therealnews--2020-01-31--Black Communities in Brazil Under Threat from US Satellite Deal

LOURENÇA VIEIRA : I ’ m Lourença Vieira .
I ’ m descended of black slaves , mixed with Indians .
I live here in the community of Mamuna .
SPEAKER : Mamuna is a traditional community on the Northeastern coast of Brazil .
It ’ s recognized as a quilombo , which means its residents are descendants from black slaves .
Their families have lived here for generations .
LOURENÇA VIEIRA : This place is special for so many reasons .
It ’ s peaceful .
It ’ s calm .
It ’ s abundant .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is in harmony .
You can grow vegetables or roots .
Everything you plant here will grow .
This land is enormously abundant .
There ’ s water .
The ocean .
Everything connected to this land is beneficial .
SPEAKER : They plant watermelon , fruit trees and manioc , which they grind into a traditional Brazilian flour .
They fish on the coast , just a short walk away .
DAVID PINHEIRO : The fishing .
The planting .
Everything we have came from our ancestors .
If we know how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s because it came from our ancestors , the slaves and the quilombo residents who left this knowledge for us .
SPEAKER : But Mamuna and other neighboring villages are under threat .
Last November , Brazil ’ s Senate approved a deal that will permit unlimited U.S. access to Brazil ’ s Alcantara Satellite Launch Center .
The site is just across the river from Mamuna .
The U.S. has been pushing to access the location for two decades , because of its proximity to to the equator , where rockets can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30 % less fuel .
The U.S. will be permitted to launch non-military and commercial rockets from the site .
Brazilian officials say the new deal will bring in much needed revenue and jobs .
Some residents in the nearby city of Alcantara are excited about the prospects .
FREDSON DO TERRES : I ’ m rooting for it to work out and for it to bring in a lot of employment .
SPEAKER : But the deal could also mean the expansion of the launch center , removing numerous communities and hundreds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the launch center occupies this area here .
This is the base here , but a federal decree approved in the 1980s increased the territory of the base on paper to this area here .
So , these are the areas in danger of being evicted .
SPEAKER : Leaked documents reveal that at least 300 families could be removed by the end of this year .
Quilombo leaders say even more are under threat .
DANILO SEREJO : Approximately 800 families and 27 or 28 communities along the coast are at risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be the first to go .
DAVID PINHEIRO : What ’ s happening is that the Space Center , in this agreement with the United States , they want to come and just push us out like we were animals .
They want to come and say look , this is ours , we need this land , and that ’ s it , ending our culture .
Ending everything .
Ending our community .
If they remove us , we won ’ t have a beach to fish , we won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plants .
We won ’ t have certainty of anything .
SPEAKER : Quilombos across the region are concerned .
JOSE INALDO CORREIA RIBEIRO : At my age , 67 years , if I had to move to the capital city , Sao Luis , what would I do there ?
I have no guarantee of employment .
Here , where I live , I farm and I fish .
That ’ s what I know how to do .
SPEAKER : This not the first time that one of Alcantara ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In 1986 , more than 300 families living in several Alcantara communities were removed to make way for construction of the initial satellite launch center .
They were sent to newly built inland communities .
The government promised to compensate families and provide delivers of food for a year .
Almost all promises were broken .
LEANDRA SILVEIRA : It was really hard when we arrived .
Really hard .
First , we didn ’ t have any estuary or river to fish .
And you know you have to eat every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got here .
We started everything over from scratch .
We only received an empty house , which the new owner had to clean .
There was no farm .
No fruit trees .
Nothing .
And we had to start over completely from scratch .
SPEAKER : The residents of the traditional black communities surrounding the launch site hope history does not repeat itself .
CLAUDIA ARAUJO : The United States has to understand that there are people here : families , adolescents , children .
I want the people who come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mothers and fathers who live on this land and care for it , who have been descended from this land , like my grandparents .
There has to be an agreement that works for us .
Because if there ’ s an agreement that we don ’ t agree with , I ’ m going to fight until the end for my rights , even if I die trying , I ’ m going to fight for my community .
SPEAKER : The story of Mamuma and the black communities surrounding the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There are roughly 3,000 quilombos , or traditional black communities across the country .
Like indigenous territories , many quilombos are under threat , as the process of land titling has been halted and the government of far-right president Jair Bolsonaro is pushing development and backing powerful interests in land disputes .
LOURENÇA VIEIRA : The government ’ s dream is to destroy the history of this people , because they believe we shouldn ’ t exist , because we are black , Indian , quilombo residents , descended from slaves .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like in the past , we are at risk of being extinct .
We are living the same as in the past .
Running the risk of being extinct , and removed from our origins , our communities , our roots , our identity , and our ancestral knowledge .

Dozens of traditional black communities, or Quilombos, in Northern Brazil are at risk of being removed from their ancestral land, due to an agreement that will give the United States access to Brazil’s Alcantara Satellite Launch Center. Families have vowed to resist.
Story Transcript
LOURENÇA VIEIRA: I’m Lourença Vieira. I’m descended of black slaves, mixed with Indians. I live here in the community of Mamuna.
SPEAKER: Mamuna is a traditional community on the Northeastern coast of Brazil. It’s recognized as a quilombo, which means its residents are descendants from black slaves. Their families have lived here for generations.
LOURENÇA VIEIRA: This place is special for so many reasons. It’s peaceful. It’s calm. It’s abundant. It’s productive. Everything is special. Everything is in harmony. You can grow vegetables or roots. Everything you plant here will grow. This land is enormously abundant. There’s water. The ocean. Everything connected to this land is beneficial.
SPEAKER: They plant watermelon, fruit trees and manioc, which they grind into a traditional Brazilian flour. They fish on the coast, just a short walk away.
DAVID PINHEIRO: The fishing. The planting. Everything we have came from our ancestors. If we know how to do it today, it’s because it came from our ancestors, the slaves and the quilombo residents who left this knowledge for us.
SPEAKER: But Mamuna and other neighboring villages are under threat. Last November, Brazil’s Senate approved a deal that will permit unlimited U.S. access to Brazil’s Alcantara Satellite Launch Center. The site is just across the river from Mamuna. The U.S. has been pushing to access the location for two decades, because of its proximity to to the equator, where rockets can carry larger payloads, because launches burn 30% less fuel.
The U.S. will be permitted to launch non-military and commercial rockets from the site. Brazilian officials say the new deal will bring in much needed revenue and jobs. Some residents in the nearby city of Alcantara are excited about the prospects.
FREDSON DO TERRES: I’m rooting for it to work out and for it to bring in a lot of employment.
SPEAKER: But the deal could also mean the expansion of the launch center, removing numerous communities and hundreds of families
NAILTON LOBATO: Today, the launch center occupies this area here. This is the base here, but a federal decree approved in the 1980s increased the territory of the base on paper to this area here. So, these are the areas in danger of being evicted.
SPEAKER: Leaked documents reveal that at least 300 families could be removed by the end of this year. Quilombo leaders say even more are under threat.
DANILO SEREJO: Approximately 800 families and 27 or 28 communities along the coast are at risk of being removed.
SPEAKER: Mamuna would be the first to go.
DAVID PINHEIRO: What’s happening is that the Space Center, in this agreement with the United States, they want to come and just push us out like we were animals. They want to come and say look, this is ours, we need this land, and that’s it, ending our culture. Ending everything. Ending our community. If they remove us, we won’t have a beach to fish, we won’t have land to grow our plants. We won’t have certainty of anything.
SPEAKER : Quilombos across the region are concerned.
JOSE INALDO CORREIA RIBEIRO: At my age, 67 years, if I had to move to the capital city, Sao Luis, what would I do there? I have no guarantee of employment. Here, where I live, I farm and I fish. That’s what I know how to do.
SPEAKER: This not the first time that one of Alcantara’s black communities here have been under threat. In 1986, more than 300 families living in several Alcantara communities were removed to make way for construction of the initial satellite launch center. They were sent to newly built inland communities. The government promised to compensate families and provide delivers of food for a year. Almost all promises were broken.
LEANDRA SILVEIRA: It was really hard when we arrived. Really hard. First, we didn’t have any estuary or river to fish. And you know you have to eat every day.
ANTONIO MARCOS: When we got here. We started everything over from scratch. We only received an empty house, which the new owner had to clean. There was no farm. No fruit trees. Nothing. And we had to start over completely from scratch.
SPEAKER: The residents of the traditional black communities surrounding the launch site hope history does not repeat itself.
CLAUDIA ARAUJO: The United States has to understand that there are people here: families, adolescents, children. I want the people who come to put themselves in the shoes of the mothers and fathers who live on this land and care for it, who have been descended from this land, like my grandparents. There has to be an agreement that works for us. Because if there’s an agreement that we don’t agree with, I’m going to fight until the end for my rights, even if I die trying, I’m going to fight for my community.
SPEAKER: The story of Mamuma and the black communities surrounding the Alcantara launch site is not isolated. There are roughly 3,000 quilombos, or traditional black communities across the country. Like indigenous territories, many quilombos are under threat, as the process of land titling has been halted and the government of far-right president Jair Bolsonaro is pushing development and backing powerful interests in land disputes.
LOURENÇA VIEIRA: The government’s dream is to destroy the history of this people, because they believe we shouldn’t exist, because we are black, Indian, quilombo residents, descended from slaves. We are under threat today. And just like in the past, we are at risk of being extinct. We are living the same as in the past. Running the risk of being extinct, and removed from our origins, our communities, our roots, our identity, and our ancestral knowledge.
Production: Michael Fox
Post-Production: Michael Fox
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-31--10 Years After Earthquake, Massive Demonstrations Call for Haiti’s President to Resign

MARC STEINER : Welcome to The Real News .
I ’ m Marc Steiner .
Good to have you with us .
A little over 10 years ago , as we all know , Haiti was struck by a huge earthquake from which he had never recovered .
One can argue that Haiti never really recovered from the tribute they had to pay to France to become independent in 1804 .
And more recently from the coup sponsored by the US under Reagan , and the popular President Aristide overthrown under George Bush .
And now , with massive demonstrations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moise , accused of being part of stealing the billions of PetroCaribe dollars that Venezuela gave Haiti to rebuild .
All this time , when people are looking at what happens after for the 10th anniversary of the disastrous earthquake , we still don ’ t know how many people died in Haiti .
We don ’ t know .
The statistics of waste , fraud , and corruption are staggering .
As the almost 2.5 billion USAID dollars spent , over 54 % of that money stayed in the United States paying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ squandered and plundered by the corrupt elite of Haiti .
Of the hundreds of million dollars spent for housing .
Barely 2000 houses were built , each at exorbitant costs .
So now , it ’ s no wonder that thousands of Haitians are calling for Moise to go .
But also , they chant , “ And the whole damn system.
” Well , we ’ re joined now by Jake Johnson ; senior research associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research , where he is the leading author of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Watch blog as the author of numerous papers on Haiti , covering the cholera epidemic , aid accountability , and transparency of US foreign aid–or lack of it .
And Jake , welcome .
Good to have you here with us on The Real News .
JAKE JOHNSON : Thanks for having me .
MARC STEINER : You know , when I read your list that you put out about the money spent and all the things that happened in these 10 years , let ’ s just start with the amount of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have spent on housing .
It ’ s amounted to nothing .
Talk a bit about that .
JAKE JOHNSON : Yeah , exactly .
After the earthquake you had billions of dollars , over $ 10 billion , pled by international donors .
And the mantra was Build Back Better .
And at the heart of that was to provide safe and durable housing , right ?
The magnitude of the destruction and the damage and the death from this earthquake had so much to do with poor quality building of houses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local construction jobs , to stimulate local industry and to really live up to that mantra to Build Back Better .
And as you pointed out , what we ’ ve seen instead has been very haphazard efforts in the housing sector .
Minimal results .
I ’ ve looked tremendously in detail at USAID ’ s flagship housing program .
Now , originally this was designed to build 15,000 homes across the country and predominantly right near Port-au-Prince , where the epicenter of the earthquake was around that area .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about 900 homes built .
750 of which were more than 100 miles north of Port-au-Prince and Caracol near an industrial park that was built also with international funding .
And those homes , while they were initially designed to just cost $ 8,000 each , ended up costing over $ 75,000 each .
And there ’ s been no accountability , no follow up , and really no transparency around what really happened and who was involved in that scandal .
MARC STEINER : It leads to so many questions .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your statistics that I mentioned at the top was that 54 % of all that money stayed in the United States inside the beltway , to American contractors .
Never got to Haiti .
And the fact that , if you couple that with the idea we really do not understand or know how many Haitian people died in that earthquake .
To me these are both obscenities , and how can we just let that happen ?
JAKE JOHNSON : No , I think that ’ s right .
And I think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back 10 years later after this earthquake and say , “ Hey , where did all this money go ?
What have we done ?
” But this is the system that that exists , right ?
This is the system that all developed countries have consolidated and continue to perpetuate in terms of foreign aid .
And the way it works is that most of the money goes right back to companies of those donor countries .
So as you pointed out with USAID , more than 50 % of the money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beltway , where I work , in Washington ; Maryland ; Virginia .
Now only 2.4 % of that money of total USAID spending went directly to Haitian organizations , Haitian companies , local civil society organizations .
So yes , some of that money that goes to foreign companies does eventually trickle down to the ground .
But it ’ s not $ 10 billion , right ?
JAKE JOHNSON : Each layer taking overhead , taking salaries , spent on security , etc .
Then you have to look at what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So much of foreign aid goes to these very short term solutions .
Bottles of water after the earthquake who delivers these things , which sure can save lives in the short term .
But in terms of a longterm development , in terms of coming back 10 years later and seeing some durable progress , that foreign aid was never going to do that .
MARC STEINER : When you take what ’ s going on right now in Haiti , with all the money that was given by Venezuela when Chavez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dollars , four point something billion dollars , all missing .
Nobody knows what happened to it .
I was reading this morning stories about $ 80 million being deposited in the President ’ s account .
The corruption has stolen the life of the Haitian people both inside of Haiti by the folks who are tied to the United States .
And in terms of how the money was never spent overseen , and there ’ s no accountability and no one seems to care .
JAKE JOHNSON : Yeah , exactly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the Haitian people are caring .
JAKE JOHNSON : And I think that ’ s tremendously important that that ’ s happening .
I think when you take a step back and you look at the PetroCaribe program , this aid from Venezuela , it was an extremely different model than traditional foreign aid .
That it was money that went to the government , and it was a long term loan at very low interest rates .
But this was money that was actually in the government ’ s hands as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totally bypass the government .
In terms of actually strengthen the government , having these long term impacts , channeling money through the government is certainly a more effective strategy .
But of course there has to be checks and balances on that .
Right ?
And I think what you saw after the earthquake was basically a deal between foreign actors and the Haitian government .
Which was , you take the Venezuela money and do whatever you want .
You leave us alone to do whatever we want with these billions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlling .
It was just as simple as that .
And I think just now we ’ re starting to actually see what really happened with this money and who is ultimately accountable for how it was spent and how it was mismanaged .
MARC STEINER : So let ’ s talk now with the time we have about Chemonics International , this company , and also this kind of coalition for international development companies .
That kind of scandalous thing also overlooked in most of the major media and this country doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
JAKE JOHNSON : That ’ s exactly right .
I think most people when they think about foreign aid , they think of like a mom and pop NGO or a little organization that ’ s just a charitable organization , an NGO .
But in reality , our foreign aid system has seen the exact same developments as our military .
Whereas , you have the military industrial complex , here you have the foreign aid industrial complex .
You have for-profit development companies , which Chemonics is one of , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms of where US money goes .
So of course that has tremendous implications in terms of how that money is actually spent , what portion of it is actually getting to the ground and issues in terms of accountability and transparency .
I ’ ve spent years trying to FOIA information , to get more detailed spending data and breakdowns from Chemonics .
And from other private companies like Developmental Alternatives Incorporated .
And , I ’ ve really come up basically empty handed .
All of these things are considered trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of US government policy .
MARC STEINER : It ’ s interesting , what you just said , makes you think of when this shift occurred .
International aid has always had its issues , but in some ways , it may have worked better in the decades before the 1960s .
And now you ’ re talking about for profit companies controlling aid money .
I mean that in itself seems to be a massive contradiction .
JAKE JOHNSON : Yeah , exactly right .
And I think it manifests itself in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a big effort to reform foreign aid and specifically with the United States and after the earthquake .
There was a big program USAID Forward , which aim to increase the amount of local procurement , to break up these private cartels that run the aid industry .
And yet , as soon as that started being implemented you saw all of these companies form a lobbying coalition and immediately hire a well-connected , democratic leader ; one of the Podestas .
And they were lobbying against these commonsense reforms .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US Congress where the rationale for foreign aid is not the development of foreign countries , but rather how it benefits their home districts right here in the United States .
MARC STEINER : Let ’ s take a look at this present moment , what ’ s happening in Haiti .
There are massive demonstrations , again , not being covered in any way by the major press .
Maybe by the Miami Herald , because of some of the staff people that they have there who actually cover Haiti .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who has really become in some ways , I don ’ t want to over-play it , but almost like a stooge of the Americans who just shifted his stance against Venezuela to appease the Americans who are helping keep him in office .
And people want him out .
He ’ s clearly saying he ’ s not leaving .
So let ’ s talk a bit about the present political situation .
Now , it fits into all the work you ’ ve done in terms of [ crosstalk 00:09:33 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly .
To begin with , a few weeks ago we had the 10th anniversary of the earthquake .
And a lot of people didn ’ t realize that the very next day , on January 13th , the terms of parliament expired because there had not been elections held last year .
So Jovenel Moise , the president of Haiti , is currently ruling without any legislative oversight .
It ’ s a , sort of , de facto rule by decree scenario , if you will .
I think when you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obviously you can go back , over 100 years of the US occupation .
100 years before that to their enforcing of the reparations , the money paid to France for their freedom .
But even more recently , you look at just this post-earthquake period , and I think you have to make the connection between how foreign aid is used and how that manifests itself in the political reality in Haiti .
And so , you ’ ve seen over decades this erosion of the state and the replacement of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Now the implication of that , or the result of that , is that you have a state that ’ s tremendously dependent on international actors .
And that can come in handy when you ’ re trying to get a state to do what you want .
You saw that in 2010 , there was an election held after the earthquake .
There was over a million people still displaced .
This was a very , very difficult context for having an election , it probably never should have happened .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case in Haiti , it ’ s short term stability at the expensive of long term development .
And so they held this election and it was a total mess , as everyone expected .
And yet , instead of recognizing that fault , realizing that foundations for reconstruction for development had to have been based on real democracy , a real mandate from the Haitian people .
The organization of American States was brought into Haiti , without any statistical basis for doing so , changed the results of the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
As opposed to the person who had been there , which was the successor of the President at the time of the earthquake , Renee Preval .
Now , he had become an impediment for those international actors looking to take over the control of this aid apparatus on the ground in Haiti after the earthquake .
And I think when you look at today and the US roll in Jovenel Moise , who is himself the chosen successor of Martelly , you have to go back to that 2010 election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as neutral arbiters , or as some sort of arbiter of justice for democracy in Haiti , their credibility is shot .
And so when they say , “ We ’ re going to support this or we want to see this , ” currently this week , the UN and the OIOS are trying to convene a dialogue to try and bring folks around the table and meet with Jovenel Moise .
But their credibility is gone .
For the last 10 years , Haitians have seen the United States side with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and as we continue to see more and more , pilfered millions and millions of dollars from this country .
And benefited themselves at the expense of the Haitian people .
MARC STEINER : When you look back in the 1990s and the victory of Jean-Bertrand Aristide as president , an overwhelming majority voted for Aristide .
And now you will have Jovenel Moise , clearly doesn ’ t have the support of the people of Haiti .
And so this disintegration of this country continues .
Let me just conclude by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressed into having a crystal ball , but just talk a bit about where you think this might go .
The people in the Haiti or are arising up throughout the island , from everything I ’ ve heard from people down there and reading the reports .
Where do you think this ends up ?
Where does this go ?
JAKE JOHNSON : First , a quick point on Jovenel Moise and his mandate .
He did win an election , but I think you have to note that that election had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Exactly , that ’ s what I ’ m saying .
JAKE JOHNSON : He came to office with less than 600,000 votes in a country of 11 million people .
So you can ’ t be surprised when you see these protests or people not respecting the legitimacy of his “ democratic mandate.
” I mean , what sort of mandate could you ever get with that sort of participation and turnout in a country like this ?
It just doesn ’ t exist .
So I think that ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go forward , it ’ s clear there ’ s been a significant effort over previous months to try and push Jovenel Moise out of office .
And he ’ s resisted that and maintains an office today .
And again , I don ’ t think anybody knows exactly what ’ s going to happen , but I think we have been here before and we can have some idea about what the strategy is going to be from international actors and from the Haitian government .
In 2015 , Martelly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t held elections and was ruling in this de facto by decree scenario for about a year .
And the strategy was basically to name a government and move to elections as soon as possible .
And I think there ’ s a tremendous risk with this strategy .
Because without these fundamental reforms that Haitians have been asking for , without this greater transparency , without addressing the impunity prices , the corruption crisis and the democratic deficit of Haiti ’ s current political class , holding elections is only likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a similar mandate Jovenel Moise has today ; which , as you ’ ve seen , is not nearly sustainable .
MARC STEINER : Well , Jake Johnson , A ) let me thank you for the work that you do .
And I ’ m glad we hear it .
The Real News will stay on top of Haiti , as we have , to keep covering what other people will not cover .
Because this is a hugely important story for not just the Haitians ; for the hemisphere and our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for joining us today .
JAKE JOHNSON : Thanks for having me .
MARC STEINER : And I ’ m Marc Steiner here with The Real News Network .
Thank you all for joining us .
Please let us know what you think .
Take care .

Foreign state donors and Haitian elites have misappropriated and stolen billions that were meant to rebuild Haiti.
Story Transcript
MARC STEINER: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. Good to have you with us.
A little over 10 years ago, as we all know, Haiti was struck by a huge earthquake from which he had never recovered. One can argue that Haiti never really recovered from the tribute they had to pay to France to become independent in 1804. And more recently from the coup sponsored by the US under Reagan, and the popular President Aristide overthrown under George Bush. And now, with massive demonstrations calling for the ouster of President Jovenel Moise, accused of being part of stealing the billions of PetroCaribe dollars that Venezuela gave Haiti to rebuild.
All this time, when people are looking at what happens after for the 10th anniversary of the disastrous earthquake, we still don’t know how many people died in Haiti. We don’t know. The statistics of waste, fraud, and corruption are staggering. As the almost 2.5 billion USAID dollars spent, over 54% of that money stayed in the United States paying our contractors. Most of the rest squandered and plundered by the corrupt elite of Haiti. Of the hundreds of million dollars spent for housing. Barely 2000 houses were built, each at exorbitant costs. So now, it’s no wonder that thousands of Haitians are calling for Moise to go. But also, they chant, “And the whole damn system.”
Well, we’re joined now by Jake Johnson; senior research associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, where he is the leading author of the report Haiti: Relief and Reconstruction Watch blog as the author of numerous papers on Haiti, covering the cholera epidemic, aid accountability, and transparency of US foreign aid–or lack of it. And Jake, welcome. Good to have you here with us on The Real News.
JAKE JOHNSON: Thanks for having me.
MARC STEINER: You know, when I read your list that you put out about the money spent and all the things that happened in these 10 years, let’s just start with the amount of money that both USAID and other agencies have spent on housing. It’s amounted to nothing. Talk a bit about that.
JAKE JOHNSON: Yeah, exactly. After the earthquake you had billions of dollars, over $10 billion, pled by international donors. And the mantra was Build Back Better. And at the heart of that was to provide safe and durable housing, right? The magnitude of the destruction and the damage and the death from this earthquake had so much to do with poor quality building of houses. This was a way to stimulate local construction jobs, to stimulate local industry and to really live up to that mantra to Build Back Better. And as you pointed out, what we’ve seen instead has been very haphazard efforts in the housing sector. Minimal results.
I’ve looked tremendously in detail at USAID’s flagship housing program. Now, originally this was designed to build 15,000 homes across the country and predominantly right near Port-au-Prince, where the epicenter of the earthquake was around that area. In the end, what we saw was only about 900 homes built. 750 of which were more than 100 miles north of Port-au-Prince and Caracol near an industrial park that was built also with international funding. And those homes, while they were initially designed to just cost $8,000 each, ended up costing over $75,000 each. And there’s been no accountability, no follow up, and really no transparency around what really happened and who was involved in that scandal.
MARC STEINER: It leads to so many questions. I mean, one of the things in your statistics that I mentioned at the top was that 54% of all that money stayed in the United States inside the beltway, to American contractors. Never got to Haiti. And the fact that, if you couple that with the idea we really do not understand or know how many Haitian people died in that earthquake. To me these are both obscenities, and how can we just let that happen?
JAKE JOHNSON: No, I think that’s right. And I think you look and so many people come back 10 years later after this earthquake and say, “Hey, where did all this money go? What have we done?” But this is the system that that exists, right? This is the system that all developed countries have consolidated and continue to perpetuate in terms of foreign aid. And the way it works is that most of the money goes right back to companies of those donor countries.
So as you pointed out with USAID, more than 50% of the money went to companies located here inside the beltway, where I work, in Washington; Maryland; Virginia. Now only 2.4% of that money of total USAID spending went directly to Haitian organizations, Haitian companies, local civil society organizations. So yes, some of that money that goes to foreign companies does eventually trickle down to the ground. But it’s not $10 billion, right?
MARC STEINER: Right.
JAKE JOHNSON: Each layer taking overhead, taking salaries, spent on security, etc. Then you have to look at what the money was actually spent on. So much of foreign aid goes to these very short term solutions. Bottles of water after the earthquake who delivers these things, which sure can save lives in the short term. But in terms of a longterm development, in terms of coming back 10 years later and seeing some durable progress, that foreign aid was never going to do that.
MARC STEINER: When you take what’s going on right now in Haiti, with all the money that was given by Venezuela when Chavez was head of Venezuela, billions of dollars, four point something billion dollars, all missing. Nobody knows what happened to it. I was reading this morning stories about $80 million being deposited in the President’s account. The corruption has stolen the life of the Haitian people both inside of Haiti by the folks who are tied to the United States. And in terms of how the money was never spent overseen, and there’s no accountability and no one seems to care.
JAKE JOHNSON: Yeah, exactly. I think it’s clear that the Haitian people are caring.
MARC STEINER: Yes, the Haitian people care.
JAKE JOHNSON: And I think that’s tremendously important that that’s happening. I think when you take a step back and you look at the PetroCaribe program, this aid from Venezuela, it was an extremely different model than traditional foreign aid. That it was money that went to the government, and it was a long term loan at very low interest rates. But this was money that was actually in the government’s hands as opposed to traditional foreign aid, which totally bypass the government.
In terms of actually strengthen the government, having these long term impacts, channeling money through the government is certainly a more effective strategy. But of course there has to be checks and balances on that. Right? And I think what you saw after the earthquake was basically a deal between foreign actors and the Haitian government. Which was, you take the Venezuela money and do whatever you want. You leave us alone to do whatever we want with these billions in aid dollars that we’re controlling. It was just as simple as that. And I think just now we’re starting to actually see what really happened with this money and who is ultimately accountable for how it was spent and how it was mismanaged.
MARC STEINER: So let’s talk now with the time we have about Chemonics International, this company, and also this kind of coalition for international development companies. That kind of scandalous thing also overlooked in most of the major media and this country doesn’t even pay attention to it.
JAKE JOHNSON: That’s exactly right. I think most people when they think about foreign aid, they think of like a mom and pop NGO or a little organization that’s just a charitable organization, an NGO. But in reality, our foreign aid system has seen the exact same developments as our military. Whereas, you have the military industrial complex, here you have the foreign aid industrial complex. You have for-profit development companies, which Chemonics is one of, that is dominating this field globally in terms of where US money goes.
So of course that has tremendous implications in terms of how that money is actually spent, what portion of it is actually getting to the ground and issues in terms of accountability and transparency. I’ve spent years trying to FOIA information, to get more detailed spending data and breakdowns from Chemonics. And from other private companies like Developmental Alternatives Incorporated. And, I’ve really come up basically empty handed. All of these things are considered trade secrets and proprietary business information in terms of US government policy.
MARC STEINER: It’s interesting, what you just said, makes you think of when this shift occurred. International aid has always had its issues, but in some ways, it may have worked better in the decades before the 1960s. And now you’re talking about for profit companies controlling aid money. I mean that in itself seems to be a massive contradiction.
JAKE JOHNSON: Yeah, exactly right. And I think it manifests itself in different ways. So one, there was a big effort to reform foreign aid and specifically with the United States and after the earthquake. There was a big program USAID Forward, which aim to increase the amount of local procurement, to break up these private cartels that run the aid industry.
And yet, as soon as that started being implemented you saw all of these companies form a lobbying coalition and immediately hire a well-connected, democratic leader; one of the Podestas. And they were lobbying against these commonsense reforms. They had a very receptive audience in the US Congress where the rationale for foreign aid is not the development of foreign countries, but rather how it benefits their home districts right here in the United States.
MARC STEINER: Let’s take a look at this present moment, what’s happening in Haiti. There are massive demonstrations, again, not being covered in any way by the major press. Maybe by the Miami Herald, because of some of the staff people that they have there who actually cover Haiti. The demonstrations taking place against President Jovenel Moise, who has really become in some ways, I don’t want to over-play it, but almost like a stooge of the Americans who just shifted his stance against Venezuela to appease the Americans who are helping keep him in office. And people want him out. He’s clearly saying he’s not leaving. So let’s talk a bit about the present political situation. Now, it fits into all the work you’ve done in terms of [crosstalk 00:09:33].
JAKE JOHNSON: Yeah, exactly. To begin with, a few weeks ago we had the 10th anniversary of the earthquake. And a lot of people didn’t realize that the very next day, on January 13th, the terms of parliament expired because there had not been elections held last year. So Jovenel Moise, the president of Haiti, is currently ruling without any legislative oversight. It’s a, sort of, de facto rule by decree scenario, if you will. I think when you look at US relationships with Haiti, obviously you can go back, over 100 years of the US occupation. 100 years before that to their enforcing of the reparations, the money paid to France for their freedom.
But even more recently, you look at just this post-earthquake period, and I think you have to make the connection between how foreign aid is used and how that manifests itself in the political reality in Haiti. And so, you’ve seen over decades this erosion of the state and the replacement of the state by this foreign aid system. Now the implication of that, or the result of that, is that you have a state that’s tremendously dependent on international actors. And that can come in handy when you’re trying to get a state to do what you want. You saw that in 2010, there was an election held after the earthquake. There was over a million people still displaced. This was a very, very difficult context for having an election, it probably never should have happened.
But, as it’s so often the case in Haiti, it’s short term stability at the expensive of long term development. And so they held this election and it was a total mess, as everyone expected. And yet, instead of recognizing that fault, realizing that foundations for reconstruction for development had to have been based on real democracy, a real mandate from the Haitian people. The organization of American States was brought into Haiti, without any statistical basis for doing so, changed the results of the election and put Michel Martelly into the runoff election. As opposed to the person who had been there, which was the successor of the President at the time of the earthquake, Renee Preval.
Now, he had become an impediment for those international actors looking to take over the control of this aid apparatus on the ground in Haiti after the earthquake. And I think when you look at today and the US roll in Jovenel Moise, who is himself the chosen successor of Martelly, you have to go back to that 2010 election. The discrediting of these international actors as neutral arbiters, or as some sort of arbiter of justice for democracy in Haiti, their credibility is shot. And so when they say, “We’re going to support this or we want to see this,” currently this week, the UN and the OIOS are trying to convene a dialogue to try and bring folks around the table and meet with Jovenel Moise. But their credibility is gone.
For the last 10 years, Haitians have seen the United States side with this political movement that has, frankly, and as we continue to see more and more, pilfered millions and millions of dollars from this country. And benefited themselves at the expense of the Haitian people.
MARC STEINER: When you look back in the 1990s and the victory of Jean-Bertrand Aristide as president, an overwhelming majority voted for Aristide. And now you will have Jovenel Moise, clearly doesn’t have the support of the people of Haiti. And so this disintegration of this country continues. Let me just conclude by asking, not that you’re pressed into having a crystal ball, but just talk a bit about where you think this might go. The people in the Haiti or are arising up throughout the island, from everything I’ve heard from people down there and reading the reports. Where do you think this ends up? Where does this go?
JAKE JOHNSON: First, a quick point on Jovenel Moise and his mandate. He did win an election, but I think you have to note that that election had 18% participation.
MARC STEINER: Exactly, that’s what I’m saying.
JAKE JOHNSON: He came to office with less than 600,000 votes in a country of 11 million people. So you can’t be surprised when you see these protests or people not respecting the legitimacy of his “democratic mandate.” I mean, what sort of mandate could you ever get with that sort of participation and turnout in a country like this? It just doesn’t exist. So I think that’s the first point. I think as you go forward, it’s clear there’s been a significant effort over previous months to try and push Jovenel Moise out of office. And he’s resisted that and maintains an office today.
And again, I don’t think anybody knows exactly what’s going to happen, but I think we have been here before and we can have some idea about what the strategy is going to be from international actors and from the Haitian government. In 2015, Martelly, Jovenel Moise’s predecessor also hadn’t held elections and was ruling in this de facto by decree scenario for about a year. And the strategy was basically to name a government and move to elections as soon as possible.
And I think there’s a tremendous risk with this strategy. Because without these fundamental reforms that Haitians have been asking for, without this greater transparency, without addressing the impunity prices, the corruption crisis and the democratic deficit of Haiti’s current political class, holding elections is only likely to exacerbate these tensions and result in a similar mandate Jovenel Moise has today; which, as you’ve seen, is not nearly sustainable.
MARC STEINER: Well, Jake Johnson, A) let me thank you for the work that you do. And I’m glad we hear it. The Real News will stay on top of Haiti, as we have, to keep covering what other people will not cover. Because this is a hugely important story for not just the Haitians; for the hemisphere and our country. And thank you so much for joining us today.
JAKE JOHNSON: Thanks for having me.
MARC STEINER: And I’m Marc Steiner here with The Real News Network. Thank you all for joining us. Please let us know what you think. Take care.
Studio: Bababtunde Ogunfolaju, Cameron Granadino
Production: Genevieve Montinar, Cameron Granadino, Andrew Corkery
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-31--NFL’s Racism Runs Deep, All the Way to the Super Bowl

MARC STEINER : Welcome to The Real News .
I ’ m Marc Steiner .
Great to have you with us .
We all know the Super Bowl is upon us .
And okay , my Ravens didn ’ t make it .
But some of us prepare for this annual event , and there ’ s much more reflect on then just whether Kansas City or San Francisco walks away with a trophy .
Now , not to take away from your chips and salsa , but the NFL is a bastion of racism .
Everything from the team @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reality that even though 70 % of all the players are black , only three of them are head coaches , and only one black person is a GM .
They attack Kaepernick or any other player who stands up against racism , and for building a new equitable society .
And then , of course , many of the owners are billionaires , of course .
And they back who ?
Donald Trump ; and view the players as so much meat to profit from .
Who better to tackle this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ editor for The Nation ; whose latest book is Bad Sports : How Owners Are Ruining the Games We Love , and who wrote The Nation article “ Why Are There So Few Black Coaches in the NFL ?
It ’ s the Racism , Stupid.
” And our generation ’ s Red Barber is here with us .
Welcome , Dave Zirin .
Good to have you back .
DAVE ZIRIN : It ’ s great to be here , Marc .
MARC STEINER : So , let ’ s talk about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t think about this often in this sense ; the kind of racism inside that pervades this , who the owners are , their relationships with the players .
And why should that matter to us , when we want to love to watch the game ?
DAVE ZIRIN : Well , it only matters if we want to watch as conscious sports fans .
It only matters if we want to see the game that ’ s taking place beyond the game .
It only matters if we want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its carefully manicured shield .
It only matters if we know that there are NFL players who say that NFL stands for Not for Long or N-word For Lease .
That ’ s what they say .
Because–and I ’ ve had players say that to me–because they believe that they are just pieces of equipment .
The average NFL career is only three and a half years .
Michael Bennett , who plays for the Dallas Cowboys , he once said to me , “ People think that the NFL is integrated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s actually segregated .
It ’ s segregated between those who play , and those who get to sit in the front offices , and those who get to sit in the owner ’ s box.
” And that kind of segregation is something we should be well aware of .
Because if the NFL is going to be this cultural force in our society , which it surely is , then we should be able to make demands on it to be more equitable , and frankly , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So how do we even get there when you ’ ve… When , for years and years and years , people have been trying to get the Washington team to change its name .
The owner refuses to do that , will not even consider it .
when you have what happened to Kaepernick , all the things that have gone on inside the NFL .
I mean , the only , there ’ s only one team that has , that is not owned by a billionaire , when that would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ?
I mean , what is the , it ’ s a , this is like a private domain , their own plantations .
MARC STEINER : How do you change it ?
DAVE ZIRIN : Well , I think the only way you can talk about changing it is through , first of all , the NFL players association , and the union .
Their contract comes up this next year , and this is a big deal .
We should follow these contract negotiations very closely , because they should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a pipeline towards working in the front office , for their players .
It should contain some sort of stipulation in the collective bargaining agreement , about making sure that players have proper healthcare upon retirement , so they aren ’ t just seen as pieces of meat by ownership .
And I think that ’ s the only way you ’ re going to make a dent in this .
Now fans can make demands , as well , for certainly hiring better coaches , which means coaches of color , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hiring process , despite what they call the Rooney Rule in the NFL- DAVE ZIRIN : That forces ownership .
And it says so much that they have to be forced to do this , to actually sit across the table with candidates of color .
So this is where we are .
We need to look to the union , fans need to be more conscious about it , and we need to be willing to discuss this in uncomfortable spaces , like sports radio , for example .
And we need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and make sure that this discussion isn ’ t whitewashed out of the conversation , particularly now , leading up to the Super Bowl .
MARC STEINER : I mean , and you , when you think about this , it ’ s only been in the last several years that you ’ ve seen a lot of black quarterbacks .
That was the white position in football , right ?
And that ’ s begun- MARC STEINER : It ’ s slowly beginning to change .
And so , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what you ’ re saying is , alluding to the fact that I think that some of these white owners of the NFL teams really don ’ t think much of black intelligence , or the intelligence of people of color , and- DAVE ZIRIN : Right .
You have to go with what they ’ re showing us in practice .
I mean when there ’ s only one front office leader who is African American , and that ’ s in Miami… And not coincidentally , Miami also has a black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell us something about how this operates , and how the systems operate , and how institutionally racist the NFL is .
Because interestingly , even think about the way we ’ re talking about this , Marc .
We ’ re talking about this in terms of , 70 % of the players are black , and only 3 % of the coaches are black .
We ’ re not even speaking about the idea .
What if you ’ re not a player , and you ’ re just an incredibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about football ?
I mean , you see that among white coaches all the time , particularly white coaches who are part of the family tree of certain coaches .
The coach of the San Francisco 49ers–who are playing in the Superbowl–is Kyle Shanahan , the son of Mike Shanahan , longtime coach of the Denver Broncos .
DAVE ZIRIN : Now , neither Mike Shanahan nor Kyle Shanahan played in the National Football League .
But there you have the nepotism pipeline , which exists on a host of fronts and on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Football League .
So if you ’ re a black player , and you can ’ t make it to the head coaching position , what the heck are your chances if you ’ re just a black person who is deeply intelligent about coaching and NFL strategy ?
You basically have no chance to make it to the higher echelons of the sport .
And that ’ s really problematic , on the grand scale of things .
Because we ’ re watching this sport , we ’ re indulging in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sport monetarily , and yet , this is the kind of cultural excrement that the sport puts back into our face .
MARC STEINER : So let ’ s talk for a moment about Colin Kaepernick , who is somebody who really changed the nature of the discussion of football .
And I think , in some ways , brought some of these contradictions to the fore , just because of who he is , and what ’ s happened .
And in what this might mean for the future of football .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ get , never get a chance again to play , but what he did was to stand up to something and change even the dialogue inside .
So talk a bit about what , what that means .
DAVE ZIRIN : Well , let ’ s make no mistake about it , Colin Kaepernick changed the power relationship between NFL players and owners .
He showed that through social media , and through support of the people themselves , that players could be more than just pieces of meat , more than just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a whole layer of players , as well , to be , to misbehave basically .
I mean , that ’ s how ownership sees it , to not act the way they ’ re supposed to act , to not act like good little soldiers , but instead , say , “ Wait a minute , police violence is an issue that ’ s important in my community .
I ’ m going to take a knee in front of all the cameras and in front of all the world before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ESPN was having to have a column every week about which players were taking a knee during the Anthem .
And it had to be covered and discussed .
And so , then , all of a sudden , the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell aren ’ t controlling the messaging of their multi-multi-billion dollar operation .
And that made Colin Kaepernick dangerous .
And that ’ s why he can ’ t find a job , even though he ’ s clearly one of the 15 best quarterbacks in the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand that Colin Kaepernick is somebody who the NFL ownership are trying to turn into a ghost story .
They ’ re trying to turn him into somebody who they can use to frighten players , to stay in their place , to be able to say , “ You don ’ t want to end up colluded against .
You don ’ t want to end up whiteballed ( as Etan Thomas puts it ) like Colin Kaepernick.
” And yet I think the opposite has taken place .
I think Colin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and somebody who ’ s still inspiring players , not just at the NFL level , but at all levels .
Just this past year , you had a basketball players at the University of Mississippi take a knee during the National Anthem , because some Klansmen types were having a demonstration on their campus and we ’ re being allowed to do so .
I mean , that ’ s at Mississippi , for goodness sakes .
And it just goes to show you , that you can ’ t get rid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t erase Colin Kaepernick .
And I think that ’ s something that drives the NFL batty .
I mean , just this past couple of weekends back , during the NFL Championship game , there was a commercial that the NFL showed , about the works they were trying to do , in terms of working with local law enforcement on the issue- MARC STEINER : Right , I saw that .
Yes , yes .
DAVE ZIRIN : Of police violence .
And who ’ s conspicuously missing from these ads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like , National Archives level erasure , in terms of what they ’ re trying to do to him .
But they can ’ t do it completely .
They just can ’ t .
MARC STEINER : Well , I mean , the social conditioning in the economic issues that face this country , man , they play themselves out on the field in sports , all the time .
MARC STEINER : And so , out of curiosity , you ’ re going to watch the game this weekend ?
DAVE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a question .
I mean , let me cover… If I had a job like my sister does , very proud of my sister , she ’ s a teacher in the public school system .
If I had a job like her , I would be one of the boycotters .
I ’ d be somebody who didn ’ t watch , in solidarity with Colin Kaepernick .
As somebody who covers this stuff for a living , I feel like I need to watch , to see the kind of messaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across .
But when it comes to watching the NFL as a consumer , I mean , those days for me are done no matter how tempting Lamar Jackson is and no matter how many Lamar Jackson posters my son chooses to put on his wall .
It ’ s very difficult for me to put to approach the NFL as a consumer , because of the way ownership behaves themselves .
MARC STEINER : So , let ’ s just close with this .
I mean , what you just raised here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a little tongue in cheek , but the answer was incredible .
So , for people who love the game , of any game , but let ’ s say , this game in particular , we ’ re talking about football right now , and how I have to weigh that , weigh the idea- MARC STEINER : That the enjoyment of watching a great football game , or watching incredible folks play this game , with understanding what ’ s going on behind the game , and how you live @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s what you ’ re talking about .
DAVE ZIRIN : And you know whose fault that is ?
That ’ s the fault of Roger Goodell , the Commissioner of the NFL , and all of the cowardly NFL owners who hide behind the shield .
It ’ s their fault .
They ’ ve turned the league into something that ’ s polarizing .
Donald Trump has certainly helped , but the idea that we shouldn ’ t just appreciate the players , and the humanity of the players , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something that the NFL , in the way they treat players , has done .
So I think all NFL fans should take a close look at this collective bargaining agreement and how it ’ s going .
They should weigh in on social media , on behalf of the players , and they should push for players to be able to have more rights and more power .
And I think if they do that , interestingly , I think that ’ ll bring more people back to the game , because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s just rank exploitation .
I mean , if it ’ s where you feel like the players actually have an equity , then it becomes a different moral question .
MARC STEINER : Well , we have to fight against racism , and for economic and racial justice , no matter where we find it , whether it ’ s sports , or it was any place else .
And Dave Zirin , you show us the way in many ways .
Thank you so much for your work and thanks for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Thank you so much , Marc .
MARC STEINER : Always my pleasure .
And I ’ m Marc Steiner here for The Real News Network .
Thank you all for joining us .
Let us know what you think and write those letters to the NFL .
Take care .

For example: Teams with racist names; only three Black coaches when 70% of players are Black; players like Kaepernick are sidelined for life; billionaire owners who support Trump; and players who are treated like meat to be bought and sold.
Story Transcript
MARC STEINER: Welcome to The Real News. I’m Marc Steiner. Great to have you with us.
We all know the Super Bowl is upon us. And okay, my Ravens didn’t make it. But some of us prepare for this annual event, and there’s much more reflect on then just whether Kansas City or San Francisco walks away with a trophy. Now, not to take away from your chips and salsa, but the NFL is a bastion of racism. Everything from the team whose name was a racist slur, the reality that even though 70% of all the players are black, only three of them are head coaches, and only one black person is a GM. They attack Kaepernick or any other player who stands up against racism, and for building a new equitable society. And then, of course, many of the owners are billionaires, of course. And they back who? Donald Trump; and view the players as so much meat to profit from.
Who better to tackle this than Edge of Sports host and sports editor for The Nation; whose latest book is Bad Sports: How Owners Are Ruining the Games We Love, and who wrote The Nation article “Why Are There So Few Black Coaches in the NFL? It’s the Racism, Stupid.” And our generation’s Red Barber is here with us. Welcome, Dave Zirin. Good to have you back.
DAVE ZIRIN: It’s great to be here, Marc.
MARC STEINER: So, let’s talk about this thing. I mean, we don’t think about this often in this sense; the kind of racism inside that pervades this, who the owners are, their relationships with the players. And why should that matter to us, when we want to love to watch the game?
DAVE ZIRIN: Well, it only matters if we want to watch as conscious sports fans. It only matters if we want to see the game that’s taking place beyond the game. It only matters if we want to understand what the NFL truly is behind its carefully manicured shield. It only matters if we know that there are NFL players who say that NFL stands for Not for Long or N-word For Lease. That’s what they say. Because–and I’ve had players say that to me–because they believe that they are just pieces of equipment. The average NFL career is only three and a half years.
Michael Bennett, who plays for the Dallas Cowboys, he once said to me, “People think that the NFL is integrated, but it’s not integrated. It’s actually segregated. It’s segregated between those who play, and those who get to sit in the front offices, and those who get to sit in the owner’s box.” And that kind of segregation is something we should be well aware of. Because if the NFL is going to be this cultural force in our society, which it surely is, then we should be able to make demands on it to be more equitable, and frankly, to be less authoritarian.
MARC STEINER: So how do we even get there when you’ve… When, for years and years and years, people have been trying to get the Washington team to change its name. The owner refuses to do that, will not even consider it. when you have what happened to Kaepernick, all the things that have gone on inside the NFL. I mean, the only, there’s only one team that has, that is not owned by a billionaire, when that would be Green Bay. How do you change that? I mean, what is the, it’s a, this is like a private domain, their own plantations.
DAVE ZIRIN: Right.
MARC STEINER: How do you change it?
DAVE ZIRIN: Well, I think the only way you can talk about changing it is through, first of all, the NFL players association, and the union. Their contract comes up this next year, and this is a big deal. We should follow these contract negotiations very closely, because they should contain demands about a pipeline towards coaching, a pipeline towards working in the front office, for their players.
It should contain some sort of stipulation in the collective bargaining agreement, about making sure that players have proper healthcare upon retirement, so they aren’t just seen as pieces of meat by ownership. And I think that’s the only way you’re going to make a dent in this. Now fans can make demands, as well, for certainly hiring better coaches, which means coaches of color, because they get shut out of the hiring process, despite what they call the Rooney Rule in the NFL-
MARC STEINER: Right.
DAVE ZIRIN: That forces ownership. And it says so much that they have to be forced to do this, to actually sit across the table with candidates of color. So this is where we are. We need to look to the union, fans need to be more conscious about it, and we need to be willing to discuss this in uncomfortable spaces, like sports radio, for example. And we need to discuss it on social media, and make sure that this discussion isn’t whitewashed out of the conversation, particularly now, leading up to the Super Bowl.
MARC STEINER: I mean, and you, when you think about this, it’s only been in the last several years that you’ve seen a lot of black quarterbacks. That was the white position in football, right? And that’s begun-
DAVE ZIRIN: Absolutely.
MARC STEINER: It’s slowly beginning to change. And so, it’s the same thing. I said, what you’re saying is, alluding to the fact that I think that some of these white owners of the NFL teams really don’t think much of black intelligence, or the intelligence of people of color, and-
DAVE ZIRIN: Right. You have to go with what they’re showing us in practice. I mean when there’s only one front office leader who is African American, and that’s in Miami… And not coincidentally, Miami also has a black coach: Brian Flores. That should tell us something about how this operates, and how the systems operate, and how institutionally racist the NFL is.
Because interestingly, even think about the way we’re talking about this, Marc. We’re talking about this in terms of, 70% of the players are black, and only 3% of the coaches are black. We’re not even speaking about the idea. What if you’re not a player, and you’re just an incredibly intelligent black person who knows a lot about football? I mean, you see that among white coaches all the time, particularly white coaches who are part of the family tree of certain coaches. The coach of the San Francisco 49ers–who are playing in the Superbowl–is Kyle Shanahan, the son of Mike Shanahan, longtime coach of the Denver Broncos.
MARC STEINER: Right.
DAVE ZIRIN: Now, neither Mike Shanahan nor Kyle Shanahan played in the National Football League. But there you have the nepotism pipeline, which exists on a host of fronts and on a host of teams throughout the National Football League. So if you’re a black player, and you can’t make it to the head coaching position, what the heck are your chances if you’re just a black person who is deeply intelligent about coaching and NFL strategy? You basically have no chance to make it to the higher echelons of the sport. And that’s really problematic, on the grand scale of things. Because we’re watching this sport, we’re indulging in this sport, we’re supporting this sport monetarily, and yet, this is the kind of cultural excrement that the sport puts back into our face.
MARC STEINER: So let’s talk for a moment about Colin Kaepernick, who is somebody who really changed the nature of the discussion of football. And I think, in some ways, brought some of these contradictions to the fore, just because of who he is, and what’s happened. And in what this might mean for the future of football. Because I mean, he may not get, never get a chance again to play, but what he did was to stand up to something and change even the dialogue inside. So talk a bit about what, what that means.
DAVE ZIRIN: Well, let’s make no mistake about it, Colin Kaepernick changed the power relationship between NFL players and owners. He showed that through social media, and through support of the people themselves, that players could be more than just pieces of meat, more than just extensions of equipment. And he inspired a whole layer of players, as well, to be, to misbehave basically. I mean, that’s how ownership sees it, to not act the way they’re supposed to act, to not act like good little soldiers, but instead, say, “Wait a minute, police violence is an issue that’s important in my community. I’m going to take a knee in front of all the cameras and in front of all the world before the National Anthem.”
Before you knew it, ESPN was having to have a column every week about which players were taking a knee during the Anthem. And it had to be covered and discussed. And so, then, all of a sudden, the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell aren’t controlling the messaging of their multi-multi-billion dollar operation. And that made Colin Kaepernick dangerous. And that’s why he can’t find a job, even though he’s clearly one of the 15 best quarterbacks in the world. And we have to recognize and understand that Colin Kaepernick is somebody who the NFL ownership are trying to turn into a ghost story. They’re trying to turn him into somebody who they can use to frighten players, to stay in their place, to be able to say, “You don’t want to end up colluded against. You don’t want to end up whiteballed (as Etan Thomas puts it) like Colin Kaepernick.”
And yet I think the opposite has taken place. I think Colin Kaepernick has become an animating spirit, and somebody who’s still inspiring players, not just at the NFL level, but at all levels. Just this past year, you had a basketball players at the University of Mississippi take a knee during the National Anthem, because some Klansmen types were having a demonstration on their campus and we’re being allowed to do so. I mean, that’s at Mississippi, for goodness sakes. And it just goes to show you, that you can’t get rid of Colin Kaepernick, you can’t erase Colin Kaepernick. And I think that’s something that drives the NFL batty. I mean, just this past couple of weekends back, during the NFL Championship game, there was a commercial that the NFL showed, about the works they were trying to do, in terms of working with local law enforcement on the issue-
MARC STEINER: Right, I saw that. Yes, yes.
DAVE ZIRIN: Of police violence. And who’s conspicuously missing from these ads is Colin Kaepernick, and it is like, National Archives level erasure, in terms of what they’re trying to do to him. But they can’t do it completely. They just can’t.
MARC STEINER: Well, I mean, the social conditioning in the economic issues that face this country, man, they play themselves out on the field in sports, all the time.
DAVE ZIRIN: Absolutely.
MARC STEINER: And so, out of curiosity, you’re going to watch the game this weekend?
DAVE ZIRIN: Well, it’s a question. I mean, let me cover… If I had a job like my sister does, very proud of my sister, she’s a teacher in the public school system. If I had a job like her, I would be one of the boycotters. I’d be somebody who didn’t watch, in solidarity with Colin Kaepernick. As somebody who covers this stuff for a living, I feel like I need to watch, to see the kind of messaging that they’re trying to put across.
But when it comes to watching the NFL as a consumer, I mean, those days for me are done no matter how tempting Lamar Jackson is and no matter how many Lamar Jackson posters my son chooses to put on his wall. It’s very difficult for me to put to approach the NFL as a consumer, because of the way ownership behaves themselves.
MARC STEINER: So, let’s just close with this. I mean, what you just raised here when I asked that question, I was a little tongue in cheek, but the answer was incredible. So, for people who love the game, of any game, but let’s say, this game in particular, we’re talking about football right now, and how I have to weigh that, weigh the idea-
DAVE ZIRIN: Yes.
MARC STEINER: That the enjoyment of watching a great football game, or watching incredible folks play this game, with understanding what’s going on behind the game, and how you live with those contradictions? And that’s what you’re talking about.
DAVE ZIRIN: Yeah, they’ve turned it into a moral choice.
MARC STEINER: Tight.
DAVE ZIRIN: And you know whose fault that is? That’s the fault of Roger Goodell, the Commissioner of the NFL, and all of the cowardly NFL owners who hide behind the shield. It’s their fault. They’ve turned the league into something that’s polarizing. Donald Trump has certainly helped, but the idea that we shouldn’t just appreciate the players, and the humanity of the players, is absolutely absurd. And that’s something that the NFL, in the way they treat players, has done.
So I think all NFL fans should take a close look at this collective bargaining agreement and how it’s going. They should weigh in on social media, on behalf of the players, and they should push for players to be able to have more rights and more power. And I think if they do that, interestingly, I think that’ll bring more people back to the game, because nobody wants to see something that’s just rank exploitation. I mean, if it’s where you feel like the players actually have an equity, then it becomes a different moral question.
MARC STEINER: Well, we have to fight against racism, and for economic and racial justice, no matter where we find it, whether it’s sports, or it was any place else. And Dave Zirin, you show us the way in many ways. Thank you so much for your work and thanks for joining us again today.
DAVE ZIRIN: Thank you so much, Marc.
MARC STEINER: Always my pleasure. And I’m Marc Steiner here for The Real News Network. Thank you all for joining us. Let us know what you think and write those letters to the NFL. Take care.
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.


therealnews--2020-01-29--Cop Charged for Shooting Handcuffed Man 7 Times

While waiting handcuffed in a police car after a traffic stop , a man was shot 7 times by Cpl @ @ @ @ @ County , MD .
The officer was not wearing his body camera at the time @ @ @ @ @ Police department has already been placed under a consent decree for unconstitutional policing and excessive @ @ @ @ @ .

Host & Producer
Stephen Janis is an award winning investigative reporter turned documentary filmmaker. His first feature film, The Friendliest Town was distributed by Gravitas Ventures and won an award of distinction from The Impact Doc Film Festival, and a humanitarian award from The Indie Film Fest. He is the co-host and creator of The Police Accountability Report on The Real News Network, which has received more than 10,000,000 views on YouTube. His work as a reporter has been featured on a variety of national shows including the Netflix reboot of Unsolved Mysteries, Dead of Night on Investigation Discovery Channel, Relentless on NBC, and Sins of the City on TV One.
He has co-authored several books on policing, corruption, and the root causes of violence including Why Do We Kill: The Pathology of Murder in Baltimore and You Can’t Stop Murder: Truths about Policing in Baltimore and Beyond. He is also the co-host of the true crime podcast Land of the Unsolved. Prior to joining The Real News, Janis won three Capital Emmys for investigative series working as an investigative producer for WBFF. Follow him on Twitter.


therealnews--2020-02-03--In Iowa, Candidates Slam DAPL as Documents Show Expansion Tied to Exports

Ed Fallon , a long time progressive political activist in Iowa and founder of the grassroots organization Bold Iowa , has dogged presidential candidates before the state ’ s first in the nation primary caucuses for more than two decades .
A member of the Iowa legislature from 1993-2006 , Fallon has worked on issues such as opposing war , sustainable agriculture , and in more recent years , the climate crisis .
This year , Fallon and others at Bold Iowa confronted every Democratic Party candidate about their position on the Dakota Access Pipeline ( DAPL ) and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extracted in North Dakota diagonally across Iowa and eventually into Illinois where it connects with the Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline ( ETCO ) .
ETCO then brings the oil down to Gulf of Mexico refineries , and soon perhaps increasingly to the global export market .
Fallon ’ s most recent encounter , one with former Vice President Joe Biden on January 26 , ended with Biden gently pushing him away and telling him to “ go vote for somebody else.
” Though a supporter of Tom Steyer , Biden assumed Fallon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a central part of their organizing strategy in the months leading up to the caucuses was confronting candidates in person .
“ We ’ ve got over 250 people statewide , who early last year agreed to birddog candidates on climate and most of them have been to at least one and some of them a dozen or more events , ” Fallon said .
“ I mean , several people have been to probably 50 events.
” They also asked candidates questions on issues such as their stances on the Green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the climate crisis if they become president .
But it is Dakota Access , the pipeline owned by the Dallas-based company Energy Transfer Partners , that has taken center stage .
The pipeline was subject to the most prolonged and largest mobilization against a pipeline proposal in U.S. history near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota .
“ In terms of local connections to climate change , it ’ s the biggest issue here in Iowa , ” Fallon said .
During the 2016 election cycle , Dakota Access was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it opened for business with an executive order signed by President Donald Trump , who received more than $ 100,000 in campaign contributions from Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren during the 2016 election cycle .
It is the proposal to double the pipeline ’ s capacity to about 1.1 million barrels a day , that is now up for consideration .
North Dakota ’ s Bakken Shale basin , where the oil flowing through the pipeline is obtained via the hydraulic fracturing ( “ fracking ” ) drilling process , currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oil .
Bold Iowa has confronted 17 different candidates on the expansion plan , with nine of them opposing the plan .
Fallon also worries , though Energy Transfer Partners often makes its sales pitch for the pipeline in the name of “ energy security , ” that “ nearly every drop of this oil they want to double through here is going to be for export.
” Fallon and Bold Iowa ’ s concerns are supported by a review by The Real News of investor call transcripts and lobbying disclosures .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global market is the central calculus behind the expansion push—an endeavor Energy Transfer Partners has called “ capacity optimization ” .
In June , when the company notified the Iowa Utilities Board that it intended to double the pipeline ’ s capacity , it also used that phraseology .
For the company , “ optimization ” entails opening up new global market frontiers for exporting its oil .
In September , Energy Transfer Partners acquired SemGroup for $ 5 billion .
As part of the purchase , the company also announced that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 75-mile line that will shuttle oil between two major export terminals .
One of them in Nederland , Texas Energy Transfer Partners already owns , while the other in St. James , Louisiana it acquired as part of the SemGroup acquisition .
The availability of “ export opportunities ” of up to two billion barrels per day of oil at the two Gulf of Mexico-based terminals is the top bullet point in the press release announcing the merger .
Prior to the September announcement , in its August call with investors , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also in the midst of applying for a deepwater docking permit with the U.S. Maritime Administration .
A slew of companies in recent years have applied for such permits from the agency to allow for dredging , a process to deepen coastal area waters and enable heavy Very Large Crude Carriers ( VLCCs ) to come ashore and pick up oil for exports .
The U.S. Energy Information Administration concluded in a 2018 analysis that without VLCC loading areas , the process of doing oil exports is exponentially more expensive .
Federal lobbying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second quarter of 2019 , Energy Transfer Partners began lobbying for “ issues associated with channel dredging and harbor maintenance.
” The company hired former chief of staff for the U.S. Department of Energy under President George W. Bush , Adam Ingols , to do the job .
That lobbying continued in successive quarters for the rest of the year , the disclosure forms detail .
In Energy Transfer Partners ’ next investor call held in November , the company stated that it hopes to begin exporting from the two interconnected hubs by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those plans explicitly to “ optimization ” of Dakota Access .
Exports along the Gulf of Mexico became more likely when Philadelphia Energy Solutions , a refinery co-owned by Energy Transfer Partners and its subsidiary Sunoco , exploded in June and announced it would shutter .
Much of the oil obtained from fracking in the Bakken formerly moved eastward by rail to that refinery , which was the largest on the east coast and equipped to intake Bakken crude , until Dakota Access opened for business in 2017 and changed market dynamics .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ USA—also harkened back to President Barack Obama ’ s 2015 decision to undo the crude oil export ban , in place since 1973 , as a root of the problem .
“ The fact that DAPL ’ s owners are planning to double its capacity with an eye to increasing exports is yet more evidence that removing the crude export ban in 2015 was a mistake that has deepened our climate crisis and made the needed transformation of the U.S. energy system significantly more difficult , ” Donaghy told The Real News .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ crucial factor in sparking the ongoing boom that has made the U.S. the world ’ s largest oil producer.
” According to a report co-published by Greenpeace USA and Oil Change International and released on January 28 , reinstating the export ban would equate to closing between 19 and 42 coal-fired power plants for preventing greenhouse gas emissions .
Since Obama signed legislation that lifted the ban , exports have grown over 750 percent , the report concludes .
Energy Transfer Partners did not respond to a request for comment on the potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Initially when Energy Transfer Partners notified the Iowa Utilities Board that it intended to perform an “ optimization project ” for Dakota Access , it stated that it did not need to notify the agency under state law , but was doing so as “ courtesy.
” “ None of the improvements that Dakota Access intends to make in Iowa as part of the Capacity Optimization require an amendment to the permit or constitute reportable changes for which a notice to the Board is required , ” the company wrote .
“ Dakota @ @ @ @ @ @ @ courtesy to the Board to provide it information regarding the work that will be performed.
” The company added that it would not gobble up any new land under the proposal and it could double the capacity by adding more pump stations and horsepower to enable more oil to flow through the line .
The Iowa Utilities Board did not agree with the Energy Transfer Partners , though , telling the company in a September 2019 order that it must file an application for amending its permit because the proposal amounts to an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recently , the Story County Board of Supervisors in Iowa—the government for the county which houses one of Energy Transfer Partners ’ pump stations in Cambridge , Iowa—voted unanimously on January 7 calling on the Iowa Utilities Board to hold a public hearing to “ investigate how the proposed doubling of the flow of oil serves the public convenience and necessity of the residents of Iowa , when in fact the U.S. has become a net exporter of oil.
” The Board also called on the agency to “ weigh any potential benefits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangers to public health , safety and welfare—specifically harm to our land and water—due to an even higher potential for pipeline leaks and breaks.
” Fallon said Bold Iowa and its allies plan to use this decision by Story County to push for a public hearing in the weeks following the Iowa Caucuses , saying the prospect of a hearing is “ going to be a big deal ” and adding Bold Iowa has intentions to “ really promote the heck out of that.
” And after months of regulatory docket submissions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Partners on January 21 to “ provide expert explanation of whether the increased flow will increase the amount of oil that will be released if a spill occurs , ” the Associated Press reported .
Things are heating up outside of Iowa , as well , extending into the pipeline ’ s point of origin in North Dakota .
Among the groups speaking out against the expansion proposal there , once again , is the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe .
The tribe was an official intervenor against the proposal in front of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commission has yet to make a decision on the proposal , but held a hearing on November 13 .
“ In every era , when the United States responds to demands from those seeking to advance particular economic interests – for gold in the Black Hills , for land for non-Indian homesteaders on our Reservation , or for navigation or hydropower – it has always been the Tribe that has borne the heavy burdens , through the loss of our lands and harm to our way of life , ” wrote Jon Eagle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Standing Rock Sioux Tribe , in a pre-hearing written testimony .
“ In every case , the United States has ensured that the interests of others are advanced , while the interests of the Tribe are ignored.
” “ The siting of the Dakota Access Pipeline , which crossed treaty lands stolen from us and puts our waters at risk of spills and leaks , is simply another chapter in this story , ” Eagle continued .
Greenpeace ’ s Donaghy said that the redux of the opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of climate justice .
“ The resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline shows that frontline communities — in particular Indigenous people and people of color — are no longer willing to shoulder the burden of air and water pollution that comes from oil and gas drilling and infrastructure , ” he said .
A Dakota Access expansion application still remains undecided in three of the four states it would cross , with the company ’ s application to “ optimize ” its pipeline getting the green light in South Dakota in October .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a climate parade on February 1 , two days before the Caucus , a march ending at the main media hub for national outlets that come to Iowa to cover the Caucuses .
The ending point was not an accident , but part of an ongoing strategy .
For Fallon , he said his group hoped to get the media to shine a light on the pipeline expansion plan through the march and by confronting candidates over the past several months .
But instead , he added , the pipeline has garnered far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the months before the 2016 election .
“ It ’ s just been a real surprise to me that neither local nor national media have focused on DAPL , because I mean DAPL was a huge national story for a couple years , ” Fallon said .
“ It is surprising that nobody ’ s picked it up .
”

Ed Fallon, a long time progressive political activist in Iowa and founder of the grassroots organization Bold Iowa, has dogged presidential candidates before the state’s first in the nation primary caucuses for more than two decades.
A member of the Iowa legislature from 1993-2006, Fallon has worked on issues such as opposing war, sustainable agriculture, and in more recent years, the climate crisis. This year, Fallon and others at Bold Iowa confronted every Democratic Party candidate about their position on the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) and other climate change issues.
DAPL brings oil extracted in North Dakota diagonally across Iowa and eventually into Illinois where it connects with the Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline (ETCO). ETCO then brings the oil down to Gulf of Mexico refineries, and soon perhaps increasingly to the global export market.
Fallon’s most recent encounter, one with former Vice President Joe Biden on January 26, ended with Biden gently pushing him away and telling him to “go vote for somebody else.” Though a supporter of Tom Steyer, Biden assumed Fallon supported Bernie Sanders.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY17MfkDifE
For Bold Iowa, a central part of their organizing strategy in the months leading up to the caucuses was confronting candidates in person.
“We’ve got over 250 people statewide, who early last year agreed to birddog candidates on climate and most of them have been to at least one and some of them a dozen or more events,” Fallon said. “I mean, several people have been to probably 50 events.”
They also asked candidates questions on issues such as their stances on the Green New Deal and how they will respond to the climate crisis if they become president.
But it is Dakota Access, the pipeline owned by the Dallas-based company Energy Transfer Partners, that has taken center stage. The pipeline was subject to the most prolonged and largest mobilization against a pipeline proposal in U.S. history near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota.
“In terms of local connections to climate change, it’s the biggest issue here in Iowa,” Fallon said.
During the 2016 election cycle, Dakota Access was in proposal phase. But by 2017, it opened for business with an executive order signed by President Donald Trump, who received more than $100,000 in campaign contributions from Energy Transfer Partners CEO Kelcy Warren during the 2016 election cycle.
It is the proposal to double the pipeline’s capacity to about 1.1 million barrels a day, that is now up for consideration. North Dakota’s Bakken Shale basin, where the oil flowing through the pipeline is obtained via the hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) drilling process, currently produces 1.5 million barrels per day of oil.
Bold Iowa has confronted 17 different candidates on the expansion plan, with nine of them opposing the plan. Fallon also worries, though Energy Transfer Partners often makes its sales pitch for the pipeline in the name of “energy security,” that “nearly every drop of this oil they want to double through here is going to be for export.”
“Optimization”
Fallon and Bold Iowa’s concerns are supported by a review by The Real News of investor call transcripts and lobbying disclosures. The ability to export that oil to the global market is the central calculus behind the expansion push—an endeavor Energy Transfer Partners has called “capacity optimization”.
In June, when the company notified the Iowa Utilities Board that it intended to double the pipeline’s capacity, it also used that phraseology. For the company, “optimization” entails opening up new global market frontiers for exporting its oil.
In September, Energy Transfer Partners acquired SemGroup for $5 billion. As part of the purchase, the company also announced that it will construct the Ted Collins Pipeline, a 75-mile line that will shuttle oil between two major export terminals. One of them in Nederland, Texas Energy Transfer Partners already owns, while the other in St. James, Louisiana it acquired as part of the SemGroup acquisition.
The availability of “export opportunities” of up to two billion barrels per day of oil at the two Gulf of Mexico-based terminals is the top bullet point in the press release announcing the merger. Prior to the September announcement, in its August call with investors, Energy Transfer Partners explained that it is also in the midst of applying for a deepwater docking permit with the U.S. Maritime Administration.
A slew of companies in recent years have applied for such permits from the agency to allow for dredging, a process to deepen coastal area waters and enable heavy Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCCs) to come ashore and pick up oil for exports. The U.S. Energy Information Administration concluded in a 2018 analysis that without VLCC loading areas, the process of doing oil exports is exponentially more expensive.
Federal lobbying disclosure forms show that beginning in the second quarter of 2019, Energy Transfer Partners began lobbying for “issues associated with channel dredging and harbor maintenance.” The company hired former chief of staff for the U.S. Department of Energy under President George W. Bush, Adam Ingols, to do the job. That lobbying continued in successive quarters for the rest of the year, the disclosure forms detail.
In Energy Transfer Partners’ next investor call held in November, the company stated that it hopes to begin exporting from the two interconnected hubs by 2022 or 2023. And it tied those plans explicitly to “optimization” of Dakota Access.
Exports along the Gulf of Mexico became more likely when Philadelphia Energy Solutions, a refinery co-owned by Energy Transfer Partners and its subsidiary Sunoco, exploded in June and announced it would shutter. Much of the oil obtained from fracking in the Bakken formerly moved eastward by rail to that refinery, which was the largest on the east coast and equipped to intake Bakken crude, until Dakota Access opened for business in 2017 and changed market dynamics.
Tim Donaghy—a senior research specialist for Greenpeace USA—also harkened back to President Barack Obama’s 2015 decision to undo the crude oil export ban, in place since 1973, as a root of the problem.
“The fact that DAPL’s owners are planning to double its capacity with an eye to increasing exports is yet more evidence that removing the crude export ban in 2015 was a mistake that has deepened our climate crisis and made the needed transformation of the U.S. energy system significantly more difficult,” Donaghy told The Real News. “Removing the export ban was a crucial factor in sparking the ongoing boom that has made the U.S. the world’s largest oil producer.”
Image Credit: Oil Change International/Greenpeace USA
According to a report co-published by Greenpeace USA and Oil Change International and released on January 28, reinstating the export ban would equate to closing between 19 and 42 coal-fired power plants for preventing greenhouse gas emissions. Since Obama signed legislation that lifted the ban, exports have grown over 750 percent, the report concludes.
Energy Transfer Partners did not respond to a request for comment on the potential climate change impacts of its proposal.
Standing Rock Redux
Initially when Energy Transfer Partners notified the Iowa Utilities Board that it intended to perform an “optimization project” for Dakota Access, it stated that it did not need to notify the agency under state law, but was doing so as “courtesy.”
“None of the improvements that Dakota Access intends to make in Iowa as part of the Capacity Optimization require an amendment to the permit or constitute reportable changes for which a notice to the Board is required,” the company wrote. “Dakota Access nonetheless provides this notice as a courtesy to the Board to provide it information regarding the work that will be performed.”
The company added that it would not gobble up any new land under the proposal and it could double the capacity by adding more pump stations and horsepower to enable more oil to flow through the line. The Iowa Utilities Board did not agree with the Energy Transfer Partners, though, telling the company in a September 2019 order that it must file an application for amending its permit because the proposal amounts to an entirely new project for consideration.
More recently, the Story County Board of Supervisors in Iowa—the government for the county which houses one of Energy Transfer Partners’ pump stations in Cambridge, Iowa—voted unanimously on January 7 calling on the Iowa Utilities Board to hold a public hearing to “investigate how the proposed doubling of the flow of oil serves the public convenience and necessity of the residents of Iowa, when in fact the U.S. has become a net exporter of oil.”
The Board also called on the agency to “weigh any potential benefits to the residents of Iowa against potential dangers to public health, safety and welfare—specifically harm to our land and water—due to an even higher potential for pipeline leaks and breaks.”
Fallon said Bold Iowa and its allies plan to use this decision by Story County to push for a public hearing in the weeks following the Iowa Caucuses, saying the prospect of a hearing is “going to be a big deal” and adding Bold Iowa has intentions to “really promote the heck out of that.”
And after months of regulatory docket submissions, the Iowa Utilities Board ordered Energy Transfer Partners on January 21 to “provide expert explanation of whether the increased flow will increase the amount of oil that will be released if a spill occurs,” the Associated Press reported.
Things are heating up outside of Iowa, as well, extending into the pipeline’s point of origin in North Dakota.
Among the groups speaking out against the expansion proposal there, once again, is the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The tribe was an official intervenor against the proposal in front of the North Dakota Public Service Commission. The Commission has yet to make a decision on the proposal, but held a hearing on November 13.
“In every era, when the United States responds to demands from those seeking to advance particular economic interests – for gold in the Black Hills, for land for non-Indian homesteaders on our Reservation, or for navigation or hydropower – it has always been the Tribe that has borne the heavy burdens, through the loss of our lands and harm to our way of life,” wrote Jon Eagle, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, in a pre-hearing written testimony. “In every case, the United States has ensured that the interests of others are advanced, while the interests of the Tribe are ignored.”
“The siting of the Dakota Access Pipeline, which crossed treaty lands stolen from us and puts our waters at risk of spills and leaks, is simply another chapter in this story,” Eagle continued.
Greenpeace’s Donaghy said that the redux of the opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline symbolizes a tipping point in the area of climate justice.
“The resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline shows that frontline communities — in particular Indigenous people and people of color — are no longer willing to shoulder the burden of air and water pollution that comes from oil and gas drilling and infrastructure,” he said.
A Dakota Access expansion application still remains undecided in three of the four states it would cross, with the company’s application to “optimize” its pipeline getting the green light in South Dakota in October.
Media Blackout
Bold Iowa and 50 other organizations did a climate parade on February 1, two days before the Caucus, a march ending at the main media hub for national outlets that come to Iowa to cover the Caucuses. The ending point was not an accident, but part of an ongoing strategy.
For Fallon, he said his group hoped to get the media to shine a light on the pipeline expansion plan through the march and by confronting candidates over the past several months. But instead, he added, the pipeline has garnered far less attention than the original proposal in the months before the 2016 election.
“It’s just been a real surprise to me that neither local nor national media have focused on DAPL, because I mean DAPL was a huge national story for a couple years,” Fallon said. “It is surprising that nobody’s picked it up.”
Related
Republish This Story Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.