truthout--2020-07-23--Trump and DeVos’s Plan to Reopen Schools Hides a Sinister Agenda

Parents of 51 million school-age children in the U.S. are facing an agonizing choice — whether to risk exposing their children to the coronavirus in public school classrooms this fall , or to sacrifice their children ’ s intellectual , social and emotional development by keeping them home for “ online learning ” via the web , which even before the pandemic was judged not very effective .
To make the choice even more difficult , President Trump and his education secretary , billionaire Betsy DeVos , have threatened to withhold federal funds from any school that does not open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Both Trump and DeVos insist face-to-face teaching is perfectly safe , which health scientists say is not true .
Trump and DeVos are adamant .
On “ Fox News Sunday ” on July 12 , DeVos said , “ There ’ s nothing in the data that suggests that kids being in school is in any way dangerous.
” Trump ’ s spokesperson , press secretary Kayleigh McEnany , said on July 16 that “ science should not stand in the way ” of school reopening because “ science is on our side @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe ” to fully open all classrooms in the fall .
Science does not support claims of perfect safety .
Schools are likely high-contact zones .
Most schools can not presently afford regular disinfection ; many students and their parents may object to mandatory masks ( 38 percent of U.S. adults don ’ t wear masks when they leave the house ) ; certainly not all kids will remain six feet apart .
COVID-19 can definitely infect some children , some of whom can pass it on to their families , teachers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ test and report COVID cases differently , but Bloomberg News reports that , in Florida , about a third of all children tested have been positive for COVID-19 ; in California it ’ s 8.4 percent ; Mississippi , 9.4 percent ; Arizona and Washington state , 11 percent .
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation , 3.3 million seniors age 65 and older — prime candidates for serious illness — live with a school-age child .
Furthermore , another Kaiser study concluded that one-quarter of all teachers ( 1.47 million people ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if infected with coronavirus .
Almost everyone agrees that children sorely need the many benefits of school attendance — food and friendships , books and basketball courts , time away from family , and a safe place to spend it , plus stimulating interactions as they learn reading , writing and arithmetic .
Furthermore , 27 million working parents need their children cared for safely during the week .
“ Safely ” is the hard part .
Educators say opening schools safely will cost up to $ 245 billion on health-related renovations — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and which Republicans in Congress have so far refused to provide .
The CARES coronavirus relief law , enacted in March , earmarked only $ 13.5 billion to improve school safety .
Since then , Republicans have refused to provide additional funds , instead suggesting that state governments should simply declare bankruptcy .
( Bankruptcies occur in federal courts , which would give Republicans a chance to slash social safety nets in Democratic strongholds like New York . )
To reopen safely , schools need more money and more space .
Doubling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the space .
Part-time online learning will require access to broadband , and laptops or tablets for everyone .
According to a recent survey , only 24 percent of teachers report that all their students have access to a tablet or laptop for school work .
In addition , everyone will need masks , and schools will require frequent , thorough cleaning .
The Washington Post reports that Congress is currently negotiating a bill that might give schools another $ 50 billion to $ 100 billion — still far below the amount needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Post says , Trump and DeVos are angling to give the money only to schools that open fully .
They want to punish schools that open only part-time .
Why are Trump and DeVos saddling parents and public schools with this impossible dilemma ?
Trump just wants to win the election November 3 and he apparently thinks opening schools will make everything appear normal .
DeVos appears to have a more devious agenda .
DeVos blurted out her coronavirus plan on “ Fox News Sunday ” when she said , “ American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students and their families .
If schools aren ’ t going to reopen and not fulfill that promise , they shouldn ’ t get the funds .
Then give it to the families to decide to go to a school that is going to meet that promise.
” It ’ s no secret that DeVos would like to privatize all public schools .
If public schools become hotbeds of infection , confidence in public education will diminish ; perhaps then more parents would join DeVos in pressing to eliminate the public school system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one — it has been Betsy DeVos ’ s religious mission for the past 25 years .
DeVos is a fundamentalist Christian who has said she wants “ to confront the culture to advance God ’ s Kingdom.
” To do that , she said , God led her to reform public education , which in her mind means privatizing it .
“ It ’ s been a long-standing goal of the Religious Right to replace public education with Christian education , ” says Julie Ingersoll , a professor of religious studies .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ change culture is through education.
” On June 30 , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the state can fund religious schools , which DeVos called “ a historic victory.
” DeVos is also a so-called deeply anti-government libertarian .
An editor with the Detroit Free Press says DeVos is driven “ by her conviction that any nontraditional public school is better than a traditional one , simply because it is not operated by government.
” Since the early 1990s , in her home state of Michigan , DeVos has led and funded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ school choice.
” This means taking taxpayer money from public schools and giving it directly to parents in the form of “ school vouchers ” which can be used like cash to pay expenses for sending a child to any school that will accept them , including public schools , private schools , religious schools and “ charter schools.
” Vouchers are always promoted and defended as a way to give poor people a decent education , but that ’ s often a cover for other motives .
Charter schools are “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public pays for them .
However , charters are privately owned and operated ; they choose their own students , manage their own curriculum , and in most places are not answerable or accountable to local school districts or school boards or to anyone else .
They can teach whatever they want and manage their money in secret .
With Betsy DeVos and her husband funding and cheerleading the campaign , in 1994 , the state of Michigan bet heavily on charter schools .
It has not gone well .
In 2014 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s charter schools by the Detroit Free Press revealed : “ Wasteful spending and double-dipping .
Board members , school founders and employees steering lucrative deals to themselves or insiders .
Schools allowed to operate for years despite poor academic records .
No state standards for who operates charter schools or how to oversee them.
” As a lengthy New York Times exposé revealed in 2017 , “ Michigan Gambled on Charter Schools .
The Children Lost.
” As the Times pointed out , “ it ’ s important to understand that what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t solely , or even primarily , an education story : It ’ s a business story.
” The “ school choice ” movement is driven by libertarian malice toward all government , but it is also driven powerfully by the profit motive .
U.S. public schools spend $ 694 billion each year and a lot of hucksters — many with no experience as educators — want a slice of that pie .
Jonathan Kozol , a writer and advocate for public education , has described the “ corporate predation ” attacking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kozol reported that a group of investment bank analysts said privatizing public schools offered the biggest profit opportunity since health care services were privatized in the 1970s .
“ The K-12 market is the Big Enchilada , ” one banker wrote .
Because they can choose their own students , charter schools tend to select students whose parents are well-to-do and resourceful , leaving the public schools with reduced funds to educate the remaining kids , whose parents are poorer .
In this way , “ school choice ” increases inequality in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. , conservatism and racism have always gone hand in hand .
Vouchers and charter schools have become a legal way to maintain and expand racial segregation .
It ’ s probably no accident that the idea of school vouchers was invented by libertarian economist Milton Friedman in 1955 — the same year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public schools must be racially integrated “ with all deliberate speed.
” After Brown v. Board of Education in 1954 , Southern states were looking for a way to evade school integration ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they were expensive .
School vouchers ( and later , charter schools ) solved that problem by diverting taxpayer money to private schools , thus legally maintaining racially segregated schools , separate and unequal .
From the DeVos/Trump viewpoint , privatizing education has another major benefit — eliminating or weakening teachers ’ unions , which are among the nation ’ s largest and strongest remaining labor organizations .
As a Republican Party donor and leader in Michigan , DeVos has aggressively opposed unions .
In 2012 , she and her husband pushed through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outlawing labor contracts that require all employees in a unionized workplace to pay dues for union representation .
In 2018 , the U.S. Supreme Court ’ s Janus decision made “ right to work ” the law of the land nationwide .
The most important factor in the quality of public schools is funding , but the second most important factor is the quality of the teaching .
To maintain quality , teachers — rather than bureaucrats or business managers — must shape the curriculum and control the amount of time teachers spend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Furthermore , teacher pay and years of experience are crucial to successful schools .
Without collective bargaining provided by a union , teachers can not have a serious voice in school improvement .
As Trump and DeVos demand that all schools open in the fall , despite the obvious health hazards to tens of millions of people , we can recognize their cynical plan as part of a long-term strategy by conservatives to eliminate democracy ’ s most important foundation — an informed populace based on quality education for all .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instead of privatizing schools we could eliminate poverty and stop funding public schools by property taxes , which inherently produces unequal school funding .
We could easily fund all public schools adequately and equally , and , finally , we could protect , support and strengthen teachers ’ unions .
If Democrats are serious about “ resistance , ” they will take this stand , loud and bold , for public health and quality education for all .

Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
Parents of 51 million school-age children in the U.S. are facing an agonizing choice — whether to risk exposing their children to the coronavirus in public school classrooms this fall, or to sacrifice their children’s intellectual, social and emotional development by keeping them home for “online learning” via the web, which even before the pandemic was judged not very effective.
To make the choice even more difficult, President Trump and his education secretary, billionaire Betsy DeVos, have threatened to withhold federal funds from any school that does not open its classrooms fully in the fall. Both Trump and DeVos insist face-to-face teaching is perfectly safe, which health scientists say is not true.
Trump and DeVos are adamant. On “Fox News Sunday” on July 12, DeVos said, “There’s nothing in the data that suggests that kids being in school is in any way dangerous.” Trump’s spokesperson, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany, said on July 16 that “science should not stand in the way” of school reopening because “science is on our side,” showing it is “perfectly safe” to fully open all classrooms in the fall.
Science does not support claims of perfect safety. Schools are likely high-contact zones. Most schools cannot presently afford regular disinfection; many students and their parents may object to mandatory masks (38 percent of U.S. adults don’t wear masks when they leave the house); certainly not all kids will remain six feet apart. COVID-19 can definitely infect some children, some of whom can pass it on to their families, teachers, school staff and other children.
States test and report COVID cases differently, but Bloomberg News reports that, in Florida, about a third of all children tested have been positive for COVID-19; in California it’s 8.4 percent; Mississippi, 9.4 percent; Arizona and Washington state, 11 percent. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 3.3 million seniors age 65 and older — prime candidates for serious illness — live with a school-age child. Furthermore, another Kaiser study concluded that one-quarter of all teachers (1.47 million people) are in danger of developing serious illness if infected with coronavirus.
Almost everyone agrees that children sorely need the many benefits of school attendance — food and friendships, books and basketball courts, time away from family, and a safe place to spend it, plus stimulating interactions as they learn reading, writing and arithmetic. Furthermore, 27 million working parents need their children cared for safely during the week. “Safely” is the hard part.
In Florida, about a third of all children tested have been positive for COVID-19.
Educators say opening schools safely will cost up to $245 billion on health-related renovations — billions that local governments do not have, and which Republicans in Congress have so far refused to provide. The CARES coronavirus relief law, enacted in March, earmarked only $13.5 billion to improve school safety. Since then, Republicans have refused to provide additional funds, instead suggesting that state governments should simply declare bankruptcy. (Bankruptcies occur in federal courts, which would give Republicans a chance to slash social safety nets in Democratic strongholds like New York.)
To reopen safely, schools need more money and more space. Doubling the distance between students will require twice the space. Part-time online learning will require access to broadband, and laptops or tablets for everyone. According to a recent survey, only 24 percent of teachers report that all their students have access to a tablet or laptop for school work. In addition, everyone will need masks, and schools will require frequent, thorough cleaning.
The Washington Post reports that Congress is currently negotiating a bill that might give schools another $50 billion to $100 billion — still far below the amount needed to make schools safe. Plus, the Post says, Trump and DeVos are angling to give the money only to schools that open fully. They want to punish schools that open only part-time.
It’s no secret that DeVos would like to privatize all public schools.
Why are Trump and DeVos saddling parents and public schools with this impossible dilemma? Trump just wants to win the election November 3 and he apparently thinks opening schools will make everything appear normal. DeVos appears to have a more devious agenda.
DeVos blurted out her coronavirus plan on “Fox News Sunday” when she said, “American investment in education is a promise to students and their families. If schools aren’t going to reopen and not fulfill that promise, they shouldn’t get the funds. Then give it to the families to decide to go to a school that is going to meet that promise.”
It’s no secret that DeVos would like to privatize all public schools. If public schools become hotbeds of infection, confidence in public education will diminish; perhaps then more parents would join DeVos in pressing to eliminate the public school system entirely. This agenda should surprise no one — it has been Betsy DeVos’s religious mission for the past 25 years.
DeVos is a fundamentalist Christian who has said she wants “to confront the culture to advance God’s Kingdom.” To do that, she said, God led her to reform public education, which in her mind means privatizing it.
U.S. public schools spend $694 billion each year and a lot of hucksters — many with no experience as educators — want a slice of that pie.
“It’s been a long-standing goal of the Religious Right to replace public education with Christian education,” says Julie Ingersoll, a professor of religious studies. “The long-term strategy of how to change culture is through education.” On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the state can fund religious schools, which DeVos called “a historic victory.”
DeVos is also a so-called deeply anti-government libertarian. An editor with the Detroit Free Press says DeVos is driven “by her conviction that any nontraditional public school is better than a traditional one, simply because it is not operated by government.”
Since the early 1990s, in her home state of Michigan, DeVos has led and funded a libertarian anti-government movement to give parents “school choice.” This means taking taxpayer money from public schools and giving it directly to parents in the form of “school vouchers” which can be used like cash to pay expenses for sending a child to any school that will accept them, including public schools, private schools, religious schools and “charter schools.” Vouchers are always promoted and defended as a way to give poor people a decent education, but that’s often a cover for other motives.
Charter schools are “public” schools in the sense that the public pays for them. However, charters are privately owned and operated; they choose their own students, manage their own curriculum, and in most places are not answerable or accountable to local school districts or school boards or to anyone else. They can teach whatever they want and manage their money in secret.
With Betsy DeVos and her husband funding and cheerleading the campaign, in 1994, the state of Michigan bet heavily on charter schools. It has not gone well.
Vouchers and charter schools have become a legal way to maintain and expand racial segregation.
In 2014, a yearlong investigation of Michigan’s charter schools by the Detroit Free Press revealed: “Wasteful spending and double-dipping. Board members, school founders and employees steering lucrative deals to themselves or insiders. Schools allowed to operate for years despite poor academic records. No state standards for who operates charter schools or how to oversee them.”
As a lengthy New York Times exposé revealed in 2017, “Michigan Gambled on Charter Schools. The Children Lost.” As the Times pointed out, “it’s important to understand that what happened to Michigan’s schools isn’t solely, or even primarily, an education story: It’s a business story.”
The “school choice” movement is driven by libertarian malice toward all government, but it is also driven powerfully by the profit motive. U.S. public schools spend $694 billion each year and a lot of hucksters — many with no experience as educators — want a slice of that pie.
Jonathan Kozol, a writer and advocate for public education, has described the “corporate predation” attacking U.S. public schools. In 2007, Kozol reported that a group of investment bank analysts said privatizing public schools offered the biggest profit opportunity since health care services were privatized in the 1970s. “The K-12 market is the Big Enchilada,” one banker wrote.
Because they can choose their own students, charter schools tend to select students whose parents are well-to-do and resourceful, leaving the public schools with reduced funds to educate the remaining kids, whose parents are poorer. In this way, “school choice” increases inequality in the nation’s educational system.
In the U.S., conservatism and racism have always gone hand in hand. Vouchers and charter schools have become a legal way to maintain and expand racial segregation. It’s probably no accident that the idea of school vouchers was invented by libertarian economist Milton Friedman in 1955 — the same year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public schools must be racially integrated “with all deliberate speed.” After Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, Southern states were looking for a way to evade school integration; private schools were the answer, but they were expensive. School vouchers (and later, charter schools) solved that problem by diverting taxpayer money to private schools, thus legally maintaining racially segregated schools, separate and unequal.
From the DeVos/Trump viewpoint, privatizing education has another major benefit — eliminating or weakening teachers’ unions.
From the DeVos/Trump viewpoint, privatizing education has another major benefit — eliminating or weakening teachers’ unions, which are among the nation’s largest and strongest remaining labor organizations. As a Republican Party donor and leader in Michigan, DeVos has aggressively opposed unions. In 2012, she and her husband pushed through an anti-union “right-to-work” law, outlawing labor contracts that require all employees in a unionized workplace to pay dues for union representation. In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Janus decision made “right to work” the law of the land nationwide.
The most important factor in the quality of public schools is funding, but the second most important factor is the quality of the teaching. To maintain quality, teachers — rather than bureaucrats or business managers — must shape the curriculum and control the amount of time teachers spend in collaborative planning and in individual tutoring. Furthermore, teacher pay and years of experience are crucial to successful schools. Without collective bargaining provided by a union, teachers cannot have a serious voice in school improvement.
As Trump and DeVos demand that all schools open in the fall, despite the obvious health hazards to tens of millions of people, we can recognize their cynical plan as part of a long-term strategy by conservatives to eliminate democracy’s most important foundation — an informed populace based on quality education for all. To ensure a decent education for all, instead of privatizing schools we could eliminate poverty and stop funding public schools by property taxes, which inherently produces unequal school funding. We could easily fund all public schools adequately and equally, and, finally, we could protect, support and strengthen teachers’ unions.
If Democrats are serious about “resistance,” they will take this stand, loud and bold, for public health and quality education for all.
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--2020-07-24--Robert E. Lee High School in Virginia Renamed to Honor John Lewis

A school in Fairfax County , Virginia , will remove Robert E. Lee from its name and change it to honor the life and legacy of the late Rep. John Lewis .
The Fairfax County School Board voted on Thursday to make the name change official .
“ Rep .
Lewis was a champion of the Civil Rights movement , and our Board strongly believes this is an appropriate tribute to an individual who is a true American hero , ” School Board Chair Ricardy Anderson said in a statement .
“ We will also honor his life ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ justice , tolerance and service in the work that we do.
” The initial decision to remove the Confederate general ’ s name from the school was made in June .
Barack Obama , Mildred Loving and Cesar Chavez were among the other names considered .
The decision to rename the school was made in order to address concerns about honoring a leader of the slaveholding society .
“ The name Robert E. Lee is forever connected to the Confederacy , and Confederate values are ones that do not align with our community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one of two members who proposed the name change , said after the vote .
“ Our schools must be places where all students , staff , and members of the community feel safe and supported .
I believe that John Lewis ’ extraordinary life and advocacy for racial justice will serve as an inspiration to our students and community for generations to come.
” Lewis died on July 17 at the age 80 of pancreatic cancer .
He had served in Congress since 1987 .
Prior to that , Lewis was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting rights for people of color .
Lewis helped organize a 1965 march in Selma , Alabama , to bring attention to the denial of voting rights for Black residents .
Known as “ Bloody Sunday , ” state troopers attacked the marchers on the Edmund Pettus Bridge , and Lewis suffered a fractured skull after one trooper beat him with a baton .
Lewis was also a participant at the 1963 March on Washington , and prior was the last surviving individual to have spoken at that event .
Days after Lewis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress urged Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Kentucky ) to honor the late statesman by restoring the Voting Rights Act , with some calling on the bill to be renamed in his honor as well .

Renaming the school to honor Lewis “will serve as an inspiration to our students,” one board member said.
A school in Fairfax County, Virginia, will remove Robert E. Lee from its name and change it to honor the life and legacy of the late Rep. John Lewis.
The Fairfax County School Board voted on Thursday to make the name change official.
“Rep. Lewis was a champion of the Civil Rights movement, and our Board strongly believes this is an appropriate tribute to an individual who is a true American hero,” School Board Chair Ricardy Anderson said in a statement. “We will also honor his life’s work by continuing to promote equity, justice, tolerance and service in the work that we do.”
The initial decision to remove the Confederate general’s name from the school was made in June. Barack Obama, Mildred Loving and Cesar Chavez were among the other names considered.
The decision to rename the school was made in order to address concerns about honoring a leader of the slaveholding society.
“The name Robert E. Lee is forever connected to the Confederacy, and Confederate values are ones that do not align with our community,” Board member Tamara Derenak Kaufax, one of two members who proposed the name change, said after the vote. “Our schools must be places where all students, staff, and members of the community feel safe and supported. I believe that John Lewis’ extraordinary life and advocacy for racial justice will serve as an inspiration to our students and community for generations to come.”
Lewis died on July 17 at the age 80 of pancreatic cancer. He had served in Congress since 1987. Prior to that, Lewis was a civil rights activist who organized for voting rights for people of color.
Lewis helped organize a 1965 march in Selma, Alabama, to bring attention to the denial of voting rights for Black residents. Known as “Bloody Sunday,” state troopers attacked the marchers on the Edmund Pettus Bridge, and Lewis suffered a fractured skull after one trooper beat him with a baton.
Lewis was also a participant at the 1963 March on Washington, and prior was the last surviving individual to have spoken at that event.
Days after Lewis’s death, Democratic leaders in Congress urged Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) to honor the late statesman by restoring the Voting Rights Act, with some calling on the bill to be renamed in his honor as well.
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--2020-07-24--AOC Refuses to Accept Rep. Yoho’s Pathetic Excuses for His Verbal Assault

AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, Democracynow.org , The War and Peace Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
We begin today ’ s show with the stunning rebuke delivered by New York Congressmember Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Florida Congressmember Ted Yoho Thursday after he was overheard by reporters calling the congresswoman from New York an “ f-ing b-word ” but he used the actual words .
He was standing on the steps of the Capitol earlier this week .
Her response came after Yoho offered a non-apology from the House floor on Wednesday saying , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” and never naming Ocasio-Cortez directly .
On Thursday , the New York congresswoman took to the floor of the House to respond .
This is her full fiery address .
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO–CORTEZ : I would also like to thank many of my colleagues for the opportunity to not only speak today but for the many members from both sides of the aisle who have reached out to me in support following an incident earlier this week .
About two days ago , I was walking up the steps of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corner—and he was accompanied by Representative Roger Williams—and accosted me on the steps right here in front of our nation ’ s Capitol .
I was minding my own business , walking up the steps , and Representative Yoho put his finger in my face .
He called me disgusting .
He called me crazy .
He called me out of my mind .
And he called me dangerous .
And then he took a few more steps , and after I had recognized his comments as rude , he walked away and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You ’ re calling me rude.
” I took a few steps ahead , and I walked inside and cast my vote .
Because my constituents send me here each and every day to fight for them and to make sure that they are able to keep a roof over their head , that they are able to feed their families and that they are able to carry their lives with dignity .
I walked back out and there were reporters in the front of the Capitol .
And in front of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quote— ” a f [ beep ] ing bitch.
” These are the words that Representative Yoho levied against a congresswoman , the congresswoman that not only represents New York ’ s 14th congressional district , but every congresswoman and every woman in this country .
Because all of us have had to deal with this in some form , some way , some shape at some point in our lives .
And I want to be clear that Representative Yoho ’ s comments were not deeply hurtful or piercing to me because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have waited tables in restaurants .
I have ridden the subway .
I have walked the streets in New York City .
And this kind of language is not new .
I have encountered words uttered by Mr. Yoho and men uttering the same words as Mr. Yoho while I was being harassed in restaurants .
I have tossed men out of bars that have used language like Mr. Yoho ’ s .
And I have encountered this type of harassment riding the subway in New York City .
This is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Mr. Yoho was not alone .
He was walking shoulder to shoulder with Representative Roger Williams .
And that is when we start to see that this issue is not about one incident .
It is cultural .
It is a culture of lack of impunity , of accepting of violence and violent language against women , and an entire structure of power that supports that .
Because not only have I been spoken to disrespectfully , particularly by members of the Republican Party and elected officials in the Republican Party , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the United States last year told me to go home to another country , with the implication that I don ’ t even belong in America .
The governor of Florida , Governor DeSantis , before I even was sworn in , called me a “ whatever that is.
” Dehumanizing language is not new .
And what we are seeing is that incidents like these are happening in a pattern .
This is a pattern of an attitude towards women and dehumanization of others .
So while I was not deeply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are made , when I was reflecting on this , I honestly thought that I was just going to pack it up and go home .
It ’ s just another day , right ?
But then yesterday , Representative Yoho decided to come to the floor of the House of Representatives and make excuses for his behavior .
And that , I could not let go .
I could not allow my nieces , I could not allow the little girls that I go home to , I could not allow victims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see that , to see that excuse , and to see our Congress accept it as legitimate and accept it as an apology and to accept silence as a form of acceptance .
I could not allow that to stand .
Which is why I am rising today to raise this point of personal privilege .
And I do not need Representative Yoho to apologize to me .
Clearly , he does not want to .
Clearly , when given the opportunity , he will not .
And I will not stay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apology from a man who has no remorse over calling women and using abusive language toward women .
But what I do have issue with is using women , our wives and daughters , as shields and excuses for poor behavior .
Mr. Yoho mentioned that he has a wife and two daughters .
I am two years younger than Mr. Yoho ’ s youngest daughter .
I am someone ’ s daughter , too .
My father , thankfully , is not alive to see how Mr. Yoho treated his daughter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s disrespect on the floor of this House towards me on television .
And I am here because I have to show my parents that I am their daughter and that they did not raise me to accept abuse from men .
Now , what I am here to say is that this harm that Mr. Yoho levied , tried to levy against me , was not just an incident directed at me .
But when you do that to any woman , what Mr. Yoho did was give permission to other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In using that language in front of the press , he gave permission to use that language against his wife , his daughters , women in his community .
And I am here to stand up to say that is not acceptable .
I do not care what your views are .
It does not matter how much I disagree or how much it incenses me or how much I feel that people are dehumanizing others .
I will not do that myself .
I will not allow people to change and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so what I believe is that having a daughter does not make a man decent .
Having a wife does not make a decent man .
Treating people with dignity and respect makes a decent man .
And when a decent man messes up , as we all are bound to do , he tries his best and does apologize .
Not to save face , not to win a vote .
He apologizes genuinely to repair and acknowledge the harm done so that we can all move on .
Lastly , what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is gratitude .
I want to thank him for showing the world that you can be a powerful man and accost women .
You can have daughters and accost women without remorse .
You can be married and accost women .
You can take photos and project an image to the world of being a family man and accost women without remorse and with a sense of impunity .
It happens every day in this country .
It happened here on the steps of our nation ’ s Capitol .
It happens when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this land admit–admit -to hurting women and using this language against all of us .

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, Democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.
We begin today’s show with the stunning rebuke delivered by New York Congressmember Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Florida Congressmember Ted Yoho Thursday after he was overheard by reporters calling the congresswoman from New York an “f-ing b-word” but he used the actual words. He was standing on the steps of the Capitol earlier this week. Her response came after Yoho offered a non-apology from the House floor on Wednesday saying, “I cannot apologize for my passion,” and never naming Ocasio-Cortez directly.
On Thursday, the New York congresswoman took to the floor of the House to respond. This is her full fiery address.
REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO–CORTEZ: I would also like to thank many of my colleagues for the opportunity to not only speak today but for the many members from both sides of the aisle who have reached out to me in support following an incident earlier this week. About two days ago, I was walking up the steps of the Capitol when Representative Yoho suddenly turned a corner—and he was accompanied by Representative Roger Williams—and accosted me on the steps right here in front of our nation’s Capitol.
I was minding my own business, walking up the steps, and Representative Yoho put his finger in my face. He called me disgusting. He called me crazy. He called me out of my mind. And he called me dangerous. And then he took a few more steps, and after I had recognized his comments as rude, he walked away and said, “I’m rude. You’re calling me rude.” I took a few steps ahead, and I walked inside and cast my vote. Because my constituents send me here each and every day to fight for them and to make sure that they are able to keep a roof over their head, that they are able to feed their families and that they are able to carry their lives with dignity.
I walked back out and there were reporters in the front of the Capitol. And in front of reporters, representative Yoho called me—and I quote—”a f[beep]ing bitch.” These are the words that Representative Yoho levied against a congresswoman, the congresswoman that not only represents New York’s 14th congressional district, but every congresswoman and every woman in this country. Because all of us have had to deal with this in some form, some way, some shape at some point in our lives.
And I want to be clear that Representative Yoho’s comments were not deeply hurtful or piercing to me because I have worked a working-class job. I have waited tables in restaurants. I have ridden the subway. I have walked the streets in New York City. And this kind of language is not new. I have encountered words uttered by Mr. Yoho and men uttering the same words as Mr. Yoho while I was being harassed in restaurants. I have tossed men out of bars that have used language like Mr. Yoho’s. And I have encountered this type of harassment riding the subway in New York City. This is not new. And that is the problem.
Mr. Yoho was not alone. He was walking shoulder to shoulder with Representative Roger Williams. And that is when we start to see that this issue is not about one incident. It is cultural. It is a culture of lack of impunity, of accepting of violence and violent language against women, and an entire structure of power that supports that. Because not only have I been spoken to disrespectfully, particularly by members of the Republican Party and elected officials in the Republican Party, not just here, but the president of the United States last year told me to go home to another country, with the implication that I don’t even belong in America. The governor of Florida, Governor DeSantis, before I even was sworn in, called me a “whatever that is.”
Dehumanizing language is not new. And what we are seeing is that incidents like these are happening in a pattern. This is a pattern of an attitude towards women and dehumanization of others. So while I was not deeply hurt or offended by little comments that are made, when I was reflecting on this, I honestly thought that I was just going to pack it up and go home. It’s just another day, right?
But then yesterday, Representative Yoho decided to come to the floor of the House of Representatives and make excuses for his behavior. And that, I could not let go. I could not allow my nieces, I could not allow the little girls that I go home to, I could not allow victims of verbal abuse, and worse, to see that, to see that excuse, and to see our Congress accept it as legitimate and accept it as an apology and to accept silence as a form of acceptance. I could not allow that to stand.
Which is why I am rising today to raise this point of personal privilege. And I do not need Representative Yoho to apologize to me. Clearly, he does not want to. Clearly, when given the opportunity, he will not. And I will not stay up late at night waiting for an apology from a man who has no remorse over calling women and using abusive language toward women. But what I do have issue with is using women, our wives and daughters, as shields and excuses for poor behavior.
Mr. Yoho mentioned that he has a wife and two daughters. I am two years younger than Mr. Yoho’s youngest daughter. I am someone’s daughter, too. My father, thankfully, is not alive to see how Mr. Yoho treated his daughter. My mother got to see Mr. Yoho’s disrespect on the floor of this House towards me on television. And I am here because I have to show my parents that I am their daughter and that they did not raise me to accept abuse from men.
Now, what I am here to say is that this harm that Mr. Yoho levied, tried to levy against me, was not just an incident directed at me. But when you do that to any woman, what Mr. Yoho did was give permission to other men to do that to his daughters. In using that language in front of the press, he gave permission to use that language against his wife, his daughters, women in his community. And I am here to stand up to say that is not acceptable. I do not care what your views are. It does not matter how much I disagree or how much it incenses me or how much I feel that people are dehumanizing others. I will not do that myself. I will not allow people to change and create hatred in our hearts.
And so what I believe is that having a daughter does not make a man decent. Having a wife does not make a decent man. Treating people with dignity and respect makes a decent man. And when a decent man messes up, as we all are bound to do, he tries his best and does apologize. Not to save face, not to win a vote. He apologizes genuinely to repair and acknowledge the harm done so that we can all move on.
Lastly, what I want to express to Mr. Yoho is gratitude. I want to thank him for showing the world that you can be a powerful man and accost women. You can have daughters and accost women without remorse. You can be married and accost women. You can take photos and project an image to the world of being a family man and accost women without remorse and with a sense of impunity. It happens every day in this country. It happened here on the steps of our nation’s Capitol. It happens when individuals who hold the highest office in this land admit–admit -to hurting women and using this language against all of us.


truthout--2020-07-24--Fascism Expert Warns Trump’s Deployment of Feds Could Suppress Election Turnout

President Donald Trump ’ s plans to place federal agents in cities across the nation in order to quell uprisings responding to the killings of Black Americans at the hands of law enforcement may be an attempt to help Trump win reelection , an expert in fascism recently warned .
Trump has used partisan language when discussing his decision to send federal officers to various cities .
During an interview on Fox News this past weekend , when discussing the cities he claimed are “ a mess , ” Trump noted they were run “ by liberal Democrats.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2020 presidential race , Democratic presumptive nominee Joe Biden , won , “ the whole country would go to hell.
” According to Jason Stanley , a philosophy professor at Yale University and an expert on fascism , Trump ’ s strategy is focused on the November election .
“ He ’ s trying to use force to create dissension and amp up conflict , ” Stanley said during an interview with Business Insider earlier this week .
“ He ’ s manufacturing dissent because dissent is what he thrives off of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics becomes very fascist.
” But there ’ s another component to Trump ’ s strategy that ’ s not as obvious : Placing federal officers into cities like Chicago , Philadelphia and New York may actually result in a lower voter turnout .
Stanley said that it ’ s possible that Customs and Border Protection ( CBP ) or Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) agents might be used to suppress voters in these Democratic-leaning cities .
“ One thing we need to worry about is CBP and ICE being used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m not predicting it will happen .
I ’ m not saying it will happen .
I ’ m saying that we have to worry about it , ” Stanley added .
The presence of officers in these cities alone could be a factor for 2020 ’ s presidential race .
“ Flooding these cities with federal agents , flooding these cities with law enforcement — when people encounter law enforcement , they ’ re much less likely to vote ; to participate civically , ” he said .
Stanley , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How Fascism Works : The Politics of Us and Them , cited a study during the interview by University of California-Berkeley professor Amy Lerman and Yale professor Vesla Weaver that found probability of voting went down by 8 percent among individuals who were stopped or questioned by police officers .
He also cited another study from Northwestern University political scientist Traci Burch that concluded communities with the highest rates of contact from police were 50 percent less likely to vote than other neighborhoods that had lower crime rates .
Having agents from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , could lead to a similar outcome , of fewer people voting .
The silver lining , according to Stanley , is that Trump is typically clear about what he does , making it easier to grasp his intentions .
“ That ’ s one nice thing about Trump : he ’ s transparent , ” Stanley said .
A number of governors , mayors and other local officials across the country have spoken out against Trump ’ s plans to send federal agents to cities across the U.S. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not tolerate federal agents acting in ways she felt were illegal .
“ We have to remain diligent .
And if we see any steps out of line , particularly with [ the Department of Homeland Security ] or border patrol , we ’ re not going to hesitate to take the president to court and stop any unconstitutional actions , ” she said .
However , later in the week , Lightfoot announced she would accept the presence of federal agents in Chicago under certain conditions .
According to reporting from The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mayor discussed the issue on Wednesday evening , agreeing that the agents would work in partnership with local law enforcement to address crime , and would not create a situation similar to what ’ s happened in Portland .
“ The Mayor has made clear that if there is any deviation from what has been announced , we will pursue all available legal options to protect Chicagoans , ” Lightfoot ’ s office said in a statement .
Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner suggested he ’ d also hold federal agents to account @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement , who unlawfully assaults and kidnaps people will face criminal charges from my office , ” he said in a statement .
Organizations are taking action against the White House , too .
The Chicago Black Lives Matter chapter filed a lawsuit this week , seeking an injunction against the administration ’ s attempts to send federal officers to the city , saying they would be “ interfering in or otherwise policing lawful and peaceful assemblies and protests.
” “ The President has continually spoken out against peaceful protestors , even directing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public grounds outside of the White House through the use of physical force and chemical weapons , ” the lawsuit said .

President Donald Trump’s plans to place federal agents in cities across the nation in order to quell uprisings responding to the killings of Black Americans at the hands of law enforcement may be an attempt to help Trump win reelection, an expert in fascism recently warned.
Trump has used partisan language when discussing his decision to send federal officers to various cities. During an interview on Fox News this past weekend, when discussing the cities he claimed are “a mess,” Trump noted they were run “by liberal Democrats.” He also said if his main challenger for the 2020 presidential race, Democratic presumptive nominee Joe Biden, won, “the whole country would go to hell.”
According to Jason Stanley, a philosophy professor at Yale University and an expert on fascism, Trump’s strategy is focused on the November election.
“He’s trying to use force to create dissension and amp up conflict,” Stanley said during an interview with Business Insider earlier this week. “He’s manufacturing dissent because dissent is what he thrives off of. And that’s where his politics becomes very fascist.”
But there’s another component to Trump’s strategy that’s not as obvious: Placing federal officers into cities like Chicago, Philadelphia and New York may actually result in a lower voter turnout.
Stanley said that it’s possible that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents might be used to suppress voters in these Democratic-leaning cities.
“One thing we need to worry about is CBP and ICE being used to intimidate people at the polls. I’m not predicting it will happen. I’m not saying it will happen. I’m saying that we have to worry about it,” Stanley added.
The presence of officers in these cities alone could be a factor for 2020’s presidential race. “Flooding these cities with federal agents, flooding these cities with law enforcement — when people encounter law enforcement, they’re much less likely to vote; to participate civically,” he said.
Stanley, who also authored a 2018 book titled How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them, cited a study during the interview by University of California-Berkeley professor Amy Lerman and Yale professor Vesla Weaver that found probability of voting went down by 8 percent among individuals who were stopped or questioned by police officers. He also cited another study from Northwestern University political scientist Traci Burch that concluded communities with the highest rates of contact from police were 50 percent less likely to vote than other neighborhoods that had lower crime rates.
Having agents from the federal government in these cities, therefore, could lead to a similar outcome, of fewer people voting.
The silver lining, according to Stanley, is that Trump is typically clear about what he does, making it easier to grasp his intentions.
“That’s one nice thing about Trump: he’s transparent,” Stanley said.
A number of governors, mayors and other local officials across the country have spoken out against Trump’s plans to send federal agents to cities across the U.S. Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot explained earlier this week that she would not tolerate federal agents acting in ways she felt were illegal.
“We have to remain diligent. And if we see any steps out of line, particularly with [the Department of Homeland Security] or border patrol, we’re not going to hesitate to take the president to court and stop any unconstitutional actions,” she said.
However, later in the week, Lightfoot announced she would accept the presence of federal agents in Chicago under certain conditions. According to reporting from The Chicago Sun-Times, the president and the mayor discussed the issue on Wednesday evening, agreeing that the agents would work in partnership with local law enforcement to address crime, and would not create a situation similar to what’s happened in Portland.
“The Mayor has made clear that if there is any deviation from what has been announced, we will pursue all available legal options to protect Chicagoans,” Lightfoot’s office said in a statement.
Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner suggested he’d also hold federal agents to account. “Anyone, including federal law enforcement, who unlawfully assaults and kidnaps people will face criminal charges from my office,” he said in a statement.
Organizations are taking action against the White House, too. The Chicago Black Lives Matter chapter filed a lawsuit this week, seeking an injunction against the administration’s attempts to send federal officers to the city, saying they would be “interfering in or otherwise policing lawful and peaceful assemblies and protests.”
“The President has continually spoken out against peaceful protestors, even directing his agents to clear peaceful protestors from public grounds outside of the White House through the use of physical force and chemical weapons,” the lawsuit 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--2020-07-24--Trump Cancels GOP Convention While Urging Schools to Reopen

Citing the pandemic that he has downplayed for months , President Donald Trump on Thursday abruptly announced that it is “ not the right time ” to hold the Republican National Convention in August in Florida as planned — moments before he repeated his demand that public schools in the Sunshine State and nationwide reopen even as the coronavirus continues to spread across the country .
As Common Dreams reported last week , teachers in Florida , Arizona , and West Virginia have signaled in recent days that they plan to stage an uprising akin to the Red for Ed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain closed in the fall because the Republican Party is refusing to federally fund safety measures to ensure teachers , students , and staff members don ’ t contract Covid-19 at school .
Trump ’ s insistence on sending the nation ’ s children and educators into harm ’ s way while admitting a crowded gathering of GOP leaders , delegates , and voters should be canceled was condemned by American Federation of Teachers ( AFT ) President Randi Weingarten .
“ The president ’ s hypocrisy knows no bounds , ” Weingarten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Today he shut down the GOP National Convention in Florida in one breath , while pushing to reopen schools in the next.
” In his statement , Trump cited the National Education Association ( NEA ) , which acknowledged in June that “ online learning has never been an effective replacement for in-person learning and support.
” But NEA President Lily Eskelsen García has also forcefully called for federal funding for Personal Protective Equipment ( PPE ) and other safety protocols in schools , which the CDC recommended this month and which Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R-Ky. ) dismissed as “ expensive.
” García echoed Weingarten Thursday in a statement that blasted Trump ’ s misplaced priorities as well as his ongoing disregard for students , teachers , and school staff .
“ For months , educators have been begging for tools and resources that will allow us to return to in-person instruction safely while President Trump ’ s failure of leadership has allowed the pandemic to rage uncontrolled , ” Garcia said .
“ Today he told us it ’ s too dangerous to hold a political convention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to reopen school buildings.
” The GOP ’ s convention was set to take place in Jacksonville , Florida , after being moved from North Carolina when state officials objected to the gathering , citing safety concerns .
Florida emerged as a global epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic earlier this month .
Over the past week , the state has seen an average of more than 10,000 new Covid-19 cases per day .
More than 5,000 people have died of the disease since the beginning of the pandemic .
The Florida Education Association @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week against the state after Republican Gov .
Ron DeSantis , a Trump loyalist , issued an emergency order forcing schools to reopen in less than a month .
“ No one wants to be back in a classroom and reopen our [ schools ] more than educators , ” FEA President Fedrick Ingram told CNN .
“ But we want to do it safely .
And we don ’ t want to put people at risk.
” The push to reopen by Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has been denounced by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public education system , driving communities toward school voucher programs which pull money from public schools .
As Garcia noted , in the president ’ s statement Thursday he “ doubled down on his threats to withhold federal funding that is desperately needed to reopen school buildings safely and equitably while pushing vouchers that steal scarce money from public schools when they need it the most.
” The president told the press that if a school remains closed , its funding should “ follow the student so the parents and families are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Weingarten accused Trump as “ sowing seeds of chaos and confusion so he can fulfill his and Betsy DeVos ’ dream of privatizing and voucherizing public education.
” “ He ’ s provided no plan and no funding , and has ignored the health experts , ” the AFT leader said .
“ Teachers won ’ t let him get away with it .
”

The push to reopen has been denounced by education advocates as an attempt to weaken the public education system.
Citing the pandemic that he has downplayed for months, President Donald Trump on Thursday abruptly announced that it is “not the right time” to hold the Republican National Convention in August in Florida as planned — moments before he repeated his demand that public schools in the Sunshine State and nationwide reopen even as the coronavirus continues to spread across the country.
As Common Dreams reported last week, teachers in Florida, Arizona, and West Virginia have signaled in recent days that they plan to stage an uprising akin to the Red for Ed movement of 2018, demanding that schools remain closed in the fall because the Republican Party is refusing to federally fund safety measures to ensure teachers, students, and staff members don’t contract Covid-19 at school.
Trump’s insistence on sending the nation’s children and educators into harm’s way while admitting a crowded gathering of GOP leaders, delegates, and voters should be canceled was condemned by American Federation of Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten.
“The president’s hypocrisy knows no bounds,” Weingarten said in a statement Thursday. “Today he shut down the GOP National Convention in Florida in one breath, while pushing to reopen schools in the next.”
In his statement, Trump cited the National Education Association (NEA), which acknowledged in June that “online learning has never been an effective replacement for in-person learning and support.”
But NEA President Lily Eskelsen García has also forcefully called for federal funding for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and other safety protocols in schools, which the CDC recommended this month and which Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) dismissed as “expensive.”
García echoed Weingarten Thursday in a statement that blasted Trump’s misplaced priorities as well as his ongoing disregard for students, teachers, and school staff.
“For months, educators have been begging for tools and resources that will allow us to return to in-person instruction safely while President Trump’s failure of leadership has allowed the pandemic to rage uncontrolled,” Garcia said. “Today he told us it’s too dangerous to hold a political convention but it’s not too dangerous to reopen school buildings.”
The GOP’s convention was set to take place in Jacksonville, Florida, after being moved from North Carolina when state officials objected to the gathering, citing safety concerns.
Florida emerged as a global epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic earlier this month. Over the past week, the state has seen an average of more than 10,000 new Covid-19 cases per day. More than 5,000 people have died of the disease since the beginning of the pandemic.
The Florida Education Association (FEA) filed a lawsuit this week against the state after Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Trump loyalist, issued an emergency order forcing schools to reopen in less than a month.
“No one wants to be back in a classroom and reopen our [schools] more than educators,” FEA President Fedrick Ingram told CNN. “But we want to do it safely. And we don’t want to put people at risk.”
The push to reopen by Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has been denounced by education advocates as an attempt to weaken the public education system, driving communities toward school voucher programs which pull money from public schools.
As Garcia noted, in the president’s statement Thursday he “doubled down on his threats to withhold federal funding that is desperately needed to reopen school buildings safely and equitably while pushing vouchers that steal scarce money from public schools when they need it the most.”
The president told the press that if a school remains closed, its funding should “follow the student so the parents and families are in control of their own decisions.”
“Students, parents, educators, schools, communities deserve better,” said Garcia.
Weingarten accused Trump as “sowing seeds of chaos and confusion so he can fulfill his and Betsy DeVos’ dream of privatizing and voucherizing public education.”
“He’s provided no plan and no funding, and has ignored the health experts,” the AFT leader said. “Teachers won’t let him get away with it.”
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.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-07-24--How the US Chamber of Commerce Wrecked the Economy and Made the Pandemic Worse

As hospital intensive care units overflow again , and delays in COVID-19 testing reports reach record levels in many cities , a conversation I recently with Sen. Ed Markey , a Massachusetts Democrat , reminded me that I had forgotten something utterly critical : Donald Trump ’ s decision to unilaterally disarm America in the face of the coronavirus invasion was urged upon him by an ostensible defender of American business : the U.S. Chamber of Commerce .
When the pandemic reached America , we weren ’ t ready — any more than we were ready when Japan bombed Pearl @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do what the U.S. has often done : make up for lack of preparedness .
The crucial gaps to fill in March were supplies for testing to limit the spread of the virus , and medical equipment to treat those who got sick — testing kits , swabs , reagents , masks , gowns and gloves — by the billions .
Government health agencies estimated that if the pandemic took hold , the country would need , for example , 3.5 billion N95 medical masks .
We had 12 million .
Presidents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to overcome such critical supply shortages — not just in wartime , but also to ensure adequate relief supplies after natural disasters .
DPA can be used to put emergency purchases at the head of a supply chain , but also to require factories to convert their output to provide needed equipment in adequate volumes .
Members of Congress urged Trump to appoint a military official as DPA czar to coordinate production and distribution of essential pandemic-related medical supplies , as was done in the Korean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaning towards robust use of the DPA , fashioning himself as a wartime president and the battle against the coronavirus as America ’ s “ big war.
” He invoked the DPA to require General Motors to speed up its production of ventilators .
But he quickly discovered that he had an enemy within — not the virus as such , but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce .
Within days of Trump ’ s announcement that he would mobilize as if for war and use the DPA , the Chamber of Commerce ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Among the Chamber ’ s arguments : DPA would impose “ red tape on companies precisely when they need flexibility to deal with closed borders and shuttered factories.
” Unstated : if the government took charge of the supply chain for tests , masks and gowns , it could also prevent bidding wars from competing hospitals and states that would , and did , drive prices — and profits — through the roof .
In response , labor unions representing nurses , hospital staff and other frontline workers who were unable to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gowns , protested and urged the Chamber to join a national mobilization to defeat the coronavirus .
The appeal was not answered .
On March 23 , Markey and his Massachusetts colleague , Sen. Elizabeth Warren , wrote to the Chamber demanding an explanation .
The Chamber ’ s response : Defense Production Act reliance was unnecessary , because “ American companies will do whatever it takes to support America ’ s response to the pandemic and shore up the economy.
” But what the workers had feared — insufficient production , soaring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — took over the health care market during the first wave of virus spikes in the Northeast .
Some hospitals were paying 15 times the usual price for masks .
The Chamber continued its strenuous opposition to enabling the government to ensure an adequate supply of tests and PPE .
Even Trump conceded that profiteering had taken over the market , and ultimately he did invoke the DPA to prevent it — but when it came to the export market .
Supplies increased , but often at exorbitant prices .
Only when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought the number of hospitalizations down sharply did supply and demand come into temporary balance .
Americans believed that if there was a second wave later in the year , at least health care workers on the front lines would have the tools they needed .
Trump , denied by Chamber opposition of an easy pathway to acting like a heroic wartime president , seemingly lost interest .
By June his focus had shifted from fighting the virus to reopening the economy and then reigniting the culture wars .
Media headlines proclaiming his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provoke “ fake news ” tweets from the East Wing of the White House .
The virus had a longer attention span .
With major states like Florida , Texas and Arizona opening rapidly and prematurely , the holes in the jerry-built testing , tracing and quarantine systems each state had fashioned without federal guidance gave the virus its chance .
Cases — although not , initially , fatalities — began to soar .
Suddenly , what any nationally coordinated effort would have been tracking and resolving all along — that the nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ masks and gowns to meet the needs of an economy in shutdown , but had nowhere near the level of supplies for a massive second wave — came home to roost .
By early July , new cases were flooding the hospital capacity of even some of the nation ’ s major health care centers , such as Houston .
In New Orleans , testing centers had to close eight minutes after they opened .
In 100-degree heat in Phoenix , lines at testing centers were eight hours long .
San Antonio and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those with symptoms , leaving the system utterly unable to detect asymptomatic cases , when research suggests that to 40 % of infections take place .
Wait times for test results soared with caseloads , so that even those who got tested might not find out they were positive until they were well past the contagious stage .
Nurses were again forced to use one N95 mask for weeks at a time .
Prices for what was actually available soared .
States reported they could only fulfill 10 % of their orders .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. has nothing like the 3.5 billion N95 masks that we knew in January we would need .
Indeed , how could we ?
No manufacturer could have guessed in March how severe the crisis would be by fall .
With no one managing the system , it was clearly foolish for any private company to produce , on speculation , several billion masks .
Market signals can not prepare America for the massive increase in possible scale required by such a pandemic .
Nor can individual cities and states trigger the necessary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national plan designed to ensure that we were ready for the worst-case scenario could have protected us .
Inevitably , the “ market solutions ” favored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have failed America not once but twice .
In failing , they have taken the nation ’ s economy over the precipice into a deep , long , economic decline .
That the loudest voice claiming to represent U.S. business chose to defend profiteering , embrace short-term thinking and risk the collapse of the American health care system and economy is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most Americans , including me , had already forgotten this is scary .
This is not the first time the Chamber has successfully pursued policies that put us enormously at risk — for years it has been one of the major forces preventing Washington from adopting even the most modest efforts to accelerate a transition off fossil fuels to save lives and protect the climate .
But if the Chamber can get away once again with having caused massive economic damage while risking the health of millions , and with its public reputation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change its behavior .

As hospital intensive care units overflow again, and delays in COVID-19 testing reports reach record levels in many cities, a conversation I recently with Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, reminded me that I had forgotten something utterly critical: Donald Trump’s decision to unilaterally disarm America in the face of the coronavirus invasion was urged upon him by an ostensible defender of American business: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
When the pandemic reached America, we weren’t ready — any more than we were ready when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. But Trump had the tools to do what the U.S. has often done: make up for lack of preparedness. The crucial gaps to fill in March were supplies for testing to limit the spread of the virus, and medical equipment to treat those who got sick — testing kits, swabs, reagents, masks, gowns and gloves — by the billions. Government health agencies estimated that if the pandemic took hold, the country would need, for example, 3.5 billion N95 medical masks. We had 12 million.
Presidents have available, and have routinely used, the Cold War-era Defense Production Act to overcome such critical supply shortages — not just in wartime, but also to ensure adequate relief supplies after natural disasters. DPA can be used to put emergency purchases at the head of a supply chain, but also to require factories to convert their output to provide needed equipment in adequate volumes. Members of Congress urged Trump to appoint a military official as DPA czar to coordinate production and distribution of essential pandemic-related medical supplies, as was done in the Korean War.
In March, Trump was leaning towards robust use of the DPA, fashioning himself as a wartime president and the battle against the coronavirus as America’s “big war.” He invoked the DPA to require General Motors to speed up its production of ventilators. But he quickly discovered that he had an enemy within — not the virus as such, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Within days of Trump’s announcement that he would mobilize as if for war and use the DPA, the Chamber of Commerce’s lobbying army swung into action. Among the Chamber’s arguments: DPA would impose “red tape on companies precisely when they need flexibility to deal with closed borders and shuttered factories.” Unstated: if the government took charge of the supply chain for tests, masks and gowns, it could also prevent bidding wars from competing hospitals and states that would, and did, drive prices — and profits — through the roof.
In response, labor unions representing nurses, hospital staff and other frontline workers who were unable to be tested, or to obtain masks or gowns, protested and urged the Chamber to join a national mobilization to defeat the coronavirus. The appeal was not answered. On March 23, Markey and his Massachusetts colleague, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, wrote to the Chamber demanding an explanation. The Chamber’s response: Defense Production Act reliance was unnecessary, because “American companies will do whatever it takes to support America’s response to the pandemic and shore up the economy.”
But what the workers had feared — insufficient production, soaring prices and profits, chaotic delivery mechanisms — took over the health care market during the first wave of virus spikes in the Northeast. Some hospitals were paying 15 times the usual price for masks.
The Chamber continued its strenuous opposition to enabling the government to ensure an adequate supply of tests and PPE. Even Trump conceded that profiteering had taken over the market, and ultimately he did invoke the DPA to prevent it — but when it came to the export market.
Supplies increased, but often at exorbitant prices. Only when the shutdowns of most of the American economy brought the number of hospitalizations down sharply did supply and demand come into temporary balance. Americans believed that if there was a second wave later in the year, at least health care workers on the front lines would have the tools they needed.
Trump, denied by Chamber opposition of an easy pathway to acting like a heroic wartime president, seemingly lost interest. By June his focus had shifted from fighting the virus to reopening the economy and then reigniting the culture wars. Media headlines proclaiming his lack of interest didn’t even provoke “fake news” tweets from the East Wing of the White House.
The virus had a longer attention span. With major states like Florida, Texas and Arizona opening rapidly and prematurely, the holes in the jerry-built testing, tracing and quarantine systems each state had fashioned without federal guidance gave the virus its chance.
Cases — although not, initially, fatalities — began to soar. Suddenly, what any nationally coordinated effort would have been tracking and resolving all along — that the nation had stepped up production of tests, masks and gowns to meet the needs of an economy in shutdown, but had nowhere near the level of supplies for a massive second wave — came home to roost. By early July, new cases were flooding the hospital capacity of even some of the nation’s major health care centers, such as Houston.
In New Orleans, testing centers had to close eight minutes after they opened. In 100-degree heat in Phoenix, lines at testing centers were eight hours long. San Antonio and Austin were forced to limit testing to those with symptoms, leaving the system utterly unable to detect asymptomatic cases, when research suggests that to 40% of infections take place. Wait times for test results soared with caseloads, so that even those who got tested might not find out they were positive until they were well past the contagious stage.
Nurses were again forced to use one N95 mask for weeks at a time. Prices for what was actually available soared. States reported they could only fulfill 10% of their orders. Even now, in July, the U.S. has nothing like the 3.5 billion N95 masks that we knew in January we would need. Indeed, how could we? No manufacturer could have guessed in March how severe the crisis would be by fall. With no one managing the system, it was clearly foolish for any private company to produce, on speculation, several billion masks. Market signals cannot prepare America for the massive increase in possible scale required by such a pandemic. Nor can individual cities and states trigger the necessary ramp-up of supplies. Only a systematic national plan designed to ensure that we were ready for the worst-case scenario could have protected us.
Inevitably, the “market solutions” favored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have failed America not once but twice. In failing, they have taken the nation’s economy over the precipice into a deep, long, economic decline. That the loudest voice claiming to represent U.S. business chose to defend profiteering, embrace short-term thinking and risk the collapse of the American health care system and economy is both shameful and shocking.
And that most Americans, including me, had already forgotten this is scary. This is not the first time the Chamber has successfully pursued policies that put us enormously at risk — for years it has been one of the major forces preventing Washington from adopting even the most modest efforts to accelerate a transition off fossil fuels to save lives and protect the climate. But if the Chamber can get away once again with having caused massive economic damage while risking the health of millions, and with its public reputation unscathed, it’s unlikely to change its behavior.
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.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.