truthout--2020-08-19--Anti-Immigrant Policies Are Not Only Cruel, They Also Have an Economic Cost

U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services ( USCIS ) , the government agency that processes visas , green cards and citizenship applications , claims it ’ s going broke .
USCIS officials are threatening to furlough some 13,400 employees as early as August 30 , after initially planning the measure for August 3 .
The furloughs would add to what was already a huge backlog in application processing , creating a disaster for tens of thousands of immigrant applicants .
As many as 126,000 people already approved for citizenship may not be naturalized in time to register for the November @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency ’ s financial problems on the COVID-19 pandemic , but critics say the main problem is the Trump administration ’ s three-year campaign to close off channels for legal immigration .
This has increased the agency ’ s operating expenses and has discouraged current and prospective immigrants from filing applications and paying the processing fees that provide the bulk of USCIS funding .
The agency is asking Congress for a $ 1.2 billion bailout .
That may seem like a minor expense in the present massive economic crisis , but the USCIS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reminder that anti-immigrant policies have a cost : such policies generate a net economic loss for the great majority of the U.S. population , in addition to causing tremendous human suffering .
The Wall and the Stimulus One obvious example is the cost of immigration enforcement .
The government budgeted $ 24.7 billion for enforcement in fiscal year 2019 , more than two and a half times the cost in 2003 , and one-third more than the 2019 budgets for the other major federal enforcement agencies combined .
Even this isn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump is now pouring an additional $ 11 billion into upgrades and extensions for the 650 miles of fencing on the Mexico-U.S. border .
( Despite the expense , the new or upgraded barriers can be breached with an electric saw that retails for as little as $ 100 . )
Still , direct costs like Trump ’ s wall are insignificant compared to the opportunity costs of anti-immigrant measures — the economic benefits that U.S. society loses by denying full rights to immigrants .
Consider the exclusion of undocumented workers and their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Congress approved in the spring .
The payout that the government offered U.S. residents in the March CARES Act was linked to the recipient ’ s Social Security number , which most undocumented workers are legally barred from acquiring .
Payment by a federal ID makes sense as an administrative matter , but there ’ s another federal ID that could have been used in addition to the Social Security number .
Approximately half of undocumented households file their federal taxes with the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number ( ITIN ) .
By @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government denied the stimulus to millions of undocumented workers , and even to their citizen spouses if they filed joint returns .
An estimated 16.7 million people live in mixed-status families , and many of them were impacted by the decision to write off people who file with the ITIN .
( The HEROES Act , which the Democrat-led House of Representatives passed in May , would allow use of the ITIN in a second stimulus package , but the White House is unlikely to agree to this . )
The stimulus check @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : to help working people get by during the crisis and to help keep the economy running by maintaining consumers ’ purchasing power .
The marketplace , like the virus , doesn ’ t care about immigration status : From a purely economic standpoint , the country needs to tide undocumented workers over — an estimated 74 percent of them are designated “ essential workers ” — and it also needs them to keep purchasing goods .
Excluding these workers made the stimulus from the CARES Act less effective for no reason other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their families .
A still larger opportunity cost arises from the denial of labor rights to many foreign-born workers .
The U.S. workforce includes about 7.6 million undocumented immigrants .
Lack of legal status makes these workers exceptionally vulnerable to exploitation by employers ; undocumented workers receive significantly lower wages than citizens or other immigrants with the same job qualifications .
Various studies estimate that this “ wage penalty ” ranges from 6 percent to more than 20 percent .
In addition , there are about 250,000 people who work at seasonal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ landscaping golf courses ) in the United States through the H-2A and H-2B visa programs ; these guest workers labor in conditions that the Southern Poverty Law Center calls “ close to slavery.
” A 2011 study suggested that many are being paid from 25 percent to 40 percent less than other workers in similar fields .
A legalization program for undocumented workers would almost immediately raise their wages , while guest workers would get the same sort of boost from a work visa program with strong protections for labor rights — along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sanders ’ s immigration plan and , separately , by the Migrant Justice Platform , a set of policy proposals from a group of immigration activists and experts .
The benefits a full-scale legalization would offer undocumented immigrants can be seen in the results of the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ( DACA ) , an Obama-era program the Trump administration keeps trying to end ( unsuccessfully so far ) .
DACA doesn ’ t grant legalization , but it has temporarily shielded nearly 825,000 undocumented youths from deportation and has allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A September 2019 survey of 1,105 DACA recipients found that 58 percent had moved to jobs with better pay , 48 percent had moved to jobs with better working conditions and 17 percent had earned professional licenses .
Their average hourly wages shot up by 86 percent .
The effect of a general legalization wouldn ’ t be as dramatic for undocumented workers who came to the United States as adults — DACA recipients arrived as minors and must attend college or join the military to qualify , so they have advantages like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have college degrees — but it would still be substantial .
Based on the libertarian Cato Institute ’ s estimated wage penalty for unauthorized workers , the pay average increase would be around 11 percent .
Workers born outside the U.S. wouldn ’ t be the only ones getting a pay hike .
Millions of workers in low-wage occupations currently have to accept lower pay because they ’ re forced into wage competition with underpaid guest workers and undocumented immigrants .
The combination of legalization and a fair work visa program would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well .
This wage increase for millions of lower-wage workers — whatever their place of origin — would in itself provide an important stimulus to an economy facing its worst crisis since the 1930s .
During the 2007-2009 Great Recession , Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda , a professor at the University of California , Los Angeles , proposed an amnesty for undocumented immigrants as a response to that crisis .
“ Legalization increases short-term incomes , job-creating consumption and net tax revenues in the low-wage segments of the labor market , ” Hinojosa-Ojeda wrote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an expanding middle class and a more sustainable economic recovery.
” He projected that an amnesty “ would result in a net income rise of $ 30-36 billion , support 750,000–900,000 new jobs , and generate $ 4.5 to 5.4 billion in net tax revenue.
” The current situation is far worse than the one a decade ago , and the economy is probably not going to recover quickly even once the pandemic is contained .
A meaningful recovery will require dramatic measures like the Green New Deal that can create jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environment , repairing infrastructure and building a more equitable society .
But any effective recovery program will also need to include a rational approach to the millions of residents who happen to have been born outside the United States .
Ideally , the U.S. immigration system should get a complete overhaul .
But there are measures the politicians could easily put in place right now : the HEROES Act ’ s extension of stimulus payments to ITIN filers , for example , and the diversion of Department of Homeland Security funds from immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Trump administration ’ s approach ) .
Above all , the country needs long-overdue reforms to the guest worker programs , and the type of legalization program already favored by a large majority of U.S. citizens .
As Hinojosa-Ojeda noted in his proposal for the last recession , a humane immigration policy “ is now an economic necessity , as well as a moral and civil rights imperative .
”

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the government agency that processes visas, green cards and citizenship applications, claims it’s going broke. USCIS officials are threatening to furlough some 13,400 employees as early as August 30, after initially planning the measure for August 3. The furloughs would add to what was already a huge backlog in application processing, creating a disaster for tens of thousands of immigrant applicants. As many as 126,000 people already approved for citizenship may not be naturalized in time to register for the November elections.
Trump administration officials blame the agency’s financial problems on the COVID-19 pandemic, but critics say the main problem is the Trump administration’s three-year campaign to close off channels for legal immigration. This has increased the agency’s operating expenses and has discouraged current and prospective immigrants from filing applications and paying the processing fees that provide the bulk of USCIS funding.
The agency is asking Congress for a $1.2 billion bailout. That may seem like a minor expense in the present massive economic crisis, but the USCIS’s financial troubles are a timely reminder that anti-immigrant policies have a cost: such policies generate a net economic loss for the great majority of the U.S. population, in addition to causing tremendous human suffering.
The Wall and the Stimulus
One obvious example is the cost of immigration enforcement. The government budgeted $24.7 billion for enforcement in fiscal year 2019, more than two and a half times the cost in 2003, and one-third more than the 2019 budgets for the other major federal enforcement agencies combined. Even this isn’t enough to satisfy anti-immigrant politicians: President Trump is now pouring an additional $11 billion into upgrades and extensions for the 650 miles of fencing on the Mexico-U.S. border. (Despite the expense, the new or upgraded barriers can be breached with an electric saw that retails for as little as $100.)
Still, direct costs like Trump’s wall are insignificant compared to the opportunity costs of anti-immigrant measures — the economic benefits that U.S. society loses by denying full rights to immigrants.
Consider the exclusion of undocumented workers and their families from the “stimulus checks” that Congress approved in the spring. The payout that the government offered U.S. residents in the March CARES Act was linked to the recipient’s Social Security number, which most undocumented workers are legally barred from acquiring. Payment by a federal ID makes sense as an administrative matter, but there’s another federal ID that could have been used in addition to the Social Security number. Approximately half of undocumented households file their federal taxes with the Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). By refusing to utilize the ITIN, the government denied the stimulus to millions of undocumented workers, and even to their citizen spouses if they filed joint returns. An estimated 16.7 million people live in mixed-status families, and many of them were impacted by the decision to write off people who file with the ITIN. (The HEROES Act, which the Democrat-led House of Representatives passed in May, would allow use of the ITIN in a second stimulus package, but the White House is unlikely to agree to this.)
From a purely economic standpoint, excluding these workers made the stimulus from the CARES Act less effective for no reason other than a desire to punish undocumented workers and their families.
The stimulus check was supposed to have a dual purpose: to help working people get by during the crisis and to help keep the economy running by maintaining consumers’ purchasing power. The marketplace, like the virus, doesn’t care about immigration status: From a purely economic standpoint, the country needs to tide undocumented workers over — an estimated 74 percent of them are designated “essential workers” — and it also needs them to keep purchasing goods. Excluding these workers made the stimulus from the CARES Act less effective for no reason other than a desire to punish undocumented workers and their families.
The Costs of Exploitation
A still larger opportunity cost arises from the denial of labor rights to many foreign-born workers.
The U.S. workforce includes about 7.6 million undocumented immigrants. Lack of legal status makes these workers exceptionally vulnerable to exploitation by employers; undocumented workers receive significantly lower wages than citizens or other immigrants with the same job qualifications. Various studies estimate that this “wage penalty” ranges from 6 percent to more than 20 percent. In addition, there are about 250,000 people who work at seasonal jobs (such as harvesting crops or landscaping golf courses) in the United States through the H-2A and H-2B visa programs; these guest workers labor in conditions that the Southern Poverty Law Center calls “close to slavery.” A 2011 study suggested that many are being paid from 25 percent to 40 percent less than other workers in similar fields.
A legalization program for undocumented workers would almost immediately raise their wages, while guest workers would get the same sort of boost from a work visa program with strong protections for labor rights — along the lines proposed last year by Bernie Sanders’s immigration plan and, separately, by the Migrant Justice Platform, a set of policy proposals from a group of immigration activists and experts.
The benefits a full-scale legalization would offer undocumented immigrants can be seen in the results of the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama-era program the Trump administration keeps trying to end (unsuccessfully so far). DACA doesn’t grant legalization, but it has temporarily shielded nearly 825,000 undocumented youths from deportation and has allowed them to apply for work permits. A September 2019 survey of 1,105 DACA recipients found that 58 percent had moved to jobs with better pay, 48 percent had moved to jobs with better working conditions and 17 percent had earned professional licenses. Their average hourly wages shot up by 86 percent.
Legalization and a fair work visa program would raise wages for many U.S.-born workers as well. This wage increase would in itself provide an important stimulus to an economy facing its worst crisis since the 1930s.
The effect of a general legalization wouldn’t be as dramatic for undocumented workers who came to the United States as adults — DACA recipients arrived as minors and must attend college or join the military to qualify, so they have advantages like greater English proficiency and are more likely to have college degrees — but it would still be substantial. Based on the libertarian Cato Institute’s estimated wage penalty for unauthorized workers, the pay average increase would be around 11 percent.
A Real Stimulus
Workers born outside the U.S. wouldn’t be the only ones getting a pay hike. Millions of workers in low-wage occupations currently have to accept lower pay because they’re forced into wage competition with underpaid guest workers and undocumented immigrants. The combination of legalization and a fair work visa program would raise wages for many U.S.-born workers as well.
This wage increase for millions of lower-wage workers — whatever their place of origin — would in itself provide an important stimulus to an economy facing its worst crisis since the 1930s.
During the 2007-2009 Great Recession, Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, proposed an amnesty for undocumented immigrants as a response to that crisis. “Legalization increases short-term incomes, job-creating consumption and net tax revenues in the low-wage segments of the labor market,” Hinojosa-Ojeda wrote, and it “sets the long-term foundation for an expanding middle class and a more sustainable economic recovery.” He projected that an amnesty “would result in a net income rise of $30-36 billion, support 750,000–900,000 new jobs, and generate $4.5 to 5.4 billion in net tax revenue.”
The current situation is far worse than the one a decade ago, and the economy is probably not going to recover quickly even once the pandemic is contained. A meaningful recovery will require dramatic measures like the Green New Deal that can create jobs while at the same time saving the environment, repairing infrastructure and building a more equitable society. But any effective recovery program will also need to include a rational approach to the millions of residents who happen to have been born outside the United States.
Ideally, the U.S. immigration system should get a complete overhaul. But there are measures the politicians could easily put in place right now: the HEROES Act’s extension of stimulus payments to ITIN filers, for example, and the diversion of Department of Homeland Security funds from immigration enforcement to disaster relief (the opposite of the Trump administration’s approach). Above all, the country needs long-overdue reforms to the guest worker programs, and the type of legalization program already favored by a large majority of U.S. citizens.
As Hinojosa-Ojeda noted in his proposal for the last recession, a humane immigration policy “is now an economic necessity, as well as a moral and civil rights imperative.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-08-19--In an Era of Pandemic and Protest, STEM Education Can’t Pretend to Be Apolitical

Across the U.S. , the push to reopen schools is predicated on troubling beliefs about schools and families .
Time at home is assumed to result in “ learning loss ” because our institutions measure learning and achievement by standardized test scores , and do not consider students ’ families as a source of education .
Besides chasing test score gains , the driving goal for reopening schools is facilitating parents ’ return to work — regardless of the health consequences for all involved .
However , this summer ’ s powerful protests against police violence and racism have pushed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misguided calls for a return to normalcy and reopening of the economy .
The COVID-19 pandemic exposes the United States — the nation often upheld as the leader in scientific innovation — as unable ( or unwilling ) to use its vast resources to care for its people at the most basic human level .
Yet the country rapidly mobilized its military and police to repress outrage against deep , persistent and violent anti-Blackness .
As science , technology , engineering and math ( STEM ) education researchers , we anticipate that efforts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S will double down on an enduring paradigm which positions STEM education as operating in service of U.S. economic and military supremacy .
We see this “ return to normalcy ” as a failure of leadership in this moment .
It assumes that the status quo was desirable or healthy for students and communities and represents a massive missed opportunity to reimagine the deeper purposes of STEM education , and education more broadly .
In fact , one reason for our current situation is the hyper focus on a nationalistic STEM pipeline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students toward our collective social and ecological well-being .
On June 10 , a self-described “ multi-identity , intersectional coalition of STEM professionals and academics ” organized a one-day strike to withhold scientific labor to confront anti-Blackness in their fields .
This campaign to # recognizes that the ideology of white supremacy permeates all of the nation ’ s institutions , including our existing system of STEM education , whether or not they claim to embrace diversity .
Gross inequities in educational resources and opportunities are well known ; less often discussed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of curricula to challenge scientific racism or question STEM ’ s role in war and environmental injustice .
The need to rethink STEM curricula is also a crucial matter of public health .
The pandemic illustrates how we have become dependent on widespread public understanding of epidemiology as tied to a sense of responsibility for one another ’ s fate .
This is not the type of learning our schools have been prioritizing .
Young people would be better served by STEM education that teaches them to deal with the complexity of problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear-eyed view of politics and history .
Anyone who has spent meaningful time with young children can observe how artistic , scientific , literary , mathematical and ethical questions and ideas animate their engagement with the natural and social world .
Yet our current system often teaches children to compartmentalize these ways of knowing — to the detriment of the deeper learning we could be cultivating .
Teaching students narrow and apolitical views of science also hides the fact that the everyday practice of STEM routinely involves moral decision-making .
This point is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practitioners face and the forms of protest they have been compelled to enact during the pandemic , as well as by the recent effort of mathematicians to expose the role of their discipline in racist policing practices .
What if we were to invite children into science and math as pluralistic practices of making sense of the world that have always been tied to values , histories and places ?
What if we built from their cultural ways of knowing and their deep ethical sensibilities to develop complex views of natural systems as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
In one science education project , researchers , educators , families and community-based organizations have developed models of field based ( outdoor ) inquiry led by “ should we ” questions that engage children in investigating human decision making in their families , neighborhoods , and in our broader social systems alongside evidence and growing understandings of phenomena in the world .
Such approaches support students to see who they are as tied to what they know , how they know and why ( to what ends ) , and present a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knowledge is , and has been , generated globally .
Challenging current narratives of “ learning loss , ” this vision also re-grounds learning in the ways of knowing and relating that are already deeply present within families and communities and recognizes that consequential learning occurs in places they live , not only in school buildings .
For generations , high school students have righteously questioned their teachers ’ insistence that they memorize the quadratic formula or the phases of mitosis .
Secondary math and science are consistently among the most dreaded and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and gendered pathways diverge most sharply .
Reforms have made substantial progress towards authentically engaging students with scientific practices , but fall short of engaging them with related political and ethical considerations .
Our present circumstances highlight the complex social and scientific thinking our world demands and suggest that the standard requirements of biology , chemistry and physics are outdated .
Imagine , if instead of regurgitating the work of Newton , Darwin or Avogadro , high school students were regularly challenged to think about health , food production , energy and transportation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and scientific components .
Thinking about such locally relevant problems as embedded in global systems would better equip learners to deal with pandemics and racial inequities , and better approximate the complex problem-solving required of STEM professionals .
We know many phenomenal STEM teachers who directly take on oppression and teach toward environmental and racial justice , health equity and diverse intellectual traditions .
Such courses go beyond reforms that focus on students ’ development of technical skills and core concepts .
They challenge dominant values and teach ideas and skills in ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and politics .
They cultivate students ’ imagination , creativity , empathy and solidarity .
Finally , the COVID-19 pandemic exposes a fundamental contradiction in the underlying logics of higher education .
We teach future STEM professionals a false reality , one in which the worlds of science and technology — and those of economics , politics , culture and ethics — exist separately .
Relationships between these artificial silos are mentioned in passing , perhaps through an outdated ethics requirement that most students rightly brush off as the “ easy ” checkbox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are subsequently launched into their careers unprepared for the moral , cultural or political dimensions of their professional practice , and thus unprepared to transform the inhumane systems in which they will work .
Fortunately , some brave medical professionals have taken a stand even as their field threatens to marginalize them .
These cumulative conditions are increasingly placing science professionals at risk for careers of anguish and declining mental health .
Meanwhile , non-STEM majors largely avoid any kind of sustained engagement with critical topics in science , mathematics or technology that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may spare students from harsh grading curves and curricula that do not make relevant connections with their lives , it helps reinforce the illusion of separate worlds .
We worry that in colleges and universities across the nation , this is what a “ return to normalcy ” will continue to offer .
In this moment of great peril and possibility , we have the rare opportunity to reinvent teaching and learning toward racial , ecological and global justice .
Let ’ s match the political clarity of protesters on the streets , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own disciplines , to remake STEM learning as not merely a technical and economic pursuit , but a moral and ethical one .

Across the U.S., the push to reopen schools is predicated on troubling beliefs about schools and families. Time at home is assumed to result in “learning loss” because our institutions measure learning and achievement by standardized test scores, and do not consider students’ families as a source of education. Besides chasing test score gains, the driving goal for reopening schools is facilitating parents’ return to work — regardless of the health consequences for all involved.
However, this summer’s powerful protests against police violence and racism have pushed our public discourse to go beyond these misguided calls for a return to normalcy and reopening of the economy. The COVID-19 pandemic exposes the United States — the nation often upheld as the leader in scientific innovation — as unable (or unwilling) to use its vast resources to care for its people at the most basic human level. Yet the country rapidly mobilized its military and police to repress outrage against deep, persistent and violent anti-Blackness.
As science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education researchers, we anticipate that efforts to restore the damaged global image of the U.S . will double down on an enduring paradigm which positions STEM education as operating in service of U.S. economic and military supremacy. We see this “return to normalcy” as a failure of leadership in this moment. It assumes that the status quo was desirable or healthy for students and communities and represents a massive missed opportunity to reimagine the deeper purposes of STEM education, and education more broadly. In fact, one reason for our current situation is the hyper focus on a nationalistic STEM pipeline that does not train professionals or educate students toward our collective social and ecological well-being.
On June 10, a self-described “multi-identity, intersectional coalition of STEM professionals and academics” organized a one-day strike to withhold scientific labor to confront anti-Blackness in their fields. This campaign to # ShutDownSTEM recognizes that the ideology of white supremacy permeates all of the nation’s institutions, including our existing system of STEM education, whether or not they claim to embrace diversity. Gross inequities in educational resources and opportunities are well known; less often discussed, but equally consequential, are the failures of curricula to challenge scientific racism or question STEM’s role in war and environmental injustice. The need to rethink STEM curricula is also a crucial matter of public health. The pandemic illustrates how we have become dependent on widespread public understanding of epidemiology as tied to a sense of responsibility for one another’s fate. This is not the type of learning our schools have been prioritizing.
Young people would be better served by STEM education that teaches them to deal with the complexity of problems like pandemics and climate change with a clear-eyed view of politics and history.
Anyone who has spent meaningful time with young children can observe how artistic, scientific, literary, mathematical and ethical questions and ideas animate their engagement with the natural and social world. Yet our current system often teaches children to compartmentalize these ways of knowing — to the detriment of the deeper learning we could be cultivating. Teaching students narrow and apolitical views of science also hides the fact that the everyday practice of STEM routinely involves moral decision-making. This point is clearly revealed by the dilemmas health care practitioners face and the forms of protest they have been compelled to enact during the pandemic, as well as by the recent effort of mathematicians to expose the role of their discipline in racist policing practices.
Young people would be better served by STEM education that teaches them to deal with the complexity of problems like pandemics and climate change with a clear-eyed view of politics and history.
What if we were to invite children into science and math as pluralistic practices of making sense of the world that have always been tied to values, histories and places? What if we built from their cultural ways of knowing and their deep ethical sensibilities to develop complex views of natural systems as tied to complex views of social systems? In one science education project, researchers, educators, families and community-based organizations have developed models of field based (outdoor) inquiry led by “should we” questions that engage children in investigating human decision making in their families, neighborhoods, and in our broader social systems alongside evidence and growing understandings of phenomena in the world. Such approaches support students to see who they are as tied to what they know, how they know and why (to what ends), and present a humbler and nuanced view of how STEM knowledge is, and has been, generated globally. Challenging current narratives of “learning loss,” this vision also re-grounds learning in the ways of knowing and relating that are already deeply present within families and communities and recognizes that consequential learning occurs in places they live, not only in school buildings.
For generations, high school students have righteously questioned their teachers’ insistence that they memorize the quadratic formula or the phases of mitosis. Secondary math and science are consistently among the most dreaded and failed courses and also where discriminatory racialized and gendered pathways diverge most sharply. Reforms have made substantial progress towards authentically engaging students with scientific practices, but fall short of engaging them with related political and ethical considerations. Our present circumstances highlight the complex social and scientific thinking our world demands and suggest that the standard requirements of biology, chemistry and physics are outdated.
Imagine, if instead of regurgitating the work of Newton, Darwin or Avogadro, high school students were regularly challenged to think about health, food production, energy and transportation as complex, systemic challenges with social and scientific components. Thinking about such locally relevant problems as embedded in global systems would better equip learners to deal with pandemics and racial inequities, and better approximate the complex problem-solving required of STEM professionals. We know many phenomenal STEM teachers who directly take on oppression and teach toward environmental and racial justice, health equity and diverse intellectual traditions. Such courses go beyond reforms that focus on students’ development of technical skills and core concepts. They challenge dominant values and teach ideas and skills in ways that deal explicitly with relationships, history and politics. They cultivate students’ imagination, creativity, empathy and solidarity.
Teaching students narrow and apolitical views of science also hides the fact that the everyday practice of STEM routinely involves moral decision-making.
Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic exposes a fundamental contradiction in the underlying logics of higher education. We teach future STEM professionals a false reality, one in which the worlds of science and technology — and those of economics, politics, culture and ethics — exist separately. Relationships between these artificial silos are mentioned in passing, perhaps through an outdated ethics requirement that most students rightly brush off as the “easy” checkbox in their otherwise rigorous curriculum. Students are subsequently launched into their careers unprepared for the moral, cultural or political dimensions of their professional practice, and thus unprepared to transform the inhumane systems in which they will work. Fortunately, some brave medical professionals have taken a stand even as their field threatens to marginalize them. These cumulative conditions are increasingly placing science professionals at risk for careers of anguish and declining mental health.
Meanwhile, non-STEM majors largely avoid any kind of sustained engagement with critical topics in science, mathematics or technology that nonetheless shape their lives. While this may spare students from harsh grading curves and curricula that do not make relevant connections with their lives, it helps reinforce the illusion of separate worlds. We worry that in colleges and universities across the nation, this is what a “return to normalcy” will continue to offer.
In this moment of great peril and possibility, we have the rare opportunity to reinvent teaching and learning toward racial, ecological and global justice. Let’s match the political clarity of protesters on the streets, and STEM professionals reexamining the character of their own disciplines, to remake STEM learning as not merely a technical and economic pursuit, but a moral and ethical one.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-08-20--Trump Petitions Supreme Court to Let Him Block Users on Twitter Again

President Donald Trump has made a formal request to the United States Supreme Court to reinstate his legal ability to block users on social media .
U.S. acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall filed a motion on Trump ’ s behalf to the High Court on Thursday , arguing that a lower court ’ s ruling last year requiring the president to unblock several Twitter users was improper .
Wall argued in his petition to the Court that Trump ’ s account is a personal one , not used for official business , and thus he has the same rights as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ functions that Twitter affords to users .
“ President Trump ’ s ability to use the features of his personal Twitter account , including the blocking function , are independent of his presidential office , ” the brief to the Supreme Court read .
“ Blocking third-party accounts from interacting with the @ realDonaldTrump account is a purely personal action that does not involve any ‘ right or privilege created by the State.
’ ” The petition further alleged that the decision from the lower court , if left to stand , may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social media accounts in a way that would benefit the American people .
“ Denying him the power to exclude third parties ’ accounts from his personal account — a power that every other owner of a Twitter account possesses — would deter holders of his Office from using new technology to efficiently communicate to a broad public audience , ” the brief read .
A three-judge panel unanimously ruled in 2019 that Trump did not have the right to block users on the social media platform , agreeing with a separate court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s account wasn ’ t personal because he used it to make official pronouncements .
“ We conclude that the evidence of the official nature of the account is overwhelming , ” Judge Barrington Parker , writing the unanimous ruling of the court , said .
“ We also conclude that once the president has chosen a platform and opened up its interactive space to millions of users and participants , he may not selectively exclude those whose views he disagrees with.
” In order for the Supreme Court to hear the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least four of the nine sitting justices must be granted .
It ’ s unclear whether the Court will agree to hear the case or not at this time , but whatever choice they make will likely shape First Amendment protections on the internet , including the right of users on social media to petition government leaders in the U.S. , for years to come .
Jameel Jaffer , executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University , which originally won the case on behalf of Twitter users to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , called on the Supreme Court to reject Trump ’ s plea to reinstate his blocking ability .
“ This case stands for a principle that is fundamental to our democracy and basically synonymous with the First Amendment : government officials can ’ t exclude people from public forums simply because they disagree with their political views , ” Jaffer said .

President Donald Trump has made a formal request to the United States Supreme Court to reinstate his legal ability to block users on social media.
U.S. acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall filed a motion on Trump’s behalf to the High Court on Thursday, arguing that a lower court’s ruling last year requiring the president to unblock several Twitter users was improper. Wall argued in his petition to the Court that Trump’s account is a personal one, not used for official business, and thus he has the same rights as any other account to utilize the blocking functions that Twitter affords to users.
“President Trump’s ability to use the features of his personal Twitter account, including the blocking function, are independent of his presidential office,” the brief to the Supreme Court read. “Blocking third-party accounts from interacting with the @realDonaldTrump account is a purely personal action that does not involve any ‘right or privilege created by the State.’”
The petition further alleged that the decision from the lower court, if left to stand, may result in future presidents not utilizing their social media accounts in a way that would benefit the American people.
“Denying him the power to exclude third parties’ accounts from his personal account — a power that every other owner of a Twitter account possesses — would deter holders of his Office from using new technology to efficiently communicate to a broad public audience,” the brief read.
A three-judge panel unanimously ruled in 2019 that Trump did not have the right to block users on the social media platform, agreeing with a separate court ruling one year prior that the president’s account wasn’t personal because he used it to make official pronouncements.
“We conclude that the evidence of the official nature of the account is overwhelming,” Judge Barrington Parker, writing the unanimous ruling of the court, said. “We also conclude that once the president has chosen a platform and opened up its interactive space to millions of users and participants, he may not selectively exclude those whose views he disagrees with.”
In order for the Supreme Court to hear the case, a writ of certiorari from at least four of the nine sitting justices must be granted. It’s unclear whether the Court will agree to hear the case or not at this time, but whatever choice they make will likely shape First Amendment protections on the internet, including the right of users on social media to petition government leaders in the U.S., for years to come.
Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which originally won the case on behalf of Twitter users to limit Trump’s blocking of users, called on the Supreme Court to reject Trump’s plea to reinstate his blocking ability.
“This case stands for a principle that is fundamental to our democracy and basically synonymous with the First Amendment: government officials can’t exclude people from public forums simply because they disagree with their political views,” Jaffer said.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-08-20--Latinx Democrats Received the Same Number of DNC Prime-Time Slots as Republicans

On the first night of the Democratic National Convention ( DNC ) , four Republicans spoke in support of former Vice President Joe Biden .
That ’ s the same as the number of Latinxs who will be given time to speak during prime time for the entire week of the convention .
While the first face to appear on-screen during the first-ever virtual DNC was Eva Longoria , the activist and actor of “ Desperate Housewives ” fame , only three other Latinxs received prime-time billing : Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto ( D-Nevada ) , the first ever Latina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was given 120 seconds to speak the first night .
Gov .
Michelle Lujan Grisham ( D-New Mexico ) was given a short slot to speak on Wednesday .
And the most prominent Latina in the Democratic Party , Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-New York ) , only spoke for 97 seconds on Tuesday .
The DNC ’ s decision to limit Latinx voices baffled some observers — in 2020 , Latinx voters will be second only to white voters as the largest eligible voting bloc in the country .
Especially in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ itself as centered on racial justice , it was confusing , to say the least , that Latinx issues weren ’ t more highlighted .
However , while minimized in the nightly prime-time coverage , Latinx Democrats took their own space during less prominent daytime sessions : On Monday and Wednesday , conference calls built around the Congressional Hispanic Caucus became a space to amplify the seriousness and vigor of activism taking place among Latinx Democrats .
The Hispanic Caucus seems to be aimed in part toward giving space to Latinx leaders who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the main proceedings .
One of the more prominent snubs of the convention was made toward Julián Castro , the former secretary of Housing and Urban Development and former San Antonio mayor who ran for the 2020 Democratic nomination .
Despite having given a historic keynote address during the 2012 DNC , Castro was not invited to speak at this year ’ s convention , despite a # LetJulianSpeak campaign on social media .
While Castro was ignored in the DNC ’ s main proceedings , the Hispanic Caucus invited the former secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , during its first session in the early afternoon .
After being introduced to an instrumental rendition of “ Oye Como Va , ” Castro gave a short speech : “ I only have a few minutes to speak to you today , so I thought that I should get right to the point , ” Castro said .
“ I don ’ t have to tell the folks on this call that the Latino community is in a state of emergency.
” Castro went on to describe how the COVID-19 pandemic has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vast majority of Latinxs have not had the option of working from home , and the community has formed one of the bedrocks of the essential workforce — as nurses , doctors , fieldworkers , grocery store clerks , delivery people , and other critical workers .
This work , as well as environmental and health inequities , has led Latinxs — alongside Black and Indigenous people — to both catch the virus and become hospitalized at horrifyingly higher rates than white people .
Castro ’ s short address set the tone for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a crisis — and standing in solidarity with one another .
But while the prominent Latino gave a stirring keynote , the proceedings made one fact clear : It is Latinas who are the future of the Party .
The second meeting of the Hispanic Caucus , broadcast live on Wednesday , centered the work of Latina activists and politicians .
Latinas are one of the fastest-growing electorates in the country ; historically , they ’ ve also been one of the most disenfranchised .
Increased turnout among Latinas could turn the tide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in such critical states as Texas , Florida and Arizona .
An introductory video to the day ’ s session highlighted the work of organizers with ¡Mujeres Mobilized !
, a DNC Latina-led effort to get out the Latina Vote .
A collection of young women and femmes from around the country gave short descriptions of their work : “ I want to empower my community , and win the representation that we deserve , ” Tess Ortega , an organizer in Austin , Texas , said .
Christina Lopez , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about overcoming gender stereotypes to become a leader in her family and her community .
And Cynthia Jasso-Rotunno , Latinx political director for the DNC , offered strong words about the importance of Latinas in political advocacy : “ At a time when the Latino community is often used as a political wedge issue , it ’ s critical that we tell our own stories and push back on the falsehoods and fear tactics that attempt to paint us as invaders .
Latinas are often the leaders and influencers of our families and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to expand this electorate.
” Other speakers and guests during the two days of the Hispanic Caucus conferences included Latinx candidates running for office , like Candace Valenzuela , who is running for Congress in Texas ’ s 24th district , as well as members of the Hispanic Caucus , like Castro ’ s twin brother Rep. Joaquin Castro ( D-Texas ) .
It was clear that , besides the limited number of Latinx voices , the DNC also struggled to find its message on immigration , an issue of serious importance for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before segments about immigration ran in prime time .
Though the night included a powerful video featuring voices from a family whose mother was deported in 2018 , the most prominent speaker on immigration was former President Barack Obama .
The irony of Obama ’ s speech was likely not lost on many Latinxs who had loved ones deported under the former president — in his eight-year term , Obama deported more people , at a faster average rate , than any other president in history , including Trump .
Today , many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cages ” actually come from 2014 , a year in which Obama kept thousands of unaccompanied Central American children behind bars , before eventually deporting the majority of the minors , who had fled a historic wave of violence in El Salvador and Honduras .
Obama and the Democrats ’ troubled history on immigration has endangered the reliability of the Latinx vote .
While Biden has spoken of a deportation moratorium , such a policy does not appear in his official platform .
Given Biden ’ s lack of emphasis on the issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the man many see as the “ deporter-in-chief , ” support for Biden within the Latinx community has been lackluster .
In the primary , Latinxs overwhelmingly supported Biden ’ s opponent , Sen. Bernie Sanders ( besides the matter of immigration , Latinx voters tend to support social infrastructure and public investment at a higher average than other groups ) .
More than simple formality , the DNC ’ s set list might speak to who Biden sees as his base : Non-Latinx voters .
While in 2020 there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters showing up for Trump , depressed turnout is a real threat for Democrats — and the future of the Party ’ s relationship with Latinxs is also in doubt .
During the same week as the DNC , Castro told Axios that the country “ could see a potential slide of Latino support for Democrats , ” even after a Biden victory in November .
While many of the people who appeared on screen spoke of the importance of electing Biden to replace Donald Trump in November , much of the messaging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state offices .
When Castro gave his keynote , it was hard to detect any enthusiasm in his voice when he declared , “ We need to change this country for the better by electing Joe Biden for president in November.
” But passion returned to his speech as he went on to say , “ And [ electing ] senators , governors , people up and down the ballot .
”

On the first night of the Democratic National Convention (DNC), four Republicans spoke in support of former Vice President Joe Biden. That’s the same as the number of Latinxs who will be given time to speak during prime time for the entire week of the convention. While the first face to appear on-screen during the first-ever virtual DNC was Eva Longoria, the activist and actor of “Desperate Housewives” fame, only three other Latinxs received prime-time billing: Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nevada), the first ever Latina to serve in the U.S. senate, was given 120 seconds to speak the first night. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-New Mexico) was given a short slot to speak on Wednesday. And the most prominent Latina in the Democratic Party, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York), only spoke for 97 seconds on Tuesday.
The DNC’s decision to limit Latinx voices baffled some observers — in 2020, Latinx voters will be second only to white voters as the largest eligible voting bloc in the country. Especially in the midst of a Biden campaign that bills itself as centered on racial justice, it was confusing, to say the least, that Latinx issues weren’t more highlighted.
However, while minimized in the nightly prime-time coverage, Latinx Democrats took their own space during less prominent daytime sessions: On Monday and Wednesday, conference calls built around the Congressional Hispanic Caucus became a space to amplify the seriousness and vigor of activism taking place among Latinx Democrats.
The Hispanic Caucus seems to be aimed in part toward giving space to Latinx leaders who were not given time to speak during the main proceedings. One of the more prominent snubs of the convention was made toward Julián Castro, the former secretary of Housing and Urban Development and former San Antonio mayor who ran for the 2020 Democratic nomination. Despite having given a historic keynote address during the 2012 DNC, Castro was not invited to speak at this year’s convention, despite a #LetJulianSpeak campaign on social media.
While Castro was ignored in the DNC’s main proceedings, the Hispanic Caucus invited the former secretary to give its keynote address on Monday, during its first session in the early afternoon. After being introduced to an instrumental rendition of “Oye Como Va,” Castro gave a short speech: “I only have a few minutes to speak to you today, so I thought that I should get right to the point,” Castro said. “I don’t have to tell the folks on this call that the Latino community is in a state of emergency.”
Castro went on to describe how the COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked unique devastation on Latinxs. The vast majority of Latinxs have not had the option of working from home, and the community has formed one of the bedrocks of the essential workforce — as nurses, doctors, fieldworkers, grocery store clerks, delivery people, and other critical workers. This work, as well as environmental and health inequities, has led Latinxs — alongside Black and Indigenous people — to both catch the virus and become hospitalized at horrifyingly higher rates than white people.
In 2020, Latinx voters will be second only to white voters as the largest eligible voting bloc in the country.
Castro’s short address set the tone for members of a diverse community facing down a crisis — and standing in solidarity with one another. But while the prominent Latino gave a stirring keynote, the proceedings made one fact clear: It is Latinas who are the future of the Party.
The second meeting of the Hispanic Caucus, broadcast live on Wednesday, centered the work of Latina activists and politicians. Latinas are one of the fastest-growing electorates in the country; historically, they’ve also been one of the most disenfranchised. Increased turnout among Latinas could turn the tide of this election, and future elections, in such critical states as Texas, Florida and Arizona.
An introductory video to the day’s session highlighted the work of organizers with ¡Mujeres Mobilized!, a DNC Latina-led effort to get out the Latina Vote. A collection of young women and femmes from around the country gave short descriptions of their work: “I want to empower my community, and win the representation that we deserve,” Tess Ortega, an organizer in Austin, Texas, said. Christina Lopez, a regional organizer in Las Vegas, spoke about overcoming gender stereotypes to become a leader in her family and her community. And Cynthia Jasso-Rotunno, Latinx political director for the DNC, offered strong words about the importance of Latinas in political advocacy: “At a time when the Latino community is often used as a political wedge issue, it’s critical that we tell our own stories and push back on the falsehoods and fear tactics that attempt to paint us as invaders. Latinas are often the leaders and influencers of our families and a vital part of the organizing strategy to expand this electorate.”
Other speakers and guests during the two days of the Hispanic Caucus conferences included Latinx candidates running for office, like Candace Valenzuela, who is running for Congress in Texas’s 24th district, as well as members of the Hispanic Caucus, like Castro’s twin brother Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas).
It was clear that, besides the limited number of Latinx voices, the DNC also struggled to find its message on immigration, an issue of serious importance for many Latinxs. It took until Wednesday before segments about immigration ran in prime time. Though the night included a powerful video featuring voices from a family whose mother was deported in 2018, the most prominent speaker on immigration was former President Barack Obama. The irony of Obama’s speech was likely not lost on many Latinxs who had loved ones deported under the former president — in his eight-year term, Obama deported more people, at a faster average rate, than any other president in history, including Trump. Today, many of the images of “kids in cages” actually come from 2014, a year in which Obama kept thousands of unaccompanied Central American children behind bars, before eventually deporting the majority of the minors, who had fled a historic wave of violence in El Salvador and Honduras.
While Biden has spoken of a deportation moratorium, such a policy does not appear in his official platform.
Obama and the Democrats’ troubled history on immigration has endangered the reliability of the Latinx vote. While Biden has spoken of a deportation moratorium, such a policy does not appear in his official platform. Given Biden’s lack of emphasis on the issue, and his status as vice president to the man many see as the “deporter-in-chief,” support for Biden within the Latinx community has been lackluster. In the primary, Latinxs overwhelmingly supported Biden’s opponent, Sen. Bernie Sanders (besides the matter of immigration, Latinx voters tend to support social infrastructure and public investment at a higher average than other groups). More than simple formality, the DNC’s set list might speak to who Biden sees as his base: Non-Latinx voters.
While in 2020 there’s little risk of a majority of Latinx voters showing up for Trump, depressed turnout is a real threat for Democrats — and the future of the Party’s relationship with Latinxs is also in doubt. During the same week as the DNC, Castro told Axios that the country “could see a potential slide of Latino support for Democrats,” even after a Biden victory in November.
While many of the people who appeared on screen spoke of the importance of electing Biden to replace Donald Trump in November, much of the messaging focused on down-ballot races for Congress and state offices. When Castro gave his keynote, it was hard to detect any enthusiasm in his voice when he declared, “We need to change this country for the better by electing Joe Biden for president in November.” But passion returned to his speech as he went on to say, “And [electing] senators, governors, people up and down the ballot.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-08-20--Steve Bannon Charged With Stealing From Charity He Created to Fund Trump’s Wall

Steve Bannon , who served as President Trump ’ s chief White House strategist up until August 2017 , was arrested Thursday on charges relating to misusing funds raised for constructing a private wall on the U.S.-Mexico border .
Acting Manhattan U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss charged Bannon and three other individuals with defrauding donors by promising to spend the money on building border wall projects located on private lands through an organization called “ We Build the Wall.
” Instead , they raised millions of dollars and used it for their own personal expenses .
“ As alleged , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , capitalizing on their interest in funding a border wall to raise millions of dollars , under the false pretense that all of that money would be spent on construction , ” Strauss said .
“ We Build the Wall ” is a nonprofit organization dedicated to funding and building a wall on the Mexico-U.S. border .
It was created by Brian Kolfage , a veteran who said he started the nonprofit because was upset with lawmakers in Washington for blocking Trump ’ s attempts to construct a wall , which was one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Kolfage had previously promised that he would “ not take a penny of compensation ” from the funds raised for “ We Build the Wall.
” But according to the criminal complaint filed against the four individuals on Thursday , Kolfage received more than $ 350,000 from the organization ’ s coffers .
Each of the four members involved has been charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering .
Bannon had served as Trump ’ s White House chief strategist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the week after the “ Unite the Right ” rally in Charlottesville , Virginia , which resulted in a number of injuries and death of activist Heather Heyer .
Trump and Bannon have maintained an uneasy relationship after the latter left the White House .
In 2019 , Bannon praised Trump while discussing potential Democratic candidates that might run against him in the 2020 election .
“ Nice to see that one of my best pupils is still a giant Trump fan , ” Trump tweeted at the time .
But Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a three-mile border wall project the group had built in Texas showed signs of deterioration .
Rainfall from Hurricane Hanna earlier this year resulted in erosion that threatened the stability of the wall the organization built on private land alongside the Rio Grande ( though structural issues also existed before the hurricane ’ s arrival ) .
Trump described the failed project as a purposeful slight against him .
“ It was only done to make me look bad , ” he said .
Though the president added that he had disagreed from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being produced , it appears that members of his own family were in support of the project .
A quote from Donald Trump Jr. is featured on the group ’ s website , in which he gives glowing praise to its ambitions .
“ This is private enterprise at its finest , ” Trump Jr. is quoted as saying .
“ Doing it better , faster , cheaper than anything else and what you guys are doing is pretty amazing .
”

Steve Bannon, who served as President Trump’s chief White House strategist up until August 2017, was arrested Thursday on charges relating to misusing funds raised for constructing a private wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.
Acting Manhattan U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss charged Bannon and three other individuals with defrauding donors by promising to spend the money on building border wall projects located on private lands through an organization called “We Build the Wall.” Instead, they raised millions of dollars and used it for their own personal expenses.
“As alleged, the defendants defrauded hundreds of thousands of donors, capitalizing on their interest in funding a border wall to raise millions of dollars, under the false pretense that all of that money would be spent on construction,” Strauss said.
“We Build the Wall” is a nonprofit organization dedicated to funding and building a wall on the Mexico-U.S. border. It was created by Brian Kolfage, a veteran who said he started the nonprofit because was upset with lawmakers in Washington for blocking Trump’s attempts to construct a wall, which was one of his key campaign promises in 2016.
Kolfage had previously promised that he would “not take a penny of compensation” from the funds raised for “We Build the Wall.” But according to the criminal complaint filed against the four individuals on Thursday, Kolfage received more than $350,000 from the organization’s coffers.
Each of the four members involved has been charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering.
Bannon had served as Trump’s White House chief strategist, but was fired by the president in the week after the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, which resulted in a number of injuries and death of activist Heather Heyer.
Trump and Bannon have maintained an uneasy relationship after the latter left the White House. In 2019, Bannon praised Trump while discussing potential Democratic candidates that might run against him in the 2020 election.
“Nice to see that one of my best pupils is still a giant Trump fan,” Trump tweeted at the time.
But Trump indirectly took a jab at Bannon after a three-mile border wall project the group had built in Texas showed signs of deterioration. Rainfall from Hurricane Hanna earlier this year resulted in erosion that threatened the stability of the wall the organization built on private land alongside the Rio Grande (though structural issues also existed before the hurricane’s arrival).
Trump described the failed project as a purposeful slight against him. “It was only done to make me look bad,” he said.
Though the president added that he had disagreed from the start about the privately funded wall being produced, it appears that members of his own family were in support of the project. A quote from Donald Trump Jr. is featured on the group’s website, in which he gives glowing praise to its ambitions.
“This is private enterprise at its finest,” Trump Jr. is quoted as saying. “Doing it better, faster, cheaper than anything else and what you guys are doing is pretty amazing.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-08-20--Obama Breaks With Convention Protocol to Call Trump a Threat at DNC Night Three

The third night of the Democratic National Convention was an affirmation of the formidable opposition to a second Trump term .
Here was Kamala Harris , a Black and Indian American woman , becoming the vice-presidential nominee with the crack of a gavel .
Here was Hillary Clinton , the road not taken made flesh , dressed in suffragette white and warning the country not to blow it again .
Here was Elizabeth Warren with a plan .
Here were children made electric in their fear of dying in bullet-riddled classrooms .
Here was Gabrielle Giffords to underscore their point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former president shattering conventional norms to sound a klaxon alarm about the existential threat to democracy posed by the current norms-shattering White House resident .
Barack Obama did not tell the nation that Donald Trump ’ s policies are bad , or that his behavior is shameful .
He looked dead into the camera and told the country that the sitting president is an active menace to their freedom .
Half a century on the planet , and I ’ ve never seen the like .
“ No single American can fix this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Museum of the American Revolution in Philadelphia .
“ Not even a president .
Democracy was never meant to be transactional — you give me your vote ; I make everything better .
It requires an active and informed citizenry .
So I am also asking you to believe in your own ability — to embrace your own responsibility as citizens — to make sure that the basic tenets of our democracy endure .
Because that ’ s what ’ s at stake right now .
Our democracy.
” Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Service — democracy ’ s lifeline in a pandemic election year — served to make last night ’ s overarching message on voting an emergency siren .
That message did not crowd out powerful segments on the damage Trump has done with his fascistic immigration policies , and did not obscure the children who stood to warn of a day when this planet and its damaged climate will shake us off like water off a dog ’ s back .
These various threads , and more , came together in Obama ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and for , the pages of our history .
Whatever our backgrounds , we ’ re all the children of Americans who fought the good fight .
Great grandparents working in firetraps and sweatshops without rights or representation .
Farmers losing their dreams to dust .
Irish and Italians and Asians and Latinos told to go back where they came from .
Jews and Catholics , Muslims and Sikhs , made to feel suspect for the way they worshiped .
Black Americans chained and whipped and hanged .
Spit on for trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to vote .
If anyone had a right to believe that this democracy did not work , and could not work , it was those Americans .
Our ancestors .
They were on the receiving end of a democracy that had fallen short all their lives .
They knew how far the daily reality of America strayed from the myth .
And yet , instead of giving up , they joined together and said somehow , some way , we are going to make this work .
We are going to bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to life .
I ’ ve seen that same spirit rising these past few years .
Folks of every age and background who packed city centers and airports and rural roads so that families wouldn ’ t be separated .
So that another classroom wouldn ’ t get shot up .
So that our kids won ’ t grow up on an uninhabitable planet .
Americans of all races joining together to declare , in the face of injustice and brutality at the hands of the state , that Black Lives Matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so that no child in this country feels the continuing sting of racism .
A number of immigration activists hailed the sentiments Obama espoused last night , but wished someone else had given them .
“ Obama did a lot of things right , but not immigration , he didn ’ t get that right , ” wrote author and immigration activist Julissa Natzely Arce Raya .
“ I promise you , tonight there is a Estela whose mom was deported by Obama .
We must face all the things we don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This is one of them .
If we can face it , admit the harm , then , and only then , can we do better.
” And of course , nothing had changed when the sun came up this morning .
Trump is still president , still racist , still ranting , and his minions are still coring out the Postal Service like an apple .
More than 173,000 Americans are dead from the still-uncontained COVID-19 , and the Republicans in the senate still don ’ t care to help .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is all as shabby and scary as it was yesterday .
Nothing had changed , but there is now a definitive sense that a Rubicon of sorts has been crossed .
In her acceptance speech , which followed Obama ’ s remarks , Kamala Harris reinforced the warnings .
Even as Trump proved the validity of those warnings with yet another fact-free tweetstorm , Harris looked hard into the camera and summoned some history of her own .
“ This week marks the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we celebrate the women who fought for that right .
Yet so many of the Black women who helped secure that victory were still prohibited from voting , long after its ratification .
But they were undeterred.
” Tonight , Joe Biden will accept the presidential nomination he has sought for the term of his long political life .
Over the course of the last three evenings , voice after voice has been raised to proclaim his decency , his capability , his worthiness to assume the office of the presidency .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stuff of conventions since time out of mind .
Whether Biden and his career record of conservative centrism are equal to the monumental tasks awaiting him should he win is as uncertain as the COVID-marred dawn .
The fear suffusing this convention , however , is a rarer form of element unseen at such affairs in generations .
Barack Obama gave it a voice last night , Harris and the others made it a chorus , and in 75 days we will find out if anyone was listening .

The third night of the Democratic National Convention was an affirmation of the formidable opposition to a second Trump term. Here was Kamala Harris, a Black and Indian American woman, becoming the vice-presidential nominee with the crack of a gavel. Here was Hillary Clinton, the road not taken made flesh, dressed in suffragette white and warning the country not to blow it again. Here was Elizabeth Warren with a plan. Here were children made electric in their fear of dying in bullet-riddled classrooms. Here was Gabrielle Giffords to underscore their point in blood.
And here was a former president shattering conventional norms to sound a klaxon alarm about the existential threat to democracy posed by the current norms-shattering White House resident. Barack Obama did not tell the nation that Donald Trump’s policies are bad, or that his behavior is shameful. He looked dead into the camera and told the country that the sitting president is an active menace to their freedom. Half a century on the planet, and I’ve never seen the like.
“No single American can fix this country alone,” Obama said from the Museum of the American Revolution in Philadelphia. “Not even a president. Democracy was never meant to be transactional — you give me your vote; I make everything better. It requires an active and informed citizenry. So I am also asking you to believe in your own ability — to embrace your own responsibility as citizens — to make sure that the basic tenets of our democracy endure. Because that’s what’s at stake right now. Our democracy.”
Trump’s ongoing assault on the U.S. Postal Service — democracy’s lifeline in a pandemic election year — served to make last night’s overarching message on voting an emergency siren. That message did not crowd out powerful segments on the damage Trump has done with his fascistic immigration policies, and did not obscure the children who stood to warn of a day when this planet and its damaged climate will shake us off like water off a dog’s back. These various threads, and more, came together in Obama’s speech to form a warning from, and for, the pages of our history.
Whatever our backgrounds, we’re all the children of Americans who fought the good fight. Great grandparents working in firetraps and sweatshops without rights or representation. Farmers losing their dreams to dust. Irish and Italians and Asians and Latinos told to go back where they came from. Jews and Catholics, Muslims and Sikhs, made to feel suspect for the way they worshiped. Black Americans chained and whipped and hanged. Spit on for trying to sit at lunch counters. Beaten for trying to vote. Related Story Op-Ed | Politics & Elections The Convention’s First Night Was Filled With Sorrow — as It Should Be Kristin Urquiza said of her father, who died of COVID, "His only preexisting condition was trusting Donald Trump." Truthout If anyone had a right to believe that this democracy did not work, and could not work, it was those Americans. Our ancestors. They were on the receiving end of a democracy that had fallen short all their lives. They knew how far the daily reality of America strayed from the myth. And yet, instead of giving up, they joined together and said somehow, some way, we are going to make this work. We are going to bring those words, in our founding documents, to life. I’ve seen that same spirit rising these past few years. Folks of every age and background who packed city centers and airports and rural roads so that families wouldn’t be separated. So that another classroom wouldn’t get shot up. So that our kids won’t grow up on an uninhabitable planet. Americans of all races joining together to declare, in the face of injustice and brutality at the hands of the state, that Black Lives Matter, no more, but no less, so that no child in this country feels the continuing sting of racism.
A number of immigration activists hailed the sentiments Obama espoused last night, but wished someone else had given them. “Obama did a lot of things right, but not immigration, he didn’t get that right,” wrote author and immigration activist Julissa Natzely Arce Raya. “I promise you, tonight there is a Estela whose mom was deported by Obama. We must face all the things we don’t like. The uncomfortable truths. This is one of them. If we can face it, admit the harm, then, and only then, can we do better.”
And of course, nothing had changed when the sun came up this morning. Trump is still president, still racist, still ranting, and his minions are still coring out the Postal Service like an apple. More than 173,000 Americans are dead from the still-uncontained COVID-19, and the Republicans in the senate still don’t care to help. California is on fire, again. It is all as shabby and scary as it was yesterday.
Obama looked dead into the camera and told the country that the sitting president is an active menace to their freedom.
Nothing had changed, but there is now a definitive sense that a Rubicon of sorts has been crossed. In her acceptance speech, which followed Obama’s remarks, Kamala Harris reinforced the warnings.
Even as Trump proved the validity of those warnings with yet another fact-free tweetstorm, Harris looked hard into the camera and summoned some history of her own. “This week marks the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 19th Amendment,” she said. “And we celebrate the women who fought for that right. Yet so many of the Black women who helped secure that victory were still prohibited from voting, long after its ratification. But they were undeterred.”
Tonight, Joe Biden will accept the presidential nomination he has sought for the term of his long political life. Over the course of the last three evenings, voice after voice has been raised to proclaim his decency, his capability, his worthiness to assume the office of the presidency. This is, of course, the standard stuff of conventions since time out of mind. Whether Biden and his career record of conservative centrism are equal to the monumental tasks awaiting him should he win is as uncertain as the COVID-marred dawn.
The fear suffusing this convention, however, is a rarer form of element unseen at such affairs in generations. Barack Obama gave it a voice last night, Harris and the others made it a chorus, and in 75 days we will find out if anyone was listening.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.