US Politics

The US ultra-rich justify their low tax rates with three myths – all of them rubbishRobert ReichA record share of the nation’s wealth is in the hands of billionaires, who pay a lower tax rate than the average American. This is indefensible On Tuesday, the Congressional Budget Office released a study of trends in the distribution of family wealth between 1989 and 2019.Over those 30 years, the richest 1% of families increased their share of total national wealth from 27% to 34%. Families in the bottom half of the economy now hold a mere 2%.Meanwhile, a record share of the nation’s wealth remains in the hands of the nation’s billionaires, who are also paying a lower tax rate than the average American.How do the ultra-wealthy justify their wealth and their low tax rates? By using three myths – all of which are utter rubbish.The first is trickle-down economics.Billionaires (and their apologists) claim that their wealth trickles down to everyone else as they invest it and create jobs.Really? For more than 40 years, as wealth at the top has soared, almost nothing has trickled down. Adjusted for inflation, the median wage today is barely higher than it was four decades ago.Trump provided a giant tax cut to the wealthiest Americans, promising it would generate $4,000 increased income for everyone else. Did you receive it?In reality, the super-wealthy don’t create jobs or raise wages. Jobs are created when average working people earn enough money to buy all the goods and services they produce, pushing companies to hire more people and pay them higher wages.The second myth is the “free market”.The ultra-rich claim they’re being rewarded by the impersonal market for creating and doing what people are willing to pay them for.The wages of other Americans have stagnated, they say, because most Americans are worth less in the market now that new technologies and globalization have made their jobs redundant.Baloney. Even if they’re being rewarded, there’s no reason why the “free market’ would reward vast multiples of what the rich were rewarded with decades ago.The market can induce great feats of invention and entrepreneurship with lures of hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars – not billions.As to the rest of us succumbing to labor-replacing globalization and labor-saving technologies, no other advanced nation has nearly the degree of inequality found in the United States, yet all these nations have been exposed to the same forces of globalization and technological change.In reality, the ultra-wealthy have rigged the so-called “free market” in the US for their own benefit. Billionaires’ campaign contributions have soared from a relatively modest $31m in the 2010 elections to $1.2bn in the most recent presidential cycle – a nearly 40-fold increase.What have they got for their money? Tax cuts, freedom to bash unions and monopolize markets and government bailouts. Their pockets have been further lined by privatization and deregulation.The third myth is that they’re superior human beings.They portray themselves as “self-made” rugged individuals who “did it on their own” and therefore deserve their billions.Bupkis. Six of the 10 wealthiest Americans alive today are heirs to fortunes passed on to them by wealthy ancestors.Others had the advantages that come with wealthy parents.Jeff Bezos’s garage-based start was funded by a quarter-million-dollar investment from his parents. Bill Gates’s mother used her business connections to help land a software deal with IBM that made Microsoft. Elon Musk came from a family that reportedly owned shares of an emerald mine in southern Africa.Don’t fall for these three myths.Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.The so-called free market has been distorted by huge campaign contributions from the ultra-rich.Don’t lionize the ultra-rich as superior “self-made” human beings who deserve their billions. They were lucky and had connections.In reality, there is no justification for today’s extraordinary concentration of wealth at the very top. It’s distorting our politics, rigging our markets and granting unprecedented power to a handful of people.The last time America faced anything comparable was at the start of the 20th century.In 1910, former president Theodore Roosevelt warned that “a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power” could destroy American democracy.Roosevelt’s answer was to tax wealth. The estate tax was enacted in 1916, and the capital gains tax in 1922.Since that time, both have eroded. As the rich have accumulated greater wealth, they have also amassed more political power – and have used that political power to reduce their taxes.Teddy Roosevelt understood something about the American economy and the ultra-rich that has now re-emerged, even more extreme and more dangerous. We must understand it, too – and act.
Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His new book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com
TopicsUS politicsOpinionInequalityTax and spendingJeff BezosElon MuskBill GatescommentReuse this content More

Confidence Man review: Maggie Haberman takes down Trump The New York Times reporter presents a forensic account of the damage he has done to AmericaMaggie Haberman, the New York Times’ Trump whisperer, delivers. Her latest book is much more than 600 pages of context, scoop and drama. It is a political epic, tracing Donald Trump’s journey from the streets of Queens to Manhattan’s Upper East Side, from the White House to Mar-a-Lago, his Elba. There, the 45th president holds court – and broods and plots his return.Kushner camping tale one of many bizarre scenes in latest Trump bookRead moreHaberman gives Trump and those close to him plenty of voice – and rope. The result is a cacophonous symphony. Confidence Man informs and entertains but is simultaneously absolutely not funny. Trumpworld presents a reptilian tableau – reality TV does Lord of the Flies.For just one example, Mark Meadows, Trump’s last White House chief of staff, is depicted as erratic and detestable. Then there’s the family. Haberman reports how, after the 2016 election, Melania Trump won a renegotiated pre-nuptial agreement. Haberman also describes Trump repeatedly dumping on his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. If only he looked like Tom Brady and spoke in a deeper register. If only Ivanka had not converted to Judaism.The abuse gets absurd – even a kind of baroque. According to Haberman, at one 2020 campaign strategy meeting Trump implied Kushner might be brutally attacked, even raped, if he ever went camping: “Can you imagine Jared and his skinny ass camping? It’d be like something out of Deliverance.”The reader, however, should not weep for Jared. In Haberman’s telling, he is the kid who was born on third base and mistakes his good fortune with hitting a triple. For his part, Kushner is shown trashing Steve Bannon, the far-right ideologue who was campaign chair and chief White House strategist but was forced out within months.Haberman catches Kushner gleefully asking a White House visitor: “Did you see I cut Bannon’s balls off?”To quote Peter Navarro, like Bannon now a former Trump official under indictment, “nepotism and excrement roll downhill”.As it happens, Bannon’s testicles grew back. Like Charlie Kushner, Jared’s father, he received a Trump pardon. Bannon also helped propagate the big lie that Trump won the election, stoking the Capitol attack.These days, Bannon awaits sentencing, convicted of contempt of Congress. He also faces felony fraud charges arising from an alleged border-wall charity scam. In Trump’s universe, there is always a grift.For Confidence Man, Haberman interviewed Trump three times. He confesses that he is drawn to her, like a moth to a flame.“I love being with her,” he says. “She’s like my psychiatrist”.The daughter of Clyde Haberman, a legendary New York Times reporter, is not flattered or amused. She sees through her subject.“The reality is that he treats everyone like they are his psychiatrists,” Haberman writes. “All present a chance for him to vent or test reactions or gauge how his statements are playing or discover how he is feeling.”Also, Trump and Haberman have not always had a rapport. When he was president, she would interview him and he would attack her. In April 2018, Trump tweeted that Haberman was a Clinton “flunkie” he didn’t know or speak with, a “third-rate reporter” at that. He called her “Maggot Haberman” and even contemplated obtaining her phone records to identify her sources.Trump is 76 but he remains the envious boy from a New York outer borough, face pressed against the Midtown glass. Haberman is not the only Manhattan reporter he has courted and attacked. In 2018, he threatened Michael Wolff for writing Fire and Fury, the Trump book that started it all. Later, he welcomed Wolff to Mar-a-Lago.Haberman vividly captures Trump’s lack of couth. For just one example, according to Haberman the president chose to enrich his first meeting with a foreign leader, Theresa May, by asking the British prime minister to “imagine if some animals with tattoos raped your daughter and she got pregnant”.Each of Trump’s three supreme court justices voted to overturn Roe v Wade. One might wonder how the young woman in Trump’s hypothetical would feel about that.Haberman also pierces Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns. All that talk about an “audit” was a simple dodge, birthed on a campaign plane.In the run-up to Super Tuesday, the crucial day of primaries in March 2016, aides confronted Trump about his taxes. The candidate, Haberman writes, “thought for a second about how to ‘get myself out of this’, as he said. He leaned back, before snapping up to a sudden thought.01:13“‘Well, you know my taxes are under audit. I always get audited … So what I mean is, well I could just say, ‘I’ll release them when I’m no longer under audit. ‘Cause I’ll never not be under audit.’”These days, the Trump Organization faces criminal tax fraud charges. Together with Ivanka, Don Jr and Eric, his children from his first marriage, Trump is also being sued for fraud by Letitia James, the New York attorney general.As a younger reporter, Haberman did two stints at the New York Post, Rupert Murdoch’s flagship US tabloid. Murdoch’s succession plans – it’s Lachlan, he told Trump – appear in Confidence Man. So does Tucker Carlson, the headline-making Fox News host and kindred spirit to Vladimir Putin.Trump made up audit excuse for not releasing tax returns on the fly, new book saysRead moreAccording to Haberman, Carlson met Kushner and demanded Trump commute Roger Stone’s conviction for perjury.“What happened to Roger Stone should never happen to anyone in this country of any political party,” Carlson reportedly thundered, threatening to go public.Stone has since emerged as a central figure in the January 6 insurrection. Apparently, he has a thing for violence. For some Republicans, a commitment to “law and order” is elastic.When it comes to the attempt to overturn the election and the Capitol attack it fueled, Trump’s fate rests with prosecutors in Washington DC and Fulton county, Georgia.That old campaign chant from 2016, “Lock her up”? It carries its own irony.
Confidence Man: The Making of Donald Trump and the Breaking of America is published in the US by Penguin Random House
TopicsBooksDonald TrumpTrump administrationUS politicsRepublicansUS elections 2016US elections 2020reviewsReuse this content More

Iranian American held in Tehran for seven years granted temporary releaseSiamak Namazi, convicted along with father on espionage charges, freed from Evin prison on one-week renewable furlough An Iranian American businessman who has been imprisoned in Iran for nearly seven years has been released from Tehran’s Evin prison on a one-week, renewable furlough, the United Nations announced on Saturday.The release of detainee Siamak Namazi comes as his father, Baquer Namazi, is being allowed to leave Iran for medical treatment, UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said in a statement. ‘Women are in charge. They are leading’: Iran protests continue despite crackdownsRead more“The [UN] secretary general is grateful that, following his appeals to the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, our former colleague Baquer Namazi has been permitted to leave Iran for medical treatment abroad,” Dujarric said.Baquer Namazi is the ex-governor of Iran’s Khuzestan province and former representative of what was originally known as the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef).“The secretary general is also pleased to learn that Baquer Namazi’s son, Siamak Namazi, has been released from detention,” Dujarric continued. “We will continue to engage with the Iranian authorities on a range of important issues, including the regional situation, sustainable development and the promotion and protection of human rights.”Baquer Namazi was convicted in Iran of “collaboration with a hostile government” in 2016 and sentenced to 10 years in prison. Iranian authorities released him on medical grounds in 2018 and closed his case in 2020, commuting his sentence to time served but effectively barring him from leaving the country.His son, Siamak, was convicted of the same charge and has been held in Evin prison since 2015. The US government has described the charges against both as baseless.It was unclear if Siamak’s furlough might be a step toward his full release. It was also not clear whether it signals the possible furlough or release of other US citizens detained in Iran.“I am thrilled for the Namazi family that for the first time in seven years Siamak Namazi is sleeping at home with his family,” the attorney who represents the Namazi family, Jared Genser, told Reuters.Genser added that Siamak Namazi was staying with his parents at their Tehran apartment.“This is a critical first step but of course we will not rest until the entire family is able to return to the United States and their long nightmare is finally over,” Genser also said.Their release coincides with the height of intense protests against the Iranian regime following the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old woman who was allegedly beaten by Iran’s morality police over headscarf laws.Iran’s semi-official news agency Nournews on Saturday reported that a regional country has helped Iran and the US mediate for the “simultaneous release of prisoners,” shortly after Tehran allowed Siamak Namazi out of prison on a one-week furlough.“In recent weeks, intensive talks, with the mediation of a regional country were held for the release of Iranian and American prisoners,” the news agency said, without disclosing which country was the mediator.The news agency also said that billions of dollars of Iranian assets frozen by US sanctions would “be released soon”.Iran said in August it was ready to swap prisoners with the United States after the American secretary of state, Antony Blinken, tweeted that “Siamak Namazi had now spent 2,500 days wrongfully detained” in Iran. According to Blinken, Washington was determined to secure the freedom of all Americans held by its Middle East adversary.Tehran has sought the release of a dozen Iranians held in the United States, including seven Iranian-American dual nationals, two Iranians with permanent US residency and four Iranian citizens with no legal status in the United States.Reuters contributed reportingTopicsIranUS politicsMiddle East and north AfricaUS foreign policynewsReuse this content More

Abbott and O’Rourke clash on abortion and immigration in Texas debateDemocratic challenger aiming to wrest governorship away from rightwing Abbott in November election Immigration, abortion and border security all came up in Friday’s contentious, rapid-paced gubernatorial debate in Texas, where Beto O’Rourke is trying to help the Democrats wrest back the far-right leaning state from Greg Abbott and the Republicans.Uvalde families stand with Beto O’Rourke amid Republican silence on gun reformRead moreTopicsTexasUS politicsBeto O’RourkeGreg AbbottReuse this content More

Uvalde families stand with Beto O’Rourke amid Republican silence on gun reformFamilies of those killed in May school shooting support Democrat in race against Texas governor Greg Abbott A small photo of Jacklyn Casarez, one of the children killed during the school massacre in Uvalde, Texas, in May, graced the front of a greeting card held by Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke, who visited a Rio Grande Valley park Friday morning before the one and only staged debate with incumbent governor Greg Abbott.“Maybe you don’t consider yourself a political person,” Kimberly Rubio, whose 10-year-old daughter Lexi was also killed in the 24 May shooting at Robb elementary, said Friday during a pre-debate news conference.TopicsTexasBeto O’RourkeGreg AbbottTexas school shootingUS politicsDemocratsRepublicansnewsReuse this content More

Gun reformers feel history is on their side despite bleak outlook in CongressThe few Republican supporters of gun restrictions have faced backlash from the party faithful When Joe Biden signed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act into law this summer, he and congressional Democrats celebrated the enactment of the first significant gun control policy in decades in the US.The US president also acknowledged that the law, a bipartisan compromise brokered after the Uvalde tragedy that left 19 children and two adults dead, did not go nearly far enough to address the devastation caused by gun violence.“I know there’s much more work to do, and I’m never going to give up,” Biden said in June.Although Democrats and activists agree that much more needs to be done to combat gun violence, legislative progress on this lightning-rod issue could soon become even more difficult. With crucial midterm elections looming, the prospect of meaningful progress on gun reform now looks unlikely – despite widespread domestic revulsion at continuing gun violence and bafflement overseas at the US gun problem.If Republicans regain control of the House of Representatives after the midterm elections this November, as they are favored to do, proposed gun regulations will probably be dead on arrival in Congress. Despite those obstacles, anti–gun violence activists and their allies on Capitol Hill insist they are not giving up on their goal to see more desperately needed change in the months and years to come.The Democratic senator Chris Murphy, who played a leading role in negotiations over the BSCA, said on Tuesday that he considers the law to be proof of potential bipartisan cooperation on gun regulations.The compromise secured by Murphy and the Republican senator John Cornyn expanded background checks for firearm buyers under the age of 21, and it enacted new gun restrictions for those previously convicted on domestic violence charges. The legislation also provided financial incentives for states to enact “red-flag laws”, which help keep guns away from those deemed to be a danger to themselves or others, and it provided funding for more mental health services to children and families.Speaking at an event in Washington organized by the Common Ground Committee, Murphy credited the anti–gun violence movement and an engaged citizenry in forcing Congress to finally act nearly a decade after the shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school in his home state of Connecticut.“The reason that we found common ground this summer is because the American public had had enough of inaction,” Murphy said at George Washington University. “While Sandy Hook shook this country to the core, it’s really been the cumulative impact of mass shooting after mass shooting, as well as suicides and homicides continuing to spiral upward, that brought the public to a point this summer where they just weren’t willing to accept Congress retreating to their corners.”But while the passage of the BSCA offered some hope for supporters of stricter gun laws, the negotiation process also displayed the sharp partisan divides on this polarizing issue. Just 14 House Republicans supported the bill, while 193 opposed it. After playing a leading role in the negotiations over the bill, Cornyn was booed and heckled at a Republican convention in his home state of Texas.Former Republican congressman Will Hurd, who joined Murphy at Tuesday’s event, acknowledged the political pressure that members of his party face from some voters when they back new gun restrictions. Nodding to the widespread public support that policies like universal background checks and a higher age limit for gun purchases enjoy, Hurd encouraged his former colleagues to take proactive steps to prevent future tragedies.“This is something that people want to see happen and so don’t be afraid of some of these issues that might have had a different political constituency in the 90s,” Hurd told reporters after the event. He added, “It always requires political courage to do something that’s difficult and that is not embraced by everybody.”As of now, House Republicans have shown little interest in taking up new gun regulations if they regain control of the chamber in November. Even if Democrats retain control of the Senate, Republicans would be able to block any gun control bill in the House if they have the majority.But Hurd, who previously represented the Uvalde community in the House, said political pressure could change the calculus for Republican lawmakers if a similar tragedy occurs again.“If a terrible action like this happens in the future and there’s not going to be a response, I think you’re going to see a public backlash,” Hurd said.That grim possibility is a near certainty in the US, as Tuesday’s event vividly demonstrated. One audience member who posed a question to Murphy and Hurd said that he was a survivor of the Highland Park shooting, which left seven people dead. The attack unfolded just days after Biden signed the BSCA into law.In the face of such tragedy, anti–gun violence activists have doubled down on their commitment to push for more reform, regardless of who controls Congress after November.Murphy echoed that commitment, even as he conceded that Congress was unlikely to pass another gun control bill this year. Praising the anti–gun violence community as “one of the great social change movements in the history of this nation,” Murphy said he and his allies were just getting started.“All of those great social change movements that you read about in the history books, they failed a whole bunch of times before they ever changed the world,” Murphy said. “My hope is based upon the history books, which tell you – when your cause is right and you choose not to give up, in this country, in a democracy – you eventually prevail.”TopicsUS gun controlGun crimeUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

What’s Prison For? Concise diagnosis of a huge American problem Bill Keller, once editor of the New York Times, now with the Marshall Project, shows how the US came to imprison so many of its citizens, disproportionately Black and brown, and how such a gross injustice might yet be addressedThe statistics are familiar but remain startling: America’s incarceration rate per 100,000 is “roughly twice that of Russia’s and Iran’s, four times that of Mexico’s, five times of England’s, six times Canada’s” and nine times that of Germany. In addition, “parole and probation regulate the lives of 4.5 million Americans” – more than twice as many as are confined in prison.We Are Proud Boys review: chilling exposé illuminates Republicans’ fascist turnRead moreThese numbers come at the beginning of Bill Keller’s smart, short new book, in which he tries to explain how America became so addicted to mass incarceration, and how we might finally reform a system which houses a disproportionally Black and brown population.Keller is a veteran journalist who won a Pulitzer for his first New York Times posting as a foreign correspondent, in Moscow as the Soviet Union collapsed. He went on to be executive editor and then a columnist, but in 30 years, criminal justice was never one of his specialties. That all changed when Neil Barsky, a journalist turned investor turned philanthropist, tapped Keller to be founding editor of The Marshall Project, an ambitious effort to produce great journalism about the “causes and consequences” of mass incarceration.Keller’s book highlights many of the best pieces by Marshall Project reporters, but he also uses plenty of his own reporting to illuminate this particularly dark side of American democracy.The “good news”: the incarcerated population has actually been in slow and steady decline, from a peak of 2.3 million in 2008 to 1.8 million in 2020, including an unprecedented drop of 14% spurred by early releases because of Covid.America’s unfortunate exceptionalism on this subject is actually a fairly recent development. From the 1920s through the 1970s, the rate of incarceration mostly held steady at around 110 out of every 100,000 Americans. But it is nearly 500 today.Liberals and conservatives were equally responsible. A Democratic House speaker, Thomas “Tip” O’Neill, sharply overreacted to the crack cocaine overdose of Len Bias, a Boston Celtics draftee, pushing through the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, “which imposed mandatory sentences, asset forfeitures and outlandishly severe sanctions on crack cocaine” favored by Black ghetto residents, while white consumers of powdered cocaine faced much more lenient penalties.As Keller writes, “Rehabilitation was denigrated on the right as coddling”. But a Democratic Senate judiciary committee chairman, Joseph R Biden of Delaware, made everything much worse by championing the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which not only spurred a prison-building boom but also eliminated Pell Grants for prisoners enrolled in college courses. President Biden has acknowledged his mistake.It was President Reagan who inserted the profit motive into the prison business, allowing the Corrections Corporation of America to pioneer “the idea of privately run, for-profit prisons”. As Keller explains, “Since the new prison owners were paid the same way as hotel proprietors, by occupancy, they had no incentive to prepare prisoners for release.” Private prisons now house about 7% of state inmates and 17% of federal.Keller makes an unintentional argument for sending more Republicans to jail, by pointing out that three of the more unlikely advocates of prison reform are Republican officials who ended up in prison.Patrick Nolan was the minority leader of the California assembly when, in 1993, he was indicted on charges of racketeering and extortion. He served 25 months in a federal prison near San Francisco. When he was paroled, he was recruited by Charles Colson, a famous Watergate felon from Nixon’s White House who found religion “shortly before serving seven months himself in a federal prison”.Colson campaigned for more humane treatment of prisoners. Nolan became director of a new Center for Criminal Justice Reform at the American Conservative Union Foundation. Meanwhile, Bernard Kerik, Rudy Giuliani’s police commissioner who then did three years in federal prison for tax fraud and other crimes, became an advocate for voting rights for ex-felons.It’s not all good news. By the end of Trump administration, Nolan had succumbed to a rightwing conspiracy theory that “billionaire George Soros was masterminding a ‘Trojan horse’ strategy to elect soft-on-crime prosecutors and bring down the entire criminal justice system”.Keller points to Norway and Germany as providing the best examples for systemic reform. While American prison guards rarely get more than a few weeks of training, Germans get two years of college courses in psychology, ethics and communication. American visitors to German jails are amazed to see unarmed guards “shooting baskets, playing chess, sharing lunch” and having conversations with prisoners.One reason Europe is so far ahead is its depoliticization of the criminal justice system: judges and district attorneys are appointed, not elected.A Fordham University professor, John Pfaff, has pointed out that in the US, during the 1990s and 2000s, “as violent crime and arrests for violent crime both declined, the number of felony cases in state courts” suddenly shot up. Because of political pressures, “tens of thousands more prosecutors” were hired, “even after the rising crime of the 1980s had stalled out”.A Question of Standing review: how the CIA undermined American authorityRead morePfaff attributed the racial inequality in numbers of prisoners to “an imbalance of political power – tough-on-crime prosecutors elected by suburban whites who see the community destruction of mass incarceration from a distance”.Keller reports the most effective ways to reduce the prison population are also the most obvious ones:
Make low-level drug crimes “non-crimes”.
Divert people into “mental health and addiction programs, or probation or community service”.
“Abolish mandatory minimum sentences and encourage” judges to “apply the least severe punishment appropriate under the circumstances”.
Give “compassionate release to old and infirm inmates” who don’t pose a real threat to the general population.
The challenge is to get these common-sense ideas to prevail over the rhetoric of politicians who still rail against anyone who is “soft on crime” – the knee-jerk ideology which got us into this catastrophe in the first place.
What’s Prison For? Punishment and Rehabilitation in the Age of Mass Incarceration is published in the US by Columbia Global Reports
TopicsBooksUS prisonsUS crimeUS domestic policyUS politicsPolitics booksRacereviewsReuse this content More

Michigan man charged with shooting elderly woman in abortion altercationRichard Harvey, 74, says he ‘accidentally’ shot Joan Jacobson, 84, as she campaigned on his doorstep but faces assault charges Michigan authorities have filed criminal charges against a man accused of shooting an elderly woman campaigning against abortion rights in the shoulder while she argued with his wife last week.Richard Alan Harvey, 74, had publicly claimed it was an accident when he shot the 84-year-old woman. But prosecutors from Ionia county, Michigan, charged him on Friday with one count each of assault with felonious assault, careless discharge of a gun causing injury, and reckless use of a firearm in a case that appears to serve as an extreme example of how heated the debate surrounding abortion in the US can become.According to investigators, the woman who was shot was volunteering with an organization named Right to Life and going door-to-door asking voters to oppose Michigan’s protecting abortion rights during a ballot measure in November when she went to Harvey’s home near Lake Odessa on 20 September.Harvey later told the local television news station WOOD that the woman, Joan Jacobson, was arguing with his wife, who supports abortion rights. The couple told Jacobson she was trespassing and she should leave, but Jacobson refused, according to what Harvey told WOOD.Harvey eventually emerged from a barn at his home with a .22-caliber rifle belonging to his wife, aimed at a pine tree out front and fired a warning shot. Then, “without thinking”, he said, he tried to use the rifle to “club” away a clipboard that the volunteer was holding, fearing she would hit Harvey’s wife with it.According to Harvey, one of his fingers accidentally pulled the rifle’s trigger, and the ensuing shot hit the volunteer in the right shoulder.“It went off,” Harvey said of the rifle he had pulled. “It was an accident.”Jacobson received medical treatment for her wound after driving herself to a nearby police department. She told WOOD that she was peaceful throughout the confrontation with Harvey and his wife, Sharon. Jacobson said she was walking away when she was alarmed to see Harvey coming up to her while holding a rifle.“The thing that I noticed the most was that he had a gun, and it was a big gun,” Jacobson said to WOOD. “It was [a] long barrel and by the time that registered in my brain, I heard a shot and I felt some pain.”Authorities did not immediately charge Harvey with a crime. But that changed after an investigation from Michigan state police and the Ionia county prosecutor’s office.The most serious of the charges against Harvey was felonious assault, which can carry up to four years in prison upon conviction.A judge arraigned Harvey on Friday. His bail was set at $10,000.The US supreme court’s 1973 decision titled Roe v Wade established federal abortion rights. But, in June, the supreme court’s current conservative majority voted to repeal those rights and let states individually decide whether abortion should be legal in their jurisdictions.The legislatures of many states have since implemented restrictive abortion bans without putting the issue to voters. Michigan, for its part, is letting voters decide on 8 November whether abortion rights should be protected in their state constitution.Michigan’s abortion referendum is coming after 730,000 of the state’s residents signed a petition requesting a vote.TopicsMichiganAbortionUS politicsUS crimenewsReuse this content More