelt states and though still small, when we vote, we are electorally significant.” - Varun Nikore, head of a super political action committee that helps elect Asian Americans.
Thomas Perez, chair of the Democratic National Committee, has said that the Indian-American vote ― and the Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) electorate more broadly ― could be an “absolute decision-maker” in this coming election, especially in key swing states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Donald Trump’s narrow victories in those three states won him the White House in 2016.
Given that, it’s likely that Harris’ Asian American roots played at least some part in the Biden camp’s electoral math, said Varun Nikore, president of the AAPI Victory Fund, a super political action committee that helps elect Asian Americans.
Advertisement
“There is growing recognition of Asian Americans, the fastest-growing community in the U.S., especially now during COVID when so many Asian American health care workers are at the forefront,” he told HuffPost. “We are the fastest-growing population in the South and Sunbelt states and though still small, when we vote, we are electorally significant.”
With Harris on the ticket, it puts more “wind behind the AAPI sail,” he said.
Still, as she has risen in politics, Harris’ South Asian background has been often overshadowed by her Jamaican roots.
“If Kamala Harris is also of Asian descent, why does the press only label her ’Black?” a recent Poynter story asked.
At least part of the answer may lie in the words of Harris’ late mother, Shyamala Gopalan, a cancer researcher and civil rights advocate who, at 19, made the bold move to immigrate to the U.S. alone and pursue her doctorate degree at the University of California, Berkeley.
In a June interview on The Los Angeles Times podcast, “Asian Enough,” Harris said her mother was “conscious of race” when raising her and her sister, Maya, in Berkeley. That community, despite its liberal, hippie reputation, was still deeply segregated during the girls’ childhoods.
Advertisement
“She knew that in America, her daughters would be treated, for better or worse, as Black women and Black children, and she raised us with a sense of pride about who we were,” Harris said. But it was “never to the exclusion of always being very proud and very active in terms of our Indian culture as well.”
Now that Harris will be the Democratic nominee for vice president, many South Asian American voters said they hoped her Indian background would get equal time.
“She is beloved in our community and I’ve seen it,” said Neil Makhija, executive director of IMPACT, a Philadelphia-based civic organization that helps recruit, train, and elect Indian Americans at all levels of government.
“She has been the keynote speaker at our summits and gets totally swarmed,” he said. “I think it’s encouraging to see her South Asian background finally getting attention in the media.”
The attention it keeps getting will depend in part on Harris’ willingness to use her personal biography as a political tool. As reporter Jamilah King noted in a Mother Jones story last year as Harris was gearing up her unsuccessful presidential bid, the senator had “a reserved quality” when discussing her personal life and experiences with race on the campaign trail.
Advertisement
Her viral moment in the Democratic primary’s first debate ― when she shared a personal anecdote about being a member of the second class to desegregate Berkeley’s public schools through a bussing program (something that Biden, then a senator from Delaware, opposed) ― was the high point of her presidential campaign.
Harris has on occasion provided other glimpses of her personal story. A video posted to Twitter earlier this week by Harris’ sister, Maya, shows her reflecting on the experiences of her single mother.
“My mother was a proud woman. She was a brown woman. She was a woman with a heavy accent,” Harris says in the clip. “She was a woman, who many times people would overlook her or not take her seriously or because of her accent, they’d assume things about her intelligence. Every time, she proved them wrong.”
You can’t know who @KamalaHarris is without knowing who our mother was. Missing her terribly, but know she and the ancestors are smiling today. #BidenHarris2020 pic.twitter.com/nmWVj90pkA — Maya Harris (@mayaharris_) August 12, 2020
Harris has frequently said her mother is her role model. In her 2019 autobiography “The Truths We Hold,” she said she’s equally inspired by her Indian grandparents: her grandmother was a community organizer in India and her grandfather, a diplomat, worked to help resettle refugees during the that nation’s India’s post-independence partition period.
Advertisement
Years later, Harris would take summer trips to stay with her grandparents in the southern Indian city of Chennai. Harris can speak a bit of a local dialect of Tamil. (On the Asian Enough podcast, Harris joked that she, like many children of immigrants, ”learned words of affection and words of frustration” with “with great acuity,” thanks to her elders.)
A widely shared photo on Twitter shows Harris (on the left) with her grandmother, Rajam Gopalan, grandfather P.V. Gopalan and sister Maya. In front are Maya’s daughter, Meena, left, and Harris’ cousin Sharada Balachandran Orihuela.
Meet your veep pic.twitter.com/dFWL4jGlnO — Nandini Jammi (@nandoodles) August 11, 2020
Harris clearly embraces her biraciality and doesn’t like to choose sides. In the Asian Enough interview, she told the hosts “I was raised with a deep sense of pride in my cultural background. Just speaking about myself, as much as I don’t like to do, I’ve never had an identity crisis. I’m really comfortable in who I am.”
That said, as the hosts noted, Harris has said she prefers to simply be called “an American” ― a remark which vaguely calls to mind the comment by former Republican presidential candidate Bobby Jindal, who is of Indian heritage, about not wanting to be a “hyphenated American.”
Advertisement
Seattle-based policy analyst Sonyah Terrason said she doesn’t see an issue in that personal preference. Terrason herself is half Pakistani and half Mexican.
“She is American. That is her nationality,” Terrason said. “People can definitely see that she is a woman of color, though I was a little surprised to find out that she is a child of a South Asian immigrant. I had a feeling that she had some South Asian in her because of her features.”
“We need to understand that nationality does not mean erasing our ethnicity or heritage,” Terrason added.
Harris may have been slower to speak about her South Asian heritage than she would otherwise after seeing the “harsh treatment that Barack Obama had gotten about his father’s immigrant roots” with the birther movement, Karthick Ramakrishnan, a public policy and political science professor at the University of California, Riverside, said in a recent interview with NBC News.
Indeed, just days after her selection, Harris is already being targeted by birthers.
But overall, given America’s changing racial demographics, it could be useful for the Biden-Harris campaign to harness Harris’ duel racial identity and her parents’ immigrant stories, said Sumit Ganguly, a political science professor at Indiana University.
Advertisement
Those personal stories are even more compelling when juxtaposed with the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant policies, Ganguly told HuffPost.
“Her ascent exemplifies how the country is changing and becoming genuinely representative,” he said. “It also explains why Trump is playing fast and loose with xenophobia, appealing to that dwindling section of the country’s population that is clinging on to benighted notions of racial privilege.”
Regardless of how much Harris talks about her Indian heritage, some South Asian Americans ― younger ones especially ― have raised questions about her political record.
“Harris has a problematic past. If progressives have learned anything from the Obama administration, it’s that having representation in the White House is not enough and we must continue to challenge our elected leaders” - Isha Kaur, a digital marketing manager who’s a Sikh American
Before winning her Senate seat in 2016, Harris served as San Francisco’s district attorney and then as California’s attorney general. Like many Black voters, some South Asians say they are wary of the years she spent enforcing laws that disproportionately sent people of color to jail. During her campaign for president, Harris was criticized for the marijuana convictions she pursued and for arresting the parents of truant students, who were mostly Black, among other issues.
Advertisement
“Harris has a problematic past,” said Isha Kaur, a digital marketing manager who’s a Sikh American. “If progressives have learned anything from the Obama administration, it’s that having representation in the White House is not enough and we must continue to challenge our elected leaders.”
“I hope she adapts to learn from the urgent needs for minority communities today and that people see this beyond symbolic representation,” Kaur said.
Other voters of South Asian descent say they’ll be keeping a sharp eye on Harris’ stance on India if she and Biden win the election.
Neelam Malhotra, an Indian American health educator in California, said she’s curious to see if Harris will risk alienating Hindus ― who make up a large portion of the South Asian diaspora ― by acknowledging and addressing the rise of Hindu fascism in India and the violent Delhi riots it caused earlier this year.
“I’m also curious how she will grapple with caste and how it manifests in the diaspora, especially since on her Indian side, she comes from a Brahmin family, which is the highest caste,” Malhorta said. “As an Indian, the answers to these questions are important to me.”
Advertisement
South Asians are largely celebrating Joe Biden's choice to put Californian Kamala Harris on the Democratic presidential ticket. Here, the senator -- then a presidential candidate -- is seen speaking to the Asian and Latino Coalition at the Iowa Statehouse in February 2019. Stephen Maturen via Getty Images
Shivam Bhatt, an Indian American tech worker in California’s Silicon Valley, said he has mixed feelings about Harris. When he sees how comfortable she is with her biracial heritage, it gives him hope for his own biracial child, he said.
Still, he’s uncomfortable with what he sees as her negative record on issues concerning trans people and with her anti-truancy efforts.
“However, I do think Harris showed that she can learn, grow, and work toward changing her behavior and attitudes towards justice and progress,” he said.
Bhatt said he’s interested to see if Harris will grapple with or address the prejudice toward Black people that persists in many South Asian countries and within the South Asian community in the U.S.
Advertisement
“For Harris to deal with anti-black racism both here and in India and to not only succeed but thrive, well, I’d feel good about that,” he said.
Regardless of the attitudes among South Asians about Harris’ policy record, many are genuinely excited about what her place on the Democratic ticket means for representation.
Amol Naik, an Indian American attorney from Atlanta (and a long-time Harris supporter), said he felt the headiness of the historic moment when he saw an old picture of Harris’ recently immigrated parents in which her mother is wearing a sari.
“The thought that kept coming to mind for me was how scary it must have been for her parents, like mine, to leave everything they knew to come to America in search of a better life,” he said.
“The fact that new immigrants to America doing the same thing in 2021 might see a picture of Kamala Harris on the wall as they clear the immigration process, particularly in contrast to the current occupants of that wall, is transformative and everything that is right about America,” he said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-15--U.S. Postal Service Watchdog To Probe Service Woes As Worries Rise About Mail Ballots

WASHINGTON ( Reuters ) - The U.S .
Postal Service ’ s internal watchdog is investigating cost-cutting that has slowed delivery and alarmed lawmakers ahead of a presidential election when up to half of U.S. voters could cast ballots by mail , a congressional aide said on Friday .
The Postal Service ’ s inspector general also will examine possible conflicts of interest involving new Postmaster General Louis DeJoy , who has donated $ 2.7 million to President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans , according to Saloni Sharma , a spokeswoman for Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren , who requested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Postal Service is warning states there is “ significant risk ” voters will not have enough time to complete and return their ballots .
The Postal Service late on Friday released letters it had sent to 46 states and the District of Columbia , after the Washington Post reported earlier on the extent of the warnings .
The warning highlighted the possibility that a meaningful number of mail votes in the Nov. 3 presidential election might go uncounted if they are returned too late .
Election officials are bracing for a deluge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made it easier to vote by mail to address concerns about public gatherings during the coronavirus pandemic .
Trump , who is trailing Democratic rival Joe Biden in opinion polls , has said without evidence that widespread mail voting could lead to fraud .
However , public records show he has requested mail ballots for himself and his wife Melania before Florida ’ s Tuesday primary election .
Evidence has shown that mail voting is as secure as any other method .
Biden and other Democrats say Trump is trying to interfere with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama said he was worried that Trump was trying to “ kneecap ” the Postal Service .
The issue has taken on added urgency in recent weeks as cost-cutting measures put in place by DeJoy have led to widespread mail delays .
The measures have included removal of letter collection boxes in some states .
The Postal Service has warned some states that allowing voters to request ballots less than a week before the election does not leave enough time to print the ballot , mail it to the voter and have it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters to request an absentee ballot within seven days of an election .
The Postal Service recommends that mail ballots should be completed and sent in by that point .
Pennsylvania ’ s secretary of state asked the state Supreme Court to allow ballots to be counted if they are received up to three days after the Nov. 3 election , rather than on Election Day .
In past elections , the Postal Service has given priority to all political and election mail , no matter the postage rate , according to workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ If this letter aims to backtrack on that collaboration or the promise of prioritization of election mail , that would be very concerning , ” said Tracy Wimmer , a spokeswoman for the Michigan Department of State , which oversees elections .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Postal Service’s internal watchdog is investigating cost-cutting that has slowed delivery and alarmed lawmakers ahead of a presidential election when up to half of U.S. voters could cast ballots by mail, a congressional aide said on Friday.
The Postal Service’s inspector general also will examine possible conflicts of interest involving new Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who has donated $2.7 million to President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans, according to Saloni Sharma, a spokeswoman for Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren, who requested the investigation.
Advertisement
DeJoy owns millions of dollars in stock in Postal Service rivals and customers, according to a financial disclosure form filed by his wife.
The Inspector General’s Office is “conducting a body of work to address concerns raised,” spokeswoman Agapi Doulaveris said.
The investigation comes as the Postal Service is warning states there is “significant risk” voters will not have enough time to complete and return their ballots. The Postal Service late on Friday released letters it had sent to 46 states and the District of Columbia, after the Washington Post reported earlier on the extent of the warnings.
The warning highlighted the possibility that a meaningful number of mail votes in the Nov. 3 presidential election might go uncounted if they are returned too late.
Advertisement
“State and local election officials must understand and take into account our operational standards and recommended timelines,” Postal Service spokeswoman Martha Johnson said.
Election officials are bracing for a deluge of mail ballots as many states have made it easier to vote by mail to address concerns about public gatherings during the coronavirus pandemic.
Republican President Donald Trump said Thursday that he opposes additional funding to make mail voting easier.
Trump, who is trailing Democratic rival Joe Biden in opinion polls, has said without evidence that widespread mail voting could lead to fraud. However, public records show he has requested mail ballots for himself and his wife Melania before Florida’s Tuesday primary election.
Evidence has shown that mail voting is as secure as any other method. Biden and other Democrats say Trump is trying to interfere with the election. Former Democratic President Barack Obama said he was worried that Trump was trying to “kneecap” the Postal Service.
Advertisement
The issue has taken on added urgency in recent weeks as cost-cutting measures put in place by DeJoy have led to widespread mail delays. The measures have included removal of letter collection boxes in some states.
Democratic congressional leaders and committee leaders sent a letter to Dejoy on Friday demanding an explanation for changes he is making at postal facilities.
TOO LITTLE TIME?
The Postal Service has warned some states that allowing voters to request ballots less than a week before the election does not leave enough time to print the ballot, mail it to the voter and have it returned.
Half of the states allow voters to request an absentee ballot within seven days of an election. The Postal Service recommends that mail ballots should be completed and sent in by that point.
Ohio, Michigan and several other states with tight deadlines have so far not pushed them back.
Pennsylvania’s secretary of state asked the state Supreme Court to allow ballots to be counted if they are received up to three days after the Nov. 3 election, rather than on Election Day.
Advertisement
The Postal Service’s top lawyer, Thomas Marshall, also encouraged election officials to use its first-class mail service to ensure prompt delivery, rather than the cheaper and slower bulk-mail rate.
Marshall told Congress in a letter released Friday “we have ample capacity to handle the increased volume of Election Mail that will occur because of the pandemic.”
In past elections, the Postal Service has given priority to all political and election mail, no matter the postage rate, according to workers and the service’s internal watchdog.
“If this letter aims to backtrack on that collaboration or the promise of prioritization of election mail, that would be very concerning,” said Tracy Wimmer, a spokeswoman for the Michigan Department of State, which oversees elections.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-16--Yale COVID-19 Saliva Test Used By NBA Gets FDA Approval For Emergencies

( Reuters ) ― The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Saturday granted emergency use authorization to Yale School of Public Health ’ s saliva test to detect COVID-19 , after a trial on National Basketball Association players and staff .
SalivaDirect , the fifth saliva test approved by the FDA for the disease , requires no swab or collection device and uses spit from people suspected of having the coronavirus , the agency said .
FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn called the test “ groundbreaking ” in its efficiency and in being unaffected by crucial component shortages .
SalivaDirect is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less invasive testing method that requires no extraction of nucleic acid and can use several readily available reagents .
The NBA has used the test in a program involving asymptomatic players , coaches and staff from various teams , after partnering with Yale in June , the school said in a separate statement .
“ We simplified the test so that it only costs a couple of dollars for reagents , and we expect that labs will only charge about $ 10 per sample , ” Nathan Grubaugh , assistant professor at Yale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One of the goals of the research team was to eliminate the need for expensive saliva collection tubes , and a separate study found that the virus is stable in saliva for prolonged periods at warm temperatures , and that preservatives or special test tubes were not necessary , Yale said .
The FDA said the test could lower the risk to healthcare workers from collecting samples as it is self-collected under the observation of a healthcare professional .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
(Reuters) ― The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Saturday granted emergency use authorization to Yale School of Public Health’s saliva test to detect COVID-19, after a trial on National Basketball Association players and staff.
SalivaDirect, the fifth saliva test approved by the FDA for the disease, requires no swab or collection device and uses spit from people suspected of having the coronavirus, the agency said.
Advertisement
FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn called the test “groundbreaking” in its efficiency and in being unaffected by crucial component shortages.
SalivaDirect is seen as a cheap, simpler and less invasive testing method that requires no extraction of nucleic acid and can use several readily available reagents.
The NBA has used the test in a program involving asymptomatic players, coaches and staff from various teams, after partnering with Yale in June, the school said in a separate statement.
“We simplified the test so that it only costs a couple of dollars for reagents, and we expect that labs will only charge about $10 per sample,” Nathan Grubaugh, assistant professor at Yale School of Public Health, said.
Advertisement
One of the goals of the research team was to eliminate the need for expensive saliva collection tubes, and a separate study found that the virus is stable in saliva for prolonged periods at warm temperatures, and that preservatives or special test tubes were not necessary, Yale said.
The FDA said the test could lower the risk to healthcare workers from collecting samples as it is self-collected under the observation of a healthcare professional.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-16--Donald Trump Is Rewriting History On Preexisting Conditions -- Again

He and his Republican allies have spent the last few years trying to take away preexisting condition protections , through legislation to repeal “ Obamacare ” and a series of executive actions to undermine the law .
More recently , Trump has backed a lawsuit urging the Supreme Court to wipe out the Affordable Care Act ― and with it the preexisting condition proviso ― because of a supposed constitutional flaw in the law .
None of this has been popular with voters , which is why Trump is trying desperately to make them forget that record .
“ Preexisting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % by Republicans and the Republican party , ” he said just a few days ago .
Democrats , meanwhile , are trying just as hard to make sure the voters remember what Trump and his allies actually tried to do on health care .
Part of that effort will be a focus on the issue during the Democratic National Convention that begins ― virtually ― on Monday .
Another of the speakers is a pastor and cancer survivor , the other a retired educator with a chronic autoimmune disorder .
Both will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s protections for preexisting conditions have meant to them ― a theme Joe Biden almost assuredly will emphasize in his speech accepting the Democratic Party ’ s nomination for president .
A fourth , newly announced speaker on health care is activist Ady Barkan .
Barkan , who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ― commonly known as Lou Gehrig ’ s disease ― endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts in this year ’ s Democratic presidential race and is perhaps best known as an advocate of Medicare for All .
Biden has pointedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ envisions a single government plan providing insurance for all Americans .
Instead , the soon-to-be official nominee has called for creating a public program that would be open to all but purely voluntary .
The debate between Medicare for All skeptics like Biden and its advocates , especially Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , was part of a broader dispute that pitted progressives against moderates , and upstarts versus the establishment , in the 2020 Democratic primaries .
It is likely to be a source of even more friction in the future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats win control of both chambers of Congress , offering the first real chance in a decade to pass meaningful progressive laws .
But the general election comes first .
And with voters facing a choice between a Democrat ( Biden ) whose agenda would provide coverage to millions and a Republican ( Trump ) whose agenda ― despite his misleading rhetoric ― would take coverage from millions , the different factions seem willing to play up what they have in common .
And that ’ s a defense of Obamacare and belief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notwithstanding their differences over how to get there .
What The Polls Say About Health Care Protecting people with preexisting conditions has always been among the Affordable Care Act ’ s most popular provisions , perhaps because it seems like such a basic principle of fairness : Few people argue that somebody should have to pay higher insurance premiums , or lose access to it altogether , simply because they have a congenital condition , survived cancer or are living with the lingering effects of injury .
But enthusiasm for the Affordable Care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for the preexisting condition protections and the program ’ s other popular features .
In fact , for much of the decade since Obama signed the law , opponents have slightly outnumbered supporters , according to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation ’ s monthly tracking surveys .
This was especially true in 2016 , on the eve of the last presidential election , following a series of reports about rising premiums and insurers withdrawing from markets because of big financial losses .
Although it ’ s difficult to know what role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s outcome , promises of repeal figured prominently into Trumps ’ campaign rhetoric .
But public opinion shifted once Trump ’ s victory and Republican control of Congress made repeal a real possibility .
For the first time , the debate shifted to the parts of the law voters valued and what Republicans were proposing as an alternative .
Nearly every plan the GOP advanced promised to weaken or eliminate altogether Obamacare ’ s guardrails for people , regardless of their medical status .
In Georgia , Sen. David Perdue says in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should always cover preexisting conditions .
For anyone .
Period.
” But in 2017 , Perdue voted “ yes ” on all three Obamacare repeal bills that came to the Senate floor .
And just last month , he told a local television station he supports the Trump-backed Supreme Court lawsuit .
In Arizona , GOP Sen. Martha McSally has made multiple statements along the same lines , including a boast in a campaign ad that , “ I will always protect those with preexisting conditions ― always.
” This is the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2017 , famously rallied her colleagues to vote yes on repeal by telling the caucus it was time to get this “ fucking thing ” done .
McSally , who was also running for the Senate back then , spent the next year denying she ’ d tried to gut preexisting condition protections .
Voters saw through the lie , with a little help from the media , and that ’ s one reason she ended up losing her 2018 race .
The state ’ s governor ended up appointing her to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which was vacant , and she ’ s now running in a special election for the remaining two years on the term .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump’s recent promise of an executive order on health care makes no sense as policy.
He has said the order, which he first announced during a press conference at his New Jersey golf club last weekend, would protect people with pre-existing conditions. But the Affordable Care Act already prohibits insurers from denying coverage or charging higher premiums based on a person’s medical status. An executive order wouldn’t strengthen that commitment.
Advertisement
But Trump’s vow makes a ton of sense as politics.
He and his Republican allies have spent the last few years trying to take away preexisting condition protections, through legislation to repeal “Obamacare” and a series of executive actions to undermine the law. More recently, Trump has backed a lawsuit urging the Supreme Court to wipe out the Affordable Care Act ― and with it the preexisting condition proviso ― because of a supposed constitutional flaw in the law.
President Donald Trump earlier this month pledged that "preexisting conditions will be taken care of 100% by Republicans." Yet since taking office, he has tried repeatedly to repeal and to undermine the Affordable Care Act, including its insurance protections for people with preexisting conditions. Alex Wong via Getty Images
None of this has been popular with voters, which is why Trump is trying desperately to make them forget that record. “Preexisting conditions will be taken care of 100% by Republicans and the Republican party,” he said just a few days ago.
Democrats, meanwhile, are trying just as hard to make sure the voters remember what Trump and his allies actually tried to do on health care. Part of that effort will be a focus on the issue during the Democratic National Convention that begins ― virtually ― on Monday.
Advertisement
All of this adds to the evidence that the politics of the issue have changed, turning a one-time strength for Republicans into a serious liability. And it could have a big impact come November.
The Democratic Spotlight On Health Care
The list of Democratic convention speakers this week includes several people who depend on the Affordable Care Act for insurance. One is Jeff Jeans, an Arizona small business owner who became famous in 2017 for confronting then-House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) during a CNN town hall session.
As Jeans explained that night, he had been a lifelong conservative and one of Obamacare’s biggest critics until he got cancer, giving him a preexisting condition that required expensive treatment ― and insurance. “Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, I’m standing here today alive,” he told Ryan.
Another of the speakers is a pastor and cancer survivor, the other a retired educator with a chronic autoimmune disorder. Both will talk about how much the law’s protections for preexisting conditions have meant to them ― a theme Joe Biden almost assuredly will emphasize in his speech accepting the Democratic Party’s nomination for president.
A fourth, newly announced speaker on health care is activist Ady Barkan. Barkan, who suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis ― commonly known as Lou Gehrig’s disease ― endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts in this year’s Democratic presidential race and is perhaps best known as an advocate of Medicare for All. Biden has pointedly declined to support that idea, which envisions a single government plan providing insurance for all Americans. Instead, the soon-to-be official nominee has called for creating a public program that would be open to all but purely voluntary.
Advertisement
Health care activist Ady Barkan, a supporter of Medicare for All, will be among those speaking at the Democratic National Convention that convenes virtually on Monday. Chip Somodevilla via Getty Images
The debate between Medicare for All skeptics like Biden and its advocates, especially Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), was part of a broader dispute that pitted progressives against moderates, and upstarts versus the establishment, in the 2020 Democratic primaries. It is likely to be a source of even more friction in the future ― especially if Biden wins and the Democrats win control of both chambers of Congress, offering the first real chance in a decade to pass meaningful progressive laws.
But the general election comes first. And with voters facing a choice between a Democrat (Biden) whose agenda would provide coverage to millions and a Republican (Trump) whose agenda ― despite his misleading rhetoric ― would take coverage from millions, the different factions seem willing to play up what they have in common. And that’s a defense of Obamacare and belief in the principle of universal coverage, notwithstanding their differences over how to get there.
When it comes to those broad beliefs, all of the available signs suggest the public is on Democrats’ side.
What The Polls Say About Health Care
Protecting people with preexisting conditions has always been among the Affordable Care Act’s most popular provisions, perhaps because it seems like such a basic principle of fairness: Few people argue that somebody should have to pay higher insurance premiums, or lose access to it altogether, simply because they have a congenital condition, survived cancer or are living with the lingering effects of injury.
Advertisement
But enthusiasm for the Affordable Care Act as a whole has never matched support for the preexisting condition protections and the program’s other popular features. In fact, for much of the decade since Obama signed the law, opponents have slightly outnumbered supporters, according to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation’s monthly tracking surveys.
This was especially true in 2016, on the eve of the last presidential election, following a series of reports about rising premiums and insurers withdrawing from markets because of big financial losses. Although it’s difficult to know what role health care played in the vote’s outcome, promises of repeal figured prominently into Trumps’ campaign rhetoric.
But public opinion shifted once Trump’s victory and Republican control of Congress made repeal a real possibility. For the first time, the debate shifted to the parts of the law voters valued and what Republicans were proposing as an alternative. Nearly every plan the GOP advanced promised to weaken or eliminate altogether Obamacare’s guardrails for people, regardless of their medical status.
The backlash to GOP proposals was a big reason repeal legislation failed to pass in 2017. And in 2018, Republicans lost their House majority. The thrust of the health care debate threatens to prove a similar political drag for Republicans in 2020, especially with the COVID-19 outbreak making the issue such an important one.
That probably explains why Republican candidates around the country are doing precisely what Trump has been doing: Lying about their records.
Advertisement
Senator Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) is still trying to make voters forget she supported Affordable Care Act repeal and rallied her colleagues to get the "fucking thing" done. JIM WATSON via Getty Images
In Arizona, GOP Sen. Martha McSally has made multiple statements along the same lines, including a boast in a campaign ad that, “I will always protect those with preexisting conditions ― always.” This is the same McSally who, as a House member in 2017, famously rallied her colleagues to vote yes on repeal by telling the caucus it was time to get this “fucking thing” done.
McSally, who was also running for the Senate back then, spent the next year denying she’d tried to gut preexisting condition protections. Voters saw through the lie, with a little help from the media, and that’s one reason she ended up losing her 2018 race. The state’s governor ended up appointing her to fill the state’s other seat, which was vacant, and she’s now running in a special election for the remaining two years on the term.
Polls show McSally trailing her Democratic opponent, former astronaut Mark Kelly, who has been pounding away at her record, just as polls show Trump trailing Biden in the White House race.
Advertisement