Viewpoint Michigan Chronicle
A Real Times Media Newspaper
September 19-25, 2018 | Page A-4
Anonymously Yours
By Trevor W. Coleman âThe Times is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers.â The New York Times Opinion Page, September 5, 2018 That simple act of public disclosure earlier this month from the Opinion Page Editor of the nationâs âpaper of record,â The New York Times, unleashed a flurry of debate over the ethics of running an unsigned Op-Ed in a mainstream newspaper. While such a violation of journalism protocols may have enraged the self-appointed guardians of newspaper purity, it is far less concerning than the actual content of the controversial Op-Ed.
The Septem- Trevor W. Coleman ber 5th Op-Ed, titled âI Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administrationâ illuminated in the starkest of terms the very real danger facing our nation in the form of the man serving as the President of the United States. A man, according to the author, who is who is not only temperamental, but intellectually and morally unfit for the job he holds. That is also the assessment of many members of the administration and his political party who see, speak, and work with him; President Donald J. Trump, every single day. The author wrote: â⌠we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic. That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trumpâs more misguided impulses until he is out of office. The root of the problem is the presidentâs amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.â Given his boorish and often infantile behavior, incoherent policy objectives, and lack of any discernable governing skills or an ability to articulate a rational governing philosophy, such a deter-
mination should come as no surprise. Indeed, the shock over the Op-Ed largely stems not from the assessment of those closest to the President â and charged with carrying out his agenda â but from the very act of a âseniorâ administration official writing such an OpEd while still serving in the Presidential Administration. Yet, barely two years into President Trumpâs term an entire cottage industry has emerged in the form of newspaper articles, magazine stories and books, by former and current Trump cronies describing how profoundly ignorant he is of public policy, international relations, and even interpersonal communications. Many have described in detail not only his bigotry and pettiness, but the fact that he is even incapable of demonstrating empathy or sympathy for another human being. That doesnât sound like a person who should be the President of the United States or any modern or civilized country. That sounds like a sociopath. Those bemoaning the failure of the author to sign his or her name to the column, almost obscure the real outrage. And that is the disturbing fact that our security as American citizens is imperiled by such person in the White House. One does not have to romanticize the character of all the previous men who served as President of the United States to see that something is terribly wrong here. Some of the men who led our nation were genuinely awful people. This includes blatant and aggressive racists such as Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, Richard Nixon and many African Americans would argue Ronald Reagan. But as the author of the New York Times Op-Ed notes, Donald Trump is something different. His own subordinates believe him to be such a cruel, mendacious and benighted man that they feel compelled to not only work against much of his agenda, but to stay in his administration to protect the nation. Most depressing however, is it becomes clearer with each passing day we are left to deal with the knowledge that this chaos President was illegally imposed on the American electorate in large measure by a malevolent mixture of foreign espionage, campaign finance violations (with payoffs to silence mistresses) and widespread voter suppression. And no self-serving Op-Ed proclaiming to protect us from him, will ever change that appalling fact of U.S. history. Trevor W. Coleman is a columnist for The Michigan Chronicle
Whatâs YOUR Sign? By Dan Dildy Traveling recently through parts of the deep South, I encountered folks of another orientation who attempted to engage me in conversations regarding my personal opinions concerning the removal of Confederate statues. Of course, I declined the invitation to offer a perspective, but I did listen to their logic as they seemed to take a position that I had not considered. The removal of Confederate memorials has long been a controversial issue and some states have actually passed laws against it. Now, especially in the era of Trump, any attempt to remove old, racist para- Dan Dildy phernalia seems to invite serious backlash. And the folks Iâm referencing here offered an unusual rational by insisting that moving such memorials from the public square is tantamount to denying that the Confederates ever existed in the first place---which is not true. Indeed, most cities that have removed statues have opened museums as a permanent remembrance of the Civil War, yet some people donât quite understand why. And far be it for me---particularly as I had been cruising through a small southern town in the middle of nowhere---to try and correct their misunderstanding. The most-recent flair ups over the Confederate memorabilia issue came about as a direct result of the 2015 church massacre of nine African-American worshippers and at a Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia just last year in which a young, white counter-protester was killed. The rally was arranged to glorify white supremacy and to prevent the removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee. By the way, in obedience to Virginia state law, Old General Lee is still sitting on his horse in the Charlottesville town square to this day. Unfortunately, ignorance over the caus-
es of the Civil War still exists in some quarters, but it is a historical fact that the South fought the war because Lincoln freed the slaves. But hereâs the point: Fifty years after the assassination of Dr. King, after years of struggles fighting against segregation and bigotry, cities and towns across the nation should not hide the Confederacy, but it should not be glorified either. It, like other government-sponsored periods of shame such as the Trail of Tears which involved the forced removal from their land and the genocidal murders of Native Americans, or the equally disgraceful legalization of Jim Crow laws following Reconstruction, should not stand proudly, front and center for all to see. Museums are the places where societies exhibit their histories: The United States Holocaust Memorial provides a reminder of the terrible Jewish slaughter during the Nazi reign of terror in Germany. And of course, there is The National Museum of African American History and Culture on proud display in D.C. memorializing our African American quest for equality which rages on even today. It is about the signals, the signs of where a society resides in uplifting humanity when public displays of shame are made to appear heroic. There should be no public honor in terrorizing, enslaving, hanging of human beings. And outward manifestations of Confederate flags are horrific symbols of a period of time when more people died in one war than in all the nationâs wars combined. Imagine naming a city street Hitler Boulevard, instead of M.L.King Drive. And so, to Mayor Dugginâs credit, Detroitâs sign of RESPECT will last for generations now with the re-naming of Chene Park. Alexander Chene, as we know, was a slave-owner whose name should be placed in the dustbin of history; Aretha Franklin Amphitheatre is the new sign of the waterfront---Detroiters and its visitors of all ethnicities can be proud of her. Signs tell the world who we are. Confederate symbols and statues display no inherent pride because there were no heroes. History has a place for that, but not an admirable one.
HIRAM E. JACKSON Publisher â CATHY NEDD Associate Publisher
PATREICE A. MASSEY Managing Editor | AJ WILLIAMS City.Life.Style. | Entertainment Editor SAMUEL LOGAN Publisher 1933-2011
JOHN H. SENGSTACKE Chairman-Emeritus 1912-1997
LONGWORTH M. QUINN Publisher-Emeritus 1909-1989
CONTACT US 1452 Randolph ⢠Detroit, MI 48226 ⢠(313) 963-8100 e-mail: newsdesk@michronicle.com
What the Supreme Court Nomination Would Mean for Black Women By LaâTasha D. Mayes MSPPM, Executive Director, New Voices for Reproductive Justice
With the confirmation process underway for Judge Brett Kavanaughâs nomination to the Supreme Court, Black women have certainly been voicing our opposition. Thereâs no sugar-coating it: confirming Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court would be disastrous for Black women.
employerâs personal or religious beliefs. Here, too, the stakes are higher for Black women. We are more likely to be struggling economically, therefore less likely to be able to âbuy our way out of the problemâ by paying out-of-pocket when health coverage is denied. While the threat Kavanaugh poses to reproductive health has dominated much of the news, Black women have all those and even more concerns when it comes to this nominee. As the NAACP has pointed out, âOur voting rights are on the line. Fair housing and affirmative action are on the line.â Everything that matters to Black women is on the line. In coming years, the Supreme Court could rule on pivotal cases related to racial justice, equal access to education, LGBTQ+ rights and so much more.
To begin, Kavanaugh has made it clear that he doesnât support the right to abortion enshrined in Roe v. Wade â though seven in 10 people in this country do, as well as nearly eight in 10 Black Americans. We know that many states, if they were allowed, would ban abortion immediately. In a handful of states, only one abortion clinic remains, and in others, women are forced to travel long distances, delay care, and pay out-of-pocket for care not covered by insurance. Whether the right LaâTasha to abortion is turned over to states or outlawed, or the court instead allows extreme restrictions, the impact will be fall hardest on those who already struggle to get care â and Black women could be the most harmed.
All these issues are connected - they are intersectional. Being treated fairly at work, in lending, in school, and elsewhere, as well as voting rights and access to reproductive healthcare, inD. Mayes cluding abortion, help ensure that Black women and our families can be healthy and live with dignity. Now is the time for us to work together - across issues and geography - to defend ourselves, our families and our communities.
As DC Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton has noted, Black women are more likely to need abortion care, due to greater barriers we face in accessing comprehensive sex education, contraception, and basic health care of any kind. Denying a woman an abortion has real consequences: research shows that when a woman wants to get an abortion but is denied, she is more likely to fall into poverty, less likely to have a full-time job, and twice as likely to be a victim of domestic violence.
Letâs be honest the Supreme Court has rarely been a friend to Black women. After all, it was the invisibility of Black women in discrimination jurisprudence that led KimberlĂŠ Williams Crenshaw to first coin the term âintersectionality.â But the Supreme Court certainly has the power to greatly harm or potentially improve the lives of Black women. We need to watch closely and be sure our that we speak in our own voice and those we elect to serve us trust Black women.
Forcing a woman to continue a pregnancy after sheâs decided to end it is a violation of her basic human rights â forcing a Black woman to do so in a country that places so little value on Black life adds incalculable insult to injury. Kavanaughâs record seems to indicate that heâd be perfectly comfortable forcing pregnancy on Black women, while doing little to ensure that Black womenâs children will grow to be healthy, treated equally, and thrive â unlike Antwon Rose Jr. in Pittsburgh and Nia Wilson in Oakland.
Black women are the largest constituency in the United States that has no representation on the Supreme Court â weâve never had a Black woman Supreme Court Justice. That is not to say that Justice Clarence Thomas is standing up for the health and rights of Black men â heâs not â but judicial representation matters. It would be incredible to see a Black woman, more than one Black woman, sitting on the highest court in the land.
Kavanaugh has also sided with bosses to want to deny their employeesâ birth control coverage based on the
Until we can see that, we can certainly do better than another ideologically extreme white man who would only roll back the progress for which Black women have already sacrificed so much.
Fixing Michiganâs infrastructure must begin and end with people not business in mind By Maurice BP-Weeks With the August state gubernatorial primary behind us and only 10 weeks left before the general election in November, Michiganâs hardworking families are carefully weighing where candidates stand on issues. One major issue is infrastructure: roads and transit, housing, schools, and safe water. Gretchen Whitmer, who won the contentious Democratic primary for Michigan governor, will face Republican Bill Schuette in November. Whoever wins must address Michiganâs infrastructure issues, perhaps the worst in the country, and assume Maurice BP-Weeks responsibility for fixing what is broken. âFix the damn roads.â That was part of Whitmer platform. As she continues her campaign, she should commit to putting Michiganâs workers and families first with an updated, more progressive policy platform around infrastructure. In a statewide survey of 600 residents by a Lansing-based polling firm, a quarter of respondents identified their most concerning issue as fixing Michiganâs roads, bridges and dams, drinking water sources and wastewater treatment systems. In Bay City, itâll take five years and $6 million to fix the wear and tear on the Liberty and Independence bridges that span the Saginaw River. Macomb County just repaired the massive â2016 Christmas Eve sinkhole,â that devastated a neighborhood and displaced 19 families, for $70 million. While itâs been more than one thousand days since families had clean water in Flint, more than 70 communities have drinking water systems with higher lead levels than Flint. When Whitmer announced her infrastructure plan, she said, âItâs time to invest in Michigan to rebuild our state so that businesses can grow in MichiganâŚâ But, fixing the damn roads and investing in local infrastructure because itâs âgood for businessâ is not enough. This line of thinking allowed the rapid, brutal gentrification of U.S. cities and caused the displacement of many low-income folks and people of color. Prioritizing the interests of develop-
ers while putting the needs of working people on the back burner is like the âtrickle downâ economic myth -- new business means that everyoneâs quality of life gets better. In reality, real people get hurt and donât see the benefits. The kind of infrastructure that Michigan needs shouldnât keep business owners in mind as the primary benefactors, but rather make people the priority. The kind of infrastructure that Michigan needs to fix is the water in Flint, the education system in our stateâs rural areas, and the lack of accessible and affordable public transportation that makes economic upward mobility possible. Discussions around infrastructure tend to focus on the physical objects that need fixing, and how repairing them will improve the economy as a whole. While these are valid facets of the issue, these conversations can dangerously miss the point. When we talk about infrastructure, we need to talk about the humans that use it. Currently, 41 percent of Michiganâs roads are in âpoorâ condition, which costs each household nearly $540 per year -- costs that could significantly burden a low-income family already struggling to make ends meet. Regarding our water systems, many of our stateâs pumping stations donât work, which makes flooding and storm water enormous public health concerns -- a serious threat to people who live paycheck to paycheck and canât afford to get sick. The 70 water systems with higher lead levels than Flint force families to spend extra money on drinking water when money is tight. And Detroit Schoolsâ shutting off drinking water just as school starts is a startling reminder of how dire the problem is. Itâs true that business can play a vital role in fixing our infrastructure, but not in the way that public officials are claiming. When businesses pay their fair share of taxes, we will we have increased revenue to fix these major problems. If that occurs then all of us, including business, will be beneficiaries. We must work together to hold our leaders accountable to our communities. Itâs time to recognize that infrastructure is not just a technical or business-related problem -- itâs a social justice issue that requires putting people first. Maurice BP-Weeks is the Co-Executive Director of ACRE.