Trumpocalypse Week One: Alternate Reality

Facts and the truth are not partisan. They are the bedrock of our democracy. And you are either with them, with us, with our Constitution, our history, and the future of our nation, or you are against it. 

-  Dan Rather, January 22, 2017

It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.

― George Orwell, 1984

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. 

- Joseph Goebbels

It's been just one week since the inauguration of the man who, in the words of The Atlantic magazine,  "might be the most ostentatiously unqualified major-party candidate in the 227-year history of the American presidency."  His first week in office goes a long way towards proving that conjecture.  The ignorance and distorted sense of reality evidenced by Trump and his inner circle are stunning.

The most obvious demonstration of ignorance in Trumpocalypse Week One is the border wall "tariff".  After universal mockery, the 20% tariff was quickly disavowed by the administration as just one of the ideas to build the $15 billion Trump Wall without costing Americans anything.  You learn about how tariffs work in Economics 101: the tariff is passed on to the domestic consumer.  If a consumer buys the products, she pays the price.  Also, the administration seems to have missed the fact that rules that govern world trade prevent a country from unilaterally imposing such a tariff.

Note to the Trump Administration: you cannot make up your own rules...or, for that matter, your own reality.

Trump continues to claim he would have won the popular vote were it not for millions of illegal votes.  This totally unsubstantiated statement is being disavowed even by Republicans.

Trump says the Park Service understated attendance at his inauguration.  But photos and Metro fare figures don't lie.  You are starting your term with a 36% approval rating.  Get over it.

The "alternative facts" comment of senior Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway makes us wonder if we have fallen into a time warp and landed in George Orwell's 1984. (Not coincidentally, that book hit the number one spot at amazon.com this week.)

These comments may seem trivial but the "illegal voters" lie can have some serious consequences for American democracy - especially in this era of disenfranchisement and voter suppression. The comments come at a time when we will soon have an Attorney General who thinks the Voting Rights Act is intrusive and who prosecuted and lost a "voter fraud" case against African-American civil rights activists in 1985.

As if this weren't bad enough, the Washington Post reports today: "In a private meeting with congressional Republicans this week, Vice President Pence vowed that the Trump administration would pursue a wide-ranging probe of voting rolls in the United States to examine whether millions of people voted illegally in the 2016 election as President Trump has charged."

What nonsense.  Every study ever made on voter fraud in the United States has found it to be so rare as to be almost non-existent.  Now, the party that has disenfranchised and suppressed millions of voters is undertaking an investigation on voter fraud.  Perhaps they will find "alternative facts" that fit their bizarre take on democracy.

Climate change will, of course, also be "under review" in the administration of Donald "Climate change is a Chinese hoax" Trump.  As the Associated Press reported, the Trump administration is requiring that political appointees review all Environmental Protection Agency studies and data prior to public release,  I guess in search of some "alternative facts."

Rounding out the week:
- An entire level of  career senior officials that manage the State Department, its outposts and its people resigned
- Our new ambassador to the UN warned U.S. allies that if they do not support Washington, then she is "taking names" and will respond
- The administration ordered that "all contract and grant awards [at the EPA] be temporarily suspended, effective immediately" and imposed a blackout on communicating with the public about taxpayer-funded work at the Agricultural Research Service.

I can't wait 'til Trumpocalypse Week Two.

And so the resistance begins

"Trump supporters are saying this is a day of reckoning.  

Well, yeah, as in, I reckon we are all f**ked."

- Bill Maher, Jan 20

Donald Trump's inauguration has come and gone.

Trump enters the White House with the lowest favorable rating of any President-elect in at least four decades.  He lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by 3 million votes.  Attendance at his inauguration, from photographic evidence and Metro fares, was significantly less than that at either of Obama's inaugurations.  (Churlish as ever, Trump and his press secretary spent time on his first full day in office berating the media for "falsely reporting" the attendance.  The Trump Administration's grasp of reality apparently has not improved.)

In what could have been a healing and uniting inaugural speech, he failed miserably.

Trump didn't create our country's racial divide or its xenophobic mistrust, but he stoked their flames and rode those fears to victory.  His "all blood is red" was a paltry concession to the bigotry unleashed by his campaign.

Trump didn't create the bitter partisanship that dominates the political scene, but he lashed out at "all talk and no action politicians" - words similar to those he used to attack civil rights activist and Democratic congressman John Lewis.

When he pledged to end "the American carnage" of the inner cities and the rust-belt, he somehow seemed to lay this at the Democrats' doorstep.

When he spoke of  "forgotten men and women," one wondered if he meant all the American people, those of every color and creed.

When he declared "their victories were not your victories", one wondered whom he was addressing and what victories he was talking about.

Women's March, Washington D.C.
Credit: Slate.com Jan 21

The massive Women's March on Washington followed Trump's inauguration by a day.  More than a million people demonstrated across the country and around the world in solidarity.  Madonna's dropping the F-bomb got a lot of coverage, but it was Latina actress and activist America Ferrera who best expressed the sentiment of the marchers.  Ferrera declared that “our new president is waging a war” on the values that define the country with “a credo of hate, fear, and suspicion of one another....It’s been a heart-rending time to be both a woman and an immigrant,” said Ferrera, whose parents are from Honduras. “Our dignity, our character, our rights have been under attack....But the president is not America,” she said. “We are America.” (Washington Post, Jan 21)

In a more moderate vein, Pope Francis in his congratulatory message to President Trump said, "Under your leadership, may America's stature continue to be measured above all by its concern for the poor, the outcast and those in need who, like Lazarus, stand before our door."  But, as the French news agency AFP noted, in his inauguration speech, Trump gave little indication his thoughts matched the Pope's as he vowed to put only "America first" and to make it rich again.

Aside from his nationalist blathering, much in Trump's inaugural speech was good - if what he was saying was meant to address our nation's inequalities of opportunity and its income disparity.  The speech had a populist ring to it.  As with many of Trump's pronouncements, we need to look at his actions rather than just hear his words.  His generally appalling choices for the Cabinet and his initial orders after taking office do not give us much hope.  Within hours of his inauguration, he issued executive and administrative orders that would pave the way for dismantling the Affordable Care Act and put an end to President Obama's efforts to cut premiums on FHA-insured home loans for low-income home owners.

While many news organizations are touting they will "hold Trump accountable", the rest of us need to resist.  Resist mean-spirited bigotry.  Resist the alt-right's agenda.  Resist the marginalization of the vulnerable and of those different from ourselves.  Resist the assaults on civil and voting rights.  Resist despair and fear and finger-pointing.

And in four years time, take America back to its real, best values.

The Health Care Battle

The opening volleys in the shredding of the social safety net have been fired.  The 2017 Republican attack on the Affordable Care Act is officially underway.

Republicans have been threatening to repeal ACA since it was enacted.  Until now, President Obama's veto has been all that stood in the way.  On Thursday the Senate and on Friday the House adopted budget resolutions that, with simple majority votes, could repeal the Affordable Care Act without replacing it.

Democrats, notably including Senate Minority Leader Schumer, have promised to resist the Republican efforts at repeal unless there is a replacement plan in place.  "Senate Democratic sources familiar with Schumer’s thinking say he will not engage in any negotiations to pass a watered-down version of the landmark healthcare reform law if Republicans unilaterally force its repeal first under special budgetary rules." (The Hill, Jan 15)

On Saturday, president-elect Trump, who favors simultaneous repeal and replacement, entered the fray.  In an interview with the Washington Post, "President-elect Donald Trump said...that he is nearing completion of a plan to replace President Obama’s signature health-care law with the goal of 'insurance for everybody,' while also vowing to force drug companies to negotiate directly with the government on prices in Medicare and Medicaid." (Washington Post, Jan 15)

The Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") has helped at least 20 million people gain access to health care.  The uninsured rate has almost halved: dropping from 16% to 8.9%. (Bloomberg.com)

One of the most important elements of the Affordable Care Act is the Medicaid expansion.  The following graphic shows the states that would be at risk of losing this coverage.

Repeal of the ACA would have repercussions across the country:

• the number of uninsured would climb by almost 30 million by 2019 [1]
• the health care industry would lose $3 billion in premiums [1]
• the newly uninsured would seek an additional $1.1 trillion in uncompensated care between 2019 and 2028 [1]
• up to 3 million jobs in the health sector and other areas would be lost [2]
• $1.5 trillion reduction in gross state product from 2019 through 2023 [2]
• cost the Federal government $350 billion over the next decade [3]

In addition, repeal would seriously disrupt the health care market.  "The speed of Republican efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act has stunned health industry lobbyists, leaving representatives of insurance companies, hospitals, doctors and pharmaceutical makers in disarray and struggling for a response to a legislative quick strike that would upend much of the American health care system." (Boston Globe/NYTimes News Service, Jan 10)

So, the rallying cry of the Republicans has become "repeal and replace."  Unfortunately, there is no Congressional Republican replacement plan that could pass Congress.  The Affordable Care Act took two years to craft.  To think that Republicans can come up with a suitable replacement in two weeks or even two months is ludicrous.  And that is the point of concern.  Is Republican hatred of Obamacare (and of Obama's legacy) so great that they will throw 20-30 million people off health care insurance, disrupt the market, blow a hole in the Federal budget and wreak havoc with state economies?

The Republicans have painted themselves into a corner.  For seven years, they have screamed about repeal.  It's been red meat to their base, a sure-fire vote getter.

Then, late last year, anecdotes started coming in from the hinterlands about Trump voters who were getting worried.  Concern was particularly high in coal country.  “ I voted for Trump,” Neil Yonts, who was a coal miner in Kentucky for 35 years, told CNN’s Miguel Marquez. But, he added, he felt it “may be a mistake” after being diagnosed with black lung disease and learning about the Obamacare protections, which may soon disappear. “When they eliminate the Obamacare they may just eliminate all the black lung program,” he said. “It may all be gone. Don’t matter how many years you got.”  (deathandtaxes website, Dec 26)

Now some Republican governors whose states benefit from the ACA are raising concerns.  At least "five of the...Republican governors of states that took federal money to expand Medicaid are advocating to keep it or warning GOP leaders of disastrous consequences if the law is repealed without a replacement that keeps millions of people covered."  (Politico, Jan 13)

These mounting concerns of Republicans combined with Democratic opposition to repeal and the as-yet-undisclosed Trump plan may be enough to slow the dismantling of the ACA until a replacement can be in place.  If not, if Republicans somehow successfully push through "partial repeal that keeps in place Obamacare regulations but not the spending to maintain the program,...[Republicans will create] a recipe for a long, drawn-out political catastrophe in which the individual health care marketplace slowly collapses." (Boston Globe, Jan 10)  And the lives of tens of millions will be affected.

[1]  "Implications of Partial Repeal of the ACA through Reconciliation", the Urban Institute 
[2]  CNBC, Jan 5 citing a joint study by the Commonwealth Fund and the Milliken Institute
[3] CNN, Jan 4 citing an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Trump's Attorney General and the Future of American Justice

It doesn’t matter whether Sen. Sessions may smile or how friendly he may be, whether he may speak to you. We need someone who will stand up and speak up and speak out for the people who need help, for people who are being discriminated against. And it doesn’t matter whether they are black or white, Latino, Asian or Native American, whether they are straight or gay, Muslim, Christian or Jews. We all live in the same house, the American house.

- Rep. John Lewis (D-GA)

Senator Sessions has not demonstrated a commitment to a central requisite of the job: to aggressively pursue the congressional mandate of civil rights, equal rights, and justice for all of our citizens.

- Sen. Corey Booker (D-NJ) testifying at Attorney General confirmation hearings

Alabama State Troopers Attacking
Civil Rights Activist John Lewis - Selma, AL 1965

Corey Booker's and John Lewis' moving testimony not withstanding, Jeff Sessions will be confirmed as the Attorney General of the United States. Thanks to a Democratic- supported change in Senate rules several years ago at the height of Republican obstructionism, Democrats cannot filibuster his confirmation.  That no Republican senator will "cross the aisle" to oppose his nomination is a given. The moderate Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine is one of two senators introducing Sessions at the confirmation hearings. It is more likely that Democrats from some red states will break rank and vote to confirm Sessions.

Sessions is Trump's most controversial cabinet nominee, and he is nominated for what is arguably the most important domestic cabinet position.  The AG decides what laws the Federal government will enforce.  He can use that power to enforce voting and civil rights or he can use it to deport undocumented immigrants.  He can enforce environmental laws and labor protections or he can ignore them.  He can continue the criminal justice system reform started in the Obama Administration or he can let it wither.  He can expand the surveillance of the American people or he can dial it back.

So this anti-immigrant, climate change skeptic, defense hawk, right-wing Senator who opposes the Voting Rights Act, will soon be charged with protecting the rights of all of us.  He thinks the Voting Rights Act is "intrusive" but that voter ID laws (aka voter suppression laws) are not a problem. When Sessions was the United States attorney in West Alabama in 1985, he unsuccessfully prosecuted three African-American civil rights activists, accusing them of voter fraud.  This disgraceful episode, which he still defends as a necessary action, should have been more than enough to disqualify him for the post.  But politics and partisanship being what they are, Jeff Sessions will be confirmed.  

Southern Poverty Law Center's Heidi Beirich says that his mere presence in Trump's inner circle is “a tragedy for American politics.”   His attorney-generalship is more than that.  It is an affront to the most distinguishing right in a democracy - the right to vote.  

Our democracy and its freedoms are in danger - not from Russian hacks but from within.  Is this alarmist?  If you think so, take the example of North Carolina, a leader in the Republican gerrymandering and voter suppression efforts. A recent report from the Electoral Integrity Project, based at Harvard University and the University of Sydney, indicates that North Carolina can no longer be considered a functioning democracy.    In fact, the EIP ranked US elections last among all Western democracies.  The highly-acclaimed Varieties of Democracy Project (V-Dem) agrees.  The only democracy with the same general ranking for free and fair elections in V-Dem's study is Lithuania.

With the Federal government about to abrogate its duty to protect civil rights and voting rights and with xenophobia so richly rewarded in the last elections, we will once again, for the first time in many years, need to rely on private organizations such as the ACLU, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the NAACP, and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.  Let's wish them success.  

Cashing In on the New "Red Scare", Nukes, and the Defense Pork Barrel

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. 

- President Dwight D. Eisenhower, "Farewell Address", 1961

Welcome to the world of strategic analysis where we program weapons that don't work for threats that don't exist.

- Ivan Selin, former director of the Pentagon's Strategic Forces Division

The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.

- Donald Trump, Dec 2016 tweet

As Congressional Republicans gear up to take away health insurance from 20 million Americans and to cut entitlement and other social programs, military spending - by far the most bloated and wasteful part of the Federal budget - will grow.  The new "red scare" generated by Russia's support for the rebels in Ukraine's Civil War has been given a boost by the alleged Russian hacking during the 2016 presidential campaign.  It comes at just the right time.

American militarists know a cash cow when they see it.  As with much of his comments, Trump's statements on Pentagon spending have been contradictory.   What better way to make sure the DOD budget stays intact than to exaggerate the threats.  The Republican Congress is ever willing to expand the defense budget - after all, to get more money and still balance the budget, they just need to cut more social programs.  The various branches of the armed forces are preparing their perennial cases for new weapons systems.  And defense contractors and arms suppliers are lining up at the trough.

President Eisenhower had been the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during WWII.  For 56 years, the American public has ignored his warning about the military-industrial complex.  We might add to his description - it's actually a military-industrial-political complex that we need to confront. The revolving doors for defense industry lobbyists includes retired politicians as well as retired military.  Both Democrats and Republicans have been loathe to reduce military spending - Republicans because of their innate tendency toward militarism and Democrats because they don't want to be seen as "soft on defense".

U.S. AIR FORCE/SCIENCE FACTION/­GETTY IMAGES
A mushroom cloud from the 1954 Operation Castle-bravo
nuclear test cuts through the clouds.

Since the end of the Cold War, the US military budget has averaged $560 billion/year (in 2015 dollars).  Taking into account military-related spending in other departments and the interest payments on past military debt, total defense spending is now $1.3 trillion/year.  (HuffingtonPost) Ivan Selin's quote (from Andrew Cockburn's excellent article in Harper's December issue) points out the long-standing practice of the Pentagon and American political leaders to exaggerate the threats faced by the United States.  From the non-existent "missile gap" of the 1960's to the $1 trillion modernization of our nuclear weaponry forced on Obama by Republicans as he worked to gain ratification of the 2010 nuclear arms agreement ("New START"), the waste and failures of the US military spending are a major factor in the size of our national debt.  "So pay no attention to those cries of poverty emanating from the Pentagon.  There’s already plenty of money available for 'defense.'  Instead, the problems lie in Washington’s overly ambitious, thoroughly counterproductive global military strategy and in the Pentagon’s penchant for squandering tax dollars as if they were in endless supply." (William D. Hartung, TomDispatch, Nov 22)

And now we are treated to an incoming president who thinks we need to "greatly strengthen and expand" our nuclear capability.  Really?

Between them, the US and Russia possess more than 90% of the world's nuclear weapons.  The capabilities of either country are far more than enough to destroy civilization as we know it and usher in the Nuclear Winter.  To hear Trump and Putin talking about stronger arsenals is to feel that we have entered a new realm of unreality, of insanity.  The way to get the world to come to its senses regarding nukes is to lead them there, not to promise more of the same.

Can we hope that the two world leaders who most need to "come to their senses" regarding nukes will begin a new round of nuclear disarmament?  It wouldn't be the first time that an American administration committed to a nuclear buildup changed course.  The Reagan Administration changed its rhetoric and policies after its position on nuclear weaponry "triggered widespread public anxiety and an outburst of popular protest. In the United States, the Nuclear Weapons Freeze Campaign drew broad public support and won backing from the Democratic Party. Antinuclear agitation was particularly heated in Western Europe."  (Boston Review)  The resulting START I and INF treaties made the world a safer place.

The operative words for the Reagan Administration's change of heart are "popular protest."  But who will lead the protests so instrumental to changing nuclear policy in the 1980's?  The one-trillion-dollar modernization of our nuclear weapons - the price Republicans extracted from Obama to get New START ratified - raised scarcely a blip in the public consciousness.

Some continue to work tirelessly for a world without nuclear weapons.  Three such organizations are the Nuclear Threat Institute, founded by former US Senator Sam Nunn and broadcast magnate/philanthropist Ted Turner, the UK-based Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, and the Ploughshares Fund.  

The Ploughshares Fund is currently circulating  a public petition urging President Obama to place restraints on the incoming president’s ability to launch a nuclear attack by taking the weapons off "high alert". (Democracy Now, Dec. 29)  Here's a link to the petition - http://www.ploughshares.org/keep-donald-trumps-finger-off-nuclear-button.