America’s shared values
Years ago, I read a book that changed my perspective about the founding of this nation.
The book, “American Revolutions: A Continental History, 1750-1804,” by historian Alan Taylor, was published in 2016. In it, Taylor builds the case that the revolution launched by the Declaration of Independence, which we celebrate every Fourth of July, was actually a civil war — between not only the colonists and the British, but between the Patriots and the Loyalists, the slaves and their owners, and Native tribes against colonists who sought to take their land.
The story of this nation’s birth has been sanitized over the years to make “us” look better than we actually were. It’s true that the colonists were being oppressed by an overseas monarchy, but we were also oppressors, keeping about a fifth of the Colonies’ population enslaved and taking land and resources away from those who were here first. That’s why Black slaves and Native tribes alike sided with the British — they too wanted freedom, and the colonists had proved themselves unworthy of their loyalty.
If the principles espoused in the Declaration of Independence were truly applied to all peoples, Blacks, Natives and just about every other “underclass” at that time would have been treated much differently, but of course that wasn’t the case. Instead, that declaration set in motion an ideal, that all are created equal and have God-given rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” and that any government that stands in the way of these rights deserves to be overthrown.
Such an ideal had a violent birth, even beyond the war to end British rule over the Americas. When George Washington became this nation’s first president, it was a fractured country — even more than we are today. The fact that this nation is still alive is a testament to the power of our original birthright, equality, which moved us forward, in great fits and starts, to become the nation we are today. And wouldn’t you know it, we’re still struggling with that original ideal. The actions of wannabe king Donald Trump il-
lustrate just how fragile our nation is when left in the hands of someone who believes in money and power over “We The People.”
Back in the dark days of Trump’s first term, I read Taylor’s book and it got me to thinking about our national identity. I wrote down some thoughts about the better side of our American identity, and I think they still apply, even in these darker days of a second Trump term in office. So, in keeping with America’s shared values, here they are again:
• Duty and Service. Military service is held in high regard in the U.S., and so is civic service to one’s community. We are a nation of fighters and helpers. We value acts of heroism and generosity, both in our everyday lives and during times of crisis.
• Freedom and Liberty. It’s both our strength and our weakness. Our liberties give us the right to explore, expand and innovate — and make mistakes. Our values include the belief that every person has a right to make a better life for themselves and their family, but with that comes the right to self-destruct, which many unfortunately do.
• Justice and Equality. We believe all are created equal, but we also know that not everyone is born into “equal” environments. And when inequalities are man-made, we believe in justice. As a result, most Americans are fair-minded, even if we do come from wildly different perspectives as to what “fair” is.
These values are part of our American identity, which somehow, almost miraculously, grew out of America’s first civil war, the American Revolution. Our founders gave us words that would become a battle hymn not for the privileged but for the oppressed. It’s embedded in our collective identity.
Here’s to our shared values. They are the reason I still believe in the Fourth of July.
Tom McDonald is editor and publisher of the Guadalupe County Communicator in Santa Rosa and the New Mexico Community News Exchange (CNEx). He can be reached at tmcdonald.usa@gmail.com.
have become a staple in turnout gear and firefighting foam. These seemingly beneficial chemicals have also proven to be hazardous, as they can persist in the environment and human tissues, making exposed firefighters susceptible to different forms of cancer.
Given these occupational hazards, all 50 states, the District of Columbia and even federal firefighters have implemented their respective presumptive cancer laws, easing access to benefits for firefighters diagnosed with qualifying conditions. However, New Mexico’s statute remains inadequate in providing aid to affected first responders, as it applies only to full-time personnel.
This explicitly connotes that volunteer firefighters — who often encounter the same exposures under even more constrained situations — are categorically left out. Such exclusion has created a troubling division within the fire service and deprived many of the chance to receive timely medical support and compensation for their service-related illness.
Over the past several years, states across the country have increasingly recognized the critical need to protect firefighters from the grave health risks they face, especially the disturbing link between toxic exposure and cancer. New Mexico joined that effort in 2021 by enacting a presumptive cancer law, allowing qualified firefighters to receive medical benefits without the burden of proving a direct connection between their illness and specific workplace exposures. This legal presumption acknowledges that repeated exposure to substances like PFAS is an inherent and well-documented part of the job. However, the law draws a sharp line around who qualifies. To be eligible, a firefighter must meet specific requirements, including:
• Employed as full-time, non-volunteer personnel by the state or a local government entity.
• Have taken the state-prescribed firefighter oath.
• Diagnosed with one of several enumerated cancers or infectious diseases, each tied to a minimum required period of continuous employment (ranging from five to 15 years, depending on the condition). These criteria categorically exclude volunteer firefighters, notwithstanding their years of service, exposure history, or operational role. That omission is particularly detrimental, especially since this group makes up more than half of the firefighting workforce in New Mexico and nationwide. According to the U.S.
Fire Administration, 77.5 percent of firefighters in New Mexico are volunteers. This trend also extends beyond the state, as nationally, they comprise 52 percent of the 1,054,700 active firefighting personnel. These figures simply imply that volunteer firefighters are not merely supplementary — they are the backbone of emergency response in many communities. Given the scope and nature of their responsibilities, it is reasonable to conclude that volunteers encounter the same occupational hazards as career firefighters. They respond to structure fires, hazardous material incidents and emergency medical calls — often under comparable conditions but with fewer resources. In some cases, these limitations may result in even greater exposure to toxic substances.
True to this, a 2021 study by Rutgers University found that volunteer firefighters had significantly higher concentrations of PFAS in their blood compared to full-time personnel. The research also highlighted the cumulative nature of PFAS exposure across all firefighting roles, regardless of employment status.
Presumptive cancer laws exist to remove unnecessary burdens from firefighters who become ill as a result of their professional duties. Fundamentally, the goal is to streamline access to medical benefits by eliminating the need to prove a direct causal link between years of toxic exposure and a cancer diagnosis — a process that can be legally complex, time-consuming and financially draining.
New Mexico’s statute, however, falls short of that intent. By limiting the eligibility to full-time employment status rather than exposure risk, the law effectively draws a line that excludes a large portion of the fire service. Volunteers face the same operational hazards, yet they are denied the same legal protections.
Several states have enforced laws that ensure all firefighters, regardless of employment classification, receive equal access to protections based on occupational exposure, not job status.
New Mexico has the opportunity to follow that lead. Extending eligibility to all certified firefighters would close a clear statutory gap and ensure the law serves the entire firefighting workforce it was meant to protect.
Jonathan Sharp is the chief financial officer of the Environmental Litigation Group, P.C., a firm in Birmingham, Ala., that assists victims of toxic exposure and their immediate family members.
