Mediaboss Marketing

Morris Griffin of Los Angeles speaks at the California reparations task force meeting in March in Sacramento. Economists estimate the state owes Black residents, conservatively, at least hundreds of millions of dollars for enduring decades of systemic racism. (Paul Kitagaki Jr. / Sacramento Bee via AP)

One morning a few months back, I came to understand the true meaning of reparations.

I was talking with Gloria Holland, one of the survivors of Section 14, the neighborhood of Black homeowners that Palm Springs burned to the ground in the 1950s and 1960s to make way for the high-end hotels and restaurants that define the city today.

Hollands family, like many other families, was forced to resettle on a dusty, desolate stretch of desert several miles away. Her voice still cracks with emotion when she talks about it.

"I'm a young girl watching this man stand in this doorway, half-dressed with just his underwear on, pleading don't kill him and don't burn his house down," she told me. "They did it anyway."

Since those dark days, life has mostly been kind to Holland. For her, money isnt really an issue. But money and a lot of it is the issue in the survivors' legal claim against Palm Springs, as it should be in any claim of reparations.

It's not because a specific sum will make up for what anyone lost, Holland explained, but because its a necessary statement from government about the worth of Black life.

"They undervalue us. And that's been going on for over 400 years."

Ive thought a lot about what Holland said this week, as Ive watched conservatives react with outrage and liberals with conspicuous silence to calculations from Californias reparations task force about how much Black people have lost and are potentially owed for enduring decades of systemic racism.

We're talking hundreds of millions of dollars maybe even, according to one estimate making the rounds, hundreds of billions of dollars. That could go to both Black people like me whose ancestors were enslaved, as well as Black people like Holland, who suffered a specific wrong, in her case by the city of Palm Springs.

"The breadth and depth of the historical and ongoing harm done to this group of people makes clear that the relevant question is not whether compensation should be given," the task force said in a recent draft report, "but rather, how much is necessary."

Story continues

On Saturday, the task force's nine members will vote on a series of recommendations that justify that compensation, citing a long list of racist laws and government policies that harmed Black people and deprived us of wealth, health and, in many cases, freedom.

But it won't be easy to get the state Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom to actually follow whatever the task force recommends and make reparations a reality by agreeing to pay up. Consider that California's entire annual budget is only about $300 billion and, lately, there has been a whole lot of hand-wringing in Sacramento over a growing deficit as the economy has slowed.

So, "impossible," is a word I've heard thrown around quite a bit this week. "Absurd" is another.

Meanwhile, polling continues to show flagging public opinion about reparations.

People observe an informational display near the lifeguard station in Manhattan Beach that details the history of Bruce's Beach, which was seized from a Black family in the 1920s. (Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times)

One survey conducted late last year by the Pew Research Center found that just 30% of Americans favor providing compensation to the descendants of people who were enslaved in the U.S., with a full 68% opposed.

Predictably, a majority of Black people 77% say descendants should be repaid in some way. But only 18% of white people, 39% of Latinos and 33% of Asian Americans say the same. And cash payments ranked as the least popular option for all the forms that reparations might take.

This is still very much a country that, when it comes to dollars and cents and almost anything else meaningful, doesnt value Black life. And so, even liberal California is rapidly approaching a crossroads with its nascent reparations movement.

What is morally right is about to run headfirst into what is politically possible. It won't be pretty, but it will be revealing. Compromises will likely be necessary to get anything close to whats owed, despite historical fact and the careful calculations of losses that were drawn up by the task force's economic advisors, led by William Spriggs, chief economist for the AFL-CIO.

Few understand the coming political landscape more than state Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena) and Assemblymember Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles), the only lawmakers on the reparations task force.

"It's one thing to be aspirational," Bradford told me recently. "It is another thing to be rooted in reality of what you can get."

The task force is required by law to complete its work by July 1 and, after that, will disband after almost two years of monthly meetings. When that happens, much of the work to keep reparations alive in California, and give oxygen to the parallel work happening in many cities, including L.A., will fall to Bradford and Jones-Sawyer.

As the latter put it: "There are recommendations and then there's implementation of legislation. And that [implementation] probably will be the most difficult part."

It's still unclear what their legislative strategy will be. Bradford believes it will come in the form of multiple bills, with some up for consideration by next year.

"This is probably gonna be years in the works," he said. "It's too much here in this report for me to lead anybody into believing that it's going to be addressed in one legislative cycle, let alone in one bill."

Jones-Sawyer isn't so sure.

"Is it one big bill with everything in it? Is that too much for the Legislature to follow? Or do we have to break it up in pieces so that we know we'll get something done?" he said, thinking out loud. "Or is the best plan just one big plan and they vote it up or down as one? ... Mr. Bradford and I are going to have to make that determination."

Whether as recommended in the task forces draft report "a substantial initial down payment" for Black residents who are eligible for reparations gets included in any of those bills remains to be seen. But Bradford is more optimistic about improving homeownership and healthcare.

"Some of the folks that have been our harshest critics you know, who say, 'Where's my check?' I don't want to set folks up for that disappointment if a check never comes in," he said.

And yet securing support from many of these same critics, along with millions of other Black Californians, will be critical for Bradford and Jones-Sawyer to accomplish anything legislatively in Sacramento. This also could be a problem.

In the many months I've been covering the task force, attending meetings in cities from Southern California to Northern California, it has become disturbingly clear that many people aren't even aware of the members' work or don't understand that it's the Legislature and the governor, not the task force, that are the ultimate decision-makers on reparations.

"Everybody's going to have different expectations," Jones-Sawyer acknowledged, "and so trying to manage those expectations is going to be difficult."

Working in the lawmakers' favor will be that providing reparations is truly the morally right thing to do. If that was ever in doubt, the draft report that the task force is discussing Saturday in Oakland makes it abundantly clear.

Based on months of research and testimony from experts, five categories of harm have been identified as appropriate for calculating losses and tallying up potential compensation, given the government data available.

One of those categories is "unjust property takings by eminent domain" a harm Holland knows all too well as do many others, including the descendants of Willa and Charles Bruce, whose beachfront property was seized a century ago by the city of Manhattan Beach.

So, hundreds of millions or even hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations for Black Californians isn't "absurd." It's a sober accounting of what we have given or, more accurately, been forced to give to this state and to this country, and what has been taken from us in return.

It's about the value of Black life.

"You took our valuables," Holland said. "You separated our families."

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Read more:
Column: Reparations is morally right. But L.A. Democrats will decide if it's politically doable - Yahoo News

FILE: Voters at the Multnomah County Elections Division in Portland, Ore., Nov. 8, 2022. A bill before the Oregon Senate would expand the state's automatic voter registration system.

Kristyna Wentz-Graff / OPB

Secretary of State Shemia Fagan might be on her way out of office, but one of her top legislative priorities isnt going anywhere.

On Wednesday, the Oregon House passed Fagans proposal to automatically register unregistered voters who sign up for the Oregon Health Plan, the states subsidized health care for low-income Oregonians. The 34-25 party-line approval of House Bill 2107 came despite protests from Republicans who are suspicious of the proposal and argued it is tainted by its connection to Fagan.

Because of the cloud of scrutiny under which Secretary of State Fagan resigned, I have little confidence in this bill that solely bears her name, state Rep. E. Werner Reschke, R-Malin, said on the House floor.

Democrats, who have long made increasing voter registrations and easing voting restrictions a key goal, said Fagans involvement had no bearing on the substance of the bill.

The policy in the bill is sound and has been vetted for over two years, House Majority Leader Julie Fahey, D-Eugene, said Tuesday.

HB 2107 would expand on one of Oregons pioneering elections policies.

In 2016, the state became the first in the nation to enact a motor voter law that registered citizens to vote when they interacted with the Driver and Motor Vehicle Services department to get an ID. Rather than an opt-in policy where Oregonians had to affirmatively choose to be registered, the state went with an opt-out program, registering voters unless they expressly say they do not want to receive a ballot.

The idea has been credited with increasing voter participation in Oregon. The state had the highest percentage of eligible voter turnout in the country in last years election, with 61.5%.

Motor voter has since been adopted by 22 states and Washington, D.C., according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But lately, Oregon has fallen out of the vanguard when it comes to voter registration.

I was at a conference last year and there was a presentation on automatic voter registration, Fahey said in an interview last month. For the first time ever, Oregon was not listed as the people leading the way on this. The people from Nevada got, like, a standing ovation.

HB 2107 would put Oregon in league with Nevada and Colorado in expanding opt-out registration to the states Medicaid program, the Oregon Health Plan. Other states have adopted variations on that policy, according to the Secretary of States Office.

But converting Oregon Health Plan enrollees into new voters isnt automatic. Colorado has been waiting years for the green light from federal officials, which must authorize sharing health data for that purpose.

Under HB 2107, automatic registrations via the Oregon Health Authority could not begin until 2026.

There are approximately 200,000 Oregonians who are eligible to vote but not registered, according to estimates from the Oregon Secretary of State. Fagan said earlier this year about 85% percent of those people 171,000 are on the Oregon Health Plan.

If they had interacted with the DMV since Oregon motor voter went into effect either getting a drivers license or just an identification card then they would already be registered, she said in a March interview. We dont know the reason why theyre unregistered.

Republicans were plainly suspicious about the makeup of those 171,000 unregistered voters. In committee, GOP representatives requested a breakdown of where those people lived in the state, but were told the Oregon Health Authority would not release that information.

In Colorado, Republican lawmakers voiced concerns that registering people through Medicaid could disproportionately favor Democrats.

Republicans have also questioned whether the bill would compromise the integrity of the states voting process.

Oregonians must have a signature on hand with a county elections office to vote, so the signature on their ballot envelope can be checked against the one on file. Its a key security feature of the states all-mail election system.

Signatures are no problem when registering people via the DMV, because theyre supplied as part of obtaining an ID.

Thats not the case with the Oregon Health Plan. Under HB 2107, the state might find itself in the position of registering people who have no such signature on file. Fagan and Fahey said the Secretary of States Office will craft rules that ensure people without a valid signature on file are not allowed to vote. How the government would make that happen is not yet clear.

There are a lot of unanswered questions about this bill, state Rep. Anna Scharf, R-Amity, said in Wednesdays vote. It is not ready.

Republicans also argued that its already very easy to register in Oregon, saying that anyone who wants to vote can do so without difficulty. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink, said state Rep. Emily McIntire, R-Eaglepoint. I feel like we do everything in this state to make sure we have the utmost ability to make sure people have everything they need.

Fahey, one of the only Democrats to speak on the bill Wednesday, said Republican concerns were unwarranted.

Some today have suggested that the integrity of our election system is in question, she said. I want to unequivocally refute that assertion. The reality is that our election system is safe and secure, including our automatic voter registration system.

HB 2107 now moves to the Senate, where Republicans have begun a walkout in protest of Democrats agenda. Its not the only piece of Fagans agenda making its way through the legislative process. A bill she introduced with the aim of increasing election security and discouraging harassment of elections workers passed the Senate with a bipartisan vote last month.

Read the original post:
Democrats advance bill that would automatically register unregistered voters applying for Oregon Health Plan - Oregon Public Broadcasting

Congressional Democrats have reintroduced legislation to focus federal efforts on reducing the proliferation of illegal machine gun conversion devices, also known as auto sears.

The Preventing Illegal Weapons Trafficking Act of 2023 would direct the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of the Treasury to develop a coordinated national strategy to prevent the importation and trafficking of auto sears. It would also instruct the attorney general to collect data on the recovery of the devices in crimes and include it in an annual firearms trafficking report.

The legislation is a response to a March 2022 investigation by The Trace and VICE News that found that auto sears were involved in dozens of shootings carried out by extremists, mass shooters, and drug traffickers. Our reporting showed that more than a thousand illegal auto sears had been recovered in connection with at least 260 federal prosecutions since 2017, with the number of cases filed annually climbing nearly 800 percent in five years.

The Democrats bill was introduced in the House by Representative Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Representative Sean Casten of Illinois. Senators Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Gary Peters of Michigan introduced companion legislation in the Senate.

Law enforcement must do more to protect our communities from gun violence by stopping the flow of illegal gun modification devices into and throughout our country, Peters said in a news release. This bill will enhance coordination across law enforcement agencies to prevent these dangerous and deadly devices from being used.

Machine guns are among the most regulated firearms in the United States, but auto sears provide a quick and inexpensive workaround. The small conversion devices can transform a semiautomatic gun into a weapon capable of emptying an entire magazine with a single pull of the trigger. They require little technical knowledge to use and can cost as little as $20.

The Trace and VICE News investigation found that many auto sears recovered in the U.S. were supplied by companies in China, where manufacturers list the devices on online marketplaces and sell directly to consumers. Auto sears can also be made at home using a 3D printer.

The bill seeks to hold companies that facilitate the trafficking of auto sears accountable, by requiring that proceeds from trafficking machine gun conversion devices are subject to forfeiture.

The legislation is the latest in a series of efforts from lawmakers urging federal law enforcement to take action on auto sears. In April 2022, after a gunman armed with a converted Glock handgun opened fire in Sacramento leaving six dead and 12 wounded, a group of more than 40 members of Congress signed a letter urging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to be more explicit about the illegality of the devices.

In February, Steve Dettelbach, the first confirmed director of the ATF in nearly a decade, said the agency was prioritizing the recovery of auto sears. This is a problem that needs to be focused on immediately, he said. These devices are flooding our communities.

Read the rest here:
Congressional Democrats Introduce Bill Targeting Auto Sears - The Trace

Marianne Williamson

First of all, it displays a great naivete about what you think those people do all day, including how much time they spend on the phone raising money. Thats number one. Number two, I think its very interesting what the Constitution says related to this. The Constitution says that in order to be president, you have to have lived here for fourteen years. You have to be thirty-five years or older, and you have to have been born here.

If the founders had wanted to say you had to have held elected office, then they would have. But they didnt, and I think they didnt for a reason. They were leaving it to every generation to determine for itself, what do you think are the skill sets required to lead us through the challenges of a particular moment?

I dont think the problem with Trump was his lack of governmental experience. It was his lack of ethics and his lack of character. He was a very effective president in all the terrible and some very, very terrible ways. But if he had been a different person, and instead of someone like a Stephen Miller or Sebastian Gorka or whatever, he had brought a different kind of person around him, then it would have been a completely different story.

The idea that youre repeating here is the idea that only people whose careers have been entrenched for years within the system that is, the car that drove us into the ditch should possibly be considered qualified to lead us out of the ditch. I dont think that we need somebody qualified to perpetuate that system. We need somebody qualified to disrupt that system.

That is one of the things that I feel that I do bring. Washington, DC, as you well know, David, is filled with political car mechanics. There are some very good political car mechanics in Washington, DC, and I would bring them into my administration.

But the problem is not that we dont have good political car mechanics. The problem is were on the wrong road. Were six inches from the cliff in terms of the state of our democracy, the state of our economy, and the state of our environment. What are those people so self-satisfied over? What are they so self-congratulatory about? On what basis do they say It has to be one of us? Have we not given them enough experience and enough of our nations history that, at some point, we say, We need to intervene. You are the status quo. The status quo is not going to disrupt itself. You have us on a self-defeating, self-destructive trajectory to the point where we could destroy the habitability of this planet within one hundred years. We, the people, will take it from here. Thats what needs to be said now.

Follow this link:
Marianne Williamson: Democrats Need a Genuine Economic ... - Jacobin magazine

Senate Democrats blocked a vote Tuesday night on a wide-ranging bill that would put St. Louis citys police department and part of the citys prosecutors office under state control.

After nine hours of a Democrat-led filibuster, Republicans set the bill aside for the night. The legislative session ends May 12 at 6 p.m.

Republicans argued St. Louis leaders couldnt decrease crime on their own, while Democrats said the legislation was purely a political vendetta against the citys progressive mayor and prosecutor.

And the bill, they said, ignores a major factor in the citys crime problem loose gun laws.

This is a political attack on the city of St. Louis, said Sen. Steve Roberts, D-St. Louis. Its not a rational argument. No one is proposing a real solution to address guns.

The bill would give the governor the ability to strip the authority of any elected prosecutor to handle violent crime cases and appoint a special prosecutor or the attorney general to take over those cases for five years.

The bill would also put the citys police department back under control of a state board, with Republican Gov. Mike Parson appointing four commissioners to serve alongside the president of the St. Louis board of aldermen.

The police board would assume control of the department on Aug. 28.

You can pass all the gun control that your heart desires, said Sen. Nick Schroer, a Republican from St. Charles County. But if you dont have the police to enforce those laws, and you dont have a prosecutor to go after the criminals, what are you doing?

Republican legislators made it clear in January that challenging the authority of St. Louis elected prosecutor Kimberly Gardner a progressive Black Democrat was a top priority this year.

While control over St. Louis police and prosecutor were the most controversial parts of the bill, the legislation would also make it easier to charge people with the crime of rioting, expand the areas where school safety officers can carry firearms and extend prison sentences.

It would also require fingerprinting as part of the background checks for all employees at marijuana-related businesses.

The original bill had a provision to prevent children from carrying firearms in public without adult supervision. It was meant to reinstate language that the Second Amendment Preservation Act took out of Missouri law when it was passed in 2021.

But that was stripped from the bill by Republicans concerned about infringing on the Second Amendment.

This is about protecting kids, Roberts said. Its just egregious to me, the idea that guns over lives seems to be the mantra of this body.

Rep. Lane Roberts, R-Joplin, said the goal of his special prosecutor bill was to decrease crime in the state.

However, the House bill originally targeted only Gardner, who won her re-election in November 2020 with 74% of the vote.

The bill was amended to apply to any elected prosecutors across the state, out of concern that singling out one prosecutor would be unconstitutional.

The governor could appoint a special prosecutor for five years if the number of homicide cases in any prosecuting attorneys jurisdiction in the 12 months immediately preceding exceeds 35 cases per every 100,000 people.

The governor would also have to determine that a threat to public safety and health exists based on reviewing certain crime statistics.

The special prosecutor would have exclusive jurisdiction to prosecute certain offenses including murders, assaults, robberies, hijacking and other violent offenses and be given a budget to hire up to 15 assistant prosecuting attorneys and 15 staffers.

The Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys and Gardners office testified against the bill in committee.

Gardners representative, Chief Warrant Officer Chris Hinkley, told legislators during a Jan. 30 committee hearing that the bill wrongly assumes the prosecutors office has a backlog of violent crime cases.

Weve kept violent crimes at the top, Hinkley said, even through the pandemic. The violent crimes will never and were not ever delayed in review and issuance.

The original bill included a line that explicitly states the special prosecutor shall not be the attorney general.

But that was stripped from the version the Senate debated Tuesday and replaced with the line stating the governor may appoint the attorney general or any elected prosecuting or circuit attorney as a special prosecutor.

During special sessions in 2020, Republicans similarly made two failed attempts to hand over an unprecedented amount of Gardners authority to then-Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt.

Schmitt would have been allowed to take over homicide cases if Gardners office had not filed charges within 90 days of the incidents or upon request from the chief law enforcement officer.

The Missouri Association of Prosecuting Attorneys fought vehemently against the provision in 2020, saying that Missourians have never wanted statewide politicians to meddle in local affairs.

On Tuesday, the Senate tacked on more hot-button language to the underlying bill to put St. Louis police department back under state control a policy originally born out of pro-slavery leaders attempt to maintain control 150 years ago.

Kansas City is the only major city in the country where the citys elected leaders dont control the local police department a state-appointed police board does.

Up until 2013, St. Louis was in the same boat.

However, the city gained local control of its police department after a 2012 statewide referendum.

The provision originally sponsored by Schroer would reverse that.

It also states the mayor or any city officer would be penalized $1,000 for each and every offense to hinder the board, as well as be forever be disqualified from holding or exercising any office of the city.

Sen. Karla May, D-St. Louis, pushed back saying that the city had high crime under the state control prior to 2012.

You want to try to say that we need to take control of the police department, why? May said. You dont have a good track recordIts amazing to me how they just woke up this year and decided to care about the lives of people in St. Louis city.

Former Public Safety Director Dan Isom, who was the citys police chief in 2012 when the referendum was passed, previously testified to the Senate that the city has made strides to decrease violent crime despite state lawmakers continued push to loosen gun restrictions since 2007.

Missouri has some of the loosest gun laws in the country, Isom said.

Isom said when the Missouri legislature adopted permitless concealed carry in 2016, law enforcement officials warned about the impact but were ignored.

From 2016 to 2020, Isom said firearm homicides increased in the city by 50% from 177 to 266.

However, from 2020 to 2021, he said the citys homicide rate fell by more than 25 percent, and the violent crime rate fell 23 percent over the same time period.

The return to local control has not resulted in an increase in violent crime, Isom said. An increase in weapons has increased the violence on our streets.

Isom also said taking away the authority of local elected officials to guide policing in St. Louis would also disconnect police officers from the communities they serve.

When a local mayor is in charge of their police force, they can serve as a translator between community needs and policing imperatives, Isom said. Removing this local connection will engender feelings of mistrust between officers and community, ultimately making officers less safe.

Read the original here:
State takeover of St. Louis police, prosecutor's office blocked by ... - Missouri Independent