truthout--2020-10-07--City Apologizes 41 Years After Cops Allowed Klan, Nazis to Kill Anti-Racists

Nearly 41 years after Ku Klux Klansmen and American Nazis shot dead five anti-racism activists in the town of Greensboro , North Carolina , the city council there has passed a resolution apologizing for the attack and the police department ’ s complicity in the killings .
We speak with two survivors of the 1979 attack , Rev .
Nelson Johnson and Joyce Hobson Johnson , who say the city ’ s apology acknowledges “ the police knew and chose to do nothing .
In fact , they facilitated what we name now as a North American death squad.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Nearly 41 years after a white supremacist attack on antiracist activists in the town of Greensboro , North Carolina , left five dead and the community reeling , on Tuesday night the Greensboro City Council passed a resolution apologizing for the massacre and the police department ’ s complicity in the killings .
A warning to our television viewers : The footage we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violence .
The Greensboro massacre took place November 3rd , 1979 , when Ku Klux Klansmen and American Nazis opened fire on an anti-Klan demonstration in Greensboro .
Over the span of 88 seconds , the Klan and Nazis shot dead five antiracist activists who were members of the Communist Workers ’ Party .
Ten other activists were injured .
No one was convicted in the massacre , but a jury did find the Greensboro police liable for cooperating with Ku Klux Klan in a wrongful death .
This is a clip from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Jim Waters , a news cameraperson who was on the scene and filmed that day .
VIRGIL GRIFFIN : We can take our country back from the Communist Party .
We can take it back from the niggers .
It ’ s time for us to band together .
If we have to get in the streets and fight in blood up to our knees , by God , it ’ s time to get ready to fight !
Give them what they want !
Fight for this country !
PROTESTERS : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Klan !
Death to the Klan !
Death to the Klan !
UNIDENTIFIED : Move !
OK , move out !
Move out !
PROTESTER 1 : Please , help us !
Help us !
PROTESTER 2 : Come here !
Help us !
PROTESTER 3 : Please , can we get an ambulance ?
Get him right here .
PROTESTER 1 : Klan and the state got together and planned this .
That ’ s why they were not — don ’ t come here .
Do you hear me ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this makes it clear .
They came through , and they opened fire .
They opened fire on us .
And we fired back to protect ourselves .
WITNESS : Now , the Klan , or whoever it was , jumped out and just started shooting in the direction of the thickest concentration of people .
They seemed to be aiming at particular people .
There were several police in the area who did nothing , until after these murderers left .
Police came in , immediately started arresting people who were trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nelson Johnson , you know , was taken into custody , kicked in the head by the police .
He was bleeding from the arm as he was trying to help people .
And the police did this , directly or indirectly .
They set it up .
PROTESTER 4 : This will never happen again !
We will never be [ inaudible ] .
He ’ s in — he ’ s in heaven .
[ inaudible ] on him .
Oh god !
God , he ’ s dead !
AMY @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1979 Greensboro massacre from the Jim Waters documentary The Guns of November 3rd .
The Greensboro City Council resolution passed Tuesday acknowledges the Greensboro Police Department knew the attack was planned , but failed to warn the protesters .
In this clip from the documentary about the massacre by Laura Seel , civil rights lawyer Lewis Pitts talks about the police involvement .
Pitts represented the survivors in a civil lawsuit against the Greensboro police , government officials , the Klan and the Nazis .
Well , for more on the Greensboro massacre @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we go now to Greensboro , where we ’ re joined by two survivors of the massacre , Reverend Nelson Johnson and Joyce Johnson .
They ’ re co-executive directors of the Beloved Community Center of Greensboro and co-founders of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission .
Welcome back to Democracy Now !
It ’ s great to have you with us .
All the horror of this , even 41 years later .
Reverend Johnson , if you can talk about what the City Council ruled , what they decided last night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you .
We are very pleased to be back .
There were seven resolutions passed last night .
And the heart of it was that the Greensboro police knew well in advance that the Klan and Nazis were planning to attack the march .
They actually did not actually take any action — and the resolution says that — to inform those of us who were preparing to march , that would culminate in a conference around how to engage racism in the textile mills .
One of the most important things I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a resolution that the city passed that said that it would award — the money is not the important thing , let me say that — $ 1,979 to five high school students , from a predominantly Black high school , in the name of the five people who were killed on November 3rd , at the largest gathering that the city will sponsor , which will be the annual Martin Luther King Jr. Day .
These students would compete over writing essays or doing some kind of artistic work on how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and how to overcome that .
We thought that that was significant .
And we thought that just saying plainly the police knew and chose to do nothing — in fact , they facilitated what we name now as a North American death squad .
They were antiracists , to be sure , but they were some of the best labor and community organizers in the state .
So , it wasn ’ t just a few people protesting the Klan .
We were building power within the textile industry , with people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Virginia ; Rocky Mount , North Carolina ; Haw River ; Kannapolis plants ; and five plants in Greensboro .
That ’ s the work that people were doing , and bringing that into relationship with the historic Black community in Greensboro , where I had been working for over 15 years .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : Yeah , I ’ d like to ask — REV .
NELSON JOHNSON : Joyce , you might want to say more .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : Yeah , I ’ d like to ask Joyce Johnson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bit — first of all , for those people who are listening and were not aware of this tragedy , could you talk about who the five people who were killed were and what you personally saw that day ?
JOYCE HOBSON JOHNSON : Thank you .
Thank you , Juan , for that opportunity .
And good morning , Amy .
Yes .
The five people , as Nelson has said , were powerful organizers .
And I don ’ t mean that just in technical terms , but those who loved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residents here in North Carolina .
They were a rainbow .
Sandi Smith , who happened to have been my best friend , she was like a little sister .
One of the most difficult things I ’ ve ever done in my life was to call her mom in South Carolina and tell her that Sandi was dead .
But Sandi Smith , an African American woman who had graduated from Bennett College for Women here in Greensboro as the student body president , and decided to delay her decision to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ textile plants , because her dad worked in a textile mill in South Carolina , and she understood the oppression that happened in those plants .
Then there was Michael Nathan .
Michael and I were at Duke University about the same time .
He was Jewish , I was African American .
At Duke at that time in the ’ 60s , we were both in the minority .
But he was one of those gentle giants who worked very hard with particularly African Americans in Durham , North Carolina .
Bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as I guess we would say , Anglo person in the group , he had finished at Harvard University and had also been to University of Virginia , and similarly decided that he needed to go to the place where people were really struggling hard .
And then there was Jim Waller .
And Jim Waller , who was the husband of a dear friend of mine , Signe Waller , here in Greensboro , we nicknamed him “ Blackbeard.
” He taught in the medical school at Duke University .
Off-time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Again , he sacrificed a lot to organize workers in the plant in Haw River .
I remember him calling me one night because he had actually gotten aging white workers to unite with Black workers , and they were supporting African liberation .
They began to understand here in the South the unity of those who were poor .
And then there ’ s also — who did I leave out , honey ?
JOYCE HOBSON JOHNSON : César Cauce .
César Cauce , gentle César , who , after finishing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chicken factories .
And you will remember the fires of Hamlet chicken factory .
César ’ s parents had been Cuban immigrants .
So , we really , as I said , were a rainbow .
And on that day , they had come together , as the rest of us , to have this gathering , this conference , to march through the streets of Greensboro , to draw people together to talk about how we , together , were going to combat racism and really build a community where all were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be adequate medical care , where there would be dignity and respect for all .
They were my friends .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : And , Nelson Johnson , I wanted to ask you — and it ’ s good to see you , after so many decades , actually , when I knew you back in those days .
I wanted to ask you about how North Carolina has changed and what this council resolution means .
Clearly , the state is very different than it was back then .
You ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigrants .
The Research Triangle area has drawn many people from around the country to the universities .
And there ’ s been a huge influx of African Americans from the North who retired and went back to North Carolina .
So , could you talk about how this resolution reflects the changing nature of North Carolina ?
REV .
NELSON JOHNSON : Well , if you compare it to how the city reacted the days , weeks and months after 1979 , the change is fairly significant , in that because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carolina — and let me just lift up Moral Mondays and the Poor People ’ s Campaign ; we work very closely with Reverend Barber on this — that there was a growing consciousness in the state , and there were shifts in the electoral power , electing more progressive people to office .
But there remains an undercurrent of historically accumulated racism , and built on a bed of falsehood that still exists here .
So , we actually want to acknowledge the decisions made last night by the City Council .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have named it a people ’ s victory — REV .
NELSON JOHNSON : — because it is because of the persistence of more and more people in this city and throughout the state that the state is gradually changing .
It ’ s an uphill climb .
But we are grateful for the decision last night , and we think that it provides something positive to build on .
But we want to help people appreciate themselves .
They are the ones who elected a council that , with some staggering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this deliberate North American death squad came in and shot persons who were leaders in their field .
Bill was the chief organizer at the largest denim-producing factory in the world , White Oak .
Jim was the president of the union at Haw River .
There were other people in equal positions in plants around the state .
So I ’ m saying it was not just a group of people opposing racism , but people building power strategically .
And there ’ s no way that the textile industry is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that North Carolina has moved .
It is not the worst state in the South .
It has always tended to be somewhere in the middle , in the sense that it was the last out of the Union and close to the first back in the Union in the Civil War .
So , it always has had that kind of quality to it .
AMY GOODMAN : Reverend Nelson , we have to wrap up the show , but I wanted to just say one thing .
In the clip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ used the N-word .
And we asked you : Should we repeat that ?
You said yes .
We have 10 seconds .
Why ?
REV .
NELSON JOHNSON : It ’ s as simple as that .
People need to know the truth of our history .
And that word , which is very derogatory , is part of that history .
And it is that simple .
AMY GOODMAN : We want to thank you both for being with us , Reverend Nelson Johnson and Joyce Johnson , survivors of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission and now co-executive directors of the Beloved Community Center of Greensboro , North Carolina .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , with Juan González .
Stay safe .
Wear a mask .
Save lives .

Nearly 41 years after Ku Klux Klansmen and American Nazis shot dead five anti-racism activists in the town of Greensboro, North Carolina, the city council there has passed a resolution apologizing for the attack and the police department’s complicity in the killings. We speak with two survivors of the 1979 attack, Rev. Nelson Johnson and Joyce Hobson Johnson, who say the city’s apology acknowledges “the police knew and chose to do nothing. In fact, they facilitated what we name now as a North American death squad.”
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.
Nearly 41 years after a white supremacist attack on antiracist activists in the town of Greensboro, North Carolina, left five dead and the community reeling, on Tuesday night the Greensboro City Council passed a resolution apologizing for the massacre and the police department’s complicity in the killings.
A warning to our television viewers: The footage we’re about to play contains graphic violence.
The Greensboro massacre took place November 3rd, 1979, when Ku Klux Klansmen and American Nazis opened fire on an anti-Klan demonstration in Greensboro. Over the span of 88 seconds, the Klan and Nazis shot dead five antiracist activists who were members of the Communist Workers’ Party. Ten other activists were injured. No one was convicted in the massacre, but a jury did find the Greensboro police liable for cooperating with Ku Klux Klan in a wrongful death.
This is a clip from the documentary The Guns of November 3rd by Jim Waters, a news cameraperson who was on the scene and filmed that day.
VIRGIL GRIFFIN: We can take our country back from the Communist Party. We can take it back from the niggers. It’s time for us to band together. If we have to get in the streets and fight in blood up to our knees, by God, it’s time to get ready to fight! Give them what they want! Fight for this country! PROTESTERS: Death to the Klan! Death to the Klan! Death to the Klan! Death to the Klan! UNIDENTIFIED: Move! OK, move out! Move out! PROTESTER 1: They had a plan. PROTESTER 2: Somebody, call an ambulance! PROTESTER 1: Please, help us! Help us! PROTESTER 2: Come here! Help us! PROTESTER 3: Please, can we get an ambulance? Get him right here. PROTESTER 1: Klan and the state got together and planned this. That’s why they were not — don’t come here. Do you hear me? The state protects the Klan. And this makes it clear. They came through, and they opened fire. They opened fire on us. And we fired back to protect ourselves. WITNESS: Now, the Klan, or whoever it was, jumped out and just started shooting in the direction of the thickest concentration of people. They seemed to be aiming at particular people. There were several police in the area who did nothing, until after these murderers left. Police came in, immediately started arresting people who were trying to help those who had fallen. Nelson Johnson, you know, was taken into custody, kicked in the head by the police. He was bleeding from the arm as he was trying to help people. And the police did this, directly or indirectly. They set it up. PROTESTER 4: This will never happen again! We will never be [inaudible]. He’s in — he’s in heaven. [inaudible] on him. Oh god! God, he’s dead!
AMY GOODMAN: Images and sounds of the 1979 Greensboro massacre from the Jim Waters documentary The Guns of November 3rd.
The Greensboro City Council resolution passed Tuesday acknowledges the Greensboro Police Department knew the attack was planned, but failed to warn the protesters. In this clip from the documentary about the massacre by Laura Seel, civil rights lawyer Lewis Pitts talks about the police involvement. Pitts represented the survivors in a civil lawsuit against the Greensboro police, government officials, the Klan and the Nazis.
LEWIS PITTS: When we got involved as civil rights lawyers, hired by and representing the survivors, the widows, we had every incentive to tell the full story. And, for the first time, the people’s lawyers had subpoena power. And we found a trove, trunksload of incriminating evidence right out of the police files. If the police knew, why didn’t they stop it? Why didn’t they warn the demonstrators of the nine-car caravan carrying the Klan and Nazis with all those weapons? The 10th car was an unmarked police car with the detective, Cooper, who was the handler of the informant, and a photographer, a police photographer. They followed them in, parked, did not call for help, did not do anything to warn the demonstrators, and took photographs as they pulled out weapons and murdered people.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s civil rights lawyer Lewis Pitts.
Well, for more on the Greensboro massacre and city council resolution last night, we go now to Greensboro, where we’re joined by two survivors of the massacre, Reverend Nelson Johnson and Joyce Johnson. They’re co-executive directors of the Beloved Community Center of Greensboro and co-founders of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
Welcome back to Democracy Now! It’s great to have you with us. All the horror of this, even 41 years later. Reverend Johnson, if you can talk about what the City Council ruled, what they decided last night?
REV. NELSON JOHNSON: Thank you. We are very pleased to be back.
There were seven resolutions passed last night. And the heart of it was that the Greensboro police knew well in advance that the Klan and Nazis were planning to attack the march. They actually did not actually take any action — and the resolution says that — to inform those of us who were preparing to march, that would culminate in a conference around how to engage racism in the textile mills.
One of the most important things I think that grew out of last night was a resolution that the city passed that said that it would award — the money is not the important thing, let me say that — $1,979 to five high school students, from a predominantly Black high school, in the name of the five people who were killed on November 3rd, at the largest gathering that the city will sponsor, which will be the annual Martin Luther King Jr. Day. These students would compete over writing essays or doing some kind of artistic work on how to engage the systemic existence of racism and how to overcome that. We thought that that was significant.
And we thought that just saying plainly the police knew and chose to do nothing — in fact, they facilitated what we name now as a North American death squad.
They were antiracists, to be sure, but they were some of the best labor and community organizers in the state. So, it wasn’t just a few people protesting the Klan. We were building power within the textile industry, with people gathering from Martinsville, Virginia; Danville, Virginia; Rocky Mount, North Carolina; Haw River; Kannapolis plants; and five plants in Greensboro. That’s the work that people were doing, and bringing that into relationship with the historic Black community in Greensboro, where I had been working for over 15 years.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, I’d like to ask —
REV. NELSON JOHNSON: Joyce, you might want to say more.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Yeah, I’d like to ask Joyce Johnson, if you could talk a little bit — first of all, for those people who are listening and were not aware of this tragedy, could you talk about who the five people who were killed were and what you personally saw that day?
JOYCE HOBSON JOHNSON: Thank you. Thank you, Juan, for that opportunity. And good morning, Amy. Yes.
The five people, as Nelson has said, were powerful organizers. And I don’t mean that just in technical terms, but those who loved and sacrificed for their fellow people, residents here in North Carolina. They were a rainbow.
Sandi Smith, who happened to have been my best friend, she was like a little sister. One of the most difficult things I’ve ever done in my life was to call her mom in South Carolina and tell her that Sandi was dead. But Sandi Smith, an African American woman who had graduated from Bennett College for Women here in Greensboro as the student body president, and decided to delay her decision to go to nursing school to organize in the textile plants, because her dad worked in a textile mill in South Carolina, and she understood the oppression that happened in those plants.
Then there was Michael Nathan. Michael and I were at Duke University about the same time. He was Jewish, I was African American. At Duke at that time in the ’60s, we were both in the minority. But he was one of those gentle giants who worked very hard with particularly African Americans in Durham, North Carolina.
Bill Sampson, who was the one, as I guess we would say, Anglo person in the group, he had finished at Harvard University and had also been to University of Virginia, and similarly decided that he needed to go to the place where people were really struggling hard.
And then there was Jim Waller. And Jim Waller, who was the husband of a dear friend of mine, Signe Waller, here in Greensboro, we nicknamed him “Blackbeard.” He taught in the medical school at Duke University. Off-time, he was a pediatrician to our children. Again, he sacrificed a lot to organize workers in the plant in Haw River. I remember him calling me one night because he had actually gotten aging white workers to unite with Black workers, and they were supporting African liberation. They began to understand here in the South the unity of those who were poor.
And then there’s also — who did I leave out, honey?
REV. NELSON JOHNSON: César Cauce.
JOYCE HOBSON JOHNSON: César Cauce. César Cauce, gentle César, who, after finishing college, went to work in the chicken factories. And you will remember the fires of Hamlet chicken factory. César’s parents had been Cuban immigrants.
So, we really, as I said, were a rainbow. And on that day, they had come together, as the rest of us, to have this gathering, this conference, to march through the streets of Greensboro, to draw people together to talk about how we, together, were going to combat racism and really build a community where all were treated justly, fairly, where there would be adequate medical care, where there would be dignity and respect for all. They were my friends.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Nelson Johnson, I wanted to ask you — and it’s good to see you, after so many decades, actually, when I knew you back in those days. I wanted to ask you about how North Carolina has changed and what this council resolution means. Clearly, the state is very different than it was back then. You’ve had a huge influx of Latino immigrants. The Research Triangle area has drawn many people from around the country to the universities. And there’s been a huge influx of African Americans from the North who retired and went back to North Carolina. So, could you talk about how this resolution reflects the changing nature of North Carolina?
REV. NELSON JOHNSON: Well, if you compare it to how the city reacted the days, weeks and months after 1979, the change is fairly significant, in that because of the grassroots work that continued in North Carolina — and let me just lift up Moral Mondays and the Poor People’s Campaign; we work very closely with Reverend Barber on this — that there was a growing consciousness in the state, and there were shifts in the electoral power, electing more progressive people to office. But there remains an undercurrent of historically accumulated racism, and built on a bed of falsehood that still exists here.
So, we actually want to acknowledge the decisions made last night by the City Council. We are grateful for that. But we have named it a people’s victory —
JOYCE HOBSON JOHNSON: Yes.
REV. NELSON JOHNSON: — because it is because of the persistence of more and more people in this city and throughout the state that the state is gradually changing. It’s an uphill climb. But we are grateful for the decision last night, and we think that it provides something positive to build on. But we want to help people appreciate themselves. They are the ones who elected a council that, with some staggering, got to the place of saying this deliberate North American death squad came in and shot persons who were leaders in their field.
Bill was the chief organizer at the largest denim-producing factory in the world, White Oak. Jim was the president of the union at Haw River. There were other people in equal positions in plants around the state. So I’m saying it was not just a group of people opposing racism, but people building power strategically. And there’s no way that the textile industry is not implicated in this.
But we still think that North Carolina has moved. It is not the worst state in the South. It has always tended to be somewhere in the middle, in the sense that it was the last out of the Union and close to the first back in the Union in the Civil War. So, it always has had that kind of quality to it.
AMY GOODMAN: Reverend Nelson, we have to wrap up the show, but I wanted to just say one thing. In the clip we played, the Klansman or Nazi used the N-word. And we asked you: Should we repeat that? You said yes. We have 10 seconds. Why?
JOYCE HOBSON JOHNSON: Because the truth matters, Amy.
REV. NELSON JOHNSON: It’s as simple as that. People need to know the truth of our history. And that word, which is very derogatory, is part of that history. And it is that simple.
AMY GOODMAN: We want to thank you both for being with us, Reverend Nelson Johnson and Joyce Johnson, survivors of the 1979 Greensboro massacre, co-founders of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission and now co-executive directors of the Beloved Community Center of Greensboro, North Carolina. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González. Stay safe. Wear a mask. Save lives.


truthout--2020-10-07--If SCOTUS Strikes Down ACA, Trump’s Health Care Order Cannot Replace It

The battle over the replacement of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has refocused American attention on the future of the Affordable Care Act .
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments Nov. 10 in a case seeking to overturn the law that brought insurance coverage to millions of Americans .
Meanwhile , Trump recently released his “ America-First Healthcare Plan.
” In it , the president claims significant achievements .
He also outlines broad principles of his vision for the future of health care in America .
Over the past three years , the Trump administration has taken a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ACA .
And his recently introduced executive order lacks a number of key details and the legal grounds for enacting much of the proposal .
The two factors leave me — a health policy and politics scholar who has closely followed the Affordable Care Act — skeptical about the emergence of a meaningful replacement to the ACA that would expand insurance access should the Supreme Court invalidate the Obama administration ’ s signature achievement .
President Trump campaigned and entered office with the pledge to “ repeal and replace ” the ACA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be a “ really great HealthCare Plan with far lower premiums ( costs ) & deductibles ” right after the election .
Since 2016 , Congress has made little headway besides eliminating the ACA ’ s penalty for not carrying insurance .
This is the basis for the current lawsuit to be heard before the Supreme Court in November .
The argument is that because Congress did away with the penalty , the individual mandate can no longer be constitutionally justified as a tax .
As a result , the entire law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unable to repeal the law , the Trump administration has taken a number of executive actions to limit its reach .
In combination , these efforts have contributed to bringing the uninsured rate to 14 % by 2019 from a low of 11 % in 2016 .
This leaves millions of Americans without coverage and exposed to medical bills should they fall ill. One of the major targets of the Trump administration has been reducing enrollment through the ACA ’ s marketplaces .
Here , the administration shortened the periods in which people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduced funding for individuals who help consumers enroll in coverage as well as advertising .
It also withheld subsidies to support low-income individuals with out-of-pocket costs , which also caused problems to insurers offering plans to those people .
The administration has also worked to expand alternative insurance plans like so-called short-term , limited-duration health plans and association health plans .
While these plans have lower premiums , they do not carry the consumer protections of the ACA like preexisting condition coverage .
They also do not pay for prescription drugs or hospital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they also require consumers to undergo a medical assessment before enrollment .
Consumers may be charged higher premiums or rejected entirely based on their medical condition and age .
Regulations issued by the Trump administration have reduced access to reproductive care for women .
The administration has also pushed states to implement work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries and discourage immigrants from enrolling in Medicaid for fear of being denied permanent residency .
As a result , thousands of individuals have become uninsured .
Even on one of the president ’ s favorite topics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , numerous initiatives regarding generic drugs , drug importation and capping insulin prices for Medicare beneficiaries have done very little to reduce cost or improve access .
On one of the president ’ s other priorities , eliminating surprise bills for medical services that patients unexpectedly receive for care that they reasonably thought would be covered by their insurance , the administration ’ s actions have yet to have a meaningful effect .
When it comes to Trump ’ s executive order , the topic that received the most public attention — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can obtain the insurance of their choice at affordable rates ” — carries no legal weight nor clear explanation of how it would be achieved or funded .
More generally , after years of promising a detailed plan , the America-First Healthcare Plan focuses primarily on past actions .
It also spends just 491 words on laying out a set of objectives — lower costs , better care and more choice — yet does not provide a mechanism or road map for how to implement them .
All this leads me to believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Supreme Court , the prospect of substantive replacement that seeks to expand care to more Americans is unlikely .

The battle over the replacement of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has refocused American attention on the future of the Affordable Care Act. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments Nov. 10 in a case seeking to overturn the law that brought insurance coverage to millions of Americans.
Meanwhile, Trump recently released his “America-First Healthcare Plan.” In it, the president claims significant achievements. He also outlines broad principles of his vision for the future of health care in America.
Over the past three years, the Trump administration has taken a number of steps to dismantle pieces of the ACA. And his recently introduced executive order lacks a number of key details and the legal grounds for enacting much of the proposal.
The two factors leave me — a health policy and politics scholar who has closely followed the Affordable Care Act — skeptical about the emergence of a meaningful replacement to the ACA that would expand insurance access should the Supreme Court invalidate the Obama administration’s signature achievement.
Trump’s Moves on Health Care
President Trump campaigned and entered office with the pledge to “repeal and replace” the ACA. In his own words, there would be a “really great HealthCare Plan with far lower premiums (costs) & deductibles” right after the election.
Since 2016, Congress has made little headway besides eliminating the ACA’s penalty for not carrying insurance. This is the basis for the current lawsuit to be heard before the Supreme Court in November. The argument is that because Congress did away with the penalty, the individual mandate can no longer be constitutionally justified as a tax. As a result, the entire law should fall.
While Republicans have been unable to repeal the law, the Trump administration has taken a number of executive actions to limit its reach. In combination, these efforts have contributed to bringing the uninsured rate to 14% by 2019 from a low of 11% in 2016. This leaves millions of Americans without coverage and exposed to medical bills should they fall ill.
One of the major targets of the Trump administration has been reducing enrollment through the ACA’s marketplaces. Here, the administration shortened the periods in which people are allowed to purchase insurance and drastically reduced funding for individuals who help consumers enroll in coverage as well as advertising. It also withheld subsidies to support low-income individuals with out-of-pocket costs, which also caused problems to insurers offering plans to those people.
The administration has also worked to expand alternative insurance plans like so-called short-term, limited-duration health plans and association health plans. While these plans have lower premiums, they do not carry the consumer protections of the ACA like preexisting condition coverage. They also do not pay for prescription drugs or hospital stays. And unlike the ACA, they also require consumers to undergo a medical assessment before enrollment. Consumers may be charged higher premiums or rejected entirely based on their medical condition and age.
Regulations issued by the Trump administration have reduced access to reproductive care for women. The administration has also pushed states to implement work requirements for Medicaid beneficiaries and discourage immigrants from enrolling in Medicaid for fear of being denied permanent residency. As a result, thousands of individuals have become uninsured.
Even on one of the president’s favorite topics, reducing the cost of prescription drugs, numerous initiatives regarding generic drugs, drug importation and capping insulin prices for Medicare beneficiaries have done very little to reduce cost or improve access.
On one of the president’s other priorities, eliminating surprise bills for medical services that patients unexpectedly receive for care that they reasonably thought would be covered by their insurance, the administration’s actions have yet to have a meaningful effect.
Executive Order
When it comes to Trump’s executive order, the topic that received the most public attention — the guarantee that “Americans with pre-existing conditions can obtain the insurance of their choice at affordable rates” — carries no legal weight nor clear explanation of how it would be achieved or funded.
More generally, after years of promising a detailed plan, the America-First Healthcare Plan focuses primarily on past actions. It also spends just 491 words on laying out a set of objectives — lower costs, better care and more choice — yet does not provide a mechanism or road map for how to implement them.
All this leads me to believe that if the ACA is overturned before the Supreme Court, the prospect of substantive replacement that seeks to expand care to more Americans is unlikely.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-10-07--Former CDC Chief Urges Current Director to Denounce Trump’s Handling of COVID-19

In a scathing letter sent late last month as coronavirus cases and deaths surged across the United States , renowned epidemiologist and former CDC chief Dr. William Foege called on the agency ’ s current director to publicly speak out about the Trump administration ’ s catastrophic failure to combat the pandemic and apologize for caving to the White House ’ s influence — even if it means risking his job .
“ You could upfront , acknowledge the tragedy of responding poorly , apologize for what has happened and your role in acquiescing , set a course for how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was no political interference , give them the ability to report such interference to a neutral ombudsman , and assure them that you will defend their attempts to save this country , ” Foege wrote in a September 23 letter to Dr. Robert Redfield , who was appointed by President Donald Trump .
“ Don ’ t shy away from the fact this has been an unacceptable toll on our country , ” the former CDC head added in the letter , which was published late Tuesday by USA Today .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a political dispute.
” Foege , who served as CDC director under both Carter and Reagan , acknowledged that denouncing the White House would prompt a furious response and likely result in his firing .
“ When they fire you , ” Foege wrote , “ this will be a multi-week story and you can hold your head high .
That will take exceptional courage on your part.
” But the risks of saying and doing nothing in the face of the Trump administration ’ s deadly handling of the pandemic far too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House spin attempts , this will go down as a colossal failure of the public health system of this country , ” Foege wrote .
“ The biggest challenge in a century and we let the country down.
” Since Foege sent his letter last month , coronavirus infections have continued to rise across the U.S. and the nation ’ s death toll has surpassed 210,000 — a fact that prompted no change in policy or rhetoric from the Trump administration , which has repeatedly meddled in the work of government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignored the advice of public health experts .
“ The public health texts of the future will use this as a lesson on how not to handle an infectious disease pandemic , ” wrote Foege .
“ The cause will be the incompetence and illogic of the White House program .
”

In a scathing letter sent late last month as coronavirus cases and deaths surged across the United States, renowned epidemiologist and former CDC chief Dr. William Foege called on the agency’s current director to publicly speak out about the Trump administration’s catastrophic failure to combat the pandemic and apologize for caving to the White House’s influence — even if it means risking his job.
“You could upfront, acknowledge the tragedy of responding poorly, apologize for what has happened and your role in acquiescing, set a course for how CDC would now lead the country if there was no political interference, give them the ability to report such interference to a neutral ombudsman, and assure them that you will defend their attempts to save this country,” Foege wrote in a September 23 letter to Dr. Robert Redfield, who was appointed by President Donald Trump.
“Don’t shy away from the fact this has been an unacceptable toll on our country,” the former CDC head added in the letter, which was published late Tuesday by USA Today. “It is a slaughter and not just a political dispute.”
Foege, who served as CDC director under both Carter and Reagan, acknowledged that denouncing the White House would prompt a furious response and likely result in his firing. “When they fire you,” Foege wrote, “this will be a multi-week story and you can hold your head high. That will take exceptional courage on your part.”
But the risks of saying and doing nothing in the face of the Trump administration’s deadly handling of the pandemic far too high, Foege said.
“Despite the White House spin attempts, this will go down as a colossal failure of the public health system of this country,” Foege wrote. “The biggest challenge in a century and we let the country down.”
Since Foege sent his letter last month, coronavirus infections have continued to rise across the U.S. and the nation’s death toll has surpassed 210,000 — a fact that prompted no change in policy or rhetoric from the Trump administration, which has repeatedly meddled in the work of government scientists, downplayed the pandemic, and ignored the advice of public health experts.
“The public health texts of the future will use this as a lesson on how not to handle an infectious disease pandemic,” wrote Foege. “The cause will be the incompetence and illogic of the White House program.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-10-07--Giuliani Coughs on Fox News While Attacking Biden for Urging Mask Wearing

President Donald Trump ’ s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani repeatedly coughed throughout a Monday interview with Fox News as he attacked Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for urging Americans to listen to scientific experts and wear masks amid the coronavirus pandemic .
Giuliani told Fox News host Martha MacCallum that he was awaiting his test results after working in close contact with Trump and other advisers on the president ’ s debate preparation team , who have since tested positive for COVID-19 .
“ I actually got one about two hours ago , ” Giuliani said , adding that his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ haven ’ t gotten the results yet .
I went to NYU .
I got one of those all the way in the back of the nose tests.
” He then went on to criticize Biden for telling Americans to follow the advice of scientific experts on the coronavirus .
“ I would say to Joe that you don ’ t really understand what scientists are , ” Giuliani said .
“ First of all , listen to your doctors .
They know your personal history .
Doctors really aren ’ t scientists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s what science is about.
” Giuliani , who coughed throughout the interview , went on to slam Biden ’ s mask advocacy .
“ It isn ’ t science to be wearing that mask , Joe , when you are giving a speech , and people are 30-40 feet away from you , ” he said .
“ The only thing you can infect is the teleprompter that ’ s near you , so I see through you .
That ’ s a political statement to scare people — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need that mask when you are standing at a podium.
” MacCallum noted that Biden had not gotten sick , while Trump just spent a weekend at the hospital with COVID-19 .
Giuliani said he had not gotten sick , even though he “ doesn ’ t wear masks as much ” as he probably should .
After the interview , MacCallum expressed concern about the former New York mayor ’ s cough .
“ I hope that cough is not anything bad while you are waiting for your test to come back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hope you will be healthy and well.
” Giuliani told Salon ’ s Roger Sollenberger after the interview that his test on Monday came back negative , and he had “ no symptoms.
” Giuliani was part of Trump ’ s debate prep team , which included top aide Hope Hicks , former White House adviser Kellyanne Conway and former Gov .
Chris Christie , R-N.J. , all of whom have since tested positive .
Giuliani said in another interview with ABC ’ s “ Good Morning America ” that there was “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s town hall debate in spite of Trump ’ s illness .
“ The doctors assume that by a certain time , he ’ s going to be in condition .
I assume he ’ s going to be in condition by then to do it .
Can ’ t see any reason why he wouldn ’ t , ” Giuliani said .
“ There ’ s only two more left .
They ’ re enormously valuable to the American people , and I think he ’ ll make every effort to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he will.
” The next debate is scheduled for Oct. 15 .
Biden told reporters on Monday that he would be willing to participate , but added that “ we should be very cautious.
” “ If scientists say that it ’ s safe … then I think that ’ s fine , ” he said .
“ I ’ ll do whatever the experts say is appropriate for me to do.
” Biden ’ s campaign announced on Sunday that he had tested negative for the third time since facing Trump at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week ’ s vice presidential campaign between Vice President Mike Pence and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris is expected to feature a plexiglass barrier between the candidates .
Giuliani scoffed at any rule changes for the upcoming debates , particularly a reported change which would allow moderators to cut off candidates ’ microphones after Trump repeatedly interrupted Biden and moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News last week .
“ I would not put in new rules for — you know , in the middle of the campaign , ” Giuliani said .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to do it directly — I think maybe just remind both candidates , ‘ Stay within your two minutes .
Don ’ t interrupt.
’ I think they both understand what happened last time.
” He claimed that the interrupting was part of Trump ’ s “ strategy ” for the debate .
“ It was his strategy to stay on top of [ Biden ] , ” he said .
“ I think we told the president , ‘ We don ’ t want the story coming out that he dominated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t let that story come out.
” But polls found that voters in swing states did not view Trump ’ s incessant interruptions as a win .
About two-in-three voters in Florida and Pennsylvania said they disapproved of Trump ’ s conduct at the debate , according to a New York Times/Siena poll , which found the race moving from a virtual tie to a solid Biden lead in the key swing states .
A CNN poll released on Tuesday following the debate and Trump ’ s coronavirus diagnosis showed Biden leading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % of voters saying Trump had handled the risk of infection irresponsibly .

Rudy Giuliani said he was awaiting his test results after working in close contact with Trump and other advisers.
President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani repeatedly coughed throughout a Monday interview with Fox News as he attacked Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden for urging Americans to listen to scientific experts and wear masks amid the coronavirus pandemic.
Giuliani told Fox News host Martha MacCallum that he was awaiting his test results after working in close contact with Trump and other advisers on the president’s debate preparation team, who have since tested positive for COVID-19.
“I actually got one about two hours ago,” Giuliani said, adding that his first test was negative. “I haven’t gotten the results yet. I went to NYU. I got one of those all the way in the back of the nose tests.”
He then went on to criticize Biden for telling Americans to follow the advice of scientific experts on the coronavirus.
“I would say to Joe that you don’t really understand what scientists are,” Giuliani said. “First of all, listen to your doctors. They know your personal history. Doctors really aren’t scientists. Scientists almost always have competing opinions. That’s what science is about.”
Giuliani, who coughed throughout the interview, went on to slam Biden’s mask advocacy.
“It isn’t science to be wearing that mask, Joe, when you are giving a speech, and people are 30-40 feet away from you,” he said. “The only thing you can infect is the teleprompter that’s near you, so I see through you. That’s a political statement to scare people — wearing that mask. You do not need that mask when you are standing at a podium.”
MacCallum noted that Biden had not gotten sick, while Trump just spent a weekend at the hospital with COVID-19.
Giuliani said he had not gotten sick, even though he “doesn’t wear masks as much” as he probably should.
"He's not asking people to take risks that he doesn't take," Rudy Giuliani claims of a president who has had access to the best testing and medical care in the world pic.twitter.com/qZ8gD0JM50 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 5, 2020
After the interview, MacCallum expressed concern about the former New York mayor’s cough.
“I hope that cough is not anything bad while you are waiting for your test to come back,” she said. “We hope you will be healthy and well.”
“I hope so, too,” Giuliani exclaimed.
Giuliani told Salon’s Roger Sollenberger after the interview that his test on Monday came back negative, and he had “no symptoms.”
Rudy was part of Trump's debate prep team and says he's awaiting the results of a coronavirus test pic.twitter.com/UZI9TN67w6 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 6, 2020
Giuliani was part of Trump’s debate prep team, which included top aide Hope Hicks, former White House adviser Kellyanne Conway and former Gov. Chris Christie, R-N.J., all of whom have since tested positive.
Giuliani said in another interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America” that there was “no reason to delay” next week’s town hall debate in spite of Trump’s illness.
“The doctors assume that by a certain time, he’s going to be in condition. I assume he’s going to be in condition by then to do it. Can’t see any reason why he wouldn’t,” Giuliani said. “There’s only two more left. They’re enormously valuable to the American people, and I think he’ll make every effort to make it. I’m certain he will.”
The next debate is scheduled for Oct. 15. Biden told reporters on Monday that he would be willing to participate, but added that “we should be very cautious.”
“If scientists say that it’s safe … then I think that’s fine,” he said. “I’ll do whatever the experts say is appropriate for me to do.”
Biden’s campaign announced on Sunday that he had tested negative for the third time since facing Trump at last week’s debate.
This week’s vice presidential campaign between Vice President Mike Pence and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris is expected to feature a plexiglass barrier between the candidates.
Giuliani scoffed at any rule changes for the upcoming debates, particularly a reported change which would allow moderators to cut off candidates’ microphones after Trump repeatedly interrupted Biden and moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News last week.
“I would not put in new rules for — you know, in the middle of the campaign,” Giuliani said. “I would through us, or if they want to do it directly — I think maybe just remind both candidates, ‘Stay within your two minutes. Don’t interrupt.’ I think they both understand what happened last time.”
He claimed that the interrupting was part of Trump’s “strategy” for the debate.
“It was his strategy to stay on top of [Biden],” he said. “I think we told the president, ‘We don’t want the story coming out that he dominated you.’ And the president sure didn’t let that story come out.”
But polls found that voters in swing states did not view Trump’s incessant interruptions as a win. About two-in-three voters in Florida and Pennsylvania said they disapproved of Trump’s conduct at the debate, according to a New York Times/Siena poll, which found the race moving from a virtual tie to a solid Biden lead in the key swing states.
A CNN poll released on Tuesday following the debate and Trump’s coronavirus diagnosis showed Biden leading nationally by 16 points, with 63% of voters saying Trump had handled the risk of infection irresponsibly.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-10-07--Fauci: If Precautions Are Not Taken COVID Deaths Could Reach 400K This Winter

Anthony Fauci , a member of the White House ’ s coronavirus task force and the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , told a virtual audience this week that they should not be surprised if the coronavirus casualty count ends up being near 400,000 by the end of the winter season .
Fauci was discussing the matter and other coronavirus-related topics during an event hosted by American University on Tuesday .
“ The models tell us if we don ’ t do what we need to in the fall and winter , we could have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ university quoted Fauci as saying during the event .
The potential cost of life doesn ’ t have to be that high , Fauci said , implying that , if proper precautions are taken , many lives could be saved between now and then .
“ Maybe 50 percent of you hate me because you think I ’ m trying to destroy the country , ” Fauci said , referring to a number of Americans , mostly Republicans , who have shifted their views on him in recent months .
“ But listen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and do what I say , and you ’ ll see the numbers go down.
” Fauci has long been an advocate of social distancing measures put forward by health experts like himself , including urging people to wear masks when they ’ re out and about , keeping six feet apart from others , and only going out in public spaces when it is necessary to do so .
The infectious diseases expert ’ s predictions on the potential death count by the end of winter are consistent with other health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation ( IHME ) model , which has been cited by the White House in the past .
According to that model , the total number of American deaths from coronavirus could reach between 337,000 and 392,000 by January 1 of next year .
However , IHME also has a “ universal mask projection ” model , which estimates how many deaths may come about if everyone wore masks or facial coverings in a consistent way .
According to those estimates , the total COVID-19 death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to somewhere between 261,000 to 299,000 .
The model further notes that , if nearly everyone in the U.S. wore masks , the projected daily death count in the country would be reduced by as much as 59 percent versus projections under current conditions where not everyone follows the stated health guidelines .
Trump ’ s ideas on coronavirus , however , stand in stark comparison to Fauci ’ s concerned views .
The president , for instance , wrongly suggested on Tuesday morning ( the day after he returned from Walter Reed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state-of-the-art medical care for COVID ) that the virus was no worse than the flu , adding that “ we are learning to live with Covid.
” The president ’ s comments are inconsistent with what he told journalist Bob Woodward in February , when he described the disease as being far deadlier than the flu .
As of Wednesday morning , the U.S. has over 7 million confirmed cases and more than 215,000 Americans have died from COVID-19 since the beginning of March .

The death count could be lowered, Fauci says, if Americans begin heeding advice on social distancing and wearing masks.
Anthony Fauci, a member of the White House’s coronavirus task force and the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told a virtual audience this week that they should not be surprised if the coronavirus casualty count ends up being near 400,000 by the end of the winter season.
Fauci was discussing the matter and other coronavirus-related topics during an event hosted by American University on Tuesday.
“The models tell us if we don’t do what we need to in the fall and winter, we could have 300,000-400,000 #COVID19 deaths,” the university quoted Fauci as saying during the event.
The potential cost of life doesn’t have to be that high, Fauci said, implying that, if proper precautions are taken, many lives could be saved between now and then.
“Maybe 50 percent of you hate me because you think I’m trying to destroy the country,” Fauci said, referring to a number of Americans, mostly Republicans, who have shifted their views on him in recent months. “But listen to me for six weeks or so, and do what I say, and you’ll see the numbers go down.”
Fauci has long been an advocate of social distancing measures put forward by health experts like himself, including urging people to wear masks when they’re out and about, keeping six feet apart from others, and only going out in public spaces when it is necessary to do so.
The infectious diseases expert’s predictions on the potential death count by the end of winter are consistent with other health predictors, including the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) model, which has been cited by the White House in the past. According to that model, the total number of American deaths from coronavirus could reach between 337,000 and 392,000 by January 1 of next year.
However, IHME also has a “universal mask projection” model, which estimates how many deaths may come about if everyone wore masks or facial coverings in a consistent way. According to those estimates, the total COVID-19 death tally by January 1 could be reduced to somewhere between 261,000 to 299,000.
The model further notes that, if nearly everyone in the U.S. wore masks, the projected daily death count in the country would be reduced by as much as 59 percent versus projections under current conditions where not everyone follows the stated health guidelines.
Trump’s ideas on coronavirus, however, stand in stark comparison to Fauci’s concerned views. The president, for instance, wrongly suggested on Tuesday morning (the day after he returned from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center where he received state-of-the-art medical care for COVID) that the virus was no worse than the flu, adding that “we are learning to live with Covid.”
The president’s comments are inconsistent with what he told journalist Bob Woodward in February, when he described the disease as being far deadlier than the flu.
As of Wednesday morning, the U.S. has over 7 million confirmed cases and more than 215,000 Americans have died from COVID-19 since the beginning of March.
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--2020-10-07--19 Years After US Invasion, Afghanistan’s Civil War Rages Despite Peace Talks

The United States invaded Afghanistan 19 years ago today , sparking the nation ’ s longest-running war that has cost tens of thousands of lives and the U.S. about $ 2 trillion .
While the U.S. originally ousted the Taliban as part of a broader anti-terrorism campaign , the Taliban and other militants have waged a bloody and arguably successful insurgency for nearly two decades .
Despite billions of dollars in U.S. aid , and years of state-building and counterterrorism operations obscured by mission drift and government disinformation , Afghans continue to suffer a bloody civil war even as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ historic peace talks in Qatar .
Deadly airstrikes and bombings have punctuated the fragile and slow-moving peace negotiations since they began in mid-September after months of delay .
On Monday , a suicide bomber targeted the convoy of the governor of Afghanistan ’ s Laghman province , killing eight people and injuring dozens more , including civilians and children .
Nobody immediately claimed responsibility for the attack , but the Taliban and Islamic State militants are active in the area , according to the Associated Press .
U.S. troops remain on the ground @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gestures toward the broader reality of US interventionism , militarism and occupation around the world .
“ While people in this country do not feel the direct physical effects of these wars , every bomb dropped represents millions of dollars less for our schools , health care , affordable housing , public transportation , physical infrastructure , and a myriad of other social services desperately needed in a time of pandemic and severe economic recession , ” reads a statement released Tuesday by the Chicago Committee Against War and Racism .
Meanwhile , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t toppled the Taliban .
Vanda Felbab-Brown , a foreign policy senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who studies the Afghan conflict , says the Taliban remain strong both politically and on the battlefield .
The Taliban are expected to use their capacity for violence as leverage at the negotiating table despite a peace deal with the Trump administration and international calls for a ceasefire .
“ The war in Afghanistan is not stalled , the Taliban is slowly but surely winning , ” Felbab-Brown said in an interview .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steadily chipping away at government territory , it has capacity of creating all sort of forms of insecurity.
” Civilian casualties peaked years after the U.S. invasion , with more than 10,000 civilians killed or injured each year since 2013 , including hundreds killed in U.S. airstrikes .
The United Nations estimates more than 100,000 civilians have been maimed or killed since 2010 .
Analysts say the Afghan government propped up by the U.S. remains disorganized , corrupt and unable to control much of the countryside , where the Taliban control large swaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy is now largely dependent on U.S. and international aid .
Afghan government officials and their security forces , trained and heavily funded by the U.S. to fend off terrorists and maintain stability , continue to suffer constant attacks and struggle to hold territory and defend population centers , according to the Council on Foreign Relations .
While the U.S. forces have not suffered casualties since striking a controversial peace agreement with the Taliban in February , more than 2,400 U.S. troops have lost their lives in the course of the war in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agreement as a historic turning point in the war , some critics say the administration failed to exact enough concessions from the Taliban as Trump pursued his political goal of withdrawing U.S. troops , putting rights for women and ethnic minorities in danger .
While violence subsided for a couple of weeks after the deal was finalized , fighting between the Taliban and Afghan security forces erupted shortly after , causing an alarming spike in civilian casualties .
Under the U.S.-Taliban deal , the U.S. agreed to a timetable for withdrawing troops this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ summer .
Polls show broad and bipartisan public support for ending U.S. involvement in the conflict after years of war , and Trump reportedly wanted to withdraw all troops ahead of the November elections , promoting his desired image as an antiwar president ( despite his hawkish positions toward Iran and other countries ) .
Last month , the Defense Department announced that it expects there to be fewer than 5,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan by the end of November .
The Taliban agreed to enter peace talks with the Afghan government and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a breeding ground for militant groups that could attack the U.S. , including al-Qaeda , the target of the original U.S. offensive after the 9/11 attacks .
However , reports suggest the Taliban have kept close ties with al-Qaeda despite their assurances to the Trump administration .
While the U.S.-Taliban deal set the stage for the current peace talks between the Taliban and Kabul , ending the U.S. occupation is one of the Taliban ’ s top goals , and Trump ’ s push to make good on his campaign promise to withdraw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rulers a leg up at the negotiating table .
The Taliban have made it clear that they won ’ t agree to a ceasefire until both parties agree on an “ Islamist system ” of government , guaranteeing the Taliban a large if not dominant role in the country ’ s future .
Many in the Afghan government fear losing U.S. military support and ceding power to the Taliban , given the way in which the U.S. has installed itself as a seemingly necessary part of the country ’ s precarious governmental infrastructure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exit , a power-sharing agreement is likely the only path toward peace .
“ [ The Taliban ] understand that they are stronger at the negotiating table when they are stronger on the battlefield , ” Felbab-Brown said , adding that the Taliban continue to effectively degrade the Afghan security forces with attacks .
“ So , they will ask for a lot of the table , and they will certainly ask for profound changes to the political dispensation of the country.
” While analysts and international interlocuters say the talks are the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in decades , Felbab-Brown and others do not expect the civil war will end any time soon , even if U.S. forces withdraw completely .
“ The chance that negotiations will result in a peace deal are slim , the betting odds are higher that the talks will break down , or to phrase it more precisely , talks will go on with starts and pauses … for years to come as civil war intensifies , ” Felbab-Brown said .
Anthony H. Cordesman , the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the current situation on the ground – where the Taliban and Kabul are openly competing for territory – makes building a framework for peace difficult .
“ Look at these reports of who controls territory and who is fighting for it — it tends to be district by district , and in a lot of cases , the government controls the main population center , the district capital , and the Taliban control the countryside , ” Cordesman said in an interview .
“ How on Earth do you distribute power and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ While some observers hope the Taliban will settle for changes to the Afghan constitution , Felbab-Brown is skeptical given their highly authoritarian and religious ideology .
The best scenario Felbab-Brown can imagine is an Iran-like system with a supreme council of religious leaders heading the government with some elected officials operating below them .
At minimum , she said , the Taliban hope to play a dominant role in the Afghan government , as they did before the U.S. invasion .
The prospect of an empowered Taliban terrifies urban , educated Afghans and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are already organizing through civil society to influence the peace talks .
There is an international push to include ethnic minorities and women especially in the talks , but Kabul has only four women on its 21-member negotiating team .
The Taliban have none .
In the lead-up to the negotiations , deadly attacks on human rights activists and women serving in the Afghan government increased .
“ My expectation is that Taliban want a strong or dominant role in the Afghan government and will be very inclined to make this space much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and much more repressive of civil society actors and women ’ s rights , ” Felbab-Brown said .
While the U.S. points to increased access to education for women since the Taliban were ousted , Cordesman said the U.S. government ’ s official data on children attending school are probably exaggerated .
With peace negotiations stalled at their initial stages , urban and educated Afghans are grappling with the reality that the price of peace may be living under the Taliban ’ s harsh rules once again .
However , much of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all along : An estimated 76 percent of Afghan women live in Taliban-controlled areas and the conservative countryside where little has changed since the invasion , according to Felbab-Brown .
For them , peace would at least mean an end to bloody fighting that claims the lives of brothers , sons and husbands they are forced to rely on for survival due to strict patriarchal codes .
What , if anything , the U.S. has achieved for the Afghan people during 19 years of war and occupation remains up for debate , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On the anniversary of the Afghan war , activists across the U.S. will be calling for an end to the U.S. military ’ s massive global reach and interventionism , and to reallocate the nation ’ s massive war spending to meet the needs of people at home .
Currently , the U.S. military has about 800 bases in dozens of countries across the world and is involved in a number of conflicts and proxy wars across North Africa and the Middle East .
During this time of economic hardship , organizers are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war and militarism suck up money that might otherwise fund life-affirming priorities like health care , housing and education .
“ With one-half of the federal discretionary budget going to the US military , and much of the rest given over to subsidizing the already-rich , it ’ s little wonder that there are only crumbs left for the rest of us , ” reads the statement by the Chicago Committee Against War and Racism .

After 19 years and $2 trillion, the U.S. has little to show by way of peace but the amount of bloodshed is undeniable.
The United States invaded Afghanistan 19 years ago today, sparking the nation’s longest-running war that has cost tens of thousands of lives and the U.S. about $2 trillion. While the U.S. originally ousted the Taliban as part of a broader anti-terrorism campaign, the Taliban and other militants have waged a bloody and arguably successful insurgency for nearly two decades. Despite billions of dollars in U.S. aid, and years of state-building and counterterrorism operations obscured by mission drift and government disinformation, Afghans continue to suffer a bloody civil war even as the Taliban meet with the Western-backed government for historic peace talks in Qatar.
Deadly airstrikes and bombings have punctuated the fragile and slow-moving peace negotiations since they began in mid-September after months of delay. On Monday, a suicide bomber targeted the convoy of the governor of Afghanistan’s Laghman province, killing eight people and injuring dozens more, including civilians and children. Nobody immediately claimed responsibility for the attack, but the Taliban and Islamic State militants are active in the area, according to the Associated Press.
U.S. troops remain on the ground in Afghanistan, and their lingering presence gestures toward the broader reality of US interventionism, militarism and occupation around the world.
“While people in this country do not feel the direct physical effects of these wars, every bomb dropped represents millions of dollars less for our schools, health care, affordable housing, public transportation, physical infrastructure, and a myriad of other social services desperately needed in a time of pandemic and severe economic recession,” reads a statement released Tuesday by the Chicago Committee Against War and Racism.
Meanwhile, 19 years of U.S. occupation clearly hasn’t toppled the Taliban. Vanda Felbab-Brown, a foreign policy senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who studies the Afghan conflict, says the Taliban remain strong both politically and on the battlefield. The Taliban are expected to use their capacity for violence as leverage at the negotiating table despite a peace deal with the Trump administration and international calls for a ceasefire.
“The war in Afghanistan is not stalled, the Taliban is slowly but surely winning,” Felbab-Brown said in an interview. “It’s ascendant, it’s steadily chipping away at government territory, it has capacity of creating all sort of forms of insecurity.”
Civilian casualties peaked years after the U.S. invasion, with more than 10,000 civilians killed or injured each year since 2013, including hundreds killed in U.S. airstrikes. The United Nations estimates more than 100,000 civilians have been maimed or killed since 2010.
“The war in Afghanistan is not stalled, the Taliban is slowly but surely winning.”
Analysts say the Afghan government propped up by the U.S. remains disorganized, corrupt and unable to control much of the countryside, where the Taliban control large swaths of territory. The country’s economy is now largely dependent on U.S. and international aid. Afghan government officials and their security forces, trained and heavily funded by the U.S. to fend off terrorists and maintain stability, continue to suffer constant attacks and struggle to hold territory and defend population centers, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.
While the U.S. forces have not suffered casualties since striking a controversial peace agreement with the Taliban in February, more than 2,400 U.S. troops have lost their lives in the course of the war in Afghanistan. While President Trump heralded the agreement as a historic turning point in the war, some critics say the administration failed to exact enough concessions from the Taliban as Trump pursued his political goal of withdrawing U.S. troops, putting rights for women and ethnic minorities in danger. While violence subsided for a couple of weeks after the deal was finalized, fighting between the Taliban and Afghan security forces erupted shortly after, causing an alarming spike in civilian casualties.
Under the U.S.-Taliban deal, the U.S. agreed to a timetable for withdrawing troops this year and a complete withdrawal by next summer. Polls show broad and bipartisan public support for ending U.S. involvement in the conflict after years of war, and Trump reportedly wanted to withdraw all troops ahead of the November elections, promoting his desired image as an antiwar president (despite his hawkish positions toward Iran and other countries). Last month, the Defense Department announced that it expects there to be fewer than 5,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan by the end of November.
The Taliban agreed to enter peace talks with the Afghan government and take steps to prevent Afghanistan from becoming a breeding ground for militant groups that could attack the U.S., including al-Qaeda, the target of the original U.S. offensive after the 9/11 attacks. However, reports suggest the Taliban have kept close ties with al-Qaeda despite their assurances to the Trump administration.
Reports suggest the Taliban have kept close ties with al-Qaeda despite their assurances to the Trump administration.
While the U.S.-Taliban deal set the stage for the current peace talks between the Taliban and Kabul, ending the U.S. occupation is one of the Taliban’s top goals, and Trump’s push to make good on his campaign promise to withdraw U.S. forces gives Afghanistan’s former rulers a leg up at the negotiating table. The Taliban have made it clear that they won’t agree to a ceasefire until both parties agree on an “Islamist system” of government, guaranteeing the Taliban a large if not dominant role in the country’s future. Many in the Afghan government fear losing U.S. military support and ceding power to the Taliban, given the way in which the U.S. has installed itself as a seemingly necessary part of the country’s precarious governmental infrastructure. But with the U.S. eyeing the exit, a power-sharing agreement is likely the only path toward peace.
“[The Taliban] understand that they are stronger at the negotiating table when they are stronger on the battlefield,” Felbab-Brown said, adding that the Taliban continue to effectively degrade the Afghan security forces with attacks. “So, they will ask for a lot of the table, and they will certainly ask for profound changes to the political dispensation of the country.”
While analysts and international interlocuters say the talks are the best chance Afghanistan has at establishing peace in decades, Felbab-Brown and others do not expect the civil war will end any time soon, even if U.S. forces withdraw completely.
“The chance that negotiations will result in a peace deal are slim, the betting odds are higher that the talks will break down, or to phrase it more precisely, talks will go on with starts and pauses … for years to come as civil war intensifies,” Felbab-Brown said.
Anthony H. Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the current situation on the ground – where the Taliban and Kabul are openly competing for territory – makes building a framework for peace difficult.
The U.S. military has about 800 bases in dozens of countries across the world and is involved in a number of conflicts and proxy wars across North Africa and the Middle East.
“Look at these reports of who controls territory and who is fighting for it — it tends to be district by district, and in a lot of cases, the government controls the main population center, the district capital, and the Taliban control the countryside,” Cordesman said in an interview. “How on Earth do you distribute power and authority in a new government?”
While some observers hope the Taliban will settle for changes to the Afghan constitution, Felbab-Brown is skeptical given their highly authoritarian and religious ideology. The best scenario Felbab-Brown can imagine is an Iran-like system with a supreme council of religious leaders heading the government with some elected officials operating below them. At minimum, she said, the Taliban hope to play a dominant role in the Afghan government, as they did before the U.S. invasion.
The prospect of an empowered Taliban terrifies urban, educated Afghans and women’s rights groups, who are already organizing through civil society to influence the peace talks. There is an international push to include ethnic minorities and women especially in the talks, but Kabul has only four women on its 21-member negotiating team. The Taliban have none. In the lead-up to the negotiations, deadly attacks on human rights activists and women serving in the Afghan government increased.
“My expectation is that Taliban want a strong or dominant role in the Afghan government and will be very inclined to make this space much more authoritarian, much more religiously oriented and much more repressive of civil society actors and women’s rights,” Felbab-Brown said.
While the U.S. points to increased access to education for women since the Taliban were ousted, Cordesman said the U.S. government’s official data on children attending school are probably exaggerated. With peace negotiations stalled at their initial stages, urban and educated Afghans are grappling with the reality that the price of peace may be living under the Taliban’s harsh rules once again. However, much of the country has been living under those rules all along: An estimated 76 percent of Afghan women live in Taliban-controlled areas and the conservative countryside where little has changed since the invasion, according to Felbab-Brown. For them, peace would at least mean an end to bloody fighting that claims the lives of brothers, sons and husbands they are forced to rely on for survival due to strict patriarchal codes.
What, if anything, the U.S. has achieved for the Afghan people during 19 years of war and occupation remains up for debate, but the amount of bloodshed is undeniable. On the anniversary of the Afghan war, activists across the U.S. will be calling for an end to the U.S. military’s massive global reach and interventionism, and to reallocate the nation’s massive war spending to meet the needs of people at home. Currently, the U.S. military has about 800 bases in dozens of countries across the world and is involved in a number of conflicts and proxy wars across North Africa and the Middle East. During this time of economic hardship, organizers are drawing attention to the way in which war and militarism suck up money that might otherwise fund life-affirming priorities like health care, housing and education.
“With one-half of the federal discretionary budget going to the US military, and much of the rest given over to subsidizing the already-rich, it’s little wonder that there are only crumbs left for the rest of us,” reads the statement by the Chicago Committee Against War and Racism.
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.