dailysignal--2020-09-01--Liberal Media Alternate Between Denying and Excusing Rioters and  Looters

There ’ s a reason Americans have such little faith in the news media in 2020—and the problem isn ’ t President Donald Trump .
Rioting , vandalism , arson , and looting have become commonplace , but media outlets are too busy spinning narratives , rather than pursuing the truth of what is happening .
The most common tack thus far is for the media to simply deny that violence and destruction is taking place at all .
A tweet by a Washington Post journalist was a good illustration , showing the National Mall in Washington , D.C. , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that clashes between police and rioters had taken place in the city ’ s downtown shortly before .
That has led to the summer of 2020 trend of journalists saying that a protest is “ mostly peaceful ” on camera even as a fire rages in the background .
The most recent example was a ridiculous CNN chyron proclaiming that in Kenosha , Wisconsin , there were “ fiery , but mostly peaceful protests after police shooting.
” The reality is , it ’ s getting hard to ignore what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , where protests have morphed into looting and rioting and where mayors and governors seem to be unable or unwilling to regain control of cities .
Many of the protesters and rioters have been openly calling for violence , and in some cases , the destruction of the United States .
While some media outlets are doing their best to spin the riots as “ mostly peaceful , ” others are now giving coverage to those who think that the riots are actually a good thing .
In May , Northwestern University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that destruction of property was a “ reasonable response to the crisis of policing.
” That may seem extreme enough , but now one writer has gone down the path of a full-blown defense of looting .
Vicky Osterweil , a trans woman described as a “ writer , editor , and agitator , and a regular contributor to The New Inquiry , ” recently wrote a book titled “ In Defense of Looting : A Riotous History of Uncivil Actions.
” The book has a crowbar on the cover .
This radical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given coverage by major media websites , including HuffPost and National Public Radio , which receives taxpayer funding .
In the NPR interview of Osterweil , journalist Natalie Escobar began by writing , “ In the past months of demonstrations for Black lives , there has been a lot of hand-wringing about looting.
” You can see where this is going .
Osterweil explained in the interview that looting is the “ mass expropriation of property , mass shoplifting during a moment of upheaval or riot , ” adding : “ That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Among the positive aspects of looting , according to Osterweil , is that “ it gets people what they need for free immediately , which means that they are capable of living and reproducing their lives without having to rely on jobs or a wage.
” But it gets even better .
“ Looting strikes at the heart of property , of whiteness , and of the police , ” Osterweil wrote .
“ It gets to the very root of the way those three things are interconnected .
And also it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedom and pleasure , and helps them imagine a world that could be .
And I think that ’ s a part of it that doesn ’ t really get talked about—that riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.
” When Escobar asked about the destruction of businesses , many of which are owned by immigrants and minorities , and how it destroys people ’ s livelihoods , Osterweil dismissed that as an illegitimate concern .
In fact , Osterweil called the positive portrayal of small business owners a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s actually a Republican myth that has , over the last 20 years , really crawled into even leftist discourse ; that the small business owner must be respected , that the small business owner creates jobs and is part of the community , ” Osterweil said .
“ But that ’ s actually a right-wing myth.
” Osterweil argues , essentially , that being against looting is somehow racist and demonstrates “ anti-blackness and contempt for poor people who want to live a better life.
” That ignores that riots , looting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 1970s ravaged many black-majority neighborhoods , leaving them dysfunctional and economically depressed for a generation .
It ’ s not necessarily surprising that a few radical intellectuals are advocating violence .
What ’ s shocking is that these arguments and ideas are treated with seriousness by major mainstream media outlets that have significant reach and influence .
As James Freeman at The Wall Street Journal wrote , the truly shocking part of Osterweil ’ s interview is that it “ is not posting to an obscure internet chat site , but a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s time to take another look at the millions of dollars of taxpayer money the federal government sends NPR every year .
This sort of coverage really drives home the idea—as I wrote about previously—that it ’ s actually major mainstream media outlets that are driving the sudden turn to “ radical wokeness ” in American society .
Giving air to those preaching violence—because that ’ s ultimately what looting and rioting is , despite whatever defenses some may put forth—is just the next step in American media discrediting themselves and losing @ @ @ @ @ @

There’s a reason Americans have such little faith in the news media in 2020—and the problem isn’t President Donald Trump.
Rioting, vandalism, arson, and looting have become commonplace, but media outlets are too busy spinning narratives, rather than pursuing the truth of what is happening.
The most common tack thus far is for the media to simply deny that violence and destruction is taking place at all. A tweet by a Washington Post journalist was a good illustration, showing the National Mall in Washington, D.C., appearing to be peaceful during the day—despite the fact that clashes between police and rioters had taken place in the city’s downtown shortly before.
Gonna put these in your replies so your followers can see what downtown DC looked like 36 hours before your nonsensical tweet: pic.twitter.com/xc4dyMopLS — Richie?McG? (@RichieMcGinniss) August 31, 2020
That has led to the summer of 2020 trend of journalists saying that a protest is “mostly peaceful” on camera even as a fire rages in the background.
MSNBC reporter just now: "I want to be clear on how I characterize this. This is mostly a protest. It is not generally speaking unruly."
The guy is literally standing in front of a burning building in the middle of a riot. pic.twitter.com/IzCV6On4sF — Kelb Hull (@CalebJHull) May 29, 2020
The most recent example was a ridiculous CNN chyron proclaiming that in Kenosha, Wisconsin, there were “fiery, but mostly peaceful protests after police shooting.”
The reality is, it’s getting hard to ignore what’s happening in major cities across the country, where protests have morphed into looting and rioting and where mayors and governors seem to be unable or unwilling to regain control of cities.
Many of the protesters and rioters have been openly calling for violence, and in some cases, the destruction of the United States.
“Death to America” was chanted by the mob as they marched through Oakland, California starting fires and vandalizing businesses
pic.twitter.com/8JUAPPYSox — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) August 31, 2020
A BLM leader is encouraging this crowd of protesters to fight the DC cops on the frontlines. Saying he’s “ready to put them in their graves” – this may lead to another violent night in DC… pic.twitter.com/0LXTR69c2P — Brendon Leslie (@_BrendonLeslie) August 30, 2020
While some media outlets are doing their best to spin the riots as “mostly peaceful,” others are now giving coverage to those who think that the riots are actually a good thing.
In May, Northwestern University journalism professor Steven Thrasher wrote for Slate that destruction of property was a “reasonable response to the crisis of policing.”
That may seem extreme enough, but now one writer has gone down the path of a full-blown defense of looting.
Vicky Osterweil, a trans woman described as a “writer, editor, and agitator, and a regular contributor to The New Inquiry,” recently wrote a book titled “In Defense of Looting: A Riotous History of Uncivil Actions.”
The book has a crowbar on the cover.
This radical defense of looting and property destruction was given coverage by major media websites, including HuffPost and National Public Radio, which receives taxpayer funding.
In the NPR interview of Osterweil, journalist Natalie Escobar began by writing, “In the past months of demonstrations for Black lives, there has been a lot of hand-wringing about looting.”
You can see where this is going.
Osterweil explained in the interview that looting is the “mass expropriation of property, mass shoplifting during a moment of upheaval or riot,” adding: “That’s the thing I’m defending.”
Among the positive aspects of looting, according to Osterweil, is that “it gets people what they need for free immediately, which means that they are capable of living and reproducing their lives without having to rely on jobs or a wage.”
But it gets even better.
“Looting strikes at the heart of property, of whiteness, and of the police,” Osterweil wrote. “It gets to the very root of the way those three things are interconnected. And also it provides people with an imaginative sense of freedom and pleasure, and helps them imagine a world that could be. And I think that’s a part of it that doesn’t really get talked about—that riots and looting are experienced as sort of joyous and liberatory.”
When Escobar asked about the destruction of businesses, many of which are owned by immigrants and minorities, and how it destroys people’s livelihoods, Osterweil dismissed that as an illegitimate concern.
In fact, Osterweil called the positive portrayal of small business owners a “Republican myth.”
“It’s actually a Republican myth that has, over the last 20 years, really crawled into even leftist discourse; that the small business owner must be respected, that the small business owner creates jobs and is part of the community,” Osterweil said. “But that’s actually a right-wing myth.”
Osterweil argues, essentially, that being against looting is somehow racist and demonstrates “anti-blackness and contempt for poor people who want to live a better life.”
That ignores that riots, looting, and property destruction in the 1960s and 1970s ravaged many black-majority neighborhoods, leaving them dysfunctional and economically depressed for a generation.
It’s not necessarily surprising that a few radical intellectuals are advocating violence. What’s shocking is that these arguments and ideas are treated with seriousness by major mainstream media outlets that have significant reach and influence.
As James Freeman at The Wall Street Journal wrote, the truly shocking part of Osterweil’s interview is that it “is not posting to an obscure internet chat site, but a massive taxpayer-funded media outlet.”
Maybe it’s time to take another look at the millions of dollars of taxpayer money the federal government sends NPR every year.
This sort of coverage really drives home the idea—as I wrote about previously—that it’s actually major mainstream media outlets that are driving the sudden turn to “radical wokeness” in American society.
Giving air to those preaching violence—because that’s ultimately what looting and rioting is, despite whatever defenses some may put forth—is just the next step in American media discrediting themselves and losing the faith of the public.


dailysignal--2020-09-03--Postal Service Lawsuit Is a Delivery of Pure Politics

The lawsuit filed last week by New York State Attorney General Letitia James against the U.S .
Postal Service reads more like a 64-page list of talking points than a serious legal document .
But that didn ’ t stop her colleagues in New Jersey , Hawaii , New York City , and San Francisco from joining the suit , giving a bicoastal flavor to this colossal waste of taxpayer dollars .
The suit does , however , further politicize what should be a sober , nonpartisan debate on how best to solve the Postal Service ’ s financial problems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Postal Service stands to lose billions of dollars this year and faces bankruptcy as early as next year .
Without congressional action of some sort , bankruptcy seems inevitable .
Unfortunately , sober debate has been lost in a fog of misinformation and conspiracy theories—a fog made even denser by James ’ filing .
The lawsuit alleges that Postmaster General Louis DeJoy , who took office on June 16 , is altering Postal Service policies to hamper the delivery of mail-in ballots for this year ’ s election .
However , the claims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail has steadily declined for two decades and now stands at less than half what it was in 2001 .
As volume has fallen , the Postal Service has steadily reduced its inventory of things such as sorting machines and collection boxes under both Republican and Democratic administrations .
The charge that DeJoy is responsible for starting the removal of collection boxes and sorting machines is thus wrong on two fronts .
First , the removals are part of a long-term process to cut costs and keep the Postal Service financially sustainable .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ were approved or underway prior to DeJoy ’ s arrival .
In fact , the only order he has given regarding them is to halt further removals .
The lawsuit also alleges that the Postal Service is pushing state and local governments to use more expensive first-class postage for all mail-in ballots .
This claim stems from a guidance letter that was drafted before DeJoy started .
The carefully worded guidance merely says that first-class postage might be more appropriate in cases of last-minute ballot requests .
When similar guidance was issued before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The only significant policy change implemented by DeJoy relates to a dry but vitally important aspect of the Postal Service : logistics .
An inspectors general report pointed out that delivery trucks getting a late start was causing an increasing amount of expensive overtime pay .
Acting on the report , DeJoy implemented a pilot program to emphasize on-time departures , which had the potential to generate significant savings .
In the following weeks , there was a drop in on-time mail delivery .
Some of this was caused by DeJoy ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , a June spike in nationwide COVID-19 cases also harmed deliveries , with places such as Philadelphia at times being short hundreds of drivers .
Placing the blame on DeJoy and claiming that the slowdown was evidence of deliberate sabotage is extraordinarily unfair .
Seen in that light , the lawsuit appears to be merely an exercise in election-year messaging , and a waste of time and resources that cash-strapped states such as New York and New Jersey can ill afford .
Meanwhile , as both parties devote their attention and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Postal Service moves closer to insolvency .
A bill passed by the House on Aug. 22 would hand the Postal Service a $ 25 billion check .
Unfortunately , that bill also blocks many reforms that would reduce future deficits , meaning that the threat of bankruptcy would return in a few years .
Rather than a bailout financed by adding to the $ 26.5 trillion national debt , Congress should work on legislation to reform the Postal Service based on 21st-century reality .
This could include reducing or eliminating unfunded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control over costs such as employee compensation , and providing greater flexibility to raise additional revenue .
Unfortunately , saving the Postal Service will be next to impossible if officials insist on using it as a political prop .
Dropping the lawsuit would be a good first step toward reducing the unnecessary and unhelpful amount of tension surrounding the issue .

The lawsuit filed last week by New York State Attorney General Letitia James against the U.S. Postal Service reads more like a 64-page list of talking points than a serious legal document. But that didn’t stop her colleagues in New Jersey, Hawaii, New York City, and San Francisco from joining the suit, giving a bicoastal flavor to this colossal waste of taxpayer dollars.
The suit does, however, further politicize what should be a sober, nonpartisan debate on how best to solve the Postal Service’s financial problems. Those problems are huge.
The Postal Service stands to lose billions of dollars this year and faces bankruptcy as early as next year. Without congressional action of some sort, bankruptcy seems inevitable.
Unfortunately, sober debate has been lost in a fog of misinformation and conspiracy theories—a fog made even denser by James’ filing.
The lawsuit alleges that Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, who took office on June 16, is altering Postal Service policies to hamper the delivery of mail-in ballots for this year’s election. However, the claims are nonsense.
The volume of letter mail has steadily declined for two decades and now stands at less than half what it was in 2001. As volume has fallen, the Postal Service has steadily reduced its inventory of things such as sorting machines and collection boxes under both Republican and Democratic administrations.
The charge that DeJoy is responsible for starting the removal of collection boxes and sorting machines is thus wrong on two fronts.
First, the removals are part of a long-term process to cut costs and keep the Postal Service financially sustainable. Second, this year’s removals were approved or underway prior to DeJoy’s arrival. In fact, the only order he has given regarding them is to halt further removals.
The lawsuit also alleges that the Postal Service is pushing state and local governments to use more expensive first-class postage for all mail-in ballots. This claim stems from a guidance letter that was drafted before DeJoy started.
The carefully worded guidance merely says that first-class postage might be more appropriate in cases of last-minute ballot requests. When similar guidance was issued before other elections, no eyebrows were raised.
The only significant policy change implemented by DeJoy relates to a dry but vitally important aspect of the Postal Service: logistics.
An inspectors general report pointed out that delivery trucks getting a late start was causing an increasing amount of expensive overtime pay. Acting on the report, DeJoy implemented a pilot program to emphasize on-time departures, which had the potential to generate significant savings.
In the following weeks, there was a drop in on-time mail delivery. Some of this was caused by DeJoy’s program, which he has ended.
However, a June spike in nationwide COVID-19 cases also harmed deliveries, with places such as Philadelphia at times being short hundreds of drivers. Placing the blame on DeJoy and claiming that the slowdown was evidence of deliberate sabotage is extraordinarily unfair.
Seen in that light, the lawsuit appears to be merely an exercise in election-year messaging, and a waste of time and resources that cash-strapped states such as New York and New Jersey can ill afford.
Meanwhile, as both parties devote their attention and energy to either demonizing or defending DeJoy, the Postal Service moves closer to insolvency.
A bill passed by the House on Aug. 22 would hand the Postal Service a $25 billion check. Unfortunately, that bill also blocks many reforms that would reduce future deficits, meaning that the threat of bankruptcy would return in a few years.
Rather than a bailout financed by adding to the $26.5 trillion national debt, Congress should work on legislation to reform the Postal Service based on 21st-century reality.
This could include reducing or eliminating unfunded mandates, giving the Postal Service more control over costs such as employee compensation, and providing greater flexibility to raise additional revenue.
Unfortunately, saving the Postal Service will be next to impossible if officials insist on using it as a political prop. Dropping the lawsuit would be a good first step toward reducing the unnecessary and unhelpful amount of tension surrounding the issue.
Originally published by The Sacramento Bee


dailysignal--2020-09-03--Latest Data Proves COVID-19 Doesn’t Justify Postal Bailout

A stream of apocalyptic predictions and strained conspiracy theories have turned the once-sleepy world of U.S .
Postal Service operations into front page news .
Lawmakers focused on the topic are being confronted with an approaching deadline .
By the end of 2021 , the Postal Service is on pace to run out of funds needed to continue current operations .
Several proposed and potential pieces of legislation would provide a bailout worth tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to the Postal Service , supposedly justified by the COVID-19 pandemic .
> > > What ’ s the best way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of The Heritage Foundation , assembled America ’ s top thinkers to figure that out .
So far , it has made more than 260 recommendations .
Learn more here .
Yet there ’ s a big problem with this line of thinking : The pandemic has had a minimal effect on the Postal Service ’ s bottom line .
As a result , a COVID-19 bailout would be the equivalent of giving someone a blood transfusion while ignoring gaping wounds .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into view in March , when leadership of the House Oversight and Reform Committee warned that bankruptcy was imminent due to COVID-19 .
Congress included a $ 10 billion loan to the Postal Service in the CARES Act based on these fears .
Just a few weeks later , it became apparent that warnings of an immediate collapse were unwarranted .
While revenue from letter mail was down , demand for package deliveries increased strongly enough to compensate , meaning that the organization is not going belly-up in 2020 .
This trend was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Postal Service ’ s performance from April through June .
At first glance , the numbers appear grim : In just three months , the organization suffered a $ 2.21 billion loss .
However , placing that number in context tells a different story .
The Postal Service lost $ 2.26 billion during the same period of 2019 , and $ 4.52 billion for the first three months of 2020 .
If COVID-19 were the reason for the Postal Service ’ s difficulties , we would expect the losses to be worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lockdown , not better .
The Postal Service has lost money every year since 2007 , even during periods of strong economic growth .
There are two big reasons for this troubling trend .
First , as communication increasingly moves online , the number of letters has plunged from its peak in 2001 .
That means less revenue to maintain postal facilities and pay employees .
Second , Congress has handcuffed the Postal Service when it comes to controlling costs .
The largest expense , employees , can be reduced only through layoffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compensation of $ 97,588 per worker .
Many potential operational changes , such as switching from six deliveries per week to five , also are barred by law .
Even when the Postal Service does have the ability to cut costs , it can result in a swift backlash from Capitol Hill .
That was evident in recent weeks as lawmakers chastised Postmaster General Louis DeJoy regarding the removal of sorting machines , which was set in motion before he arrived and has been taking place for years .
Rather than drafting legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it financially sustainable , both chambers of Congress seem intent on the shortsighted approach of a taxpayer-funded bailout .
The House passed a $ 25 billion bailout that wrongly includes further restrictions on cost-cutting .
A bipartisan Senate bill provides up to $ 25 billion to cover postal losses “ resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic , ” a definition that could potentially be used to cover any postal losses during the pandemic , regardless of the actual cause .
Senate leadership is considering whether to turn the $ 10 billion CARES Act loan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Postal Service ’ s bottom line at the expense of adding to the national debt .
DeJoy has requested supplemental funds from Congress to cover additional expenses related to COVID-19 , such as providing masks to employees and installing transparent dividers at retail locations .
The amount needed to address those costs would not be $ 10 billion or $ 25 billion , but instead closer to $ 1 billion .
Another common justification for a bailout is the upcoming election , which is expected to feature record levels of mail-in voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s no need for extra funding to cover mailed ballots .
Even if every vote this year were sent by mail within a few days , that would amount to about 5 % of a typical week ’ s volume .
Since mail-in ballots are sent over the course of months , and since letter-mail volume is down this year , the Postal Service will have no problem delivering ballots .
Unfortunately , the largest bailout idea of all is still gaining traction on the left ; namely , turning the Postal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-sufficient , into a standard federal agency .
Such a move would socialize postal losses of billions of dollars per year and add the organization ’ s massive unfunded liabilities to the nation ’ s already unsustainable financial future , for the sake of providing a service that is growing less relevant over time .
Rather than using the hard-earned money of millions of Americans to preserve an antiquated vision of the Postal Service , Congress should get to work on legislation that would end chronic deficits and eliminate widespread inefficiencies .
Heritage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gattuso ) produced a paper this spring , “ Congress Should Free the Postal Service , Not Bail It Out , ” which identifies a variety of postal policy options available to legislators .
Those include reforming underwater Postal Service retirement plans , adjusting onerous service requirements , and seriously considering privatization .
The latter has already taken place in Germany and the United Kingdom .
Tackling the Postal Service ’ s many problems will be no small task .
However , this is precisely the sort of problem that we should expect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a responsible manner , rather than temporarily “ fixing ” it through pricey bailouts .

A stream of apocalyptic predictions and strained conspiracy theories have turned the once-sleepy world of U.S. Postal Service operations into front-page news.
Lawmakers focused on the topic are being confronted with an approaching deadline. By the end of 2021, the Postal Service is on pace to run out of funds needed to continue current operations.
Several proposed and potential pieces of legislation would provide a bailout worth tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to the Postal Service, supposedly justified by the COVID-19 pandemic.
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
Yet there’s a big problem with this line of thinking: The pandemic has had a minimal effect on the Postal Service’s bottom line.
As a result, a COVID-19 bailout would be the equivalent of giving someone a blood transfusion while ignoring gaping wounds.
The financial status of the Postal Service burst into view in March, when leadership of the House Oversight and Reform Committee warned that bankruptcy was imminent due to COVID-19. Congress included a $10 billion loan to the Postal Service in the CARES Act based on these fears.
Just a few weeks later, it became apparent that warnings of an immediate collapse were unwarranted. While revenue from letter mail was down, demand for package deliveries increased strongly enough to compensate, meaning that the organization is not going belly-up in 2020.
This trend was confirmed in the latest quarterly report detailing the Postal Service’s performance from April through June. At first glance, the numbers appear grim: In just three months, the organization suffered a $2.21 billion loss.
However, placing that number in context tells a different story. The Postal Service lost $2.26 billion during the same period of 2019, and $4.52 billion for the first three months of 2020.
If COVID-19 were the reason for the Postal Service’s difficulties, we would expect the losses to be worse during the first months of the economic lockdown, not better.
The Postal Service has lost money every year since 2007, even during periods of strong economic growth. There are two big reasons for this troubling trend.
First, as communication increasingly moves online, the number of letters has plunged from its peak in 2001. That means less revenue to maintain postal facilities and pay employees.
Second, Congress has handcuffed the Postal Service when it comes to controlling costs. The largest expense, employees, can be reduced only through layoffs, rather than through lowering the generous compensation of $97,588 per worker.
Many potential operational changes, such as switching from six deliveries per week to five, also are barred by law.
Even when the Postal Service does have the ability to cut costs, it can result in a swift backlash from Capitol Hill. That was evident in recent weeks as lawmakers chastised Postmaster General Louis DeJoy regarding the removal of sorting machines, which was set in motion before he arrived and has been taking place for years.
Rather than drafting legislation to reform the Postal Service and make it financially sustainable, both chambers of Congress seem intent on the shortsighted approach of a taxpayer-funded bailout.
The House passed a $25 billion bailout that wrongly includes further restrictions on cost-cutting. A bipartisan Senate bill provides up to $25 billion to cover postal losses “resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic,” a definition that could potentially be used to cover any postal losses during the pandemic, regardless of the actual cause.
Senate leadership is considering whether to turn the $10 billion CARES Act loan into a grant. That would improve the Postal Service’s bottom line at the expense of adding to the national debt.
DeJoy has requested supplemental funds from Congress to cover additional expenses related to COVID-19, such as providing masks to employees and installing transparent dividers at retail locations. The amount needed to address those costs would not be $10 billion or $25 billion, but instead closer to $1 billion.
Another common justification for a bailout is the upcoming election, which is expected to feature record levels of mail-in voting. DeJoy has repeatedly explained that there’s no need for extra funding to cover mailed ballots.
Even if every vote this year were sent by mail within a few days, that would amount to about 5% of a typical week’s volume. Since mail-in ballots are sent over the course of months, and since letter-mail volume is down this year, the Postal Service will have no problem delivering ballots.
Unfortunately, the largest bailout idea of all is still gaining traction on the left; namely, turning the Postal Service, which is supposed to be self-sufficient, into a standard federal agency.
Such a move would socialize postal losses of billions of dollars per year and add the organization’s massive unfunded liabilities to the nation’s already unsustainable financial future, for the sake of providing a service that is growing less relevant over time.
Rather than using the hard-earned money of millions of Americans to preserve an antiquated vision of the Postal Service, Congress should get to work on legislation that would end chronic deficits and eliminate widespread inefficiencies.
Heritage Foundation analysts (including the now-deceased James Gattuso) produced a paper this spring, “Congress Should Free the Postal Service, Not Bail It Out,” which identifies a variety of postal policy options available to legislators.
Those include reforming underwater Postal Service retirement plans, adjusting onerous service requirements, and seriously considering privatization. The latter has already taken place in Germany and the United Kingdom.
Tackling the Postal Service’s many problems will be no small task. However, this is precisely the sort of problem that we should expect our nation’s leaders to address in a responsible manner, rather than temporarily “fixing” it through pricey bailouts.


dailysignal--2020-09-03--COVID-19 Power Trips of Leftist Politicians, Teachers Unions Must Stop

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought out political power trips like America has never seen before .
Governors and mayors have seized “ emergency powers ” that effectively shut down our economic engine and social culture .
Never before had Americans seen the day when they would be told they couldn ’ t open for business , attend worship services , hold weddings or funerals , or send their children back to school .
> > > What ’ s the best way for America to reopen and return to business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s top thinkers to figure that out .
So far , it has made more than 260 recommendations .
Learn more here .
Americans never anticipated they ’ d be forced to wear facial coverings if they so much as left their homes .
The continued crisis has sufficiently emboldened tyrants-in-waiting to the point that Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti cut off the water and power to a home that hosted a large gathering—and threatened to do the same to businesses that defy his “ social distancing ” edict .
How does that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are obvious political power grabs in order to keep people uncomfortable and inconvenienced , in hopes of affecting the November elections , but they will have destructive consequences we haven ’ t yet fully realized and can ’ t even anticipate .
One political force to be reckoned with in California is even willing to sacrifice the futures of younger generations ; namely , the teachers unions .
Health experts across the country have urged school districts to reopen in-person education for the well-being of America ’ s schoolchildren , but to no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Unified Teachers of Los Angeles has released a list of demands the union says must be met before the teachers will go back to work , and many of the demands have nothing to do with health and safety .
The teachers union is not simply demanding gallons of hand sanitizer and masks for everyone on campus .
Labor leaders are not merely requesting plexiglass barricades around their workspaces to protect them from students who may be carrying COVID-19 .
Those suggestions could be discussed .
No , the teachers union is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unless politicians abolish charter and private schools , eliminate unpaid rent evictions , remove school resource officers , and defund law enforcement .
It doesn ’ t matter to the union ’ s leaders that when kids can ’ t go to school , parents either can ’ t go to work or must make other child care arrangements—often at increased cost to already struggling families .
Students fall behind in their lessons and extracurricular activities , affecting grade point averages and skill development needed for college or post-high school careers .
Depression @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increasing , as is stress on families .
The teachers union wants to draw out the pain and inconvenience on millions for political gain , and too many area political leaders are willing to comply because they , too , see a political advantage to staying shut down and shut in .
Why are we paying property taxes if the schools those taxes fund remain locked and empty , and if parents have to take on the primary role of educating their children ?
By comparison , New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public schools can reopen for in-person education .
He needs the schools to reopen because it ’ s one of the few things that may keep his tax base from collapsing entirely .
America is six months into the pandemic , and many companies are realizing their employees can work remotely .
Why pay exorbitant rent for New York City office space when people have effectively learned to work from home ?
Why should people pay sky-high property taxes when they can do their jobs in a more affordable community ?
Cuomo has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to New York , even offering to take them out for a drink or cook them dinner .
While Cuomo ’ s decision to reopen schools is also largely political , he ’ s at least letting New York families return to some semblance of normalcy .
The Los Angeles teachers union wants to delay “ normal ” to further its far-left political agenda .
My organization , the Freedom Foundation , works tirelessly to free teachers and other government employees from union bondage .
In the two short years since the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Janus v AFSCME—giving government employees the constitutional right to opt out of union membership—we have helped more than 8,500 teachers leave their unions .
Teachers unions don ’ t care about teachers .
They only care about collecting dues from teachers ’ paychecks .
That ’ s why they fight teachers who want to leave the union .
The leaders of the Unified Teachers of Los Angeles are not thinking about the children .
They ’ re holding our children hostage , and Californians should demand that it stop .

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought out political power trips like America has never seen before.
Governors and mayors have seized “emergency powers” that effectively shut down our economic engine and social culture.
Never before had Americans seen the day when they would be told they couldn’t open for business, attend worship services, hold weddings or funerals, or send their children back to school.
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
Americans never anticipated they’d be forced to wear facial coverings if they so much as left their homes.
The continued crisis has sufficiently emboldened tyrants-in-waiting to the point that Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti cut off the water and power to a home that hosted a large gathering—and threatened to do the same to businesses that defy his “social distancing” edict.
How does that help anyone?
Many of these edicts are obvious political power grabs in order to keep people uncomfortable and inconvenienced, in hopes of affecting the November elections, but they will have destructive consequences we haven’t yet fully realized and can’t even anticipate.
One political force to be reckoned with in California is even willing to sacrifice the futures of younger generations; namely, the teachers unions.
Health experts across the country have urged school districts to reopen in-person education for the well-being of America’s schoolchildren, but to no avail in the Los Angeles area.
The Unified Teachers of Los Angeles has released a list of demands the union says must be met before the teachers will go back to work, and many of the demands have nothing to do with health and safety.
The teachers union is not simply demanding gallons of hand sanitizer and masks for everyone on campus. Labor leaders are not merely requesting plexiglass barricades around their workspaces to protect them from students who may be carrying COVID-19. Those suggestions could be discussed.
No, the teachers union is refusing to go back to the classrooms unless politicians abolish charter and private schools, eliminate unpaid rent evictions, remove school resource officers, and defund law enforcement.
It doesn’t matter to the union’s leaders that when kids can’t go to school, parents either can’t go to work or must make other child care arrangements—often at increased cost to already struggling families.
Students fall behind in their lessons and extracurricular activities, affecting grade point averages and skill development needed for college or post-high school careers.
Depression and anxiety rates among K-12 students is increasing, as is stress on families.
The teachers union wants to draw out the pain and inconvenience on millions for political gain, and too many area political leaders are willing to comply because they, too, see a political advantage to staying shut down and shut in.
Why are we paying property taxes if the schools those taxes fund remain locked and empty, and if parents have to take on the primary role of educating their children?
By comparison, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has announced that his state’s public schools can reopen for in-person education. He needs the schools to reopen because it’s one of the few things that may keep his tax base from collapsing entirely.
America is six months into the pandemic, and many companies are realizing their employees can work remotely. Why pay exorbitant rent for New York City office space when people have effectively learned to work from home? Why should people pay sky-high property taxes when they can do their jobs in a more affordable community?
Cuomo has begun begging his wealthy constituents to return to New York, even offering to take them out for a drink or cook them dinner.
While Cuomo’s decision to reopen schools is also largely political, he’s at least letting New York families return to some semblance of normalcy.
The Los Angeles teachers union wants to delay “normal” to further its far-left political agenda.
My organization, the Freedom Foundation, works tirelessly to free teachers and other government employees from union bondage. In the two short years since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in Janus v AFSCME—giving government employees the constitutional right to opt out of union membership—we have helped more than 8,500 teachers leave their unions.
Teachers unions don’t care about teachers. They only care about collecting dues from teachers’ paychecks. That’s why they fight teachers who want to leave the union.
The leaders of the Unified Teachers of Los Angeles are not thinking about the children. They’re holding our children hostage, and Californians should demand that it stop.


dailysignal--2020-09-03--CDC Is Failing to Collect and Share COVID-19 Data for the Front Line

When the levees broke under Hurricane Katrina , the Army Corps of Engineers was roasted for spending billions and still failing to protect Americans .
So where ’ s the outrage over the latest epic governmental fail—this one by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ?
As the federal agency with primary responsibility for handling infectious diseases , the CDC uses an antiquated system to collect information essential to fighting the coronavirus .
Medical workers literally phone or fax in their data .
And when they do , it ’ s not the data we need .
The CDC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around for 76 years .
Yet its COVID-19 data pales in comparison to what ’ s available on websites that didn ’ t even exist a few months ago .
One of these , The Atlantic ’ s COVID Tracking Project , was launched in March—the same month Congress gave the CDC $ 1 billion to collect the same data .
Multiple congresses and administrations have tried to drag the CDC into the 21st century , to no avail .
Since 2006 , the CDC has ignored four separate laws requiring it to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collecting information to combat disease .
The Government Accountability Office has twice reprimanded the CDC for its impudence .
A decade ago , it warned prophetically that “ the nation will lack an effective tool for ensuring that public health situational awareness capabilities have been established.
” > > > What ’ s the best way for America to reopen and return to business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of The Heritage Foundation , assembled America ’ s top thinkers to figure that out .
So far , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Learn more here .
Compounding the problem is the fact that CDC reporting is usually a one-way street : Health care workers report to public health officials , but get little information back .
The result : clinical knowledge , patient data , and best practices for treating COVID-19 aren ’ t being shared in real time for hospitals and policymakers to use .
That is costing lives , as well as trillions of dollars .
To succeed where the CDC has failed , the Department of Health and Human Services must identify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data needed to ensure a robust , informed response to COVID-19 , opioid abuse , and other public health threats .
For example , it is essential to collect timely information on hospitalizations and mortality , the age and comorbidities of patients , and total net active cases .
It is scandalous that this data is not uniformly defined and reported .
To increase understanding of which populations are most susceptible to the contagion , the data must identify confirmed cases by race , ethnicity , disability , and income levels .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policymakers can identify hot spots and implement targeted mitigation strategies .
Front-line doctors don ’ t have time to file separate reports on top of the claims data they submit to insurers , yet that ’ s precisely what they have to do today .
Almost all hospitals—and 75 % of physician offices—now use electronic systems ( created with a $ 40 billion investment from federal taxpayers ) to file insurance claims .
Yet they are forced to reenter data by hand when they report to public health agencies .
HHS should have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s electronic health record or from insurance claims .
The end goal is not to create a federal vault of new data , but to constantly update those on the front lines with useful information .
The CDC lacks the internal expertise to do this .
HHS should immediately issue a contract to build the system .
In the interim , HHS could direct the CDC to start hosting calls for front-line clinicians to learn from each other .
Finally , the network must contain strong privacy protections .
Data transmitted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Those who misuse or improperly disclose personal health information must be subject to stiff civil and criminal penalties .
The CDC ’ s long-standing failure to modernize its data systems is intolerable .
Things must change , and quickly , to improve our understanding of the pandemic and prepare us for future crises .

When the levees broke under Hurricane Katrina, the Army Corps of Engineers was roasted for spending billions and still failing to protect Americans. So where’s the outrage over the latest epic governmental fail—this one by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?
As the federal agency with primary responsibility for handling infectious diseases, the CDC uses an antiquated system to collect information essential to fighting the coronavirus. Medical workers literally phone or fax in their data. And when they do, it’s not the data we need.
The CDC employs thousands of experts and has been around for 76 years. Yet its COVID-19 data pales in comparison to what’s available on websites that didn’t even exist a few months ago. One of these, The Atlantic’s COVID Tracking Project, was launched in March—the same month Congress gave the CDC $1 billion to collect the same data.
Multiple congresses and administrations have tried to drag the CDC into the 21st century, to no avail. Since 2006, the CDC has ignored four separate laws requiring it to build a modern, efficient system for collecting information to combat disease.
The Government Accountability Office has twice reprimanded the CDC for its impudence. A decade ago, it warned prophetically that “the nation will lack an effective tool for ensuring that public health situational awareness capabilities have been established.”
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
Compounding the problem is the fact that CDC reporting is usually a one-way street: Health care workers report to public health officials, but get little information back.
The result: clinical knowledge, patient data, and best practices for treating COVID-19 aren’t being shared in real time for hospitals and policymakers to use. That is costing lives, as well as trillions of dollars.
To succeed where the CDC has failed, the Department of Health and Human Services must identify, prioritize, and standardize the key data needed to ensure a robust, informed response to COVID-19, opioid abuse, and other public health threats.
For example, it is essential to collect timely information on hospitalizations and mortality, the age and comorbidities of patients, and total net active cases. It is scandalous that this data is not uniformly defined and reported.
To increase understanding of which populations are most susceptible to the contagion, the data must identify confirmed cases by race, ethnicity, disability, and income levels. It must also be geographically specific, so policymakers can identify hot spots and implement targeted mitigation strategies.
Front-line doctors don’t have time to file separate reports on top of the claims data they submit to insurers, yet that’s precisely what they have to do today. Almost all hospitals—and 75% of physician offices—now use electronic systems (created with a $40 billion investment from federal taxpayers) to file insurance claims.
Yet they are forced to reenter data by hand when they report to public health agencies. HHS should have this data collected automatically from a doctor’s electronic health record or from insurance claims.
The end goal is not to create a federal vault of new data, but to constantly update those on the front lines with useful information. The CDC lacks the internal expertise to do this. HHS should immediately issue a contract to build the system.
In the interim, HHS could direct the CDC to start hosting calls for front-line clinicians to learn from each other.
Finally, the network must contain strong privacy protections. Data transmitted to the federal government should be de-identified. Those who misuse or improperly disclose personal health information must be subject to stiff civil and criminal penalties. The CDC’s long-standing failure to modernize its data systems is intolerable.
Things must change, and quickly, to improve our understanding of the pandemic and prepare us for future crises.
Originally published by Herald-Tribune


dailysignal--2020-09-03--The Facts of Cuomo’s Fatal Leadership During COVID-19

After an alarming surge in new COVID-19 cases in June and July , the country has begun to see a decline in daily cases , putting us roughly back to early July levels .
These are encouraging signs considering the harrowing two-month period , but we are still adding tens of thousands of new daily cases nationally and still losing hundreds of lives to the virus each day .
All of that makes now an odd time for New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo to decide that it ’ s appropriate to write the book on crisis leadership in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has in his favor is that New York ’ s daily case numbers have been stable for several months .
In fact , the state has gone several weeks since recording more than 20 daily deaths .
That ’ s the good news , and all Americans should rejoice that death ’ s grip on New York has finally loosened .
The bad news is that the state is still recording hundreds of new cases each day , and the low number of daily deaths occurring now came at the cost of nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s currently twice the number of deaths recorded by New Jersey ( nearly 16,000 as of this writing ) , which is second only to New York in deaths .
The combined death counts of California , Texas , and Florida have only just surpassed New York ’ s deaths .
It should also be noted that New York ’ s population is smaller than those of the three latter states .
It is particularly galling then that Cuomo , in his speech for the Democratic National Convention , said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the illness … in many ways , COVID is just a metaphor.
” > > > What ’ s the best way for America to reopen and return to business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of The Heritage Foundation , assembled America ’ s top thinkers to figure that out .
So far , it has made more than 260 recommendations .
Learn more here .
First off , COVID-19 stands for “ coronavirus disease , 2019 , ” so it is neither a symptom nor an illness but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has literally , not metaphorically , killed nearly 180,000 Americans , the largest proportion of whom were New Yorkers .
The idea that COVID-19 could ever be described as “ just a metaphor ” is revolting , especially coming from the man who presided over such concentrated carnage .
Cuomo argues that his leadership is what brought New York out of dire straits .
Indeed , in those remarks , he described New York as “ ground zero for the COVID virus , ” though he said they ’ ve gone from “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the globe to one of the lowest.
” Never mind that the first confirmed case and the first outbreaks in the United States occurred in Washington state , not New York .
Moreover , there ’ s been increasing speculation that the infection begins to burn itself out after about 20 % of a population has been infected .
New York City , as it turns out , has reached that level with an estimated 19.5 % of its population infected , as antibody surveys have suggested .
During the same period , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit hard by COVID-19 , has had an estimated 3.8 % of its population infected .
It seems less likely that Cuomo ’ s able leadership ended the pandemic in New York and more likely that , under his watch , the virus burned through the population and is running out of New Yorkers left to infect and kill .
Although he may have proved ineffectual in halting the spread of the virus , he did do something that had an enormous effect : He sent the virus into the midst of those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To be clear , policymakers deserve a tremendous amount of grace for making mistakes in the early pandemic response , but the decision to force nursing homes to admit patients with COVID-19 was completely inexcusable .
There were very few things we knew about the coronavirus at the beginning , but one of the very few things we knew for certain was that the virus had a particularly deadly effect on the elderly .
Yet the Cuomo administration , as late as March 25 , went ahead and required nursing homes to admit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confirmed or suspected case of COVID-19 .
There are numerous ways to describe the effect of this policy , but this headline is rather concise : “ NY nursing home vacancies soar during COVID-19 crisis.
” This is why it ’ s so maddening to hear the man responsible for all the above say , “ We proved that our way succeeded.
” For this to be called a success , the bar would have to be set approximately 6 feet below ground in a lonely plot .
It is fair to give @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisions in highly uncertain times , but it is also fair to expect a modicum of humility and self-awareness of them .
Cuomo , who presided over the worst pandemic response in the country and whose policy actively and directly made it worse , has no business writing a book to congratulate himself on a job well done .
He deserves exactly zero plaudits for good leadership and should be remembered for , if anything , his “ impossible mountain ” of death .

After an alarming surge in new COVID-19 cases in June and July, the country has begun to see a decline in daily cases, putting us roughly back to early July levels.
These are encouraging signs considering the harrowing two-month period, but we are still adding tens of thousands of new daily cases nationally and still losing hundreds of lives to the virus each day.
All of that makes now an odd time for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo to decide that it’s appropriate to write the book on crisis leadership in the time of a pandemic.
What Cuomo has in his favor is that New York’s daily case numbers have been stable for several months. In fact, the state has gone several weeks since recording more than 20 daily deaths. That’s the good news, and all Americans should rejoice that death’s grip on New York has finally loosened.
The bad news is that the state is still recording hundreds of new cases each day, and the low number of daily deaths occurring now came at the cost of nearly 33,000 deaths before.
For context, that’s currently twice the number of deaths recorded by New Jersey (nearly 16,000 as of this writing), which is second only to New York in deaths. The combined death counts of California, Texas, and Florida have only just surpassed New York’s deaths. It should also be noted that New York’s population is smaller than those of the three latter states.
It is particularly galling then that Cuomo, in his speech for the Democratic National Convention, said, “COVID is the symptom, not the illness … in many ways, COVID is just a metaphor.”
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
First off, COVID-19 stands for “coronavirus disease, 2019,” so it is neither a symptom nor an illness but a disease. Second, the coronavirus has literally, not metaphorically, killed nearly 180,000 Americans, the largest proportion of whom were New Yorkers.
The idea that COVID-19 could ever be described as “just a metaphor” is revolting, especially coming from the man who presided over such concentrated carnage.
Cuomo argues that his leadership is what brought New York out of dire straits. Indeed, in those remarks, he described New York as “ground zero for the COVID virus,” though he said they’ve gone from “one of the highest infection rates on the globe to one of the lowest.”
Never mind that the first confirmed case and the first outbreaks in the United States occurred in Washington state, not New York.
Moreover, there’s been increasing speculation that the infection begins to burn itself out after about 20% of a population has been infected. New York City, as it turns out, has reached that level with an estimated 19.5% of its population infected, as antibody surveys have suggested.
During the same period, the Philadelphia area, which was also hit hard by COVID-19, has had an estimated 3.8% of its population infected. It seems less likely that Cuomo’s able leadership ended the pandemic in New York and more likely that, under his watch, the virus burned through the population and is running out of New Yorkers left to infect and kill.
Although he may have proved ineffectual in halting the spread of the virus, he did do something that had an enormous effect: He sent the virus into the midst of those most vulnerable to its worst consequences.
To be clear, policymakers deserve a tremendous amount of grace for making mistakes in the early pandemic response, but the decision to force nursing homes to admit patients with COVID-19 was completely inexcusable.
There were very few things we knew about the coronavirus at the beginning, but one of the very few things we knew for certain was that the virus had a particularly deadly effect on the elderly. Yet the Cuomo administration, as late as March 25, went ahead and required nursing homes to admit or readmit patients despite their having a confirmed or suspected case of COVID-19.
There are numerous ways to describe the effect of this policy, but this headline is rather concise: “NY nursing home vacancies soar during COVID-19 crisis.” This is why it’s so maddening to hear the man responsible for all the above say, “We proved that our way succeeded.”
For this to be called a success, the bar would have to be set approximately 6 feet below ground in a lonely plot. It is fair to give leaders and policymakers credit for making tough decisions in highly uncertain times, but it is also fair to expect a modicum of humility and self-awareness of them.
Cuomo, who presided over the worst pandemic response in the country and whose policy actively and directly made it worse, has no business writing a book to congratulate himself on a job well done. He deserves exactly zero plaudits for good leadership and should be remembered for, if anything, his “impossible mountain” of death.
Originally published by the Washington Examiner


dailysignal--2020-09-03--Michiganders Seek Repeal of Emergency Law Whitmer Uses for COVID-19 Decrees

Some Michiganders say the law that Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer is using to keep their state under COVID-19 lockdown is being abused , and they are pushing to reopen their state .
“ Gov .
Whitmer ’ s interpretation and use of the [ Emergency Powers of Governor Act ] is completely novel , ” said Michael Van Beek , director of research at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy , a Midland , Michigan-based free market think tank .
The Emergency Powers of Governor Act , enacted in 1945 , has been used only a handful of times before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the Mackinac Center .
> > > What ’ s the best way for America to reopen and return to business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of The Heritage Foundation , assembled America ’ s top thinkers to figure that out .
So far , it has made more than 260 recommendations .
Learn more here .
Specifically , according to the report , the act was used “ in response to five emergency situations : labor unrest in Hillsdale in 1964 , urban riots in 1967 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1970 , once for high mercury levels in Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie , and a second for a minor riot in Ypsilanti.
” “ Constitutional concerns followed previous uses of these powers , but Gov .
Whitmer has taken these to a new level , ” Van Beek said .
“ No other governor has attempted to use the [ law ] to gain unilateral control over an emergency for an indefinite period.
” The push to open the state can be found at Unlock Michigan.com , where Michiganders are circulating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Emergency Powers of Governor Act .
The group says the law enables Whitmer to “ govern by decree , without end , and without accountability.
” On its website , UnlockMichigan says , “ Using this obscure , antiquated law , Governor Whitmer has issued a blizzard of over 100 executive decrees , with … no public input—and no end in sight , ” adding : The initiative would repeal the Emergency Powers of Governor Act of 1945 , which UnlockMichigan.com says the governor “ has misused … to assume sweeping , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ governor to have , in violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine.
” David Guenthner , senior strategist for state affairs at the Mackinac Center , told The Daily Signal in an email that Michiganders are well on their way to putting Whitmer , a Democrat elected in 2018 , in check .
“ The petition needs 340,000 validated signatures in order to start the 40-day clock for legislative action , ” Guenthner said .
“ If the legislature fails to pass the initiated legislation as proposed within the 40 days , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballot in 2022.
” Unlock Michigan said earlier this week it had already garnered 300,000 signatures , with the third hundred thousand being collected in just 10 days .
A request for comment from Whitmer ’ s office was not returned Wednesday .
Meanwhile , a similar effort is underway in neighboring Ohio , where Ohio Stands Up !
has filed a lawsuit against Ohio Republican Gov .
Mike DeWine ’ s March 9 emergency health order , which is still in effect .
“ We believe that the response to COVID-19 has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American public , ” Thomas Renz , a lawyer , said Monday in a press release for Ohio Stand Up !
“ The objective of this legal action is to force the state to honor the Constitution and to stop the lies , manipulation and fear-mongering intentionally being promoted by public health officials and elected officials .
”

Some Michiganders say the law that Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is using to keep their state under COVID-19 lockdown is being abused, and they are pushing to reopen their state.
“Gov. Whitmer’s interpretation and use of the [Emergency Powers of Governor Act] is completely novel,” said Michael Van Beek, director of research at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Midland, Michigan-based free market think tank.
The Emergency Powers of Governor Act, enacted in 1945, has been used only a handful of times before now, according to a new report from the Mackinac Center.
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
Specifically, according to the report, the act was used “in response to five emergency situations: labor unrest in Hillsdale in 1964, urban riots in 1967 and again in 1968, and twice in 1970, once for high mercury levels in Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie, and a second for a minor riot in Ypsilanti.”
“Constitutional concerns followed previous uses of these powers, but Gov. Whitmer has taken these to a new level,” Van Beek said. “No other governor has attempted to use the [law] to gain unilateral control over an emergency for an indefinite period.”
The push to open the state can be found at Unlock Michigan.com, where Michiganders are circulating petitions for a proposal that would repeal the Emergency Powers of Governor Act. The group says the law enables Whitmer to “govern by decree, without end, and without accountability.”
On its website, UnlockMichigan says, “Using this obscure, antiquated law, Governor Whitmer has issued a blizzard of over 100 executive decrees, with … no public input—and no end in sight,” adding:
… We believe Whitmer’s crushing lockdown of life and business across Michigan is a dangerous threat to our livelihoods and constitutional liberties.
The initiative would repeal the Emergency Powers of Governor Act of 1945, which UnlockMichigan.com says the governor “has misused … to assume sweeping, permanent powers the legislature never intended a governor to have, in violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine.”
David Guenthner, senior strategist for state affairs at the Mackinac Center, told The Daily Signal in an email that Michiganders are well on their way to putting Whitmer, a Democrat elected in 2018, in check.
“The petition needs 340,000 validated signatures in order to start the 40-day clock for legislative action,” Guenthner said. “If the legislature fails to pass the initiated legislation as proposed within the 40 days, it automatically goes on the next general election ballot in 2022.”
Unlock Michigan said earlier this week it had already garnered 300,000 signatures, with the third hundred thousand being collected in just 10 days.
A request for comment from Whitmer’s office was not returned Wednesday.
Meanwhile, a similar effort is underway in neighboring Ohio, where Ohio Stands Up! has filed a lawsuit against Ohio Republican Gov. Mike DeWine’s March 9 emergency health order, which is still in effect.
“We believe that the response to COVID-19 has been the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American public,” Thomas Renz, a lawyer, said Monday in a press release for Ohio Stand Up!
“The objective of this legal action is to force the state to honor the Constitution and to stop the lies, manipulation and fear-mongering intentionally being promoted by public health officials and elected officials.”


dailysignal--2020-09-03--Pro Athletes Ignore Facts, Stats, and Data When Denouncing ‘Systemic Police Brutality’

Reacting to the shooting of a black man by a white Kenosha , Wisconsin , cop , a tearful Doc Rivers , the black NBA Los Angeles Clippers coach , held a post-game press conference .
Rivers said : All you hear is Donald Trump and all of them talking about fear .
We ’ re the ones getting killed .
We ’ re the ones getting shot .
We ’ re the ones that were denied to live in certain communities .
We ’ ve been hung .
We ’ ve been shot .
And all you do is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s amazing why we keep loving this country , and this country does not love us back .
It ’ s really so sad .
Like , I should just be a coach .
And I ’ m so often reminded of my color .
… It ’ s just really sad .
We got to do better .
But we got to demand better .
“ We ’ re the ones getting killed ” ?
“ We ’ re the ones getting shot ” ?
“ And all you do is keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people get tired of hearing me say it , but we are scared as black people in America .
Black men , black women , black kids , we are terrified .
Because you don ’ t know ; you have no idea .
You have no idea how that cop that day left the house .
You don ’ t know if he woke up on the good side of the bed .
You don ’ t know if he woke up on the wrong side of the bed .
Sports is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and records .
It ’ s one of the many things we like about it .
Where are the numbers , stats , and records that show the police engage in “ systemic ” brutality against blacks ?
Why don ’ t the players and coaches who complain about police brutality employ the same use of numbers , stats , data , logic , and reason to determine the truthfulness of the claim that cops are killing black people because they are black ?
We argue over whether this player is better than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better than that team .
It ’ s fascinating to watch a coach of an NBA team dissect the game , stat sheet at his side , during the postgame press conference .
An ex-professional basketball player-turned-broadcaster responded to a critic ’ s complaint about the player ’ s “ disappointing ” NBA career .
Given the expectations coming out of college about this player ’ s future , the critic argued that the player underperformed in his pro career .
The ex-player responded that such a comment can only come from somebody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the highest level .
Citing his career statistics , he surgically dismantled the critic ’ s case .
For each of the three teams he played for , he said , his role changed .
One team wanted him to be more of a scorer while another team wanted him to concentrate on defense , leaving the scoring to others .
On his third team , he played an entirely different position with entirely different expectations .
My career , said the ex-player , must be seen in this context .
When a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that his client deserves more money , the agent uses stats and data to make the case .
In turn , the team relies on stats and data to make its case .
Any analysis of whether cops are killing blacks because they are black would begin with noting the approximately 50 million police-civilian interactions that occur every year .
Out of these 50 million interactions , about 11 million people are arrested .
In recent years , about 60,000 cops have been assaulted annually .
All of this resulted in about 1,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average in recent years , with almost all suspects resisting with a weapon or resisting violently .
Of the 1,000 killed annually , approximately 250 were black and 500 white .
The percentage of police shootings that involve a white cop and an unarmed black suspect is less than 4 % of the total .
The percentage of white cops killing unarmed black men who did not reasonably pose a threat is even smaller .
Recall that black suspect Michael Brown of Ferguson , Missouri , was “ unarmed , ” but his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s gun , indicating that Brown was attempting to grab it .
For perspective , 27 Americans on average from 2009 to 2018 died annually after being struck by lightning .
And , as Manhattan Institute ’ s Heather Mac Donald explains , “ A police officer is 18 1/2 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.
” Is it too much to ask that sports celebrities , who parrot lines like “ systemic ” police brutality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Too much to ask them to then apply the same kind of logic and reason they must rely on in their own profession ?
If they did so , they would learn the good news—that there is no evidence of “ systemic ” police killings of blacks , and that the unfortunate instances should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis .
Can training be improved ?
Of course .
Would it be helpful if officers wore body cams ?
Absolutely .
Let ’ s focus our energy on these things and @ @ @ @ @

Reacting to the shooting of a black man by a white Kenosha, Wisconsin, cop, a tearful Doc Rivers, the black NBA Los Angeles Clippers coach, held a post-game press conference. Rivers said:
All you hear is Donald Trump and all of them talking about fear. We’re the ones getting killed. We’re the ones getting shot. We’re the ones that were denied to live in certain communities. We’ve been hung. We’ve been shot. And all you do is keep hearing about fear. It’s amazing why we keep loving this country, and this country does not love us back. It’s really so sad. Like, I should just be a coach. And I’m so often reminded of my color. … It’s just really sad. We got to do better. But we got to demand better.
“We’re the ones getting killed”? “We’re the ones getting shot”? “And all you do is keep hearing about fear”?
NBA superstar LeBron James made a similar comment:
I know people get tired of hearing me say it, but we are scared as black people in America. Black men, black women, black kids, we are terrified. Because you don’t know; you have no idea. You have no idea how that cop that day left the house. You don’t know if he woke up on the good side of the bed. You don’t know if he woke up on the wrong side of the bed.
Sports is a game of numbers, statistics, and records. It’s one of the many things we like about it. Where are the numbers, stats, and records that show the police engage in “systemic” brutality against blacks?
Why don’t the players and coaches who complain about police brutality employ the same use of numbers, stats, data, logic, and reason to determine the truthfulness of the claim that cops are killing black people because they are black?
We argue over whether this player is better than that player or whether this team is better than that team. It’s fascinating to watch a coach of an NBA team dissect the game, stat sheet at his side, during the postgame press conference.
An ex-professional basketball player-turned-broadcaster responded to a critic’s complaint about the player’s “disappointing” NBA career. Given the expectations coming out of college about this player’s future, the critic argued that the player underperformed in his pro career.
The ex-player responded that such a comment can only come from somebody who’s never played basketball at the highest level. Citing his career statistics, he surgically dismantled the critic’s case.
For each of the three teams he played for, he said, his role changed. One team wanted him to be more of a scorer while another team wanted him to concentrate on defense, leaving the scoring to others. On his third team, he played an entirely different position with entirely different expectations.
My career, said the ex-player, must be seen in this context.
When a player’s agent argues to management that his client deserves more money, the agent uses stats and data to make the case. In turn, the team relies on stats and data to make its case.
Any analysis of whether cops are killing blacks because they are black would begin with noting the approximately 50 million police-civilian interactions that occur every year. Out of these 50 million interactions, about 11 million people are arrested. In recent years, about 60,000 cops have been assaulted annually.
All of this resulted in about 1,000 people being killed by the police on average in recent years, with almost all suspects resisting with a weapon or resisting violently. Of the 1,000 killed annually, approximately 250 were black and 500 white.
The percentage of police shootings that involve a white cop and an unarmed black suspect is less than 4% of the total. The percentage of white cops killing unarmed black men who did not reasonably pose a threat is even smaller.
Recall that black suspect Michael Brown of Ferguson, Missouri, was “unarmed,” but his DNA was found on the officer’s gun, indicating that Brown was attempting to grab it.
For perspective, 27 Americans on average from 2009 to 2018 died annually after being struck by lightning. And, as Manhattan Institute’s Heather Mac Donald explains, “A police officer is 18 1/2 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.”
Is it too much to ask that sports celebrities, who parrot lines like “systemic” police brutality against blacks, ask for facts first? Too much to ask them to then apply the same kind of logic and reason they must rely on in their own profession?
If they did so, they would learn the good news—that there is no evidence of “systemic” police killings of blacks, and that the unfortunate instances should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Can training be improved? Of course. Would it be helpful if officers wore body cams? Absolutely. Let’s focus our energy on these things and set the hysterics aside.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM


dailysignal--2020-09-04--Here Are 31 Times the Media Justified or Explained Away Rioting and Looting After George Floyd’s Dea

Here Are 31 Times the Media Justified or Explained Away Rioting and Looting After George Floyd’s Death

Dozens of news outlets published content that either justified or explained away rioting and looting in the initial weeks of unrest following the police custody death of George Floyd in late May , a Daily Caller News Foundation review found .
While President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden have both condemned rioting and looting , major news outlets such as CNN and MSNBC have appeared to downplay the unrest that has gripped American cities in the months following Floyd ’ s death , in one instance describing a scene as “ mostly peaceful ” as fires raged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violence broke out in American cities in late May and June , dozens of news outlets provided a platform for commentators , professors , and activists who not only acknowledged that rioting and looting were taking place , but sought to either justify the violence as a valid protesting technique or as a form of righteous rebellion against an unjust system .
Here are 31 articles , opinion pieces , interviews , and news segments published in the media in the first three weeks following Floyd ’ s death that pushed narratives that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and looting as it started to break out in American cities .
Narrative 1 : Rioting Is Patriotic , and It Works .
A common narrative pushed in the media as violence broke out across the United States in late May was that rioting is a quintessentially American activity with a storied history of bringing about positive change .
Rolling Stone was among the first outlets to push the message on May 29 when it republished a story originally published in 2014 during the Ferguson riots titled “ 9 Historical Triumphs to Make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ historical pedigree of property destruction as a tactic of resistance is long and frequently effective , ” argued the article , which was co-authored by Jose Martin , a known alias of a Washington , D.C. , Antifa leader who currently faces multiple felony charges in connection to a mob attack against two Marines in 2018 .
Like many of the articles that pushed this narrative , the Rolling Stone story cited the 1773 Boston Tea Party as proof of the positive change rioting can bring about .
“ Workers had produced that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it , and it was not the colonists ’ to destroy , but they said ‘ f— property rights ’ and did it anyway , ” the Rolling Stone article states .
“ Today ’ s conservatives don ’ t seem bothered by this inconvenient history , though , because think of the dress-up opportunities !
” Rolling Stone editors added a note to the story when it was republished that stated : “ Protests erupted in Minneapolis , and have since spread across the country .
Once again , some are criticizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worse—than the destruction of lives.
” On May 31 , as footage rolled of looters pillaging a store in Los Angeles , CNN host Don Lemon reminded viewers that the United States was started because of the Boston Tea Party rioters .
“ So do not get it twisted and think this is something that has never happened before and this is so terrible and these savages and all of that , ” Lemon said .
“ This is how this country was started.
” Other news articles , opinion pieces , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s death that suggested rioting was either effective , patriotic , or both include : • “ The Double Standard of the American Riot , ” published June 1 in The Atlantic .
• “ Rioting is a nuanced and deeply misunderstood form of protest , ” published June 7 in The DP .
• “ Does rioting work ?
Here are five times it did , ” published June 6 in Big Think .
• “ Riots Are As American As Apple Pie , ” published June 10 in Other Words @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy Studies .
• “ A justification for the unrest ?
Look no further than the Bible and the Founding Fathers , ” published June 4 in The Conversation .
Narrative 2 : Rioting and Looting Are Valid Protesting Tactics Against Police Brutality .
Many articles that addressed rioting in the aftermath of Floyd ’ s referenced Martin Luther King Jr. ’ s famous 1967 speech in which the civil rights icon said , “ A riot is the language of the unheard.
” King in that same speech also called rioting “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ continue to condemn riots , and continue to say to my brothers and sisters that this is not the way.
” Arwa Mahdawi , a columnist with The Guardian , used King ’ s quote to argue in a piece titled “ If violence isn ’ t the way to end racism in America , then what is ?
” that suggested violence was the only remaining option on the table to end police brutality in America .
“ [ King ’ s ] speech was 53 years ago and America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mahdawi wrote .
“ The uncomfortable truth is that sometimes , violence is the only answer left .
We like to pretend otherwise , which is why civil rights movements are often conveniently sanitized.
” Chicago Tribune columnist and editorial board member Steve Chapman also questioned whether black people can affect change without resorting to violence in a piece titled “ If riots are not the answer , what is ?
” “ Impossible to justify , yes , ” Chapman said of the riots in late May .
“ Impossible to understand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ participated in a quiet riot against black people for generations.
” “ I find the destruction tragic , unnecessary and counterproductive , ” Chapman wrote .
“ But if I were a black person living in Minneapolis , I might feel enough anger and despair to take part.
” “ Rioting may not bring about the changes that would establish genuine equality for black Americans .
But neither has anything else , ” he concluded .
Other articles that suggested that rioting and looting were valid protesting techniques include : • “ Burn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 28 in Essence .
• “ As Officials Condemn Violence During Protests , This Professor Says Some Is Warranted , ” published May 31 by NPR .
• “ In Defense of Destroying Property , ” published June 10 in The Nation .
• “ American history shows civil unrest is the only way black people are heard , ” published June 1 in TRTWorld .
• “ We riot because you choose not to hear : A digital equity lesson for Nashville , ” published June 4 in the Tennessean .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and weeks following Floyd ’ s death came in the form of articles that suggested it ’ s incorrect to describe violent scenes of rioting and looting as such .
Other articles and commentary suggested that destroying property isn ’ t actually an act of violence .
Teen Vogue columnist Jenn M. Jackson said the terms “ rioters ” and “ looters ” were negative terms used to ‘ delegitimize ” movements in a June 11 piece titled “ Don ’ t Let Them Bad-Mouth Rebellion or Riots : How We Name Movements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Jackson wrote .
“ The negative associations of these terms have an impact on how we think about these demonstrations , just as the terms like ‘ uprising ’ and ‘ rebellion ’ offer ways to think about these protests as good trouble.
” “ When marginalized people respond to injustice , it is the duty of those in power to sit down , be quiet , and listen to what they have to say without dictating the terms of whose language is acceptable , ” Jackson concluded .
“ Whether that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , anger , rage , or violence , it ’ s all justified .
It ’ s time to focus on the message instead of the medium.
” Time published an article on June 8 titled “ ‘ A War of Words.
’ Why Describing the George Floyd Protests as ‘ Riots ’ Is So Loaded ” that said the word riot “ connotes meaningless violence… But it also has a racial dimension in the U.S. , as a term that ’ s long been used ( by white people ) to drum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ senseless chaos in cities.
” The article quoted multiple college professors who proposed other terms such as “ uprising ” and “ rebellion ” to describe the early George Floyd protests .
Harvard associate professor Elizabeth Hinton told Time that she prefers the term “ uprising ” because it “ really captures the fact that the violence that emerges during these incidents isn ’ t meaningless , that it is a political expression , and it is communicating a certain set of demands.
” University of California , Berkeley School of Law professor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Time does not capitalize his name because it ’ s a slave name , said he prefers the term “ demonstration ” to the term “ riot.
” “ Riot suggests pandemonium , ” powell said .
“ What ’ s happening across the country and across the world is a call for justice , a call for police accountability , for the recognition that black lives matter too … Rioting detracts from all of that.
” Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones said on June 2 on CBS News that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ see property destruction , “ destroying property , which can be replaced , is not violence.
” “ To use the same language to describe those two things is not moral , ” Hannah-Jones said .
Other articles that suggested it was wrong to describe scenes of rioting as such , or that property damage isn ’ t violence , include : • “ ‘ Riots , ’ ‘ violence , ’ ‘ looting ’ : Words matter when talking about race and unrest , experts say , ” published May 31 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Racist Cherry-Picking of the Word ‘ Riot , ’ ” published June 1 in Mother Jones .
• “ Why Damaging Property Isn ’ t The Same As ‘ Violence , ’ ” published June 1 in Current Affairs .
• “ Understand Protests As ‘ Acts Of Rebellion ’ Instead Of Riots , Marc Lamont Hill Says , ” published June 2 by NPR .
• “ The George Floyd protests are a rebellion against an unjust system , ” published June 4 in The Guardian .
• “ No , We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Like George Floyd ’ s , ” published May 28 in Jacobin .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of this original content , email [ email protected ]

Dozens of news outlets published content that either justified or explained away rioting and looting in the initial weeks of unrest following the police custody death of George Floyd in late May, a Daily Caller News Foundation review found.
While President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden have both condemned rioting and looting, major news outlets such as CNN and MSNBC have appeared to downplay the unrest that has gripped American cities in the months following Floyd’s death, in one instance describing a scene as “mostly peaceful” as fires raged in the background.
But as the violence broke out in American cities in late May and June, dozens of news outlets provided a platform for commentators, professors, and activists who not only acknowledged that rioting and looting were taking place, but sought to either justify the violence as a valid protesting technique or as a form of righteous rebellion against an unjust system.
Here are 31 articles, opinion pieces, interviews, and news segments published in the media in the first three weeks following Floyd’s death that pushed narratives that either justified or explained away the rioting and looting as it started to break out in American cities.
Narrative 1: Rioting Is Patriotic, and It Works.
A common narrative pushed in the media as violence broke out across the United States in late May was that rioting is a quintessentially American activity with a storied history of bringing about positive change.
Rolling Stone was among the first outlets to push the message on May 29 when it republished a story originally published in 2014 during the Ferguson riots titled “9 Historical Triumphs to Make You Rethink Property Destruction.”
The “historical pedigree of property destruction as a tactic of resistance is long and frequently effective,” argued the article, which was co-authored by Jose Martin, a known alias of a Washington, D.C., Antifa leader who currently faces multiple felony charges in connection to a mob attack against two Marines in 2018.
Like many of the articles that pushed this narrative, the Rolling Stone story cited the 1773 Boston Tea Party as proof of the positive change rioting can bring about.
“Workers had produced that tea, capitalists had risked investment on it, and it was not the colonists’ to destroy, but they said ‘f— property rights’ and did it anyway,” the Rolling Stone article states. “Today’s conservatives don’t seem bothered by this inconvenient history, though, because think of the dress-up opportunities!”
Rolling Stone editors added a note to the story when it was republished that stated: “Protests erupted in Minneapolis, and have since spread across the country. Once again, some are criticizing the destruction of property as somehow equal—or worse—than the destruction of lives.”
On May 31, as footage rolled of looters pillaging a store in Los Angeles, CNN host Don Lemon reminded viewers that the United States was started because of the Boston Tea Party rioters.
“So do not get it twisted and think this is something that has never happened before and this is so terrible and these savages and all of that,” Lemon said. “This is how this country was started.”
“Our country was started because, the Boston tea party. Rioting. So do not get it twisted and think this is something that has never happened before and this is so terrible and these savages and all of that. This is how this country was started” –@DonLemon on @CNN 11:53 PM ET. pic.twitter.com/dGu5TmArsp — Brent Baker (@BrentHBaker) May 31, 2020
Other news articles, opinion pieces, and interviews published in the weeks following Floyd’s death that suggested rioting was either effective, patriotic, or both include:
Narrative 2: Rioting and Looting Are Valid Protesting Tactics Against Police Brutality.
Many articles that addressed rioting in the aftermath of Floyd’s referenced Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous 1967 speech in which the civil rights icon said, “A riot is the language of the unheard.”
King in that same speech also called rioting “socially destructive and self-defeating” and pledged to “continue to condemn riots, and continue to say to my brothers and sisters that this is not the way.”
Arwa Mahdawi, a columnist with The Guardian, used King’s quote to argue in a piece titled “If violence isn’t the way to end racism in America, then what is?” that suggested violence was the only remaining option on the table to end police brutality in America.
“[King’s] speech was 53 years ago and America still isn’t listening,” Mahdawi wrote. “The uncomfortable truth is that sometimes, violence is the only answer left. We like to pretend otherwise, which is why civil rights movements are often conveniently sanitized.”
Chicago Tribune columnist and editorial board member Steve Chapman also questioned whether black people can affect change without resorting to violence in a piece titled “If riots are not the answer, what is?”
“Impossible to justify, yes,” Chapman said of the riots in late May. “Impossible to understand? Not at all. Police have participated in a quiet riot against black people for generations.”
“I find the destruction tragic, unnecessary and counterproductive,” Chapman wrote. “But if I were a black person living in Minneapolis, I might feel enough anger and despair to take part.”
“Rioting may not bring about the changes that would establish genuine equality for black Americans. But neither has anything else,” he concluded.
Other articles that suggested that rioting and looting were valid protesting techniques include:
Narrative 3: These Aren’t Violent Riots. It’s an Uprising.
A third narrative that arose in the days and weeks following Floyd’s death came in the form of articles that suggested it’s incorrect to describe violent scenes of rioting and looting as such. Other articles and commentary suggested that destroying property isn’t actually an act of violence.
Teen Vogue columnist Jenn M. Jackson said the terms “rioters” and “looters” were negative terms used to ‘delegitimize” movements in a June 11 piece titled “Don’t Let Them Bad-Mouth Rebellion or Riots: How We Name Movements Matters.”
“These words matter,” Jackson wrote. “The negative associations of these terms have an impact on how we think about these demonstrations, just as the terms like ‘uprising’ and ‘rebellion’ offer ways to think about these protests as good trouble.”
“When marginalized people respond to injustice, it is the duty of those in power to sit down, be quiet, and listen to what they have to say without dictating the terms of whose language is acceptable,” Jackson concluded. “Whether that expression comes in the form of peacefulness, anger, rage, or violence, it’s all justified. It’s time to focus on the message instead of the medium.”
Time published an article on June 8 titled “‘A War of Words.’ Why Describing the George Floyd Protests as ‘Riots’ Is So Loaded” that said the word riot “connotes meaningless violence… But it also has a racial dimension in the U.S., as a term that’s long been used (by white people) to drum up the image of black people wreaking senseless chaos in cities.”
The article quoted multiple college professors who proposed other terms such as “uprising” and “rebellion” to describe the early George Floyd protests.
Harvard associate professor Elizabeth Hinton told Time that she prefers the term “uprising” because it “really captures the fact that the violence that emerges during these incidents isn’t meaningless, that it is a political expression, and it is communicating a certain set of demands.”
University of California, Berkeley School of Law professor john a. powell, who according to Time does not capitalize his name because it’s a slave name, said he prefers the term “demonstration” to the term “riot.”
“Riot suggests pandemonium,” powell said. “What’s happening across the country and across the world is a call for justice, a call for police accountability, for the recognition that black lives matter too … Rioting detracts from all of that.”
Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones said on June 2 on CBS News that while it was “disturbing” to see property destruction, “destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.”
“To use the same language to describe those two things is not moral,” Hannah-Jones said.
“Violence is when an agent of the state kneels on a man’s neck until all of the life is leached out of his body. Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence. To use the same language to describe those two things is not moral” –@nhannahjones on CBSN pic.twitter.com/GGteXRFwAr — CBS News (@CBSNews) June 2, 2020
Other articles that suggested it was wrong to describe scenes of rioting as such, or that property damage isn’t violence, include:
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.