Prisons and Prisoners

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Inside the Unfounded Claim That DeSantis Abused Guantánamo Detainees

      by

      A former prisoner’s story of mistreatment at the hands of Ron DeSantis made headlines. But The New York Times found no evidence to back it up.Nearly a year ago, as Ron DeSantis’s political stock was rising, a former Guantánamo Bay detainee came forward with a stunning claim: Before he was Florida’s governor, as a young Navy lawyer, Mr. DeSantis had taken part in a forced feeding of a hunger striker at the notorious American prison, and laughed as he did so.The detainee, Mansoor Adayfi, said he was tied to a chair, crying and screaming as tubes were shoved down his throat and cases of the dietary supplement Ensure were pumped into his stomach.As the ordeal drew to an end, Mr. Adayfi added, he was approached by Mr. DeSantis and, “he said, ‘You should eat.’ I threw up in his face. Literally on his face.”Mr. Adayfi told his story on a left-wing podcast, then in Harper’s Magazine and then again in mainstream media reports. He found other former detainees who also claimed to remember Mr. DeSantis and his cruelty. The accounts traveled quickly through the liberal media ecosystem, landing in Democratic opposition research and coalescing into a narrative that portrayed the Republican presidential candidate as an accessory to torture.Yet, an examination of military records and interviews with detainees’ lawyers and service members who served at the same time as Mr. DeSantis found no evidence to back up the claims. The New York Times interviewed more than 40 people who served with Mr. DeSantis or around the same time and none recalled witnessing or even hearing of any episodes like the ones Mr. Adayfi described.Instead, nearly all of those interviewed dismissed the story as highly improbable. Mr. DeSantis was a junior officer, who visited only for short stints and was tasked with what one fellow lawyer described as “scut work.” He would have had no reason to witness, and no power to authorize, a force feeding, according to the officer who supervised Mr. DeSantis at Guantánamo. Even senior lawyers were not allowed near force feedings, according to the commandant of the prison guards at the time.“He was just too junior and too inexperienced and too green to have had any substantial role,” said Morris D. Davis, a retired Air Force colonel, who served as chief prosecutor of Guantánamo cases the year that Mr. DeSantis visited the prison.Mr. Adayfi, through his lawyer, declined to comment.When asked by reporters, Mr. DeSantis has twice denied the accusations. But the candidate, who wears his loathing for “corporate media” as a badge of honor, has declined to be interviewed about his service on the base and his campaign has refused to release records — including dates of his travel — that might directly contradict the accusation. The governor’s personnel records have been redacted to hide details.Such secrecy is embedded at Guantánamo, where even routine information has been kept from the public for years. But Mr. Adayfi’s claims highlight how a generation of secrecy at the isolated island prison, coupled with a fiercely partisan media climate, can allow specious accusations to circulate unchecked.A culture of secrecy at the isolated island prison, coupled with a fiercely partisan media climate, can allow specious accusations to circulate unchecked.Todd Heisler/The New York TimesScut WorkMr. DeSantis first arrived at the base in 2006, a turbulent time at the prison. The year began with hunger strikes to protest conditions. In June, three detainees were found dead hanging in their cells. Three months later, the Central Intelligence Agency delivered the men accused of plotting the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to a secret prison on the base.Mr. DeSantis, who turned 28 in September that year, was a lieutenant in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps, in a role akin to that of a first-year associate at a law firm. He and several other lawyers were dispatched there for one- and two-week stints, as part of a program to give them their first up-close look at a complex military operation.The program was considered “sightseeing to get some officer experience,” and regularly involved making copies, collating binders and administrative duties, according to one Navy lawyer who was there around the same time. Another lawyer who served in the program described their role as “glorified runners.”Mr. DeSantis is remembered by his peers for winning over senior officers with an assertive confidence that struck some as brusque and cocky. At work, he was known as “Ron Possible” — a not-always-complimentary reference to his willingness to jump on any task. Outside the office, he was a fitness buff who sometimes ran shirtless in the Caribbean heat.“We would constantly have to remind him, ‘Hey, put a shirt on,’” said Joseph Hickman, a former soldier who served as a guard at a checkpoint to the detention center. “You would notice him coming in. He was a good-looking guy.”The Times contacted over 20 lawyers who served during the period when Mr. DeSantis was traveling between Guantánamo and Naval Station Mayport in Jacksonville, Fla., where he was stationed. Most spoke on the condition of anonymity either because they continue to serve in government and are not authorized to speak to the media or because they did not want to be publicly associated with the prison.Only Capt. Patrick McCarthy, a retired Navy officer who at the time was the top lawyer at the base, was familiar with Mr. DeSantis’s specific assignments there. Captain McCarthy said Mr. DeSantis made “several” visits. He would have interacted with detainees only for discrete tasks, he said, such as confirming that a detainee did not want to see his defense lawyer.“Ron DeSantis was never in a position to witness the enteral feeding of detainees, or in the position to participate in an enteral feeding,” Captain McCarthy said, referring to force feeding. “Nor was he in the position to witness or participate in the mistreatment of any detainees.”Even more senior lawyers would not, as a rule, have been present at force feedings, which were administered by medical staff. “There is no way in the world that could have occurred,” said Col. Mike Bumgarner, who is now retired from the Army and oversaw all prison guards at the time. “They would have never let a lawyer there.”The details of Mr. Adayfi’s account sometimes vary. In one version, he vomited on both Mr. DeSantis and a cultural adviser. Zak Ghuneim, the prison’s cultural adviser at the time, called the story a complete fiction.“If someone vomited on me, I would remember it now and until the day I died,” he said.Mr. DeSantis has rarely talked at length about his role at the base — he speaks more frequently about his next posting as a legal adviser for a SEAL team in Iraq. But he has at least once suggested he had a bigger role than now described by his superiors and peers.In a 2018 interview, while running for governor, he called himself a “legal adviser.” When asked what the job involved, he said that hunger strikes were among the ways detainees “would wage jihad” from prison.Mr. DeSantis was among the most junior members of the legal staff in a program designed to give them their first up-close look at a complex military operation.U.S. NavyHe then shifted to the third person: “The commander wants to know how do I combat this. So one of the jobs of the legal adviser would be like, ‘Hey, you actually can force feed.’”Allegations SurfaceAfter being released and resettled in Serbia in 2016, Mr. Adayfi emerged as a prolific activist and chronicler of life at the prison. He wrote about a friendship he had at Guantánamo with “a beautiful young lady, an iguana,” for the “Modern Love” column in The New York Times. On social media, he posted selfies wearing T-shirts and baseball caps in jumpsuit orange.In his memoir, “Don’t Forget Us Here,” he wrote at length about the hunger strikes.The military responded to the strikes with forced feeding — strapping detainees to chairs and snaking feeding tubes up their noses and down their throats. Military officials argue the practice was used to save detainees’ lives. United Nations human rights investigators have criticized the way the U.S. military treated hunger strikers, finding that forced feeding “can amount to torture” if it involves violence or psychological coercion.In his 2021 memoir, Mr. Adayfi, a Yemeni national brought to the prison in 2002, appears to place his forced feeding at the end of 2005, before Mr. DeSantis arrived at Guantánamo. He makes no mention of the governor or anyone who might resemble him. However, he acknowledges that details became murky during his years in prison. In the fall of 2022, Mike Prysner, a former soldier and left-wing activist who hosts an antiwar podcast, “Eyes Left,” decided to look into the military record of the governor, who he viewed as “kind of an evil guy,” he said.He soon came across a since-deleted tweet in which Mr. Adayfi raised his accusations after recognizing Mr. DeSantis from news coverage, Mr. Prysner said.When Mr. Adayfi told his story on the podcast, said Mr. DeSantis first came to the prisoners asking if they had been treated humanely and then laughed as they were force-fed and beaten.“He was one of the people that supervised the torture, the abuses, the beatings. All the time at Guantánamo,” Mr. Adayfi said. “I’m telling Americans: this guy is a torturer. He is a criminal.”Mansoor Adayfi, a former Guantánamo Bay detainee, has emerged as a prolific activist and chronicler of life at the prison.Salwan Georges/The Washington Post, via Getty ImagesMr. Adayfi also looked to find other detainees who could place Mr. DeSantis at Guantánamo. He posted a picture of the governor to a WhatsApp group chat with other detainees. “Everyone was responding like, ‘I hate this guy,’” said Mr. Prysner, who viewed images of the messages. “That’s how they realized DeSantis was a big figure in this.”Excerpts from the podcast were reprinted in the March issue of Harper’s. Weeks later, Mr. Adayfi’s accusations were featured in articles first in The Miami Herald and then The Washington Post. Both reports noted that the claims were not verified.They also included the account of a second detainee, Abdul Ahmed Aziz, who had seen the governor’s picture in the WhatsApp group, according to Mr. Prysner.Mr. Aziz did not respond to multiple requests for comment.In his accounts, Mr. Aziz did not connect Mr. DeSantis to forced feeding. He claimed the young lieutenant was one of the investigators who showed up at the prison the night three detainees died in June 2006. The timing spawned theories about Mr. DeSantis’s involvement in a report on the deaths, which some believe the military has not properly explained.Mr. DeSantis’s redacted military records do not indicate whether he was there that night. But one military lawyer who was traveling between Florida and the base at the time said he was certain Mr. DeSantis was not. Captain McCarthy concurred, though he said Mr. DeSantis “likely participated in activities related to the follow-up investigation, which lasted for months.”One thing the records did reveal: Mr. DeSantis’s time at the detention center was so limited he was not awarded a medal given to service members who spent 30 consecutive days there or more than two months over multiple visits in a single year.In May, Mr. Adayfi gave Mr. Prysner recordings of a third detainee, an anonymous man who claimed Mr. DeSantis supervised force feedings and “torture.”That same month a Vice News documentary featuring the claims from Mr. Adayfi and other former detainees was shelved by Paramount, which was supposed to have run it on its Showtime network. Paramount declined to comment on the decision.As these stories swirled, Mr. DeSantis shot down the accusation with brief denials.In an interview with Piers Morgan on Fox Nation in March, he said: “I was a junior officer. I didn’t have authority to authorize anything.”The following month, Mr. DeSantis was asked about Mr. Adayfi’s specific allegations during a news conference and similarly dismissed them, this time blasting the news media for amplifying where he called “B.S.”“Focus on the facts and stop worrying about narrative,” he said. More

    • 88 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Compassionate Release for Those Aging Behind Bars

      by

      More from our inbox:Living Well, and Pursuing One’s Passion, With Parkinson’sThe ‘Absurd Contradictions’ of the Migrant SystemA Civilized Argument A Debate QuestionCecilia CarlstedtTo the Editor: Re “Inside a Dementia Unit in a Federal Prison” (Opinion guest essay, Aug. 13):Katie Engelhart vividly describes the absurdity and cruelty of incarcerating frail elders with debilitating dementia. It would be a mistake, though, to conclude simply that expanding compassionate release is the answer. Certainly, that’s warranted, but policymakers should be proactive, not just reactive.As a former parole commissioner, I know that dementia is just the tip of the iceberg of the problem of mass aging behind bars.Countless people (not just men) effectively face a slow death penalty behind bars because of extreme sentences or repeated denials of parole release despite these individuals’ complete transformations. Far from being helpless, many are violence interrupters, mentors, scholars and artists, including people previously convicted of causing serious harm. They have changed.Enacting elder parole bills, which do not guarantee release based on age but rather allow older adults to be individually considered for release by a parole board, can help resolve the crisis of aging behind bars, save substantial money, and return people to the community to repair the harm they long ago caused — before they are on death’s doorstep.Carol ShapiroNew YorkTo the Editor:Dementia units in prisons should primarily serve as a conduit to helping achieve compassionate release. As physicians volunteering with the Medical Justice Alliance, we review the medical care of numerous patients with dementia who are undiagnosed and untreated in the prison system. Patients wake up unsure why they are in prison, hoping that President Nixon might pardon them.We must consider the high cost of normalizing the imprisonment of elderly patients with dementia. Financially, developing “dementia-friendly” prison units incurs significant costs; that money could instead be used to improve community resources such as nursing facilities. Ethically, we must grapple with punishing people who do not pose a threat to others and are unable to understand why they are being punished.Compassionate release laws at the state and federal levels should make dementia an explicit criterion for early release. Facilities should also screen older patients for dementia on a regular basis and develop protocols for requesting compassionate release and expediting placement in memory care facilities. The U.S. prison population is aging and change is urgently needed.Caitlin FarrellNicole MusheroWilliam WeberTo the Editor:As a person who has served three federal prison terms for antiwar protests for a total of almost three years, I found myself shaking my head that the Federal Bureau of Prisons maintains Federal Medical Center Devens to hold men with dementia.The essay noted that most of the men in the dementia unit have no memories of their crimes or why they are incarcerated, yet few are deemed eligible for compassionate release. The United States incarcerates nearly two million people in our thousands of jails and prisons. The U.S. prison system is primitive, lacks redemption and only metes out punishment. The term rehabilitation is simply not part of this cruel system.In my time in more than a half dozen federal prisons, I never met a man I would not have to my home as a dinner guest. Our jails and prisons are filled mostly with people convicted of nonviolent crimes. Many — perhaps the majority — of incarcerated people are poor, mentally ill or substance abusers. Most need medical treatment, not incarceration.I agree with F.M.C. Devens’s clinical director, Dr. Patricia Ruze, who thinks it would be “totally appropriate” to release the whole unit on compassionate grounds and relocate the men to community nursing homes.I’d go one step further: Let’s release all nonviolent people from prison with appropriate community support to help them prosper and avoid recidivism, as well as offer programs of human uplift to the remaining prisoners using the money we save by closing the prisons we will no longer need.Patrick O’NeillGarner, N.C.Living Well, and Pursuing One’s Passion, With Parkinson’sThe pianist Nicolas Hodges has continued to perform and record — with alterations and tough decisions — after receiving a Parkinson’s disease diagnosis.Roderick Aichinger for The New York TimesTo the Editor: Re “Pianist Adapts His Life to Parkinson’s” (Arts & Leisure, Aug. 13):Thank you for demonstrating how the pianist Nicolas Hodges is adapting to life with Parkinson’s disease. Mr. Hodges is testament to the fact that it is possible to continue to live well with Parkinson’s, and the article highlights two key ways to manage symptoms: consistently taking medications (dopamine) and reducing commitments or stress. Exercise and physical activity are also critical to managing symptoms.Recent research published by the Parkinson’s Foundation shows that the number of people in the U.S. diagnosed with Parkinson’s annually has increased by 50 percent, from approximately 60,000 to 90,000. This means that every six minutes, someone in the U.S. is diagnosed with the disease and may encounter similar challenges to those faced by Mr. Hodges.Further funding to support research and drug development are needed in order to find a cure, and the Parkinson’s Foundation and other organizations work tirelessly to advance this.In the meantime, we applaud Mr. Hodges for speaking about his experience with the disease and continuing to pursue his passion. Play on, Mr. Hodges.John L. LehrNew YorkThe writer is president and C.E.O. of the Parkinson’s Foundation.The ‘Absurd Contradictions’ of the Migrant SystemTo the Editor: We have millions of square feet of office space no longer being used and tens of thousands of homeless people and displaced immigrants needing shelter. Many employers cannot fill open jobs while the talents and proven determination of immigrants sit untapped in detention.We can strengthen our economy and confirm our commitment to human dignity and decency by correcting these absurd contradictions.It would be far more cost-effective to use the migrant detention system funds to create a system where people can be quickly helped and trained to be productive contributors to society instead of expensive drains on us all.Even if common decency is not a motivation, pure selfish economic need dictates that we end the waste and do the right thing.Michael E. MakoverGreat Neck, N.Y.A Civilized Argument Christopher Smith for The New York TimesTo the Editor: Re “Imagining the Face-Off in Trump’s Jan. 6 Case,” by David French (column, Aug. 12):I started feeling odd as I read Mr. French’s column. It was so quiet! Two measured, rational voices speaking through the ink, each backing up their arguments with researchable references and free of bitter, ad hominem jabs. A few bits of pique and tooth grinding to humanize both the defense and the prosecution, but all for the sake of clarifying a complex position.How civilized! How rare! It’s a shame that the essay was the voice of one man working his careful way through a thicket of legal complexity and not a real-life exchange of ideas in search of a mutually arrived at truth.Leslie BellDavenport, IowaA Debate QuestionTo the Editor: At the Republican debate I would like to see the moderator ask each of the participants if as president they would pardon Donald Trump if he is convicted of federal crimes.Walter RonaghanHarrison, N.Y. More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      A President Governing From Behind Bars?!

      by

      Watching the torrent of invective and megalomania pouring from Donald Trump on Tuesday after his arraignment for a second time, what struck me was not so much the falsehoods as the desperation.“I am the only one that can save this nation,” Trump declared. He spoke of “the most evil and heinous abuse of power in the history of our country” — meaning his own “persecution.” He denounced the special counsel, Jack Smith, as “deranged.”Trump’s delirium didn’t seem to energize either him or the crowd, however, and this classic con man has seemed to shrink under prosecutorial scrutiny. It was difficult to avoid thinking of other leaders I’ve covered over the decades when they were scrambling to avoid prison; under investigation, they deflated before our eyes. Now the net is tightening around Trump.An absurd question keeps nagging at me: Could an inmate in a federal prison get a leave to attend his own presidential inauguration?I wonder about that because Trump seems to be moving simultaneously in two opposing and irreconcilable directions. First, it seems increasingly plausible that he will become the first former president to be convicted of a felony. Second, he also seems increasingly likely to win the Republican nomination for president, with the betting markets also giving him about a 22 percent chance of going on and actually being elected president.Any defendant must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. But some smart lawyers believe that for Trump, the “peril is extreme,” as one former federal prosecutor put it. Trump’s own attorney general William Barr said, “If even half of it is true, then he’s toast.”Trump could, of course, catch a break. The evidence from his own lawyer could be declared inadmissible in trial, or maybe the trial judge will allow stalling tactics by the defense, or maybe a die-hard sympathizer on the Florida jury will refuse to convict. But Trump could eventually be indicted in four separate criminal cases, and with so many cases swirling about, the odds increase that he may find himself convicted of at least some felonies.He would be a first offender, and it’s not certain that he would do prison time. Officials so far have been very deferential toward Trump: He hasn’t been handcuffed or subjected to a mug shot.Still, deference may end upon conviction, and defendants in less serious cases have ended up with substantial prison sentences. Just this month, a former Air Force officer was sentenced to three years in prison for keeping classified documents — and he had pleaded guilty and thus presumably received leniency. And during Trump’s presidency, Reality Winner leaked a single document and was sentenced to more than five years in prison.Even if Trump is convicted and imprisoned, he could continue to run for office and even presumably hold the office of president, if he isn’t too busy in the prison factory making license plates. Eugene Debs, the socialist candidate, famously ran for president from federal prison in 1920, receiving almost one million votes.I guess accommodations could be made so that prison officials didn’t listen in on phone conversations between federal inmate No. 62953-804 and Chinese and Russian leaders. Perhaps summits could be held in a larger cell? State banquets in the prison dining hall?One low-level precedent: Joel Caston, while serving a sentence for murder, was elected in 2021 to be an advisory neighborhood commissioner in Washington, D.C. But that’s an unpaid two-year advisory position, a bit different from the presidency.If Trump is both incarcerated and elected president, perhaps his cabinet could invoke the 25th Amendment and declare him unable to serve. But Trump presumably would carefully choose cabinet members who would never do that. Alternatively, maybe if elected, would he try to pardon himself?Is it conceivable that voters would actually choose as president a man who had been convicted of felonies, or was about to be? It seems hard to believe, but I also thought Trump was unelectable in 2016. It’s notable that as the legal cases against Trump have gained ground this year he has also risen in Republican polling.A plausible guess, based in part on the latest polling since the federal indictment, is that prosecutions could help him in the Republican primaries while hurting him in the general election. Looking ahead, news organizations must not drop the ball as they did in 2016, giving Trump a platform without adequately fact-checking him. We should enable democracy, not empower an antidemocratic demagogue.All in all, I think Trump is going down. But my nightmare is that the United States slips into a recession that voters blame on President Biden, that there is a Middle East crisis that raises oil and gas prices and that there is a third-party candidate who draws more votes from Biden than from Trump. Or perhaps Biden has a health crisis and the Democratic nominee is Kamala Harris, who I fear would be a substantially weaker candidate. In short, Trump’s election as president seems unlikely, but not impossible — and the consequences could be catastrophic.A sitting president governing from behind bars? It’s utterly unimaginable — right? The uncertainty speaks to a tragedy for our nation.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com. More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      The Root Cause of Violent Crime Is Not What We Think It Is

      by

      There is a prevailing narrative about crime that positions bad people as the problem and toughness — in the form of police and prisons — as the solution. It’s emotionally powerful, enough to make politicians allocate money for more cops and more jails in order to avoid being labeled weak, or worse, pro-crime. The recent decision by Mayor Eric Adams of New York to get more homeless mentally ill people involuntarily committed — which shocked even the N.Y.P.D. — is just the latest example.But policies like this have little if any effect on violent crime, in part because they do not address what causes the problem.The 2022 midterm elections, in which the Republican Party poured considerable sums into a tough-on-crime message and did far worse than expected, offers hope that change is at last possible. Candidates with the courage to do so can run — and win — on a promise to reduce the causes of violence, addressing it before it occurs instead of just punishing it when the damage is already done.If throwing money at police and prisons made us safer, we would probably already be the safest country in the history of the world. We are not, because insufficient punishment is not the root cause of violence. And if someone is talking about how tough they are and how scared you should be, they care more about keeping you scared than keeping you safe.The tough-on-crime narrative acts like a black hole. It subsumes new ideas and silences discussions of solutions that are already making a difference in people’s lives. And it provides bottomless succor to politicians who are more interested in keeping themselves in power than keeping people safe.I have seen the message of “strong communities keeping everyone safe” open the minds of Republican voters, Democratic voters, and many in between. It is backed up by science. Academics, government commissions and even many police chiefs have agreed with the substance behind the message for decades. And there is evidence, including the results of last month’s midterms, that it can work politically on a larger scale.Local successes can be harder for national and statewide candidates to take credit for. But they are still better off telling a story about solutions than trying to out-punish their opponents. Senator-elect John Fetterman, Democrat of Pennsylvania, often advertised his efforts to eliminate shooting deaths as the mayor of Braddock, Pa.In contrast, many New York State Democrats defaulted to a defensive posture. In the closing weeks of the midterms, Gov. Kathy Hochul cut an ad highlighting stricter bail terms and trumpeted increased police presence in New York City. Sean Patrick Maloney sought (and received) the endorsement of the powerful Police Benevolent Association of New York City even though his district is not in the city. It didn’t work. Hochul survived an unexpectedly close race, but Maloney lost his seat, as did many other Democrats in the state.Even in areas that have doubled down on punishment, the police are finding it exceedingly difficult to solve crimes. This is particularly true of homicides. In New York City, by contrast, the decision to end the unconstitutional tactic of stopping and frisking hundreds of thousands of mostly young Black and brown men did not lead to a spike in crime.Meanwhile, local policies that get closer to the cause are showing results. Dozens of communities are demonstrating how to ensure safety and, in many cases, save money along the way. In Austin, Texas, a 911 call from a person reporting a mental health emergency used to get directed to the police. Now, if there is no immediate danger, dispatchers have the option to transfer the call to a mental health clinician. In the first eight months after the program’s 2019 launch, 82 percent of calls that were transferred were handled without police involvement, which resulted in savings to the taxpayer of $1,642,213. By the 2021 fiscal year, the program was involved in almost 2,000 calls. In Brooklyn, young people who completed an alternative program for illegal gun possession had a 22 percent lower rearrest rate than peers who went to prison. In Olympia, Wash., a new unit of the Police Department that provides “free, confidential, and voluntary crisis response assistance” has responded to 3,108 calls since 2019, all while minimizing arrests and with zero injuries to responders.Communities that have adopted these approaches have not done away with enforcement; they have just required less of it. In Denver, a five-year randomized control trial of a program that provides housing subsidies to those at risk of being unhoused found a 40 percent reduction in arrests among participants. These kinds of results are why localities from New Jersey to New Mexico are restructuring their local governments to invest in the social determinants of health and safety.And yet, as I have learned over more than two decades of work in this field, the black hole narrative cannot be changed by statistics alone. If you want policies that actually work, you have to change the political conversation from “tough candidates punishing bad people” to “strong communities keeping everyone safe.” Candidates who care about solving a problem pay attention to what caused it. Imagine a plumber who tells you to get more absorbent flooring but does not look for the leak.Because the old narrative is so ingrained, candidates often assume that voters agree with it. But common sense and recent polling show that a majority of voters are concerned about crime and also supportive of changes in how we keep communities safe. This has fueled thousands of local innovations across the country. City governments, community groups and nonprofits are comparing notes on what works. And organizations like One Million Experiments are tracking innovations aimed at producing scalable solutions that do not rely on punishment. Reducing crime and reducing reliance on punishment only seem incompatible if you accept, as the narrative black hole dictates, that police and prisons are the only solution.Voters know the status quo does not work. In the run-up to 2024, for the sake of public safety, candidates need to give them real alternatives. That is the only way to get out of the black hole and into the light.Phillip Atiba Goff is the chair and Carl I. Hovland professor of African American studies and professor of psychology at Yale University. He is also the co-founder and C.E.O. of the Center for Policing Equity, a nonprofit that focuses on making policing less racist, less deadly and less omnipresent.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 63 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump and the Anti-Abortion Movement

      by

      More from our inbox:Detained in AmericaHelping People in JailTreating Vote Counting as Live Sports Damon Winter/The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “The Pro-Life Camp Paid for Its Trump Bargain,” by David French (Opinion guest essay, Nov. 22):I appreciate the discomfort that Mr. French discusses. Electing Donald Trump president allowed him to appoint the conservative justices who overturned Roe v. Wade. But, he writes: “Trumpism is centered on animosity. The pro-life movement has to be centered on love, including love for its most bitter political opponents.”I wish that the pro-life movement, including Mr. French, would focus more broadly on what it claims to be about: pro-life. Most people I have known or spoken with who call themselves pro-life have told me that they favor capital punishment and expansive gun rights and oppose guaranteed access to physical and mental health care and aggressive efforts to control pollution and global warming, positions that threaten far more lives than does abortion.All lives are precious, not just fetal ones.Gordon F. BoalsSag Harbor, N.Y.To the Editor:David French’s essay was an interesting argument about the toxic influences of Donald Trump on the pro-life movement. It was also somewhat of an advertisement for a fantasied pro-life movement.Well before Mr. Trump was in office, some pro-life supporters bombed clinics offering abortion services and others murdered doctors and nurses. Many more severely harassed doctors and women walking into clinics.I do not believe that the hate and violence coming from the pro-life movement are because Mr. Trump hijacked it. It has been there all along. The recent election results have shown to me that the majority of Americans support abortion as a health care issue for women.Paul M. CamicLondonThe writer is a professor of health psychology at University College London.To the Editor:Thank you for publishing David French’s essay. As a pro-life Never Trumper, I felt my point of view was represented, and I think this stance might bring some hope for those who fear all pro-lifers. I appreciate The Times’s willingness to publish a point of view that balances two extremes.Kathie HarrisFayetteville, N.C.To the Editor:The problem with David French’s essay is that he ascribes humanistic motives to the pro-life forces and the politicians who want to ban abortion. Of course, there are true believers, both religious and secular, who think abortion is completely unacceptable.But most voters understand that this is a political battle for votes. And the prime example is the one Mr. French cited — Donald Trump. His conversion to the right-to-life side is a political convenience. It’s essentially no different from Herschel Walker’s abortion beliefs — good as a campaign issue, but, hey, keep out of my personal life.John VasiSanta Barbara, Calif.To the Editor:David French writes: “Walk into a crisis pregnancy center and you’ll often meet some of the best people you’ll ever know. These are the folks who walk with young, frightened women through some of the most difficult days of their lives.”On the contrary, crisis pregnancy centers are intentionally dishonest, using deception to trick women who actively seek abortions into making appointments there instead of abortion clinics. Once inside, they ply these women, who we all agree are often young and frightened and in some of the most difficult days of their lives, with outright lies about biology and her options, and then attempt to guilt her into making a choice she doesn’t want to make.Is tricking women and teenage girls into having unwanted babies really “pro-life”? What about the life these women want to live, a life that may not include parenthood then, or ever? Or is it just another tool in the tool kit of the forced birth movement?Alexandra EichenbaumSan FranciscoTo the Editor:I appreciate the compassionate tone of David French’s guest essay. I find it true that there’s an inherent spirit of unkindness in most pro-life messaging, demonizing the woman and the health care provider. In addition, red states are notorious for having strict and minimalist social services and income support programs for people who need them.If we seriously want young girls and women to carry unplanned pregnancies through to birth, many will need social services, mental health and income supports, as well as health care and job protection. And those who keep or adopt the children may need additional publicly funded support.So, if pro-life states say every embryo must be carried and delivered because every child is important, they must provide systems of care for these children and the families that raise them. Otherwise, it’s hypocrisy pure and simple, Trump or no Trump.Dale FlemingSan DiegoDetained in AmericaTwo Russian antiwar dissidents, Mariia Shemiatina and Boris Shevchuk, reuniting outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Pine Prairie, La.Emily Kask for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Russian Dissidents Fleeing to U.S. Find Detention, Not Freedom” (front page, Nov. 29):The outrageous and inhumane treatment experienced by two Russian political refugee doctors, Mariia Shemiatina and her husband, Boris Shevchuk, at the hands of ICE and in private for-profit prisons illustrates the need for drastic immigration reform.Since the same system has treated nonwhite refugees this way for years, we need to ask ourselves why these injustices have been allowed to fester.At the very least the Democratic lame-duck House must pass legislation that will provide proper oversight and enable early hearings so that those with legitimate claims can participate in the freedoms they risked so much to attain.Tom MillerOakland, Calif.The writer is a human rights lawyer.Helping People in JailDallas Garcia, the mother of an inmate killed in Harris County Jail, holding her son’s ashes.Brandon Thibodeaux for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “For a Growing Number of Americans, Jail Has Become a Death Sentence” (news article, Nov. 24):The reporting on Harris County, Texas, emphasizes the dire need for more programs supporting incarcerated individuals with a serious mental illness, substance abuse problems, intellectual and developmental disabilities or a brain injury — cycling through the system in the county and nationally. The percentage of such people in jails has grown over the last few years.The support services must include accessible and affordable housing options — safe shelters, rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing and community-based behavioral health services.With better staffing and oversight of jails, these programs have the ability to prevent many tragic outcomes and needless deaths, disproportionately affecting those who are Black, Indigenous and people of color.Laurie GarduqueChicagoThe writer is director of criminal justice at the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.Treating Vote Counting as Live SportsTo the Editor:Why is it that the media has to treat vote counting as if it were the fourth quarter of a football game and maybe there will be a miraculous surge by the losing team?The votes have already been cast. The results have happened already; we just haven’t opened all the boxes yet. Yes, the vote tallies will change, but that’s not due to anything any candidate or other partisan does or does not do after the polls have closed. The votes are in, or in the mail.Jay GoldmanWaltham, Mass. More

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Why a Question About Slavery Is Now on the Ballot in 5 States

      by

      The states are asking voters whether to amend constitutions that have exceptions to slavery bans. Some hope that the changes could allow prisoners to challenge the practice of being forced into labor for little or no pay.Voters in five U.S. states where slavery or involuntary servitude remains legal as a punishment for people who are convicted of crimes will vote next month on whether to ban the practices outright.If passed, the measures in Alabama, Louisiana, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont could open a door for prisoners there to challenge forced prison labor, for which most are paid pennies per hour and in some cases not at all.Legal experts cautioned that the ballot measures would not likely have any immediate legal effects if they passed, but prisoners and their advocates say the measures would send an instant message that Americans’ freedom from slavery does not hinge on whether they have committed a crime.“Nothing in the Constitution is just symbolic,” said Curtis Ray Davis II, who said he earned 2 cents an hour picking cotton, okra, squash and other crops in Louisiana’s fields while imprisoned. “We do not need to enslave people in order to punish them.”The measures, which are on the Nov. 8 ballots, have drawn criticism from some lawmakers who say that the changes are unnecessary or confusing. In one state, a former sponsor said the proposal was so ambiguous that he has started urging people to vote against it.Here’s what to know about the proposed changes.What is prison labor used for?The American Civil Liberties Union estimated in a report this year that prisoners produced more than $2 billion in goods annually and provided more than $9 billion worth of services while being paid an average of 13 to 52 cents per hour.Their jobs vary widely, and include doing laundry, serving food in prisons, building furniture for colleges and schools, and manufacturing license plates. Several states — including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas — pay prisoners nothing for most jobs, according to the A.C.L.U. The State of the 2022 Midterm ElectionsBoth parties are making their final pitches ahead of the Nov. 8 election.Where the Election Stands: As Republicans appear to be gaining an edge with swing voters in the final weeks of the contest for control of Congress, here’s a look at the state of the races for the House and Senate.Biden’s Low Profile: President Biden’s decision not to attend big campaign rallies reflects a low approval rating that makes him unwelcome in some congressional districts and states.What Young Voters Think: Twelve Americans under 30, all living in swing states, told The Times about their political priorities, ranging from the highly personal to the universal.In Minnesota: The race for attorney general in the light-blue state offers a pure test of which issue is likely to be more politically decisive: abortion rights or crime.Mr. Davis, who was imprisoned in Louisiana for more than 26 years, said that he and other prisoners spent long, hot days doing farm work, sometimes without enough access to water. He said he grew so frustrated with being forced to do the job for 2 cents an hour that he intentionally dropped a 25-pound dumbbell on his foot so that he would not have to work. Instead, he said, he was sent to solitary confinement as punishment.Claudia M. Flores, a law professor at Yale and an author of the A.C.L.U. report, said much of prisoners’ work went toward running the prison itself.“This is an entire industry of workers that are really maintaining part of our government, part of our state,” Ms. Flores said.She and other experts noted that many prisoners who worked jobs did not want to get rid of prison work because some had been able to learn skills, make some money and be productive with their time“Some people might choose to work and really choose to work, but they should be working with wages and safe conditions and proper training, and maybe even gaining skills for when they reintegrate into society,” Ms. Flores said. Any such proposal would likely come up against opposition from state governments that would be required to either get rid of their work programs or pay a lot more in wages.In California, a proposal to remove from the State Constitution an exception to its ban on indentured servitude was rejected by the State Senate after officials in the administration of Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said it could require the state to pay prison workers the state’s minimum wage of $15 an hour.What could change in the five states that have ballot measures?Each of the five states has a constitution that bans slavery or involuntary servitude for everyone except those who have been convicted of a crime.The exact language differs state by state, but each amendment is focused on eliminating or altering that exception. In Alabama, for example, the State Constitution would be amended to remove an exception that allows involuntary servitude “for the punishment of crime.” In some other states, the changes are more complicated.In Louisiana, the proposal would remove an exception having to do with people convicted of a crime but would add a new clarifying sentence noting that the amendment “does not apply to the otherwise lawful administration of criminal justice.”The broadness of that phrasing led State Representative Edmond Jordan, who had initially sponsored the bill, to fear that it could actually create more exceptions to the protection from slavery. He told The Advocate that he was urging people to vote against it but hoped to put a clearer measure up for vote in the future.Legal experts said it was unclear whether the changes would have any effect on the legality of prison labor, though prisoners will probably argue that they are being illegally forced to perform slave labor or involuntary servitude.The proposed changes — and the lawsuits that would follow — could force courts “to engage a little more deeply with whether this type of labor is prohibited,” said Andrea Armstrong, a law professor at the Loyola University New Orleans College of Law who studies prisons and jails.Does the U.S. Constitution still allow slavery?The U.S. Constitution has a nearly identical “exceptions clause” that allows people who are convicted of crimes to be forced into involuntary servitude.The clause is found in the 13th Amendment, which was ratified in 1865: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”Courts have at times referenced the amendment in denying prisoners the same rights as other workers, but they have more often relied on other laws and justifications to do so.A group of federal lawmakers has proposed a bill to remove the clause, but the lawmakers have not won enough support to pass it.Sharon Dolovich, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that even if the 13th Amendment was not the primary justification for allowing mandatory prison labor, its existence in the Constitution most likely weighs on the mind of judges who evaluate prisoners’ claims.“The 13th Amendment, as it’s currently written — and the state’s analogues to the amendment — form a backdrop that infuses the legal regime governing incarcerated people,” said Ms. Dolovich, who leads the Prison Law and Policy Program at U.C.L.A. “It forms the moral atmosphere around which we treat incarcerated workers.”Other states have already removed exceptions to their slavery bans. What happened there?Many states’ constitutions do not mention slavery at all, relying on the protections — and exception — of the U.S. Constitution. But three states with constitutions that ban slavery have in recent years voted to remove the clause that created an exception for those convicted of crimes.Colorado did so in 2018, followed by Nebraska and Utah in 2020.After Colorado’s decision, a prisoner sued the state, claiming that it was violating its new, absolute ban on slavery and involuntary servitude, but a state appellate court ruled in August that voters had not meant to abolish prison labor. The judges also ruled that the prisoner’s complaint did not support a claim that the prison work program was involuntary servitude.But in Nebraska, the change has led at least one jail that had never paid its inmates for work to begin paying them $20 to $30 a week, The Lincoln Journal Star reported.More legal challenges are expected in those states, as well as any that pass similar measures next month. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Lula salió de prisión, y ahora podría volver a ser el presidente de Brasil

      by

      RÍO DE JANEIRO — En 2019, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva pasaba 23 horas al día en una celda aislada, con una caminadora, de una penitenciaría federal.El expresidente de Brasil fue sentenciado a más de 20 años de prisión por cargos de corrupción; las condenas parecían poner fin a la carrera histórica del hombre que alguna vez fue el león de la izquierda latinoamericana.Ahora, liberado de la prisión, Da Silva está a punto de volver a ganar la presidencia de Brasil, una increíble resurrección política que parecía impensable.El domingo, los brasileños votarán por su próximo líder, y la mayoría elegirá entre el presidente Jair Bolsonaro, de 67 años, el actual mandatario de derecha, y Da Silva, un entusiasta izquierdista de 76 años mejor conocido como “Lula”, cuyas condenas por corrupción fueron anuladas el año pasado luego de que el Supremo Tribunal Federal de Brasil dictaminó que el juez que procesó sus casos no fue imparcial.Durante más de un año, las encuestas han ubicado a Da Silva con una ventaja dominante. Ahora, un aumento en sus números sugiere que podría ganar el domingo con más del 50 por ciento de los votos, lo que evitaría una segunda vuelta con Bolsonaro.Una victoria completaría la extraordinaria travesía de Da Silva, a quien el expresidente Barack Obama una vez calificó como “el político más popular de la Tierra”. Cuando dejó el cargo en 2011 después de dos mandatos, el índice de aprobación de Da Silva superaba el 80 por ciento. Pero luego se convirtió en la pieza central de una extensa investigación sobre sobornos gubernamentales que condujo a casi 300 arrestos, lo llevó a prisión y, aparentemente, acabó con su carrera política.Da Silva se ha comparado con Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi y Martin Luther King Jr., presos políticos que ampliaron sus movimientos tras ser liberados.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesHoy, el exlíder sindical vuelve a ser el centro de atención, esta vez listo para retomar el poder de la nación más grande de América Latina, con 217 millones de habitantes, y con el mandato de deshacer el legado de Bolsonaro.“¿Cómo intentaron destruir a Lula? Pasé 580 días en la cárcel porque no querían que me postulara”, le dijo Da Silva a una multitud de simpatizantes la semana pasada, con su famosa voz grave que se escucha más ronca debido a la edad y a una campaña agotadora. “Y allí me quedé tranquilo, preparándome como se preparó Mandela durante 27 años”.En la campaña electoral, Da Silva ha comenzado a compararse con Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi y Martin Luther King Jr., presos políticos que ampliaron sus movimientos después de ser liberados. “Estoy convencido de que sucederá lo mismo en Brasil”, dijo en otro mitin celebrado este mes.El regreso de Da Silva a la presidencia consolidaría su estatus como la figura más influyente en la democracia moderna de Brasil. Se trata de un ex trabajador metalúrgico, con una educación que llegó al quinto grado e hijo de trabajadores agrícolas analfabetos, que durante décadas ha sido una fuerza política, y lideró un cambio transformador en la política brasileña que se aleja de los principios conservadores y se acerca a los ideales de izquierda y los intereses de la clase trabajadora.El Partido de los Trabajadores, un movimiento de izquierda que fundó en 1980, ganó cuatro de las ocho elecciones presidenciales realizadas desde el final de la dictadura militar en 1988, y terminó en segundo lugar en el resto de los comicios.Como presidente de 2003 a 2010, la gestión de Da Silva ayudó a sacar a 20 millones de brasileños de la pobreza, revitalizó la industria petrolera del país y elevó a Brasil en el escenario mundial, llegando a organizar la Copa del Mundo y los Juegos Olímpicos de Verano.Pero también permitió que un gran sistema de sobornos se originara en todo el gobierno, por lo que muchos de sus aliados del Partido de los Trabajadores fueron condenados por aceptar sobornos. Si bien los tribunales desestimaron las dos condenas de Da Silva por aceptar un condominio y renovaciones de empresas constructoras que licitaron contratos gubernamentales, no afirmaron su inocencia.Desde hace mucho tiempo, Da Silva ha afirmado que los cargos son falsos.En general, la campaña de Da Silva se ha construido en torno a la promesa que ha formulado desde hace décadas: mejorar la vida de los pobres de Brasil.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesSi Da Silva gana la presidencia, en parte será gracias a una campaña de la vieja escuela. Recorrió su vasto país realizando mítines presenciales. Y decidió irse por lo seguro: no asistió a un debate el sábado pasado, ha ofrecido pocos detalles sobre sus propuestas, y rechazó la mayoría de las solicitudes de entrevistas, también con The New York Times.Además ha construido una amplia coalición, desde comunistas hasta empresarios, y escogió como su compañero de fórmula a Geraldo Alckmin, un exgobernador de centroderecha que fue su oponente en las elecciones presidenciales de 2006.A Da Silva también le ha beneficiado que se enfrenta a un presidente profundamente impopular. Las encuestas muestran que aproximadamente la mitad de los brasileños dicen que nunca apoyarían a Bolsonaro, quien ha molestado a muchos votantes con un torrente de declaraciones falsas, políticas ambientales destructivas, la adopción de medicamentos no probados en vez de las vacunas contra la COVID-19 y los duros ataques que ha realizado contra rivales políticos, periodistas, jueces y profesionales de la salud.En la campaña electoral, Bolsonaro ha dicho que Da Silva es un ladrón y un comunista, mientras que Da Silva describe al presidente como una persona autoritaria e inhumana.Si es elegido, Da Silva sería el ejemplo más significativo del reciente giro a la izquierda de América Latina. Desde 2018, los movimientos de izquierda han protagonizado una oleada de elecciones contra los políticos en funciones en México, Colombia, Argentina, Chile y Perú.El presidente Jair Bolsonaro de Brasil durante un mitin en Campinas, São Paulo, este mes.Victor Moriyama para The New York TimesEn general, la campaña de Da Silva giró en torno a la promesa que ha formulado durante décadas: mejorar la vida de los pobres de Brasil. La pandemia azotó la economía del país, con una inflación que alcanzó los dos dígitos y el número de personas que padecen hambre se duplicó a 33 millones. También se comprometió a ampliar la red de seguridad, aumentar el salario mínimo, reducir la inflación, alimentar y darle vivienda a más personas y crear empleos a través de grandes proyectos de infraestructura.“Fue el presidente antipobreza y ese es el legado que quiere conservar si gana”, dijo Celso Rocha de Barros, un sociólogo que escribió un libro sobre el Partido de los Trabajadores.Sin embargo, como sucede con la mayoría de los políticos exitosos, los discursos de Da Silva suelen ser cortos en detalles y extensos en promesas. Con frecuencia forja su retórica en torno a un enfrentamiento entre “ellos”, las élites, y “nosotros”, el pueblo. Porta sus credenciales de la clase trabajadora en la mano izquierda porque a los 19 años perdió su dedo meñique en una fábrica de autopartes. Y transmite su mensaje de hombre común, con muchas referencias a la cerveza, la cachaza y la picaña, el corte de carne más famoso de Brasil.“Piensan que los pobres no tienen derechos”, dijo la semana pasada frente a una multitud de simpatizantes en uno de los barrios más pobres de São Paulo. Y aseguró que él lucharía por sus derechos. “Vamos a volver a tener el derecho de hacer un asadito en familia el fin de semana, de comprar una picanhazinha, de comer ese pedacito de picanha con su grasa pasado por harina, y un vaso de cerveza fría”, gritó entre vítores.“Es el candidato del pueblo, de los pobres”, dijo Vivian Casentino, de 44 años, una cocinera vestida con el color rojo del Partido de los Trabajadores, en un mitin celebrado esta semana en Río de Janeiro. “Él es como nosotros. Es un luchador”.En su primer período como presidente, Da Silva utilizó el auge de las materias primas para financiar la expansión de su gobierno. Esta vez, la economía de Brasil está en un estado más precario y él propone impuestos más altos para los ricos con el fin de financiar más beneficios para los pobres. Algunos votantes están incómodos con sus planes después de que las políticas económicas de su sucesora, elegida por él, hicieron que Brasil entrara en una recesión.Aunque su estilo político no ha cambiado en su sexta campaña presidencial, ha tratado de modernizar su imagen. Ha incluido más referencias a las mujeres, los negros, los pueblos indígenas y el medioambiente en sus discursos y propuestas, e incluso prometió abogar por las “ensaladas orgánicas”.Maria da Silva, de 58 años, llora mientras muestra el refrigerador vacío en la casa abandonada en la que vive con su familia de ocho integrantes en Ibimirim, Brasil, el mes pasado. No tiene relación con el expresidente.Carl De Souza/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesEn una reunión reciente con personas influyentes de las redes sociales, incluido el youtuber más popular del país, un comediante ingenioso y un rapero con tatuajes en la cara, Da Silva los instó a contrarrestar las sugerencias de que era corrupto.“Globo pasó cinco años llamándome ladrón”, dijo, refiriéndose a la cadena de televisión más grande de Brasil. Dijo que deseaba que el presentador principal del canal abriera el noticiero alguna noche pidiéndole perdón. “Las disculpas son difíciles”, agregó.Da Silva nunca ha reconocido completamente el papel del Partido de los Trabajadores en el esquema de corrupción del gobierno que persistió durante gran parte de los 13 años que estuvo en el poder. La investigación, llamada Operación Lava Jato, reveló cómo las empresas pagaron cientos de millones de dólares en sobornos a funcionarios gubernamentales a cambio de contratos públicos.Da Silva dice que sus enemigos políticos lo incriminaron para eliminar al Partido de los Trabajadores de la política brasileña. También acusó al gobierno de Estados Unidos de ayudar a impulsar la investigación.La investigación finalmente se vio envuelta en su propio escándalo porque se demostró que fue utilizada como una herramienta política. Los fiscales se centraron en los delitos del Partido de los Trabajadores por encima de otros partidos, y los investigadores filtraron las conversaciones grabadas de Da Silva. Más tarde se reveló que Sergio Moro, el juez federal encargado del caso, estaba en connivencia con los fiscales, al mismo tiempo que actuaba como el único árbitro en muchos de los juicios.Da Silva tras salir de prisión en 2019.Rodolfo Buhrer/ReutersEn 2019, Da Silva fue excarcelado después de que el Supremo Tribunal Federal dictaminó que podía estar libre mientras presentaba las apelaciones. Luego, el año pasado, el tribunal desestimó sus condenas y determinó que fueron juzgadas en el tribunal equivocado y que Moro no fue imparcial.Da Silva es impulsado por un culto a la personalidad, construido durante más de cuatro décadas a la vista del público, y es mucho más popular que el partido político que construyó.Creomar de Souza, un analista político brasileño, dijo que las democracias inmaduras a menudo pueden girar en torno a una sola personalidad en vez de un movimiento o conjunto de ideas. “Algunas democracias jóvenes luchan por dar un paso adelante”, dijo. “Un individuo se convierte en una parte crucial del juego”.En un mitin de Da Silva convocado en Río esta semana, Vinicius Rodrigues, un estudiante de historia de 28 años, estaba repartiendo volantes para el partido comunista. “Apoyamos a Lula específicamente”, dijo, pero no al Partido de los Trabajadores.Cerca de allí, Luiz Cláudio Costa, de 55 años, vendía cintas para la cabeza que decían “Estoy con Lula” a 50 centavos de dólar. Siempre había votado por Da Silva, pero en 2018 eligió a Bolsonaro. “Me equivoqué”, dijo. “Necesitamos que Lula regrese”.Da Silva es impulsado por un culto a la personalidad, construido durante más de cuatro décadas a la vista del público.Dado Galdieri para The New York Times More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil’s Lula Is Out of Prison and Trying to Defeat Bolsonaro

      by

      RIO DE JANEIRO — In 2019, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was spending 23 hours a day in an isolated cell with a treadmill in a federal penitentiary.The former president of Brazil was sentenced to 22 years on corruption charges, a conviction that appeared to end the storied career of the man who had once been the lion of the Latin American left.Now, freed from prison, Mr. da Silva is on the brink of becoming Brazil’s president once again, an incredible political resurrection that at one time seemed unthinkable.On Sunday, Brazilians will vote for their next leader, with most choosing between President Jair Bolsonaro, 67, the right-wing nationalist incumbent, and Mr. da Silva, 76, a zealous leftist known simply as “Lula,” whose corruption convictions were annulled last year after Brazil’s Supreme Court ruled that the judge in his cases was biased.For more than a year, polls have shown Mr. da Silva with a commanding lead. Now a surge in his numbers suggest he could win outright on Sunday with more than 50 percent of the vote, avoiding a runoff with Mr. Bolsonaro.A victory would complete a remarkable journey for Mr. da Silva, whom former President Barack Obama once called “the most popular politician on Earth.” When he left office in 2011 after two terms, Mr. da Silva’s approval rating topped 80 percent. But then he became the centerpiece of a sprawling investigation into government bribes that led to nearly 300 arrests, landing him in prison and seemingly destined for obscurity.Mr. da Silva has taken to comparing himself to Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., political prisoners who expanded their movements after they were freed.Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesToday, the former union leader is back in the spotlight, this time poised to retake the wheel of Latin America’s largest nation, at 217 million people, with a mandate to undo Mr. Bolsonaro’s legacy.“How did they try to destroy Lula? I spent 580 days in jail because they didn’t want me to run,” Mr. da Silva told a crowd of supporters last week, his famously gravelly voice even hoarser with age and a grueling campaign. “And I stayed calm there, preparing myself like Mandela prepared for 27 years.”On the campaign trail, Mr. da Silva has taken to comparing himself to Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., political prisoners who expanded their movements after they were freed. “I am convinced the same thing will happen here in Brazil,” he said at a separate rally this month.Mr. da Silva’s return to the president’s office would cement his status as the most influential figure in Brazil’s modern democracy. A former metalworker with a fifth-grade education and the son of illiterate farm workers, he has been a political force for decades, leading a transformational shift in Brazilian politics away from conservative principles and toward leftist ideals and working-class interests.The leftist Workers’ Party he co-founded in 1980 has won four of the eight presidential elections since the end of Brazil’s military dictatorship in 1988, while finishing as the runner-up in the rest.As president from 2003 through 2010, Mr. da Silva’s administration helped lift 20 million Brazilians out of poverty, revitalized the nation’s oil industry and elevated Brazil on the world stage, including by hosting the World Cup and Summer Olympics.But it also allowed a vast kickback scheme to fester throughout the government, with many of his Workers’ Party allies convicted of accepting bribes. While the courts threw out Mr. da Silva’s two convictions of accepting a condo and renovations from construction companies bidding on government contracts, they did not affirm his innocence.Mr. da Silva has long maintained that the charges were false.Overall, Mr. da Silva’s campaign has been built around the promise he has been pitching for decades: He will make life better for Brazil’s poor. Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesIf Mr. da Silva wins the presidency, it will be in part thanks to an old-school campaign. He has toured the vast country holding in-person rallies. He has played it safe, skipping a debate last Saturday, offering few specifics in his proposals and declining most interview requests, including with The New York Times.And he has built a broad coalition, from communists to businessmen, selecting a former center-right governor as his running mate, Geraldo Alckmin, who had been his opponent in the 2006 presidential election.Mr. da Silva has also benefited from a matchup with a deeply unpopular incumbent. Polls show that about half of Brazilians say they would never support Mr. Bolsonaro, who has upset many voters with a torrent of false statements, destructive environmental policies, an embrace of unproven drugs over Covid-19 vaccines and harsh attacks against political rivals, journalists, judges and health professionals.On the campaign trail, Mr. Bolsonaro has called Mr. da Silva a crook and a communist, while Mr. da Silva describes the president as authoritarian and inhumane.If elected, Mr. da Silva would be the most significant example yet of Latin America’s recent shift to the left. Since 2018, leftists have ridden an anti-incumbent wave into office in Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Chile and Peru.On the campaign trail, President Jair Bolsonaro has called Mr. da Silva a crook and a communist.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesOverall, Mr. da Silva’s campaign has been built around the promise he has been pitching for decades: He will make life better for Brazil’s poor. The pandemic battered Brazil’s economy, with inflation reaching double digits and the number of people facing hunger doubling to 33 million. He has pledged to widen the safety net, increase the minimum wage, lower inflation, feed and house more people and create jobs through big new infrastructure projects.“He was the anti-poverty president, and that’s the legacy he wants to keep if he wins,” said Celso Rocha de Barros, a sociologist who wrote a book about the Workers’ Party.Yet, like most successful politicians, Mr. da Silva’s speeches are often short on details and long on promises. He frequently builds his rhetoric around a clash between “they,” the elites, and “we,” the people. He wears his working-class credentials on his left hand; he lost his pinkie at 19 in an auto-parts factory. And he carries his message with his Everyman image, complete with plenty of references to beer, cachaça and picanha, Brazil’s most famous cut of meat.“They think that the poor don’t have rights,” he told a crowd of supporters in one of São Paulo’s poorest neighborhoods last week. But he would fight for their rights, he said. “The right to barbecue with family on the weekend, to buy a little picanha, to that piece of picanha with the fat dipped in flour, and to a glass of cold beer,” he shouted to cheers.“He’s the candidate of the people, of the poor,” said Vivian Casentino, 44, a cook draped in the red of the Workers’ Party, at a rally this week in Rio de Janeiro. “He’s like us. He’s a fighter.”In his first stint as president, Mr. da Silva used a commodities boom to pay for his expansion of government. This time around, Brazil’s economy is in rougher shape, and he is proposing higher taxes on the rich to fund more benefits for the poor. Some voters are uneasy with his plans after his handpicked successor’s economic policies helped lead Brazil into a recession.While his political style has not changed in his sixth presidential campaign, he has tried to modernize his image. He has included more references to women, Black people, Indigenous groups and the environment in his speeches and proposals, and even promised to advocate for “organic salads.”Maria da Silva, 58, cries while showing the empty fridge at the abandoned house in which she lives with her family of eight in Ibimirim, Brazil, last month. She has no relation to Mr. da Silva.Carl De Souza/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAt a recent meeting with social-media influencers, including the nation’s most popular YouTuber, a sharp-witted comedian and a rapper with face tattoos, Mr. da Silva urged them to counter suggestions that he was corrupt.“Globo spent five years calling me a thief,” he said, referring to Brazil’s biggest TV network. He said he wished the channel’s lead anchor would open the newscast one night by saying sorry. “Apologies are hard,” he added.Mr. da Silva has never fully acknowledged the role of his Workers’ Party in the government corruption scheme that persisted for much of the 13 years it was in power. The investigation, called Operation Carwash, revealed how companies paid hundreds of millions of dollars in bribes to government officials in exchange for public contracts.Mr. da Silva says that political enemies framed him to eliminate the Workers’ Party from Brazilian politics. He has also accused the U.S. government of helping to drive the investigation.The Carwash investigation was eventually engulfed in its own scandal, as it became clear that it had been used as a political tool. Prosecutors focused on the crimes of the Workers’ Party over other parties, and investigators leaked Mr. da Silva’s taped conversations. Sergio Moro, the federal judge overseeing the case, was later revealed to be colluding with prosecutors, while also acting as the sole arbiter in many of the trials.Mr. da Silva after being released from prison in 2019.Rodolfo Buhrer/ReutersIn 2019, Mr. da Silva was released from prison after the Supreme Court ruled he could be free while pursuing appeals. Then, last year, the Supreme Court threw out his convictions, ruling that they were tried in the wrong court and that Mr. Moro was biased.Mr. da Silva is carried by a cult of personality, built over more than four decades in the public eye, and he is far more popular than the political party he built. Creomar de Souza, a Brazilian political analyst, said immature democracies can often revolve around a single personality rather than a movement or set of ideas. “Some young democracies struggle to take a step forward,” he said. “An individual becomes a crucial part of the game.”At a rally for Mr. da Silva in Rio this week, Vinicius Rodrigues, 28, a history student, was handing out fliers for a communist party. “We support Lula specifically,” he said, but not the Workers’ Party.Nearby, Luiz Claudio Costa, 55, was selling “I’m with Lula” headbands for 50 cents. He had always voted for Mr. da Silva, but in 2018, he chose Mr. Bolsonaro. “I got it wrong,” he said. “We need Lula back.”Mr. da Silva is carried by a cult of personality, built over more than four decades in the public eye.Dado Galdieri for The New York Times More