Economic Inequality Matters

No matter which party controls Congress or the Presidency or how well the economy is doing by other measures economic inequality is a problem. Of course, if you're doing very well then inequality doesn't matter to you. Even for a lot of ordinary Americans struggling to make ends meet the issue might not resonate. While inequality is inevitable and desirable in a free and prosperous society. Our economy is too unequal. The amount of wealth and income in the hands of a few people makes it increasingly difficult for everybody else to live decent or have any security.

Consider the gaps between the well off and everybody else. The group Open Markets notes: 

America is more unequal than it has been in a century. The richest 0.1 percent of American families own as much wealth as the lower 90 percent of all American families combined. Between 1979 and 2007, the richest one percent took in 53.9 percent of all income growth. And wealth inequality grew even more dramatic in the wake of the great recession. The richest 7percent expanded their average neat worth by more than 25 percent between 2009 and 2011, and whites claimed an even larger proportion of American wealth relative to Blacks and Hispanics.  

The Economic Policy Institute breaks this down as follows:

$1,316,985

Average annual income of the top 1%What you need to make to be in the top 1%:$421,926

$50,107

Average income of everyone else (the bottom 99%)

26.3x

The top 1% make 26.3 times more than the bottom 99%

The top 1% take home 21% of all the income in the United States.

Some might say all this reflects differences in skill, talent, initiative, and risk. Why punish rich people for being successful?  We need investors, job creators, and entrepreneurs, they create prosperity that benefits everyone. This argument is partly true. But if we're not paying people fair and adequately based on their productivity. Something is wrong. The fact is wages have not kept pace with inflation while top management, wealthy investors, and owners have paid themselves more and more. Why are ordinary people so upset about high prices at the grocery store or gas pump? They're working harder for less money. Credit card debt in American households is in the trillions of dollars because few of us can take care of all our needs with a weekly or biweekly paycheck. We have also smashed unions which fight to ensure good pay for workers. 

Lastly, discrimination based on race and sex contribute to the problem.

At the same time the middle class has declined and it's almost impossible for the working poor to survive especially when it comes to affordable housing. A survey by Pew Research found that The share of American adults who live in middle-income households has decreased from 61% in 1971 to 51% in 2019. This downsizing has proceeded slowly but surely since 1971, with each decade thereafter typically ending with a smaller share of adults living in middle-income households than at the beginning of the decade.  

Meanwhile work no longer pays for shelter at least not the poorest among us to. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities pointed out in 2022 that 9.4 million households spent more than half their income on rent or lived in substandard housing to avoid doing so.

The negative effects of economic inequality on people are significant.

Stress, anxiety, poor diet, and hunger drive down rates of life expectancy. Even people with health insurance delay or forgo care if they can't afford the Co Pays or the 20 % share after insurance pays 80%. This leads to poor health outcomes too. Low income people are mired in poverty no matter how hard they work or strive to better themselves. And for many seniors retirement means less comfort and financial security. 

If we value individual freedom as much as we claim then it can't be separated from material well-being. People who can't aquire any property like a home or build a savings for some wealth aren't truly free. Individuals constantly struggling to make ends meet or just survive aren't concerned with free speech, thought, or expression. Privacy is meaningless if you live in inadequate housing or you are homeless. Think about all the choices individuals are deprived of due to economic inequality education, recreation, personal relationships, goods, and services in the marketplace. They cannot achieve or focus on their own goals.

It's also important to recognize the danger gross economic inequality poses to democratic self government because rich people use their money to influence politicians at the expense of ordinary voters with far less power. Liberalism most oppose such an imbalance. 

Economic inequality must be addressed with the same focus and urgency as supposed threats to democracy if we are going to ensure a free and prosperous society for all.

Why Donald Trump Won

 

I'm not surprised that Kamala Harris lost to Donald Trump. I'm not mad either just disappointed. I never got caught up in all the hype around Vice President Harris's candidacy because positive press coverage and polls aren't votes they don't win elections. Trump turned out his base and expanded his support even in Democratic cities. It's a fact he got more votes among Hispanics and I suspect blacks too including young men.

I can already hear the " anvil chorus " of Moderates and Progressives who will argue that Kamala Harris and Democrats are out of touch with working class people. The Moderates will say Democrats must move to the Right on Immigration and crime. Progressives will claim that Harris lacked a strong pro working class populist message. Both these camps decry identity politics and " wokeness "  with the implication being if Democrats wouldn't focus on racism, abortion, and LGBTQ issues then somehow socially conservative working class men would vote for them. I don't think that's true. 

Call me one of those out of touch elitist Liberals. I can only wish I had that kind of money and power. It wasn't inept Democrats, Billionaires, or Fox News that got Trump elected to another term. Millions of people voted for him. I think they were wrong to say the least. However writing them off as a bunch of  deplorable,  ignorant, xenophobic, misogynistic, racists, might be partly true for some of them; but it's grossly unfair to the majority. 

What happened ? Why did Trump win?

Here's what I think : 

1. A pro working class populist message isn't enough. Harris talked about fighting for the middle class and gave some good policy specifics. But that didn't matter to people getting hammered by inflation. They don't care about rich people or corporations. For them it's not about economic fairness or government doing anything to help them. It's about basic survival. High prices take more money out of people’s pockets who don't have enough. Furthermore, in a country built on individualism and skepticism of government it's difficult if not impossible to advance a class based politics. The Progressive Left needs to think about this. 

2. People don't care about policies, data, or information. They want easy answers quickly. Above all they want leaders who make them feel good. In fact lies and conspiracy theories are more comforting than truth or reality for lots of people. Nobody cares about so called experts. More people than ever disdain college and higher education. Trump approaches his supporters and others this way. He says things many people are afraid to in public, and Trump doesn't fear cancelation or the establishment. That's powerful and compelling. He's a xenophobic, racist, with authoritarian tendencies; but as far as his supporters are concerned he's honest even heroic. Feelings are everything. 

3. Trump gives people enemies whether they are immigrants, criminals, or establishment politicians in both parties. Our immigration system is broken, and we can't take everyone whose trying to come. However we are a nation built on Immigration while violently opposed to it at the same time. Trump plays on that contradiction better than any politician in recent memory. And like all Rightwing Republicans before him he effectively ties Democrats to crime. He pushes the narrative and paints the picture of chaos in the streets. Robbers, rapists, and murderers who threaten the lives and property of ordinary Americans. Trump often claims they are immigrants too. People are rightly afraid and angry. Trump says he's your protector unlike Democrats who supposedly hate and defund police. Lastly, there's the political establishment that most Americans already view as self seeking, ineffective, and untrustworthy. Trump claims leaders from both parties have undermined and betrayed the country. Ironically his anti politician style of outsider politics works. Whatever he is Trump isn't a Washington politician. Millions of Americans support him for that reason. 

4. There's nothing wrong with self interest, but there's a very thin line between self interest and selfishness. When we stop caring about the well-being of other people, community, country, and our democracy that's a huge problem. But when you're hurting, feeling excluded, or disrespected it's easy to lose sight of other people and things. We all get desperate for help or solutions sometimes. For millions of people Trump is seen as the one to bring down high prices, stop immigrants from coming to their communities, validate their cherished beliefs, and provide strong leadership in a troubled world. It simply doesn't matter to them if he's a convicted felon, a man who assaults women, or disdains  democracy. " He's going to help me. " That's what matters most. 

5. I may be way off base without any statistics or data to back up my claims here. It's just my opinion. This election proves that Moderates and Independents are not going to save our politics or democracy. If a lot of them especially in swing states had not broke for Trump, Kamala Harris might have won. The conventional wisdom is that Moderation and nonpartisanship can solve our problems and contain extremes on the left and right. We're told that most Americans are in the middle. None of this is true. Conservatives are the single largest group with Moderates coming in second. Furthermore, Moderates are often closer to Conservatives on issues like the role of government, taxes, and social spending. While they may agree with the left on social issues most Moderates don't actually vote on those things. They would rather avoid the culture wars. In this case neither Moderates or Independents even cared enough about democracy to support Vice President Harris. I never believed they could move us beyond Congressional gridlock and partisan bickering. The so called virtues of Moderation and Independence didn't stop Trump which means they are not a viable solution to our broken politics. 

After an utter defeat like this it's tempting to give in to despair and hate before dropping out. Those of us truly committed to Liberalism can't be that way because this loss is the price of freedom. Trump and the Republicans have the right to govern. Our dislike doesn't make them illegitimate or mean democracy is a bad system. We must go back and try again through grassroots activism, advocacy, ideas, policies, and the democratic process.

Wokeness: A Response to Phil Ebersole

 Phil Ebersole is a retired reporter for the Rochester New York Democrat and Chronicle who blogs at https://philebersole.wordpress.com/ recently posted a piece about wokeness entitled What is this thing called "Woke?" From the outset he is well reasoned and takes so called woke advocates seriously. Agree or disagree with Ebersole he displays an openness and recognition of nuance when writing " Some parts may be good, some parts may be bad, some parts may be good up to a point and counterproductive beyond that point, and some points are used by plutocrats and militarists to divide and rule." Liberals like Mark Lilla author of The Once and Future Liberal and Leftists like Adolph Reed completely dismiss issues related to race, gender, and LGBTQ rights as a distraction or divisive Phil Ebersole does not. 

He also lays out several ideas associated with woke advocates including oppressed and oppressor are based on identity, justice for the collective is more important than individual rights, and race and race prejudice are baked into American culture. At this point one has to question the idea of wokeness as a way to understand certain various struggles for social change. The term wokeness came out the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Power Revolution in the 1960s. It meant staying aware and conscious of the need for struggle. Change didn't come from token measures or symbolism. It was important not give up or be distracted. This was the meaning of woke. At some point contemporary Anti Racists activists and supporters of Black Lives Matter sought to revive the term in relation to current protests. However, the notion of wokeness came to be identified with struggles for gender equality, LGBTQ Rights, and even climate change too. The political right seized onto the term and made it into something negative to discredit various activist efforts, Liberals, and the Left in general. The problem with using woke as an umbrella term or concept is that it lumps disparate groups and activist struggles together that often have nothing to do with each other. There are black activists concerned about racism who have nothing to do with gender equality, LGBTQ issues, or climate change. There are Feminists fighting for abortion rights and associated with the Me Too Movement that have nothing to do with climate change activism or race. There are single issue climate activists and those concerned only with LGBTQ rights. Furthermore, within in all these struggles there are differences about political goals, methods, ideology, and thought. Ultimately, Phil Ebersole disagrees with wokeness. He says, " they are a break from the old time twentieth century Liberalism and Progressivism which is based on equal rights for all and special privileges for none." 

Notions of wokeness and identity politics are less important than real problems and issues that impact whole groups of people. Think about things like racial discrimination against black homeowners, working women paid less than men doing the same work, facing sexual harassment on the job, LGBTQ persons lacking basic civil rights protections in most states, and transgender people in particular face violence while being dismissed by many. In all these cases people are defined and subordinated collectively. They don't have choices or the ability to follow self-chosen goals as free individuals. Therefore people in the same situation with common interests come together through activism and political action to challenge unjust treatment. This part of American history. In fact, the American colonists, workers fighting for unions, and agrarian populists all through American history came together to fight for freedom and their material wellbeing. Why are blacks, women, or LGBTQ people different? All politics involves groups and identities in some sense. Ebersole and other critics of so called wokeness and identity politics fail to consider this. But he keeps the door open writing " My plea is for adherents of the new ideology to openly articulate their principles, and give reasons for them, and not to expect nor demand automatic acceptance."

Of course, there are excesses and bad ideas associated with any struggle for social change. Liberals have to be critical of such things. Cancel culture and those advocating bans on hate speech are rightly opposed by Liberals. At the same time, we have to leave room for disagreement among reasonable people without charges of racism, sexism, or homophobia being leveled against individuals. Nobody gets everything they want in the democratic process. Affirmative action as a tool in reducing racial discrimination is controversial and very unpopular among whites. The Supreme Court may likely strike it down. Almost four decades ago the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution failed to get enough states for ratification. Ensuring basic civil rights for LGBTQ people will have to be balanced against religious liberty. Activists, intellectuals, and other individuals concerned about different issues won't be pleased. Some will continue to advocate calling out racism, sexism, and homophobia. However, most people are better off because of the reforms. Those changes will not happen without agitation that is often dismissed as wokeness or identity politics. Liberals and leftists who side with Conservative opponents of social change and equality completely rejecting wokeness or identity politics are making a grave mistake. 

None of this means the problems faced by all working people don't matter. The economy isn't working well for the average person regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Far too many of us live paycheck to paycheck, lack retirement savings, and face financial ruin trying pay medical bills. If you could get all kinds of ordinary working people together in a room talking about their economic struggles and worries there would be blacks, whites, Latinos, men, and women. There might also be gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and just maybe a transgender person. It's likely they would all agree about the need for a higher Federal Minimum Wage. They would probably support paid family leave and want more affordable healthcare. All of this makes an activist and political struggle for an economy that benefits working people not just monied elites essential. However that economy and society won't benefit all working people if certain people are denied rights, opportunity, and material wellbeing because of race, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity. The struggles around race and other issues matter just as much. Liberals and the Left should reject the false choice between economic or class issues and struggkes against racism, sexism, homophobia, and transphobia. Furthermore, we cannot ignore climate change because our survival depends on it. Making the good on the promise of freedom and equality for every American depends addressing all these issues. 

 

How Racism Undermines Black Homeowners

 Despite gains in education, income, and employment most blacks do not own a home. In fact the gap is wider now than fifty years ago with only 44.1% of blacks compared to 74.5% of whites owning a home. While the Fair Housing Act of 1968 outlawed discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of homes, blacks are still frequently denied loans compared to similarly situated whites. The same thing is true when paying interest on a mortgage. In 2017 J.P. Morgan Chase settled a federal lawsuit for $55 million alleging discrimination against at least 53,000 black and Hispanic borrowers who were charged more for loans than whites with similar credit profiles. All of this is compounded by the systemic devaluation of homes in mostly black areas and neighborhoods. This means blacks gain less wealth from their property or money when selling it. 

Between 2004 and 2008 blacks were consistently denied mortgage loans at higher rates than whites according to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. 2007 was the highest year with blacks being denied loans at a rate of 35% compared to just under 15% for whites. Those rates did decline to little over 15% for blacks and slightly over 5% for whites in 2018. What's going on here? Maybe it's not race. What about debt or credit ? Blacks are twice as likely as whites to have student loan debt over $ 10,000 dollars. When it comes to credit which essential to getting loans the Urban Institute found only 20% of blacks scored 740 or higher which is the best score for most lenders. However credit scores only accounted for 22% of the gap between blacks and whites. Even when blacks get loans they are charged more than similarly situated whites. 

Raheem Hanifa with the Harvard based Joint Center for Housing Studies found blacks with incomes of $75,000 to $ 100,000 paid a higher rate of interest at 4.125% compared to whites with incomes of $ 30,000 who paid 4.16%. Blacks with incomes of $ 30,000 or less paid 4.267%. For blacks in the $ 30,000 to $ 44,999 income rage the median interest rate was 4.506%. For whites it was 4.213%. 

Even when blacks get loans at comparable interest rates to whites their property is systematically devalued at levels of 21 to 23% when black homes are located in mostly black areas or neighborhoods according to the Brookings Institute which looked 113 metropolitan areas across the U.S. This was after adjustments for size, age, and physical condition. This problem is compounded by racially biased home appraisals. In February of 2023 Paul and Tenisha Tate-Austin of Marin City, CA just reached a settlement in Federal lawsuit.

In 2016 the couple bought a home listed at $ 500,000. They later renovated the property adding up to 1000 square feet. The Austins then sought refinancing to pay for the work. Their lender assigned a white Appraiser named Janette Miller to look at the property who valued the house at $ 995,000. This was despite the fact the house had been appraised at 1,450,000 a year earlier. The Austins could not believe it. They told their lender they disagreed and were concerned race was an issue. They removed any clues or signs that a black person lived in the home. They also had a white friend stand in for them at a second appraisal that came back at $ 1,482,000. 

Some people are still not convinced that systemic racism has anything to do with these disparities. They will wrongly question blacks spending habits, willingness to save or ability to manage their money. They will say that blacks aren't smart or responsible with their finances. However blacks are no better or worse than whites. The fact is we still have a race problem despite the progress America has made. Owning a home provides stability. It is an important source of intergenerational wealth too. Everything we believe about individual freedom and economic prosperity is tied to private property. Having your own home is the most basic example of that. Systemic racism undermines black homeownership. This is a matter for both political and business leaders. More importantly, it should be a reminder to blacks that our struggle for freedom and equality continues. With so much talk about reparations, police brutality, killings, and the controversy surrounding the teaching of black history in schools; we shouldn't fail to consider the importance of homeownership to our collective wellbeing. If there's a reason for protest or advocacy this is one.

SOURCES 

https://www.brookings.edu/essay/homeownership-racial-segregation-and-policies-for-racial-wealth-equity/ 

https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-racial-bias-in-appraisals-affects-the-devaluation-of-homes-in-majority-black-

https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/blog/high-income-black-homeowners-receive-higher-interest-rates-low-income-white-homeowners 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-jpmorgan-lawsuit/jpmorgan-agrees-to-55-million-settle-of-mortgage-discrimination-complaint-source- 

https://abc7news.com/wells-fargo-lawsuit-racism-allegations-lending-discrimination-civil-rights-

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/column-wells-fargo-denied-well-off-borrowers-low-

Singles Are Struggling Economically

 " I'm old enough to still remember a time from the mid 1970s until the early eighties when a high school diploma was enough to get you a decent job, an apartment, and a used car. You could even work a fulltime minimum wage job in a store, warehouse, or service firm and live decent. For people in manufacturing, construction, or the public sector it was even better. College graduates had it made. Fulltime work took care of your basic needs and there was room for improvement. Today none of this is the case. The economy and society have changed for the worse." I wrote that in September 2022 about working people in general. But now when I think about single people it makes a lot of sense. They are struggling economically. In fact, the number of unmarried people without a partner age 25 to 54 is up from 29% in 1990 to 38% in 2019.

I'm in my mid-fifties and have been divorced for over twenty years. My children are all grown now. When they were young, I worked two jobs and paid child support. It's not easy paying rent, a car payment, insurance, or emergency expenses if you're not married or don't have a partner. For the last decade I've lived with my elderly mother. We pool our resources and make out alright. However I work with men who are divorced or never married and they struggle. The old saying is very true - It takes two. None of this implies married people or single mothers have it easy. They don't. In this economy I call Predator Capitalist it's hard on most people who aren't rich and work for someone else. But it's clear that having a spouse or partner helps.

Consider these facts. 

Singles are less likely to work, have a college, and make less money than married people or those living with a partner. 

 73% of single men work compared to 91% of married men. For women 77% of single women work compared to 74% of partnered women. 

Between 1990 and 2019 single men saw their earnings drop 4% compared to 0.9% for single women. However partnered men saw a 7% increase. Partnered women saw their earnings increase 48%. 

Median income for partnered men was $ 57,000 compared to $ 35,600 for single men. For women with a partner, it was $ 40,000 compared to $ 32,000 for single women. 

For the elderly things get even harder. According to the Social Security Administration while poverty among seniors is low. For those who live alone the rate is higher: 

The never-married elderly (aged 65 or older) have the highest poverty rate among all groups, followed by those who are divorced and widowed. The overall elderly poverty rate is almost two-thirds higher among women than men with 12 percent of women in poverty compared with 7 percent of men. Unmarried women—including those who are widowed, divorced, and never married—are significantly more likely than unmarried men to be poor. The unmarried elderly are disproportionately poorer than the married elderly. Never-married individuals represent about 5 percent of the elderly, but 12 percent of the elderly poor. Likewise, divorced individuals make up 12 percent of the elderly and 20 percent of the elderly poor. Widowed individuals make up a quarter of the elderly, but 37 percent of the elderly poor.  

While the poverty rate for non-elderly seniors (without dependents) is 9.4% there are millions of people struggling to survive close to poverty. Think about that. People who struggle to pay rent, eat healthy, and pay for healthcare. 

Some will say the tax code wrongly favors people with children especially married people. Others say people need to get married stay together and have children for moral and economic reasons. Of course all of this intersects with racial and gender inequality too. There are millions of single black women never married and without children who want husbands and families. And we know that poverty is a serious problem among single parent moms regardless of race. But this shouldn't be a zero sum game that divides working people trying to make ends meet. The problems faced by single people are tied to an economy that is grossly unequal in terms of wealth and income. Employment is less stable, not adequately paid, lacking decent benefits, and uncertain because of new technologies. All working people matter. The plight of singles needs the same attention and care as working families. 

Sources

The escalating costs of being single in America

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/22788620/ 

https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/population-profiles/ 

https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/gaps-in-economic-support-for-non-elderly-adults-without-children

What's Wrong With Policing ?

 

In January the killing of Tyre Nichols, who was beaten to death by five police officers in Memphis Tennessee sparked continued outrage concerning police conduct towards black people; this despite the fact the five officers were also black. It's an all too familiar and increasingly common occurrence.

However, as this piece is being written just a few days ago on March 1 police officers in Farmington Utah shot and killed Chase Allen a law student who like Nichols died in a routine traffic stop. But in this case Allen and the officers involved were white. You can't deny racism is a problem in policing like everything else. But deadly force and brutality seem to characterize American policing in general. Many years ago, a friend at work, who had immigrated from Eastern Europe, asked me why American police kill and beat unarmed people in routine situations. I couldn't give him a satisfactory answer. 

Caroline Preston at the education policy news site Hechinger Report provided some facts about police training. It is a patchwork of programs with little standardization or oversight. Programs skew towards military style training, lacking emphasis on anti-bias, de-escalation tactics, conflict resolution, and are resistant to change. Preston notes that police departments began using military style training in the 1960s and 1970s as politicians called for law and order. At the same time President Richard Nixon launched the War on Drugs at the federal level. The federal Bureau of Justice in 2016 found that 48% of police academies followed the military model, 18% emphasized academic achievement, and a third balanced the two. The notes that in 2006 police academies spent 51 hours teaching self-defense, 11 hours on cultural diversity, and 60 hours on firearms. 

 A report by an independent group the Police Executive Research Forum entitled: Transforming Police Recruit Training 40 Guiding Principles begins with; Training standards for more than 18,000 police agencies are outdated; inconsistent; training is too brief; there's too much focus on weapons; tactics; too little focus on decision making; communications; and critical thinking skills. 

ABC News.com reports compared to police in other countries Americans on average only get 20 weeks of training. In Japan it's 15 to 20 months. For Germans it takes 2.5 years and in Finland it takes 3 years to become a police officer. Clearly there is something wrong with how police are trained. Even more alarming are the ties between law enforcement personnel and extremist groups like antigovernment militias and White Supremacists. Just think about the killings of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd. Many of the January 6th attackers on the US. Capitol were part of law enforcement. It puts a controversial and very important 2006 FBI Intelligence Report on law enforcement ties to extremist groups in perspective. Only recently, has the general public gained knowledge of the document. Here are the highlights: 

Racist and extremist groups seek affiliation with law enforcement for recruitment

Infiltration of law enforcement by group members 

Current members of law enforcement volunteer their services to White Supremacist groups they sympathize with 

Opposition to domestic and foreign policies of the government generates support for these groups among law enforcement. 

In at least one case a White Supremacist leader got hold sensitive FBI intel online that became public...it identified FBI targets of interest in the White Supremacy Movement 

An investigative report by Reuters News Service focused on police trainers with ties to rightwing groups. One man is Richard Whitehead is a law enforcement consultant has taught 560 police officers in 85 sessions in 25 states. Whitehead had been a Deputy Sheriff in Travis County Texas for more than two decades before starting his firm in 1995. He's been a member of the Oath Keepers Milita whose members have been arrested for their involvement with the January 6th attacks. Whitehead has also made remarks against Muslims and LGBTQ people. By 2020 he was living in Kootenai County Idaho running as a Constitutional Sheriff. Those who subscribe to this principle refuse to enforce any law they believe goes against the U.S. Constitution. Whitehead lost the election. 

Some say better training is needed. But if we consider the ties between law enforcement and extremists others argue the culture within law enforcement must change. Maybe it's both these things along with defunding and demilitarization of policing. Of course, it's not easy to raise this issue in the current atmosphere of rising urban crime and violence. But something has to be done. We know lots of police officers are overworked, poorly paid, and stressed out. Some struggle with alcohol and substance abuse. And many experts are concerned about the growing number of suicides among police. Because of racism the whole issue is very adversarial. It's easy to overlook the challenges a lot of ordinary good police officers face. Perhaps the problem is so complex and multifaceted that activists, experts, police officials, and political leaders will have to come together and find pragmatic solutions that will be better for us all. 

Do You Know ALEC ?

 Do you know ALEC ? It's not the name of a person. ALEC is the American Legislative Exchange Council an organization bills itself as the nation's largest nonpartisan, voluntary, membership organization of state legislators devoted to limited government, free markets, and federalism according to the group's website. Founded in 1973 the current CEO is Lisa B. Nelson, and by it's own account ALEC claims a quarter of state legislators as members. Okay so what's the problem ? ALEC is a secretive right leaning group that brings together legislators with big money business interests to write model legislation that can be introduced and passed into law in any state word for word. 

Legislators connected to ALEC meet with business representatives in task forces to draft bills that are then approved by members and the board. States like West Virginia, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Montana, Kansas, and Arizona according to the Brookings Institute have been the leaders in ALEC related activity. Brookings further notes that 57% of those sponsoring ALEC legislation are group members, and they are 90% Republican. Furthermore, working at the state level ALEC has got 9% of its legislation passed compared to Congress where only 2% of legislation introduced passes. 

What kinds of legislation are based on ALEC models? 

1. Laws that require local authorities to enforce Federal immigration laws like taking illegal immigrants into custody. These laws allow private citizens to take local governments to court if they don't think officials are complying with the law. They also make hiring illegal immigrants a criminal offense. 

2. Preventing local governments from restricting ownership of firearms or taking makers of guns, ammo, trade associations, or dealers to court. 

3. Shielding corporations from product liability lawsuits and adopting a presumption in their favor if companies if it can be shown to comply with government standards. 

4. Limiting class action lawsuits by individuals by barring monetary damages or bringing suits with plaintiffs from other states. 

ALEC has also been responsible for anti-immigrant legislation and Stand Your Ground Laws that many believe made it easier for George Zimmerman a neighborhood watch member to kill a black teenager named Trayvon Martin and later be acquitted at trial after police didn't initially arrest Zimmerman, a white Hispanic man, after the shooting happened. 

The organization lost corporate backers like Wal Mart, McDonald's, and General Electric it is believed in connection with the group's efforts to advance that legislation. However companies like Altria ( formerly Phillip Morris); American Electric Power, and Anheuser Busch remain tied to ALEC. Oil companies like Chevron and Marathon and pharmaceutical manufacturuers like Eli Lilly also partner with ALEC. They pay thousands of dollars to be ALEC members and rightwing foundations like the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation have given the organization millions of dollars over the years. 

Our economy is grossly unequal with the middle class struggling to maintain its standard of living while most poor people will never move up the ladder no matter how hard they try. At the same time climate change threatens everyone everywhere. But none of this is natural or inevitable. In the early 1970s rightwing activists and politicians who opposed social changes and struggles around civil rights and gender equality aligned with corporate interests to cut regulations, taxes, and break unions. They grew powerful together through all kinds of advocacy groups and think tanks changing laws and public policies making the economy less equal and livable than it had been for years after the Second World War. This is when ALEC was founded, and it is how the group became so influential.  

The American Legislative Exchange Council advances the interests of monied corporations at the expense of people and their communities. They bring together elected officials and commercial interests who are not accountable to voters where there is no debate or compromise doing things in secret so there is no transparency either. None of this democratic and our collective wellbeing suffers as a result. This is why we don't get paid family leave, reduced carbon emissions, a livable minimum wage, or a fair tax system despite the fact most people want these things. Americans don't trust politicians because they are connected to the rich and powerful, and whether we choose to admit it or not our country is headed towards plutocracy because of groups like ALEC. If we don't organize and challenge them, we will be less free and a lot poorer. 

Sources 

The American Legislative Exchange Council is America’s largest nonpartisan, voluntary membership organization of state legislators dedicated to the principles of limited government, free markets and federalism
LEARN MORE

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/alecs-influence-over-lawmaking-in-state-legislatures/

ALEC’s Influence over Lawmaking in State Legislatures | Brookings

https://blog.ucsusa.org/elliott-negin/how-the-american-legislative-exchange-council-turns-disinformation-into-law/

;

;