truthout--2020-06-11--Cuomo and de Blasio’s Feud Highlights Democratic Fractures Over Floyd Protests

On Sunday , June 7 , as the outcry over violent suppression of Black Lives Matter protests in New York City was heard round the world , Mayor Bill De Blasio rescinded the city ’ s 8 pm curfew implemented a week prior , and made his first overtures to appease protesters , including a vow to cut some funding to the New York City Police Department ( NYPD ) .
Immediately , Gov .
Andrew Cuomo moved to cast himself as the champion of the resistance , demanding “ we seize the moment ” to achieve equality .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mayor were both on board for implementing New York ’ s first curfew in 75 years .
The joint order was a rare point of consensus between the two most powerful New York politicians and reflected a consolidation of the political line of the Democratic Party : public outpourings of support and solidarity , but increasingly repressive moves to squash a protest movement which is growing too big and militant to control via the normal channels of cooptation and containment .
However , the consensus in New York was short lived , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the local reality continue to develop .
At a press briefing , Cuomo threatened displacing the mayor to send armed National Guards in to suppress protesters , because the city had “ not used enough police.
” In the same speech , Cuomo also said , Prior to declaring the curfew , de Blasio and Cuomo had expressed a series of divergent messages .
Cuomo , who seized on the pandemic to become a main face of the Democratic Party , performed long effusions of heartfelt support for George Floyd protests , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national stage , such as Nancy Pelosi , Amy Klobuchar , and most significantly , Joe Biden .
De Blasio , on the other hand , played his cards close to the chest , wary of infuriating the NYPD as protests escalated .
He even went so far as to defend the actions of two police cruisers that intentionally plowed into a group of protesters on May 30 .
“ It is inappropriate for protestors to surround a police vehicle and threaten police officers , ” he said .
“ That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t happened in the history of protests in this city.
” The initial difference between the governor and mayor is consistent with their responses to police murders in the past , and reflects larger contradictions within the Democratic Party as well as the significant political power of the police .
De Blasio , who ran on a police reform platform , has actually never advocated for substantial police reform .
He has , however , at several times in his tenure , set off the police by merely acknowledging the possibility of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after Eric Garner ’ s death , in which he said he taught his Black son to “ take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers.
” When two officers were shot shortly after , the mayor faced a semi-insurrection , with cops turning their backs on him at a funeral for slain officer Rafael Ramos , carrying out an unprecedented work stoppage , and issuing threatening statements from their primary union , the Patrolmen ’ s Benevolent Association ( PBA ) , which stated at the time : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands tonight — those that incited violence on the street under the guise of protests , that tried to tear down what New York City police officers did every day… .
That blood on the hands starts on the steps of City Hall , in the office of the mayor.
” Occasional tepid reform attempts , such as introducing a body cam program , have resulted in swift retribution from police unions .
Rather than anger the police , de Blasio has generally opted to weather some political pushback for defending them .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the mayor refused to call for the firing of Daniel Pantaleo , the NYPD officer who murdered Eric Garner by choking him to death after he was seen selling loose cigarettes in Staten Island .
Garner ’ s last words “ I can ’ t breathe ” became a rallying cry of the Black Lives Matter movement , but even after an internal NYPD court found Pantaleo guilty of “ reckless assault ” four years later , the mayor refused to call for him to be fired .
The mayor and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of legislation to repeal Section 50-A , the “ Police Secrecy Law ” shielding the personnel records of police officers , firefighters and corrections officers .
Cuomo , since 2019 , has said 50-A should be repealed , and that officers ’ disciplinary records should be open to the public .
However , Cuomo ’ s position on police reform is only skin deep , and merely reflects the current electoral priorities of the Democratic Party .
Before 2019 , Cuomo defended the NYPD more vigilantly than de Blasio did , often maneuvering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the PBA .
In 2015 , Cuomo went so far as to pin the deaths of two officers on the mayor ’ s “ anti-police atmosphere ” : Since 2019 , from the vantage point of Albany , and with no direct oversight of the NYPD , the governor has been relatively free to make some non-binding declarations in accordance with a national Democratic Party strategy embracing mild police reform .
The mayor , however , is in a very different position , often unable to embrace even the most moderate talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NYPD is right there , seemingly , with a gun to his head .
De Blasio ’ s most obsequious attempts to pander to police leadership have even failed to appease the more vigilant union , the Sergeants Benevolent Association ( SBA ) , which responded to the mayor ’ s statement after two officer deaths in 2014 by saying “ the NYPD is declaring war on you !
” As protests for George Floyd grew in recent weeks , the mayor was once again caught between maintaining the reformist imagery of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After mandating a little bit of restraint ( specifically , prohibiting mounted police units from the protests ) , de Blasio rediscovered the ire of the NYPD when his daughter was essentially taken hostage by them , a story amplified by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez : “ Last night the NYPD Sergeants ’ union *publicly threatened the mayor ’ s daughter* while they held her , ” she tweeted .
After Chiara de Blasio was arrested at Union Square , the SBA released identifying information about her .
On June 7 , City @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Torres wrote in a joint letter to the city ’ s Department of Investigation that the timing of the release “ suggests willful conduct calculated to inflict personal harm on the Mayor and a member of his family.
” As for the national Democratic Party , the trend shifted toward maintaining outward support for the motivation of these protests but emphasizing the danger of violent and destructive “ agitators ” which would “ overshadow the reason we protest ” according to Joe Biden , essentially orbiting President Trump ’ s more militant articulations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ thugs ” or “ antifa , ” while the Democrats point toward white interlopers , anarchists and occasionally “ Russians.
” But as Trump threatens military action in the cities , the contradictions between national and local become more pronounced , and the reality of the local police comes more into focus .
Despite claims by progressive mayors over the last three years of “ sanctuary cities ” which would not enforce or collaborate with Trump ’ s Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) deportation policies , most major police departments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to collaborate with ICE .
While it is tempting to see the NYPD as some bloated , rogue militia , its coercion and intimidation of even fake reformer Bill de Blasio reflects larger trends in the U.S. Democrats have preferred to leave out this part of the picture , characterizing the problem as a “ few bad apples ” that can be removed .
Cuomo , and other politicians who float a bit above issues of everyday police policy , can usually engage in this rhetoric unscathed .
The mayor of New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s largest police force , however , is required by circumstance to abstain from such utterances .
As the protest movement expands , and discussion about the role of the police heats up on a national level , Democrats will make every attempt to co-opt the narrative , reframe action on the streets and funnel anger into talking points for electoral reform , pinning police violence on President Trump , and seeking to diminish growing awareness of the thoroughly exploitive , oppressive and white supremacist logic of the state .
Trump , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a whole new level of violent repression on protesters in the U.S. , and the incursion of military forces into cities would likely further clarify the relationship between police violence and the essential repressive nature of the state overall .
Immediate escalation , however , is being pushed for by the leaders of the Democratic Party .
On June 2 , Cuomo escalated the state and city contradiction after de Blasio rebuked the governor ’ s push to send National Guards into the city , floating the idea of “ displacing the mayor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his response : De Blasio , in turn , stood with the NYPD , stating through a spokesperson that the governor ’ s remarks “ are offensive to the men and women of the NYPD , who are out there every night trying to keep New Yorkers safe .
It would be nice if our officers knew they had the respect of their Governor.
” In declining the National Guard , de Blasio stated , “ When outside armed forces go into communities , no good comes from it… .
They are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ De Blasio may be fearful of a situation such as what happened in Kent State University in Ohio , on May 4 , 1970 , in which deployment of the National Guard against antiwar protesters resulted in the murder of four students , further enflaming the movement .
However , one may question if the police need much outside help to produce acts of wanton aggression and violence that impassions resistance .
People around the world are already watching videos of the NYPD ramming cars into protesters , spraying tear gas point-blank into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marchers .
The contradictions between local police departments , cities , states and the larger state exist throughout the country , but there are unique aspects at play in New York City .
The size of the NYPD ( 38,000 active officers ) , a $ 6 billion budget , and an internal intelligence bureau which is an essential partner of the National Security Agency and CIA , means that the NYPD resembles something of a quasi-military .
Departments historically have attempted to toe the line between being the repressive arm of capital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our ” friendly neighborhood cop .
The latter has been attempted through various forms of “ community policing ” initiatives .
However , in New York City , where capital interests are very concentrated and class tensions consequently heightened , the police have been pioneers of a national trend toward shedding the pretense of “ the nice cop ” through heavy-handed tactics and surveillance policies .
The tug of war between Cuomo and de Blasio clarifies that , though local police operate under some different conditions , policies and leadership , they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supremacist capitalist state .
Governor Cuomo , when politically advantageous , promises transparency and reform in the NYPD .
But Mayor De Blasio ’ s mildest hints at reform have led to near rebellion by the police .
As unrest mounts , and elected leaders scramble to appease protesters with a litany of promised reforms , we must protest local police violence as state oppression , not local aberrations solvable by empty promises of Democratic Party politicians .

On Sunday, June 7, as the outcry over violent suppression of Black Lives Matter protests in New York City was heard round the world, Mayor Bill De Blasio rescinded the city’s 8 pm curfew implemented a week prior, and made his first overtures to appease protesters, including a vow to cut some funding to the New York City Police Department (NYPD). Immediately, Gov. Andrew Cuomo moved to cast himself as the champion of the resistance, demanding “we seize the moment” to achieve equality. But a week earlier, the governor and mayor were both on board for implementing New York’s first curfew in 75 years. The joint order was a rare point of consensus between the two most powerful New York politicians and reflected a consolidation of the political line of the Democratic Party: public outpourings of support and solidarity, but increasingly repressive moves to squash a protest movement which is growing too big and militant to control via the normal channels of cooptation and containment.
However, the consensus in New York was short lived, as the contradictions between national political strategy and the local reality continue to develop. At a press briefing, Cuomo threatened displacing the mayor to send armed National Guards in to suppress protesters, because the city had “not used enough police.” In the same speech, Cuomo also said,
On the protesters, they are outraged. And, by the way, I agree with them. What happened to Mr. Floyd was a disgrace, was repugnant to America, was repugnant to any good policing perspective, or strategy, or approach.
Prior to declaring the curfew, de Blasio and Cuomo had expressed a series of divergent messages. Cuomo, who seized on the pandemic to become a main face of the Democratic Party, performed long effusions of heartfelt support for George Floyd protests, in line with the Democratic players on the national stage, such as Nancy Pelosi, Amy Klobuchar, and most significantly, Joe Biden. De Blasio, on the other hand, played his cards close to the chest, wary of infuriating the NYPD as protests escalated. He even went so far as to defend the actions of two police cruisers that intentionally plowed into a group of protesters on May 30. “It is inappropriate for protestors to surround a police vehicle and threaten police officers,” he said. “That’s wrong on its face and that hasn’t happened in the history of protests in this city.”
The initial difference between the governor and mayor is consistent with their responses to police murders in the past, and reflects larger contradictions within the Democratic Party as well as the significant political power of the police. De Blasio, who ran on a police reform platform, has actually never advocated for substantial police reform. He has, however, at several times in his tenure, set off the police by merely acknowledging the possibility of racism, such as in a speech after Eric Garner’s death, in which he said he taught his Black son to “take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers.” When two officers were shot shortly after, the mayor faced a semi-insurrection, with cops turning their backs on him at a funeral for slain officer Rafael Ramos, carrying out an unprecedented work stoppage, and issuing threatening statements from their primary union, the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association (PBA), which stated at the time: “There’s blood on many hands tonight — those that incited violence on the street under the guise of protests, that tried to tear down what New York City police officers did every day…. That blood on the hands starts on the steps of City Hall, in the office of the mayor.” Occasional tepid reform attempts, such as introducing a body cam program, have resulted in swift retribution from police unions. Rather than anger the police, de Blasio has generally opted to weather some political pushback for defending them.
For example, between 2014 and 2020, the mayor refused to call for the firing of Daniel Pantaleo, the NYPD officer who murdered Eric Garner by choking him to death after he was seen selling loose cigarettes in Staten Island. Garner’s last words “I can’t breathe” became a rallying cry of the Black Lives Matter movement, but even after an internal NYPD court found Pantaleo guilty of “reckless assault” four years later, the mayor refused to call for him to be fired. The mayor and the governor have also disagreed on a piece of legislation to repeal Section 50-A, the “Police Secrecy Law” shielding the personnel records of police officers, firefighters and corrections officers. Cuomo, since 2019, has said 50-A should be repealed, and that officers’ disciplinary records should be open to the public.
De Blasio, who ran on a police reform platform, has actually never advocated for substantial police reform.
However, Cuomo’s position on police reform is only skin deep, and merely reflects the current electoral priorities of the Democratic Party. Before 2019, Cuomo defended the NYPD more vigilantly than de Blasio did, often maneuvering to drive a wedge between the mayor and the PBA. In 2015, Cuomo went so far as to pin the deaths of two officers on the mayor’s “anti-police atmosphere”:
As leadership, we have to send a different signal. And the signal is “respect law enforcement.” I understand your civil rights, I understand freedom of speech, but I also understand the role of the police…. The police are right when they say there’s now an atmosphere, now an attitude that the police are fair game. They’re not.
Since 2019, from the vantage point of Albany, and with no direct oversight of the NYPD, the governor has been relatively free to make some non-binding declarations in accordance with a national Democratic Party strategy embracing mild police reform. The mayor, however, is in a very different position, often unable to embrace even the most moderate talking points of the national party, because the NYPD is right there, seemingly, with a gun to his head. De Blasio’s most obsequious attempts to pander to police leadership have even failed to appease the more vigilant union, the Sergeants Benevolent Association (SBA), which responded to the mayor’s statement after two officer deaths in 2014 by saying “the NYPD is declaring war on you!”
Cuomo’s position on police reform is only skin deep, and merely reflects the current electoral priorities of the Democratic Party.
As protests for George Floyd grew in recent weeks, the mayor was once again caught between maintaining the reformist imagery of the Democratic Party and appeasing the NYPD. After mandating a little bit of restraint (specifically, prohibiting mounted police units from the protests), de Blasio rediscovered the ire of the NYPD when his daughter was essentially taken hostage by them, a story amplified by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “Last night the NYPD Sergeants’ union *publicly threatened the mayor’s daughter* while they held her,” she tweeted. After Chiara de Blasio was arrested at Union Square, the SBA released identifying information about her. On June 7, City Council Speaker Corey Johnson and Councilmember Ritchie Torres wrote in a joint letter to the city’s Department of Investigation that the timing of the release “suggests willful conduct calculated to inflict personal harm on the Mayor and a member of his family.”
As for the national Democratic Party, the trend shifted toward maintaining outward support for the motivation of these protests but emphasizing the danger of violent and destructive “agitators” which would “overshadow the reason we protest” according to Joe Biden, essentially orbiting President Trump’s more militant articulations. For Trump, the agitators are “thugs” or “antifa,” while the Democrats point toward white interlopers, anarchists and occasionally “Russians.” But as Trump threatens military action in the cities, the contradictions between national and local become more pronounced, and the reality of the local police comes more into focus.
Despite claims by progressive mayors over the last three years of “sanctuary cities” which would not enforce or collaborate with Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportation policies, most major police departments, including the NYPD, have continued to collaborate with ICE. While it is tempting to see the NYPD as some bloated, rogue militia, its coercion and intimidation of even fake reformer Bill de Blasio reflects larger trends in the U.S. Democrats have preferred to leave out this part of the picture, characterizing the problem as a “few bad apples” that can be removed. Cuomo, and other politicians who float a bit above issues of everyday police policy, can usually engage in this rhetoric unscathed. The mayor of New York City, who oversees the nation’s largest police force, however, is required by circumstance to abstain from such utterances.
As the protest movement expands, and discussion about the role of the police heats up on a national level, Democrats will make every attempt to co-opt the narrative, reframe action on the streets and funnel anger into talking points for electoral reform, pinning police violence on President Trump, and seeking to diminish growing awareness of the thoroughly exploitive, oppressive and white supremacist logic of the state. Trump, in turn, may lash out and unleash a whole new level of violent repression on protesters in the U.S., and the incursion of military forces into cities would likely further clarify the relationship between police violence and the essential repressive nature of the state overall. Immediate escalation, however, is being pushed for by the leaders of the Democratic Party. On June 2, Cuomo escalated the state and city contradiction after de Blasio rebuked the governor’s push to send National Guards into the city, floating the idea of “displacing the mayor” to attain control of the police in his response:
Can you displace a mayor? Yes. A mayor can be removed. It has not happened. I can’t find a precedent. But theoretically it is legally possible.
De Blasio, in turn, stood with the NYPD, stating through a spokesperson that the governor’s remarks “are offensive to the men and women of the NYPD, who are out there every night trying to keep New Yorkers safe. It would be nice if our officers knew they had the respect of their Governor.” In declining the National Guard, de Blasio stated, “When outside armed forces go into communities, no good comes from it…. They are not trained for the circumstances here.” De Blasio may be fearful of a situation such as what happened in Kent State University in Ohio, on May 4, 1970, in which deployment of the National Guard against antiwar protesters resulted in the murder of four students, further enflaming the movement. However, one may question if the police need much outside help to produce acts of wanton aggression and violence that impassions resistance. People around the world are already watching videos of the NYPD ramming cars into protesters, spraying tear gas point-blank into protesters’ eyes and pointing handguns at marchers.
We must protest local police violence as state oppression, not local aberrations solvable by empty promises of Democratic Party politicians.
The contradictions between local police departments, cities, states and the larger state exist throughout the country, but there are unique aspects at play in New York City. The size of the NYPD (38,000 active officers), a $6 billion budget, and an internal intelligence bureau which is an essential partner of the National Security Agency and CIA, means that the NYPD resembles something of a quasi-military. Departments historically have attempted to toe the line between being the repressive arm of capital interests and maintaining appearances of being “our” friendly neighborhood cop. The latter has been attempted through various forms of “community policing” initiatives. However, in New York City, where capital interests are very concentrated and class tensions consequently heightened, the police have been pioneers of a national trend toward shedding the pretense of “the nice cop” through heavy-handed tactics and surveillance policies.
The tug of war between Cuomo and de Blasio clarifies that, though local police operate under some different conditions, policies and leadership, they are really the frontline guards of a white supremacist capitalist state. Governor Cuomo, when politically advantageous, promises transparency and reform in the NYPD. But Mayor De Blasio’s mildest hints at reform have led to near rebellion by the police. As unrest mounts, and elected leaders scramble to appease protesters with a litany of promised reforms, we must protest local police violence as state oppression, not local aberrations solvable by empty promises of Democratic Party politicians.
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--2020-06-11--Non-Black People of Color Are Mobilizing to End Complicity in Black Death

The complicity of an Asian American officer in the murder of George Floyd is forcing Asian American communities across the country to face the ongoing ways in which we have benefited from and acted in complicity with broader systems of white supremacy .
Even though the vast majority of the police officers and vigilantes most directly responsible for killing Ahmaud Arbery , Breonna Taylor , Tony McDade , George Floyd and the countless other Black people who have been killed have been white , we Asian Americans , and other non-Black people of color , do not get to look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that white people need to fix .
In George Floyd ’ s case , we have learned that an Asian American officer , Tou Thao , who is Hmong American , was one of the four Minneapolis Police Department officers involved in killing Floyd .
As Floyd begged for his life , bystanders were pleading with Thao to save Floyd ’ s life and stop his companion , white officer Derek Chauvin , from killing him .
In response to those pleas , Thao says , “ He ’ s talking .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Floyd was not fine .
In the days that followed Floyd ’ s killing , prominent Asian American organizations issued statements demanding justice and accountability .
The Coalition of Asian American Leaders in Minnesota called for Asian Americans to build cross-racial solidarity and support Black-led organizing and demands for justice .
An outpouring of Asian American voices surged from organized labor to civil rights groups to public health organizations to community development and queer organizations alike — all condemning police violence and affirming their commitment to Black Lives Matter .
These responses contrast @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2014 .
Gurley was an unarmed Black man who was shot and killed by Chinese American NYPD officer Peter Liang in a public housing stairwell .
At the time , many in the Chinese American community rallied behind Peter Liang because they felt that he was being scapegoated and prosecuted more harshly than white officers who killed Black people in their regular course of business .
This case generated conflict between Black and predominantly Chinese American communities .
However , not all Asian Americans reflexively came to Liang ’ s defense .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ organizations like the Committee Against Anti-Asian Violence that worked closely with Gurley ’ s family to demand justice .
Some Asian American activists organized under the # Asians4BlackLives banner , like in California ’ s Bay Area , amplifying demands and participating in direct actions , while others have used this hashtag to organize among fellow Asian Americans in a more decentralized way .
In this era of Black Lives Matter that emerged in 2013 , younger generations of Asian Americans have shown a growing desire to have difficult conversations among Asian American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the face of conservative Chinese American forces , which have positioned themselves in opposition to Black anti-racist struggles , both in defense of Peter Liang and in opposition to affirmative action and other measures to desegregate public schools .
Given the conflict that exists among Asian American communities in relation to Black Lives Matter , there is also a responsibility and duty to do this work internally and to challenge the ways in which Asian Americans are used as a messenger and vehicle for anti-Black racism in public discourse .
For all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confront anti-Black racism in ourselves , our families and communities .
Asian Americans must grapple with the Peter Liangs and his defenders in our communities , just as Latinx people must also grapple with the George Zimmermans in theirs .
This work must be done with a deepening analysis of systemic racism .
As the writer Lisa Ko tweeted , “ The revolution will not be diversity and inclusion trainings.
” In other words , the problems in policing will not be fixed with anti-bias training or more diversity or piecemeal reforms — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diversification of police departments simply means introducing more faces of color onto the same problem of police violence in the U.S .
Racial introspection is a starting point .
Interpersonal dialogue in our homes and workplaces can help raise awareness and build understanding and critical analysis around racism in the U.S. , but it is also not enough — learning and talking is not enough .
Racism is bigger than individual attitudes and circumstances .
We have to go further and deeper .
We must identify and address the root causes of systemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ translate this growing consciousness into demands and actions that will dismantle the systems that perpetuate so much harm , violence and death against Black people and other communities of color .
There are growing calls to take action and so many resources that have been developed , especially for white people to use their racial privilege to challenge racism anywhere and everywhere .
While non-Black Asian Americans and Latinx people also bear the racial burdens of white supremacy , we too , have relational racial privilege and it is also our duty to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t have to be passive actors in this struggle .
We can join the Black Lives Matter movement by building cross-racial solidarity and intersectional mass movements .
This means we connect the struggles against anti-Black criminalization to the struggles of immigrants and the movement to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement .
This means our struggles must center the voices of intersectionally marginalized people , including Black women , immigrants , disabled people , and queer and transgender people .
As legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw , who coined the term intersectionality , has said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter , all Black lives have to matter .
That means Black lives across gender have to be lifted up.
” And as the Black Lives Matter uprising is centered this Pride month in the U.S. for LGBTQ people , we should understand , as James McMaster writes , “ It ’ s not cancelled , it ’ s being celebrated the way it would be every year if we actually honored its roots : under the radar and out in the open , with black queer and trans people at its center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand what steps or actions to take can be broken down into 10 , 11 or 20 steps .
To keep matters simple , here are three basic guiding principles : First , we must address our relationship to Black liberation in ways that build cross-racial solidarity and support Black movements .
Our actions should follow the lead of Black-led organizing , support their demands and answer their call to action , including national campaigns led by Black Lives Matter and the Movement for Black Lives , as well as local campaigns led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collective .
Oftentimes the call to action is as simple as showing up at a protest , contacting an elected official regarding a specific demand , and donating money to racial justice organizations , mutual aid funds , or to bail funds to protesters get out of jail .
Second , one of the most significant demands that have crystallized around the uprising against police violence is prison abolition and to defund police departments all across this country .
The demand to defund policing utilizes an invest-divest framework , which , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ investments in the education , health and safety of Black people ” and “ divestment from exploitative forces including prisons , fossil fuels , police , surveillance and exploitative corporations.
” Black Lives Matter is a response to police violence and it relies on an understanding of that violence as systemic and endemic to policing and prisons .
Therefore , we have to understand the killing of George Floyd as a product of systems of policing and criminalization doing what they are designed to do .
In addition , when we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ free up resources that can be utilized to uplift Black communities , which have always been subjected to disinvestment , if not extraction , of resources .
These demands are critical at a time when cities and states are experiencing budget deficits as a result of the pandemic and critical services are on the chopping block — all except for policing .
Third , we must organize the communities we are a part of — our families , schools , workplaces , places of worship , and any network of people we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mobilizing more people into this movement .
Black people have been leading and fighting for civil rights and racial justice , so it ’ s imperative that non-Black people share in this duty .
We must join and bring more people into this movement — that is how we build solidarity and create collective change .
There are organizations and other people already doing this work — find them .
If we are truly committed to Black Lives Matter then we must challenge ourselves to go beyond lip service and virtue signaling .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We can not make excuses for ourselves or rationalize that someone else is better suited to do this work .
If you can organize a book club or dinner party , that means you can organize political education , mobilize people to protest and fundraise .
There is no one way to organize , and there are many roles we can each play .
Complicity is a choice .
Fortunately , we have the opportunity to make a different choice .
We can choose to build cross-racial solidarity with Black liberation movements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kochiyama and Grace Lee Boggs did — they understood that as Asian Americans , our collective liberation was intertwined with Black liberation .
Even after this news cycle changes , we can choose to keep fighting until Black Lives Matter is no longer an aspiration , but a reality — in fact , we must .

The complicity of an Asian American officer in the murder of George Floyd is forcing Asian American communities across the country to face the ongoing ways in which we have benefited from and acted in complicity with broader systems of white supremacy.
Even though the vast majority of the police officers and vigilantes most directly responsible for killing Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, George Floyd , and the countless other Black people who have been killed have been white, we Asian Americans, and other non-Black people of color, do not get to look away or make anti-Black racism a problem that white people need to fix.
In George Floyd’s case, we have learned that an Asian American officer, Tou Thao, who is Hmong American, was one of the four Minneapolis Police Department officers involved in killing Floyd. As Floyd begged for his life, bystanders were pleading with Thao to save Floyd’s life and stop his companion, white officer Derek Chauvin, from killing him. In response to those pleas, Thao says, “He’s talking. He’s fine.” However, George Floyd was not fine.
In the days that followed Floyd’s killing, prominent Asian American organizations issued statements demanding justice and accountability. The Coalition of Asian American Leaders in Minnesota called for Asian Americans to build cross-racial solidarity and support Black-led organizing and demands for justice. An outpouring of Asian American voices surged from organized labor to civil rights groups to public health organizations to community development and queer organizations alike — all condemning police violence and affirming their commitment to Black Lives Matter.
These responses contrast sharply with the killing of Akai Gurley in 2014. Gurley was an unarmed Black man who was shot and killed by Chinese American NYPD officer Peter Liang in a public housing stairwell. At the time, many in the Chinese American community rallied behind Peter Liang because they felt that he was being scapegoated and prosecuted more harshly than white officers who killed Black people in their regular course of business. This case generated conflict between Black and predominantly Chinese American communities.
However, not all Asian Americans reflexively came to Liang’s defense. There were Asian Americans activists and community organizations like the Committee Against Anti-Asian Violence that worked closely with Gurley’s family to demand justice. Some Asian American activists organized under the #Asians4BlackLives banner, like in California’s Bay Area, amplifying demands and participating in direct actions, while others have used this hashtag to organize among fellow Asian Americans in a more decentralized way.
For all non-Black people of color, we must confront anti-Black racism in ourselves, our families and communities.
In this era of Black Lives Matter that emerged in 2013, younger generations of Asian Americans have shown a growing desire to have difficult conversations among Asian American communities. This can be tremendously difficult in the face of conservative Chinese American forces, which have positioned themselves in opposition to Black anti-racist struggles, both in defense of Peter Liang and in opposition to affirmative action and other measures to desegregate public schools. Given the conflict that exists among Asian American communities in relation to Black Lives Matter, there is also a responsibility and duty to do this work internally and to challenge the ways in which Asian Americans are used as a messenger and vehicle for anti-Black racism in public discourse.
For all non-Black people of color, we must confront anti-Black racism in ourselves, our families and communities. Asian Americans must grapple with the Peter Liangs and his defenders in our communities, just as Latinx people must also grapple with the George Zimmermans in theirs. This work must be done with a deepening analysis of systemic racism. As the writer Lisa Ko tweeted, “The revolution will not be diversity and inclusion trainings.” In other words, the problems in policing will not be fixed with anti-bias training or more diversity or piecemeal reforms — reforms that will inevitably fail. The diversification of police departments simply means introducing more faces of color onto the same problem of police violence in the U.S.
Racial introspection is a starting point. Interpersonal dialogue in our homes and workplaces can help raise awareness and build understanding and critical analysis around racism in the U.S., but it is also not enough — learning and talking is not enough. Racism is bigger than individual attitudes and circumstances. We have to go further and deeper. We must identify and address the root causes of systemic racism. Therefore, we must ultimately translate this growing consciousness into demands and actions that will dismantle the systems that perpetuate so much harm, violence and death against Black people and other communities of color.
There are growing calls to take action and so many resources that have been developed, especially for white people to use their racial privilege to challenge racism anywhere and everywhere. While non-Black Asian Americans and Latinx people also bear the racial burdens of white supremacy, we too, have relational racial privilege and it is also our duty to fight anti-Black racism. We don’t have to be passive actors in this struggle.
Black people have been leading and fighting for civil rights and racial justice, so it’s imperative that non-Black people share in this duty.
We can join the Black Lives Matter movement by building cross-racial solidarity and intersectional mass movements. This means we connect the struggles against anti-Black criminalization to the struggles of immigrants and the movement to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement. This means our struggles must center the voices of intersectionally marginalized people, including Black women, immigrants, disabled people, and queer and transgender people. As legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, who coined the term intersectionality, has said, “If Black lives really do matter, all Black lives have to matter. That means Black lives across gender have to be lifted up.” And as the Black Lives Matter uprising is centered this Pride month in the U.S. for LGBTQ people, we should understand, as James McMaster writes, “It’s not cancelled, it’s being celebrated the way it would be every year if we actually honored its roots: under the radar and out in the open, with black queer and trans people at its center calling the shots.”
The way we understand what steps or actions to take can be broken down into 10, 11 or 20 steps. To keep matters simple, here are three basic guiding principles:
First, we must address our relationship to Black liberation in ways that build cross-racial solidarity and support Black movements. Our actions should follow the lead of Black-led organizing, support their demands and answer their call to action, including national campaigns led by Black Lives Matter and the Movement for Black Lives, as well as local campaigns led by Reclaim the Block and Black Visions Collective. Oftentimes the call to action is as simple as showing up at a protest, contacting an elected official regarding a specific demand, and donating money to racial justice organizations, mutual aid funds, or to bail funds to protesters get out of jail.
Second, one of the most significant demands that have crystallized around the uprising against police violence is prison abolition and to defund police departments all across this country. The demand to defund policing utilizes an invest-divest framework, which, according to the Movement for Black Lives, refers to “investments in the education, health and safety of Black people” and “divestment from exploitative forces including prisons, fossil fuels, police, surveillance and exploitative corporations.” Black Lives Matter is a response to police violence and it relies on an understanding of that violence as systemic and endemic to policing and prisons. Therefore, we have to understand the killing of George Floyd as a product of systems of policing and criminalization doing what they are designed to do. In addition, when we defund policing and prisons, we also free up resources that can be utilized to uplift Black communities, which have always been subjected to disinvestment, if not extraction, of resources. These demands are critical at a time when cities and states are experiencing budget deficits as a result of the pandemic and critical services are on the chopping block — all except for policing.
Third, we must organize the communities we are a part of — our families, schools, workplaces, places of worship, and any network of people we have relationships to, with the intention of mobilizing more people into this movement. Black people have been leading and fighting for civil rights and racial justice, so it’s imperative that non-Black people share in this duty. We must join and bring more people into this movement — that is how we build solidarity and create collective change. There are organizations and other people already doing this work — find them. If we are truly committed to Black Lives Matter then we must challenge ourselves to go beyond lip service and virtue signaling. Organizing takes time, energy and commitment. We cannot make excuses for ourselves or rationalize that someone else is better suited to do this work. If you can organize a book club or dinner party, that means you can organize political education, mobilize people to protest and fundraise. There is no one way to organize, and there are many roles we can each play.
Complicity is a choice. Fortunately, we have the opportunity to make a different choice. We can choose to build cross-racial solidarity with Black liberation movements, like Asian American movement leaders Yuri Kochiyama and Grace Lee Boggs did — they understood that as Asian Americans, our collective liberation was intertwined with Black liberation. Even after this news cycle changes, we can choose to keep fighting until Black Lives Matter is no longer an aspiration, but a reality — in fact, we must.
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--2020-06-11--Police Are Building Surveillance Networks of Private Security Cameras in Cities

Log onto Nextdoor.com , the message board of choice for Washington , D.C. ’ s most affluent neighborhoods , and , alongside photos of lost keys and microwaves for sale , there are clips from security cameras .
“ Man attempting to enter parked cars ( possibly armed with visible gun ) ” reads one post by “ Simon J.
” from July 10 , 2018 , featuring a grainy image of a Black man walking beside a van .
Further posts by Simon J. , published in the Nextdoor forum for D.C. ’ s Georgetown neighborhood reveal that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a shape in the man ’ s pocket .
A string of comments from neighbors follows , each claiming they , too , have seen this man in their neighborhood .
“ I saw him too at 29th and N St… Scoping out cars !
” one wrote .
Another woman responded to say she saw him “ checking out cars , ” and attached an image of an unidentifiable Black man riding a bicycle down the sidewalk in broad daylight , his face turned from the camera .
Several commenters lamented that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the cops did not judge the situation worthy of response .
“ If you tell the police he is armed , they should come , ” one person suggested .
For cities across the country , encouraging security camera ownership and this kind of online sharing , often in partnership with police , is becoming a new pillar of what its advocates deem “ crime prevention.
” These initiatives have changed the way communities are policed — and police themselves .
Now , as protests over police brutality surge in cities across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on these networks to identify demonstrators .
“ We are not done making arrests , ” Peter Newsham , D.C. ’ s police chief , said at a June 1 press conference after a night of unrest in Washington , in which police used tear gas on protesters .
“ Our city , thankfully , has a very expansive CCTV system .
We have government-owned cameras .
We have privately-owned cameras.
” He added that police were “ urging ” residents and businesses to share their footage .
D.C. residents have taken up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” reads one June 2 Nextdoor post from a woman in northwest D.C. She wrote that she was forwarding police a video of “ several young men ” talking about robbing a bank during the protests , unaware they were being recorded by her home ’ s security camera .
Washington , D.C. , is a striking example of how cities can finance private surveillance .
Over the past four years , D.C. has funded more than 18,000 security cameras for its residents , an investment of more than $ 2 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ camera “ incentive program ” passes out $ 500 rebates and vouchers to city residents who purchase their own camera systems — provided they register them with the city ’ s police department .
A new abundance of security cameras now blink out from porches and back alleys .
Their footage is plastered across forums like Nextdoor .
Such initiatives are proliferating across the country .
Spokane , Washington , and Baltimore , Maryland , as well as several neighborhoods in Minneapolis , have launched similar rebate programs in the last two years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Des Moines , Iowa , and Berkeley , California , all keep private security camera registries .
These registry programs typically share only the location and camera system information with police , and do not give law enforcement direct access to camera feeds .
Chicago ’ s security camera network goes a step further , however , as once the owner registers their camera , the police and various city agencies can access it at any time without permission .
The Chicago police say they command a network of 45,000 cameras around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how many of those cameras are privately owned .
The Metropolitan Police Department ( MPD ) already operates hundreds of public CCTV cameras around Washington , D.C .
Through the security camera registry , police now have the precise coordinates of thousands more .
And unlike the CCTV system , the locations of registered private cameras are not made public .
“ I can say without a doubt we ’ re seeing more and more cameras , ” said Robert Contee , MPD assistant chief .
“ The rebate program has certainly helped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tracked people deemed “ suspects ” walking to or from crime scenes using the cameras .
Checking the private camera registry to contact camera owners for footage , he said , is now commonplace in his investigations .
Program reports show that footage from the cameras has been used to make arrests on charges ranging from murder to petty theft .
Demonstrators in D.C. and in cities across the country , already enduring police violence , must also contend with cameras at every turn — on businesses , on public buildings , within @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the D.C.-based Stop Police Terror Project , which organizes around police violence , says that for protesters , that “ is really scary.
” Historically , police and the FBI have put significant resources toward tracking Black activists , from the COINTELPRO projects during the civil rights movement to the uprising in Ferguson .
“ [ Community surveillance ] is one of the more insidious ways we witness that , ” Shepard said .
“ In this moment , we as organizers want to push the narrative that we need to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watching them .
It ’ s unfortunate to see the leaders in D.C. not take that to heart.
” There have long been concerns surrounding the privacy implications of police reliance on private security camera footage .
For Sharon Franklin , policy director for New America ’ s Open Technology Institute , the programs serve as a kind of backdoor for police surveillance .
“ This is the deputizing of private individuals for police surveillance , without apparent controls to ensure that the rules that should apply to government surveillance are still applying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warned that digital security cameras , now built to broadcast footage with ease on social media , foster paranoia in wealthy neighborhoods — often leading to racial profiling .
Use of such cameras to share photos of people of color ( often Black men ) deemed “ suspicious ” in white neighborhoods is well-documented .
In D.C. , there is a clear disparity in which residents are taking advantage of the camera rebates .
As DCist reported in March , neighborhoods east of the Anacostia river have received only 15 percent of rebates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent crime rates .
D.C. ’ s whiter , wealthier neighborhoods , meanwhile , have benefited .
Michelle Garcia , the director of D.C. ’ s Office of Victim Services and Justice Grants , which runs the camera incentive program , said she would not confirm or deny an unequal distribution of the cameras .
“ We have been literally pounding the pavement to get the information out and make people aware of the program , ” she said .
This distribution of cameras in Washington , D.C. , aligns with national trends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Amazon Ring have targeted the country ’ s more affluent , suburban neighborhoods as a consumer base .
Amazon markets its Ring Doorbell product not just as a video feed but as a platform — the shiny doorbell camera comes packaged with a community crime-mapping app .
Amazon Ring has forged data-sharing relationships with more than 400 police departments nationally , and has come under fire for its close relationship with law enforcement .
The company has pushed police departments to promote its cameras , in some cases offering free cameras as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to reporting by Motherboard .
Notably , companies like Ring have loose restrictions on when they can share private camera footage directly with police .
According to Ring ’ s public information sharing policy , the company may disclose information “ in connection with an investigation of suspected or actual illegal activity , ” though Ring says it does not do so in the absence of a subpoena or warrant .
Amazon Ring says it has played an active role in promoting security camera subsidies across the country .
Though the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with MPD , in 2016 , at the camera program ’ s launch , Ring posted a blog post announcing it was working with the government of the District of Columbia to “ get the word out.
” “ Ring has already worked with cities across the US to launch similar programs , ” the post reads .
The company then said it was lowering the price of some of its cameras specifically for D.C. residents taking advantage of the rebate program .
Garcia said that regardless of Ring ’ s support , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any particular camera for purchase .
But for Amazon , the program has undoubtedly been good business .
“ Ring is committed to protecting user privacy , ” a company spokesperson told Truthout , adding that the company does not support programs that mandate sharing of footage “ contrary to [ users ’ ] personal preference.
” Many companies have found investing in surveillance to be lucrative .
In Minneapolis , where police in at least five city suburbs have partnerships with Ring , Target has been a major investor in police surveillance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the city .
On May 28 , in the days following George Floyd ’ s death at the hands of Minneapolis police , footage of a Minneapolis Target being looted went viral .
For many , the incident has come to represent popular backlash against surveillance and corporate greed .
Private security cameras are often just one piece of the ever-expanding surveillance infrastructure in cities .
In Chicago , police use Stingray tracking devices to surveil cell phone locations .
In New York City , police use license plate readers to monitor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time .
And in January , MPD announced it was partnering with Nextdoor , allowing forum users like those that shared the “ suspicious ” photos in Georgetown to quickly forward their posts to police .
“ You ’ ve seen that cities , by partnering with private businesses and individuals , by getting federal grants from the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice , have been able to build out these very massive camera networks that essentially allow police departments to have a huge portion of cities under watch all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , senior counsel at the Project on Government Oversight .
“ That is pretty troubling.
” For Shepard , this ever-expanding digital surveillance infrastructure is most harmful for Black communities and other communities of color .
“ When we have … surveillance cameras everywhere , you have to wear an ankle bracelet , you have a drone policing your neighborhood — it ’ s a way to make communities that have already been displaced through ghettoization and redlining easy to police , ” she said .
Of course , the growing abundance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sword for police .
The camera video of George Floyd ’ s death has spurred a national reckoning .
It was captured , too , on nearby security cameras .

Some cities even have rebate programs for residential security cameras, provided they are registered with local police.
Log onto Nextdoor.com, the message board of choice for Washington, D.C.’s most affluent neighborhoods, and, alongside photos of lost keys and microwaves for sale, there are clips from security cameras.
“Man attempting to enter parked cars (possibly armed with visible gun)” reads one post by “Simon J.” from July 10, 2018, featuring a grainy image of a Black man walking beside a van. Further posts by Simon J., published in the Nextdoor forum for D.C.’s Georgetown neighborhood reveal that the “visible gun” refers only to a shape in the man’s pocket.
A string of comments from neighbors follows, each claiming they, too, have seen this man in their neighborhood. “I saw him too at 29th and N St… Scoping out cars!” one wrote. Another woman responded to say she saw him “checking out cars,” and attached an image of an unidentifiable Black man riding a bicycle down the sidewalk in broad daylight, his face turned from the camera.
Several commenters lamented that, when they had called the police, the cops did not judge the situation worthy of response. “If you tell the police he is armed, they should come,” one person suggested.
For cities across the country, encouraging security camera ownership and this kind of online sharing, often in partnership with police, is becoming a new pillar of what its advocates deem “crime prevention.” These initiatives have changed the way communities are policed — and police themselves. Now, as protests over police brutality surge in cities across the country, law enforcement is relying on these networks to identify demonstrators.
“We are not done making arrests,” Peter Newsham, D.C.’s police chief, said at a June 1 press conference after a night of unrest in Washington, in which police used tear gas on protesters. “Our city, thankfully, has a very expansive CCTV system. We have government-owned cameras. We have privately-owned cameras.” He added that police were “urging” residents and businesses to share their footage.
Security camera ownership and online sharing, often in partnership with police, is becoming a new pillar of what its advocates deem “crime prevention.”
D.C. residents have taken up the call. “Check your cameras,” reads one June 2 Nextdoor post from a woman in northwest D.C. She wrote that she was forwarding police a video of “several young men” talking about robbing a bank during the protests, unaware they were being recorded by her home’s security camera.
Police Incentivize Private Surveillance Cameras
Washington, D.C., is a striking example of how cities can finance private surveillance. Over the past four years, D.C. has funded more than 18,000 security cameras for its residents, an investment of more than $2 million. The city’s private security camera “incentive program” passes out $500 rebates and vouchers to city residents who purchase their own camera systems — provided they register them with the city’s police department. A new abundance of security cameras now blink out from porches and back alleys. Their footage is plastered across forums like Nextdoor.
Such initiatives are proliferating across the country. Spokane, Washington, and Baltimore, Maryland, as well as several neighborhoods in Minneapolis, have launched similar rebate programs in the last two years, while San Francisco, California, Des Moines, Iowa, and Berkeley, California, all keep private security camera registries.
These registry programs typically share only the location and camera system information with police, and do not give law enforcement direct access to camera feeds. Chicago’s security camera network goes a step further, however, as once the owner registers their camera, the police and various city agencies can access it at any time without permission. The Chicago police say they command a network of 45,000 cameras around the city, though they do not disclose how many of those cameras are privately owned.
We need to be watching out for our neighbors, not watching them.
The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) already operates hundreds of public CCTV cameras around Washington, D.C. Through the security camera registry, police now have the precise coordinates of thousands more. And unlike the CCTV system, the locations of registered private cameras are not made public.
“I can say without a doubt we’re seeing more and more cameras,” said Robert Contee, MPD assistant chief. “The rebate program has certainly helped with that.”
Contee said MPD has tracked people deemed “suspects” walking to or from crime scenes using the cameras. Checking the private camera registry to contact camera owners for footage, he said, is now commonplace in his investigations. Program reports show that footage from the cameras has been used to make arrests on charges ranging from murder to petty theft.
Demonstrators in D.C. and in cities across the country, already enduring police violence, must also contend with cameras at every turn — on businesses, on public buildings, within communities. Whitney Shepard, an organizer with the D.C.-based Stop Police Terror Project, which organizes around police violence, says that for protesters, that “is really scary.” Historically, police and the FBI have put significant resources toward tracking Black activists, from the COINTELPRO projects during the civil rights movement to the uprising in Ferguson.
“[Community surveillance] is one of the more insidious ways we witness that,” Shepard said. “In this moment, we as organizers want to push the narrative that we need to be watching out for our neighbors, not watching them. It’s unfortunate to see the leaders in D.C. not take that to heart.”
Amazon Ring has forged data-sharing relationships with more than 400 police departments nationally.
There have long been concerns surrounding the privacy implications of police reliance on private security camera footage. For Sharon Franklin, policy director for New America’s Open Technology Institute, the programs serve as a kind of backdoor for police surveillance.
“This is the deputizing of private individuals for police surveillance, without apparent controls to ensure that the rules that should apply to government surveillance are still applying,” Franklin said.
Others have warned that digital security cameras, now built to broadcast footage with ease on social media, foster paranoia in wealthy neighborhoods — often leading to racial profiling. Use of such cameras to share photos of people of color (often Black men) deemed “suspicious” in white neighborhoods is well-documented.
In D.C., there is a clear disparity in which residents are taking advantage of the camera rebates. As DCist reported in March, neighborhoods east of the Anacostia river have received only 15 percent of rebates, despite higher poverty levels and reported violent crime rates. D.C.’s whiter, wealthier neighborhoods, meanwhile, have benefited.
Michelle Garcia, the director of D.C.’s Office of Victim Services and Justice Grants, which runs the camera incentive program, said she would not confirm or deny an unequal distribution of the cameras. “We have been literally pounding the pavement to get the information out and make people aware of the program,” she said.
A Lucrative Spider Web of Surveillance
This distribution of cameras in Washington, D.C., aligns with national trends of private security camera use. Companies like Amazon Ring have targeted the country’s more affluent, suburban neighborhoods as a consumer base. Amazon markets its Ring Doorbell product not just as a video feed but as a platform — the shiny doorbell camera comes packaged with a community crime-mapping app.
Amazon Ring has forged data-sharing relationships with more than 400 police departments nationally, and has come under fire for its close relationship with law enforcement. The company has pushed police departments to promote its cameras, in some cases offering free cameras as a reward for promoting the Ring app, according to reporting by Motherboard.
Private security cameras are often just one piece of the ever-expanding surveillance infrastructure in cities.
Notably, companies like Ring have loose restrictions on when they can share private camera footage directly with police. According to Ring’s public information sharing policy, the company may disclose information “in connection with an investigation of suspected or actual illegal activity,” though Ring says it does not do so in the absence of a subpoena or warrant.
Amazon Ring says it has played an active role in promoting security camera subsidies across the country. Though the company does not have a public partnership with MPD, in 2016, at the camera program’s launch, Ring posted a blog post announcing it was working with the government of the District of Columbia to “get the word out.”
“Ring has already worked with cities across the US to launch similar programs,” the post reads. The company then said it was lowering the price of some of its cameras specifically for D.C. residents taking advantage of the rebate program.
Garcia said that regardless of Ring’s support, the D.C. incentive program does not recommend any particular camera for purchase. But for Amazon, the program has undoubtedly been good business.
“Ring is committed to protecting user privacy,” a company spokesperson told Truthout, adding that the company does not support programs that mandate sharing of footage “contrary to [users’] personal preference.”
Many companies have found investing in surveillance to be lucrative. In Minneapolis, where police in at least five city suburbs have partnerships with Ring, Target has been a major investor in police surveillance, spending $300,000 on CCTV cameras around the city.
On May 28, in the days following George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police, footage of a Minneapolis Target being looted went viral. For many, the incident has come to represent popular backlash against surveillance and corporate greed.
Private security cameras are often just one piece of the ever-expanding surveillance infrastructure in cities. In Chicago, police use Stingray tracking devices to surveil cell phone locations. In New York City, police use license plate readers to monitor a car’s location in real time. And in January, MPD announced it was partnering with Nextdoor, allowing forum users like those that shared the “suspicious” photos in Georgetown to quickly forward their posts to police.
“You’ve seen that cities, by partnering with private businesses and individuals, by getting federal grants from the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice, have been able to build out these very massive camera networks that essentially allow police departments to have a huge portion of cities under watch all the time,” said Jake Laperruque, senior counsel at the Project on Government Oversight. “That is pretty troubling.”
For Shepard, this ever-expanding digital surveillance infrastructure is most harmful for Black communities and other communities of color.
“When we have … surveillance cameras everywhere, you have to wear an ankle bracelet, you have a drone policing your neighborhood — it’s a way to make communities that have already been displaced through ghettoization and redlining easy to police,” she said.
Of course, the growing abundance of camera footage has also proved a double-edged sword for police. The camera video of George Floyd’s death has spurred a national reckoning. It was captured, too, on nearby security cameras.
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--2020-06-12--Minneapolis Organizers Are Already Building the Tools for Safety Without Police

In 2018 , members of the Minnesota grassroots groups Reclaim the Block and Black Visions Collective dropped a banner at Minneapolis City Hall .
On it were two lists : on the left , three budget items on the Minneapolis Police Department ( MPD ) budget , totaling $ 9 million .
The right side was significantly longer , listing programs and organizations where the city could invest those $ 9 million to promote community safety — like domestic violence programs , housing and harm reduction .
We were calling on the city to move our community ’ s dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and into programs that actually keep us safe .
That year , the city council moved $ 1 million from MPD ’ s budget into violence prevention — a drop in the bucket of the MPD ’ s $ 180 million budget , but a significant investment for underfunded anti-violence work .
It was a start .
Less than two years and a great deal of community organizing later , on June 7 , 2020 , members of the Minneapolis City Council stood on stage in a local park .
In front @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they made a historic announcement : The city of Minneapolis would disband the Minneapolis Police Department and begin a transition to a new community safety model .
That evening , the questions began .
“ Will all of the cops be gone tomorrow ?
” “ Won ’ t this allow all of the ‘ bad people ’ to do ‘ bad things ’ ?
” “ What about murders ?
” No sweeping , structural change can happen overnight .
And the transition to a police-free Minneapolis will be intentional , measured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is important to understand that Minneapolis residents have already been taking care of each other , and we will continue to .
It ’ s also worth recognizing that prison abolition is not a reaction to a moment , but a long-time movement backed by decades of Black radical thinking and experience .
In the past two weeks since Mr. Floyd ’ s brutal murder at the hands of the MPD , Minneapolis has seen community members step up to fill the gaps where our city , state and county systems have failed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fire brigades , a people ’ s ambulance , a transit support system , food banks and hot meal bars , and community safety and defense teams .
There have been informal teach-ins , and petitions to cut MPD contracts from museums , business events and schools .
Neighbors are talking to each other and actually getting to know who lives on their street .
People are having deeper conversations about community care and safety .
Friends are having Facebook conversations about the cop-like figures on every TV show — including children ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watching folks , in real time , figure out solutions to change not only behavior but how they think about their neighbors .
Minneapolis is creating a police-free future in real time .
The first question people often ask about dismantling police is : “ But what about ‘ violent criminals ’ ?
” MPD150 created a resource to answer some of those worries .
Locally , Domestic Abuse Project has a program for people who have used violence , as well as a victim/survivor program .
Last year , the city created @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assess if the city could respond to any of these calls without relying on the police department .
The idea is that people who are trained to respond to specific emergencies would be dispatched instead of police .
For example , CAHOOTS in Eugene , Oregon , is set up so that a medic and a crisis worker respond to mental health emergencies .
This is just one response model ; in other communities , neighbors have established skill shares so that as many people as possible are trained to quickly respond to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , none of these programs stands on its own as the only solution .
Unfortunately , programs like CAHOOTS — much like the Office of Violence Prevention here in Minneapolis — have had to fight for sustained funding .
In the meantime , police budgets have increased exponentially , year after year , without any real community accountability .
In this moment when a lot of folks are thinking seriously about investing in what keeps us safe and divesting from police , it ’ s time for these alternative safety programs to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The future that I see Minneapolis moving toward must be one without police .
The MPD has shown over and over and over and over that they are indeed one of the biggest threats to our communities ’ safety .
In the process of dismantling the MPD , we will try things and make mistakes , but we ’ ll learn how to fail with grace and we ’ ll be willing to try again — together .
Living in a society without police oppression is for the benefit of all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and work to come from all of us , not just the city council , not just a small group of organizers , but everyone in this city who is invested in it being a safer place to live and thrive .
And we ’ re not doing this alone .
We have generations of thought behind us and years of experience on the ground now .
As abolitionist organizer Mariame Kaba has reminded us : “ We have to act with the urgency of the moment and the patience of a thousand @ @ @

Part of the Series The Road to Abolition
In 2018, members of the Minnesota grassroots groups Reclaim the Block and Black Visions Collective dropped a banner at Minneapolis City Hall. On it were two lists: on the left, three budget items on the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) budget, totaling $9 million. The right side was significantly longer, listing programs and organizations where the city could invest those $9 million to promote community safety — like domestic violence programs, housing and harm reduction. We were calling on the city to move our community’s dollars out of the violent, untrustworthy MPD, and into programs that actually keep us safe. That year, the city council moved $1 million from MPD’s budget into violence prevention — a drop in the bucket of the MPD’s $180 million budget, but a significant investment for underfunded anti-violence work. It was a start.
Less than two years and a great deal of community organizing later, on June 7, 2020, members of the Minneapolis City Council stood on stage in a local park. In front of a crowd of community members, they made a historic announcement: The city of Minneapolis would disband the Minneapolis Police Department and begin a transition to a new community safety model.
That evening, the questions began. “Will all of the cops be gone tomorrow?” “Won’t this allow all of the ‘bad people’ to do ‘bad things’?” “What about murders?”
No sweeping, structural change can happen overnight. And the transition to a police-free Minneapolis will be intentional, measured and collaborative. Right now, it is important to understand that Minneapolis residents have already been taking care of each other, and we will continue to. It’s also worth recognizing that prison abolition is not a reaction to a moment, but a long-time movement backed by decades of Black radical thinking and experience.
In the past two weeks since Mr. Floyd’s brutal murder at the hands of the MPD, Minneapolis has seen community members step up to fill the gaps where our city, state and county systems have failed us. We’ve created community fire brigades, a people’s ambulance, a transit support system, food banks and hot meal bars, and community safety and defense teams. There have been informal teach-ins, and petitions to cut MPD contracts from museums, business events and schools. Neighbors are talking to each other and actually getting to know who lives on their street.
People are having deeper conversations about community care and safety. Friends are having Facebook conversations about the cop-like figures on every TV show — including children’s programs — and we’re watching folks, in real time, figure out solutions to change not only behavior but how they think about their neighbors. Minneapolis is creating a police-free future in real time.
Prison abolition is not a reaction to a moment, but a long-time movement backed by decades of Black radical thinking and experience.
The first question people often ask about dismantling police is: “But what about ‘violent criminals’?” MPD150 created a resource to answer some of those worries. Locally, Domestic Abuse Project has a program for people who have used violence, as well as a victim/survivor program. Last year, the city created a working group about 911 calls to assess if the city could respond to any of these calls without relying on the police department. The idea is that people who are trained to respond to specific emergencies would be dispatched instead of police. For example, CAHOOTS in Eugene, Oregon, is set up so that a medic and a crisis worker respond to mental health emergencies. This is just one response model; in other communities, neighbors have established skill shares so that as many people as possible are trained to quickly respond to various kinds of emergencies. Of course, none of these programs stands on its own as the only solution.
Unfortunately, programs like CAHOOTS — much like the Office of Violence Prevention here in Minneapolis — have had to fight for sustained funding. In the meantime, police budgets have increased exponentially, year after year, without any real community accountability. In this moment when a lot of folks are thinking seriously about investing in what keeps us safe and divesting from police, it’s time for these alternative safety programs to be tried — and funded — in earnest.
We will try things and make mistakes, but we’ll learn how to fail with grace and we’ll be willing to try again — together.
The future that I see Minneapolis moving toward must be one without police. The MPD has shown over and over and over and over that they are indeed one of the biggest threats to our communities’ safety. In the process of dismantling the MPD, we will try things and make mistakes, but we’ll learn how to fail with grace and we’ll be willing to try again — together. Living in a society without police oppression is for the benefit of all of us — and we need the wisdom and work to come from all of us, not just the city council, not just a small group of organizers, but everyone in this city who is invested in it being a safer place to live and thrive. And we’re not doing this alone. We have generations of thought behind us and years of experience on the ground now.
As abolitionist organizer Mariame Kaba has reminded us: “We have to act with the urgency of the moment and the patience of a thousand years.”
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--2020-06-12--Georgia Primary Sends Us a Warning — November Could Be a Voting Rights Disaster

For many years now , voting rights groups have warned that U.S. election infrastructure is crumbling : that low-income residents are facing a growing litany of obstacles to voting , deliberately put in their path by conservative legislators and jurists ; that elections are open to being hacked and otherwise manipulated by overseas governments and other entities ; and that , as the Voting Rights Act has been gutted by the Supreme Court , voters of color are once again being systematically discriminated against by city and state authorities in many parts of the country .
Late last year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have enacted voting rights restrictions in recent years .
Amongst these , Georgia , which is now shaping up to be a key swing state in November ’ s elections , has stood out for the lengths that its elected officials have gone to make voting harder for poor , especially non-white , people : Its legislature has passed onerous “ no match , no vote ” laws , so that if a name on the voter registration form is spelled even slightly differently from that person ’ s name on other state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It has also gone out of its way to limit early voting options .
And it has imposed lengthy deadlines for registering to vote ahead of the election — which resulted in many tens of thousands of people losing access to the ballot in 2018 .
That November , Republican Brian Kemp ( who , at the time , was the secretary of state in charge of Georgia ’ s election machinery ) narrowly defeated Democrat Stacey Abrams in the gubernatorial race .
It was an election marred by allegations of extreme voter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation has only gotten worse .
This all came to a head in the Peach State this week , when the country bore witness to an electoral fiasco so extreme that it ought to set warning lights flashing red from coast to coast regarding the November election .
Record numbers of Georgians — 30 times the number in 2018 — requested mail-in ballots to participate in Tuesday ’ s primary .
But for those who either didn ’ t receive these ballots or opted to vote in person , the lines to vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned out that the state had bought new voting machines — from a company with alleged ties to GOP Gov .
Brian Kemp — that had all kinds of glitches .
Many polling stations in poor communities simply couldn ’ t get the machines up and running , for reasons that included operational pin numbers being non-functional .
And , because so many other polling stations had been closed in these neighborhoods in recent years ; because many poll workers , out of fear that if they showed up they would get sick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the venues that did open , new social spacing and cleaning protocols dramatically slowed down the rate at which voters could be processed through , the simple act of casting a ballot turned into an epic , time-consuming , frustrating , drama for untold thousands of Atlanta residents .
Meanwhile , in wealthier , whiter parts of the state , there were no such snafus .
In Atlanta , there were , from the morning onward , reports of people leaving polling stations , after waiting for much of the day , without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And for those who stuck it out , as regular voting hours drew to a close , the lines were still so long that several counties in the greater Atlanta area had to extend their opening times well into the night .
The next day , Stacey Abrams slammed the debacle as a combination of “ malfeasance ” and “ incompetence ” on the part of state officials .
It would be bad enough if this fiasco was limited to Georgia .
But , of course , Kemp ’ s state isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around voting access .
During Wisconsin ’ s primary earlier in the spring , thousands of people who requested absentee ballots didn ’ t receive them in time , and , despite this , the state ’ s GOP legislators fought a rearguard action to drastically restrict the deadline for when such ballots had to be returned .
In Pennsylvania , South Carolina and Nevada , recent votes have all been marred by either long lines at the polls , in part caused by requested absentee ballots not being delivered to voters on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of mail-in ballots .
Texas ’ s GOP and its state attorney general have repeatedly gone to court over the past month to prevent big cities from allowing people to use “ fear of COVID-19 ” as a reason for being able to vote by mail .
And , from the White House , Trump tweets out a constant stream of dark warnings about the dangers of fraudulent votes being cast if vote-by-mail systems are expanded .
He is , in this , backed up by a chorus of conservative media and think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Republican National Committee , which is currently suing California and other states to stop their expansion of vote-by-mail systems .
So adamant are the Republicans that vote-by-mail hurts their electoral prospects , that the party even seems willing to countenance the bankruptcy of the U.S .
Postal Service ; since April , the GOP in Congress has been blocking efforts to send needed dollars the postal service ’ s way to keep it afloat in the wake of the economic shutdowns ordered to slow the spread of coronavirus .
It ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make it harder for people to vote as something new .
It ’ s not ; it ’ s actually something time-tested and shameful at this point .
For at least the past 20 years , variants on this theme have been standard operating procedure .
In 2000 , George W. Bush won the election after squeaking through in Florida .
Much of the media focused on hanging chads and dimpled ballots .
Meanwhile , as I wrote about in my book Conned , three-quarters of a million Florida residents were , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felony convictions ; and , at a county level , GOP elections officials in Florida had , in the period prior to the election , launched a particularly aggressive effort to purge voter rolls of those alleged to have felonies , even if the databases they used generated a huge number of false positives .
A similar trend was in evidence throughout the Old South , most of the states of which had , during the last years of the 19th and first years of the 20th centuries , embraced the permanent disenfranchisement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of their Jim Crow edifice .
It was also in evidence in Iowa ( and in several of the mountain West states ) the constitutions of which , written in the early years of the 20th century , had borrowed heavily from the Jim Crow constitutions of the post-Reconstruction South .
By 2020 , nearly 1.5 million Floridians had felony records , and despite the passage of a vote-restoration ballot initiative in 2018 , GOP legislators are still doing everything in their power to limit the ability of those with felony records @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
More generally , from the Reagan years onward , GOP operatives at the state and national level have gone out of their way to undermine free and fair voting processes : contracting with companies to manufacture voting machines that had no paper back-up ; making it ever-harder for students to register to vote ; imposing ID requirements that made it more difficult for low-income and residents of color to cast ballots ; closing down polling stations in low-income urban neighborhoods , and so on .
During the 2008 election season , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an article for Mother Jones .
They included , in some counties , political operatives challenging the citizenship status of voters with Latinx-sounding names ; and , elsewhere , sending out mass mailings to residents of low-income neighborhoods , and then , if the letters were returned as “ undeliverable , ” using that as evidence a person no longer lived at the address and challenging their voter registration .
Of course , this sordid vote-suppression history isn ’ t limited to the GOP : The pillars of Jim Crow were long maintained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the worst disenfranchising methods — from the poll tax to the literacy test — were perfected during years in which Democrats controlled statehouses throughout the region .
But , while Democrats historically don ’ t have even remotely clean hands regarding franchise issues , for the last several decades it has been the GOP that has enthusiastically embraced the tactics of voter suppression .
Today , with Trump struggling in his reelection efforts , these ugly campaigns to restrict the franchise have become key parts of the contemporary GOP ’ s political brand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whole country witnessed a debacle .
Sure , some of the chaos was the result of the disruption caused by a pandemic .
But the reason things got so bad , so quickly , in urban , disproportionately Black precincts , has at least as much to do with a deliberate strategy of de facto disenfranchisement as it has to do with COVID-19 .
Those images of voters forced to wait hours in line , to risk exposure to a potentially deadly virus simply in order to cast their ballots , ought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone concerned with this country ’ s democratic processes as we approach the November election .

Part of the Series Voting Wrongs
For many years now, voting rights groups have warned that U.S. election infrastructure is crumbling: that low-income residents are facing a growing litany of obstacles to voting, deliberately put in their path by conservative legislators and jurists; that elections are open to being hacked and otherwise manipulated by overseas governments and other entities; and that, as the Voting Rights Act has been gutted by the Supreme Court, voters of color are once again being systematically discriminated against by city and state authorities in many parts of the country.
Late last year, the Brennan Center documented how 25 states have enacted voting rights restrictions in recent years. Amongst these, Georgia, which is now shaping up to be a key swing state in November’s elections, has stood out for the lengths that its elected officials have gone to make voting harder for poor, especially non-white, people: Its legislature has passed onerous “no match, no vote” laws, so that if a name on the voter registration form is spelled even slightly differently from that person’s name on other state records, they cannot vote. It has also gone out of its way to limit early voting options. And it has imposed lengthy deadlines for registering to vote ahead of the election — which resulted in many tens of thousands of people losing access to the ballot in 2018.
That November, Republican Brian Kemp (who, at the time, was the secretary of state in charge of Georgia’s election machinery) narrowly defeated Democrat Stacey Abrams in the gubernatorial race. It was an election marred by allegations of extreme voter suppression. Since then, a bad situation has only gotten worse.
This all came to a head in the Peach State this week, when the country bore witness to an electoral fiasco so extreme that it ought to set warning lights flashing red from coast to coast regarding the November election.
Record numbers of Georgians — 30 times the number in 2018 — requested mail-in ballots to participate in Tuesday’s primary. But for those who either didn’t receive these ballots or opted to vote in person, the lines to vote in Atlanta stretched for hours. It turned out that the state had bought new voting machines — from a company with alleged ties to GOP Gov. Brian Kemp — that had all kinds of glitches. Many polling stations in poor communities simply couldn’t get the machines up and running, for reasons that included operational pin numbers being non-functional. And, because so many other polling stations had been closed in these neighborhoods in recent years; because many poll workers, out of fear that if they showed up they would get sick, stayed away; because, in the venues that did open, new social spacing and cleaning protocols dramatically slowed down the rate at which voters could be processed through, the simple act of casting a ballot turned into an epic, time-consuming, frustrating, drama for untold thousands of Atlanta residents. Meanwhile, in wealthier, whiter parts of the state, there were no such snafus.
In Atlanta, there were, from the morning onward, reports of people leaving polling stations, after waiting for much of the day, without having been able to cast their ballots. And for those who stuck it out, as regular voting hours drew to a close, the lines were still so long that several counties in the greater Atlanta area had to extend their opening times well into the night. The next day, Stacey Abrams slammed the debacle as a combination of “malfeasance” and “incompetence” on the part of state officials.
It would be bad enough if this fiasco was limited to Georgia. But, of course, Kemp’s state isn’t alone in its pandemic-era malfeasance around voting access. During Wisconsin’s primary earlier in the spring, thousands of people who requested absentee ballots didn’t receive them in time, and, despite this, the state’s GOP legislators fought a rearguard action to drastically restrict the deadline for when such ballots had to be returned. In Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Nevada, recent votes have all been marred by either long lines at the polls, in part caused by requested absentee ballots not being delivered to voters on time, or problems tabulating record numbers of mail-in ballots. Texas’s GOP and its state attorney general have repeatedly gone to court over the past month to prevent big cities from allowing people to use “fear of COVID-19” as a reason for being able to vote by mail.
And, from the White House, Trump tweets out a constant stream of dark warnings about the dangers of fraudulent votes being cast if vote-by-mail systems are expanded. He is, in this, backed up by a chorus of conservative media and think tank voices, as well as by the Republican National Committee, which is currently suing California and other states to stop their expansion of vote-by-mail systems. So adamant are the Republicans that vote-by-mail hurts their electoral prospects, that the party even seems willing to countenance the bankruptcy of the U.S. Postal Service; since April, the GOP in Congress has been blocking efforts to send needed dollars the postal service’s way to keep it afloat in the wake of the economic shutdowns ordered to slow the spread of coronavirus.
It’s tempting to see the GOP full-court campaign to make it harder for people to vote as something new. It’s not; it’s actually something time-tested and shameful at this point. For at least the past 20 years, variants on this theme have been standard operating procedure.
In 2000, George W. Bush won the election after squeaking through in Florida. Much of the media focused on hanging chads and dimpled ballots. Meanwhile, as I wrote about in my book Conned, three-quarters of a million Florida residents were, by 2000, permanently disenfranchised because of felony convictions; and, at a county level, GOP elections officials in Florida had, in the period prior to the election, launched a particularly aggressive effort to purge voter rolls of those alleged to have felonies, even if the databases they used generated a huge number of false positives.
A similar trend was in evidence throughout the Old South, most of the states of which had, during the last years of the 19th and first years of the 20th centuries, embraced the permanent disenfranchisement of those with felony convictions as a part of their Jim Crow edifice. It was also in evidence in Iowa (and in several of the mountain West states) the constitutions of which, written in the early years of the 20th century, had borrowed heavily from the Jim Crow constitutions of the post-Reconstruction South.
By 2020, nearly 1.5 million Floridians had felony records, and despite the passage of a vote-restoration ballot initiative in 2018, GOP legislators are still doing everything in their power to limit the ability of those with felony records to get their right to vote restored.
More generally, from the Reagan years onward, GOP operatives at the state and national level have gone out of their way to undermine free and fair voting processes: contracting with companies to manufacture voting machines that had no paper back-up; making it ever-harder for students to register to vote; imposing ID requirements that made it more difficult for low-income and residents of color to cast ballots; closing down polling stations in low-income urban neighborhoods, and so on.
During the 2008 election season, I documented a range of these tactics in an article for Mother Jones. They included, in some counties, political operatives challenging the citizenship status of voters with Latinx-sounding names; and, elsewhere, sending out mass mailings to residents of low-income neighborhoods, and then, if the letters were returned as “undeliverable,” using that as evidence a person no longer lived at the address and challenging their voter registration.
Of course, this sordid vote-suppression history isn’t limited to the GOP: The pillars of Jim Crow were long maintained by Democrats in the South, and the worst disenfranchising methods — from the poll tax to the literacy test — were perfected during years in which Democrats controlled statehouses throughout the region.
But, while Democrats historically don’t have even remotely clean hands regarding franchise issues, for the last several decades it has been the GOP that has enthusiastically embraced the tactics of voter suppression. Today, with Trump struggling in his reelection efforts, these ugly campaigns to restrict the franchise have become key parts of the contemporary GOP’s political brand.
In Georgia this past Tuesday, the whole country witnessed a debacle. Sure, some of the chaos was the result of the disruption caused by a pandemic. But the reason things got so bad, so quickly, in urban, disproportionately Black precincts, has at least as much to do with a deliberate strategy of de facto disenfranchisement as it has to do with COVID-19. Those images of voters forced to wait hours in line, to risk exposure to a potentially deadly virus simply in order to cast their ballots, ought to send chills down the spines of everyone concerned with this country’s democratic processes as we approach the November election.
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.