More stories

  • in

    US House passes George Floyd Justice in Policing Act – video

    The US House of Representatives passed the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, the most ambitious police reform effort in decades. The legislation changes would ban chokeholds and ‘qualified immunity’ for law enforcement and create national standards for policing in a bid to bolster accountability. California congresswoman Karen Bass, who authored the bill, cited the beating of Rodney King in 1991 and Floyd’s death as the catalyst for the ambitious reform while House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said the bill was ‘legislation which will fundamentally transform the culture’
    US House passes most ambitious police reform effort in decades More

  • in

    US House passes most ambitious police reform effort in decades

    [embedded content]
    The US House of Representatives passed the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, the most ambitious police reform effort in decades, for the second time on Wednesday.
    The sweeping legislation would ban chokeholds and “qualified immunity” for law enforcement and create national standards for policing in a bid to bolster accountability. Nine months after Floyd, a 46-year-old Black man, was killed by Minneapolis police, lawmakers voted to approve the reform measure named after him 220-212, along party lines. However, the only Republican who voted in favor said he did so in error, and has changed the official record to reflect his opposition.
    The House had passed a version of the bill last year, but the Republican-controlled Senate never took it up. This time around, Democrats have the support of the White House and a slight edge in the Senate. But they will have to win over at least 10 Republican senators to overcome a filibuster and pass the measure – which is unlikely to happen.
    The bill includes prohibitions on so-called qualified immunity, which shields law enforcement from certain lawsuits, and is one of the main provisions that will likely need to be negotiated in any compromise with Republican senators.
    Police unions and other law enforcement groups have argued that, without such legal protections, fears of lawsuits will stop people from becoming police officers – even though the measure permits such suits only against law enforcement agencies, rather than all public employees.
    The California congresswoman Karen Bass, who authored the bill, called provisions limiting qualified immunity and easing standards for prosecution “the only measures that hold police accountable, that will actually decrease the number of times we have to see people killed on videotape.”
    She also acknowledged the challenges Democrats faced last November, and may likely see again, when former Donald Trump’s re-election campaign and other leading Republicans crowded the airwaves with images of cities around the country burning.
    But Bass said those attacks, like much of the opposition to the bill, are built on racism, promoting fears about how, “the scary Black people are going to attack you if you try to rein in the police”.
    “That’s as old as apple pie in our history,” she said. “So do you not act because of that?”
    Still, she conceded that changes are likely to come if the measure is to win the minimum 60 votes it will need to advance in the Senate, which is now split 50-50. Bass said she had been in contact with the South Carolina senator Tim Scott, the only Black Republican in the chamber, and was confident he would help deliver some GOP support.
    Scott said this week that the legislation’s sticking points were qualified immunity and prosecutorial standards and that in both areas, “We have to protect individual officers.”
    “That’s a red line for me,” Scott said, adding “hopefully we’ll come up with something that actually works.” More

  • in

    How US police failed to stop the rise of the far right and the Capitol attack

    Sign up for the Guardian’s First Thing newsletterThe alleged complicity of some police officers in the attack on the US Capitol has led to fresh questions about how law enforcement and other public agencies around the US have approached a surging far-right street protest movement during the life of the Trump administration.The presence of off-duty officers, firefighters and corrections officers from other agencies around the country in the protest crowd was a reminder of how members of a lawless movement have been able to find a place in their ranks.Since the violent invasion of the Capitol by pro-Trump extremists seeking to overturn the election of Joe Biden, at least two Capitol police officers have been suspended, and at least 12 more are reportedly under investigation for dereliction of duty, or directly aiding the rioters.Some officers were filmed offering apparent assistance or encouragement to the mob – whether by posing for selfies with confederate flag-waving protesters, or directing protesters around the building while sporting a Maga cap.They did this at the same time that colleagues in the DC metropolitan police, a sister agency, say that they were maced, tasered, stripped of their badges and ammunition and beaten by the angry crowd.Mike German, a former FBI agent and fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, said he sees the failure of police to protect the building as following the pattern whereby “militant far-right groups have been given impunity” throughout the Trump era.In what he called a “multifaceted failure” in Washington, German said the central problem was a “failure to recognize a threat for what it was”. Far-right groups, he said, “have been engaging in militancy for months”.Pointing to similar attacks on state capitols in Virginia, Michigan, Idaho, Georgia and Oregon in 2020, German asks “how many times do they have to storm a capitol before it’s taken seriously?”.In the wake of the riot – and near misses for elected officials who the mob had in its sights – former Capitol police officers who have been involved in lawsuits over decades alleging employment discrimination against black officers, have claimed that their sustained and repeated warnings about racism in the department were ignored.Meanwhile, agencies around the country have announced investigations into their own officers who were present at the Capitol riot.In Houston, an 18-year-veteran officer resigned after the Houston police department announced an investigation into his alleged actions at the rally. In Virginia, two officers who participated in the riot, and at one posed for selfies in front of a statue of Revolutionary General John Stark, are now facing criminal charges.The actions of a serving officer in Boston are under investigation, while in California, the Los Angeles police department has launched a joint investigation with the FBI to determine whether or not any of its officers attended.It’s not just rank and file officers who are having to answer difficult questions. In Oklahoma, Canadian county’s pro-Trump Sheriff, Chris West, last Friday denied that he had participated in the riot following the rally, which he said he attended as a “patriotic citizen”, despite social media posts claiming to identify him in the crowd inside the Capitol.West later refused to answer questions from local journalists about deleted Facebook posts in which another Facebook user said that he and West had pushed past Capitol police to enter the building, and in which West himself allegedly aired conspiracy theories about election fraud, and appeared to contemplate a violent response.Elsewhere, Butch Conway, the recently retired 24-year sheriff of Gwinnett county, Georgia, attended the rally but claims not to have participated in storming the Capitol.Other current and former public safety officers were part of the melee. A retired firefighter was arrested for allegedly throwing a fire extinguisher at Capitol police and in Maryland, a corrections officer is being investigated by the Charles county sheriff’s department for their actions at the rally.Some police officers who did not attend the rally have nevertheless expressed support for the crowd’s actions, or promoted the conspiracy theories that spurred them on. In Maine, the chief of that state’s own capitol police, reportedly shared coronavirus- and Black Lives Matter-related conspiracy theories on his Facebook page in recent months.In Pinal county, Arizona, the pro-Trump “constitutional sheriff” Mark Lamb made a speech on 6 January that contained vague allegations of criminal conduct by Hillary Clinton, and urged his listeners to “fight for the constitution”. Last August, near the height of 2020 electioneering, Lamb asserted in a speech to the Arizona Police Association that “the constitution is hanging by a thread”.The large number of police and other sworn officers who either participated in, or sympathized with a large scale act of public disorder once again highlighted the significant number of serving police officers who were discovered to have been radicalized, or even to be members of extremist groups during the period in which Trump has dominated US politics.Between 2015 and 2020, police officers were revealed as having ties to far-right groups such as the Proud Boys, the Three Percenters, and the League of the South – all three of which had members on the ground at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. In Texas, Florida, Louisiana and Michigan during that time, some officers were even revealed to have been recruited to the Ku Klux Klan.In 2019, Reveal reported that dozens of serving police officers around the country were members of extremist groups on Facebook.This isn’t new … We shouldn’t treat it as if it has come out of nowhereUS authorities have repeatedly nominated the presence of extremists in law enforcement agencies as a national security issue. In 2015, the agency noted that various extremist groups had “active links to law enforcement officers”.German, the Brennan Center fellow, published a report last August on the ongoing problem of far-right militancy among law enforcement officers. He said “law enforcement has become politicized since 9/11, and even more so under the Trump administration”.While the incoming Biden administration has raised the possibility of new anti-terror laws to deal with the threat of far-right violence, Brennan argues that they should instead, through the justice department, ensure that current laws are consistently applied to far-right militants, including those in uniform.“This isn’t new”, he says. “We shouldn’t treat it as if it has come out of nowhere”.He points out that some of those involved in the Capitol riot have been involved in similar incidents over months or years, and because they have been repeatedly caught on tape, “we know their names, we know their criminal histories”.“They’ve been doing it because the police have been letting them do it. They’ve been doing it because the FBI have been letting them do it”, he said. More

  • in

    Insurrection Day: when white supremacist terror came to the US Capitol

    If there was one single moment when the veil of American resilience crumbled and the Trumpist assault on democracy turned into an invasion, it arrived just before 1pm on Wednesday.That was when a group of pro-Trump militants burst through a flimsy outer barrier on the north-west side of the Capitol building and advanced on a secondary barricade guarded by four frightened police officers, dressed only in basic uniforms and soft caps.One of the officers can be seen resting his hands on the barrier in as casual a manner he can manage, in an attempt to defuse the confrontation. He clearly had no idea what was coming.On the other side, a young man in a white hoodie and a red Make America Great Again cap, pulls at the metal barricade but it holds. Then an older man, also red-capped but in full military uniform, takes the youth by the shoulder and whispers something in his ear as the swelling crowd around them chants “USA”.Ten seconds later, the crowd pushes together, the metal fortification collapses, and the Capitol police officers are overwhelmed. The crowd surges past rushing towards the great white domed building atop Capitol Hill.The protest has turned into an insurrection, breaching the home of US democracy, for the first time since the British army set it on fire in 1814.Even those who had warned in vain of the Trump crowd’s criminal intent were stunned at how quickly the nation’s defences buckled. This was America’s “shining city upon a hill” but only the thinnest blue line was there to guard it at the crucial hour.It later turned out that the Capitol police had turned down offers of support from the national guard, only calling for reinforcements when it was too late. The plan was to act as relaxed and low-key as possible, presumably so as not to irritate the crowd.The contrast with the mass deployments of over 5,000 troops for the Black Lives Matter protests in the summer could not have been more glaring. Then, Washington resembled a city under occupation.On Wednesday, it was close to defenceless.This appeared to be deliberate, at least in part. Donald Trump was not about to let the federal government go to war with “his people”, who he had invited to the nation’s capital in a last-ditch effort to reverse his emphatic election defeat, due to be certified by Congress on Wednesday.The broader issue was race. The protesters in the summer were largely Black, infuriated by repeated police killings of unarmed Black civilians. The mob which stormed the Capitol was almost entirely white.Efforts to build a concerted government response to the growing white supremacist terrorist threat had been stymied for years in the absence of political will and money. The warning signs along the road to Wednesday’s attempted putsch, the dress-rehearsal occupations of state capitols and a foiled plot to kidnap the Michigan governor, not to mention the activities of the Proud Boys and other far-right factions, were mostly ignored.The heedlessness was hardly surprising given that the commander-in-chief was leading the calls for sedition. He responded to extremist rallies against Democratic governors by tweeting out encouragement for his followers to “liberate” those states.In his effort to somehow upend his resounding defeat in November, he summoned the faithful by Twitter for a “StopTheSteal” rally to reverse the result. “Be there, will be wild!” he promised.Tens of thousands answered the call from around the country. Some drove all night, in part to avoid the price of a hotel. Some, like Texan real estate broker Jenna Ryan, arrived on a private jet with a group of friends, saying she was on the way to “storm the Capitol”.Ryan later posed with a smile and a V-for-victory hand sign in front of the smashed windows of the Capitol building and declared it “one of the best days of my life”. After a wave of condemnation, she issued a statement saying she did not condone violence and was “truly heartbroken for the people who have lost their lives”.The crowd that converged under the giant needle of the Washington Monument was a carnival mix of red-hatted Maga aficionados, men dressed like commandos, and a sprinkling of apocalyptic cults. A pair of women in scarves held yellow signs saying “Women belong in the kitchen” and ”Fake Christians Go to Hell”. Over the years, Trump has built a broad church for the aggrieved, for which the only doctrinal requirement has been loyalty to its high priest.Thousands of people filled one side of the mound under the monument and spilled on to Constitutional Avenue across from the Ellipse, an oval park in front of the White House where a stage had been set up, protected by bulletproof glass.The choice of music on the sound system seemed deliberately melancholic, including Elton John’s Funeral for a Friend, the My Heart Will Go On theme from Titanic, and In the End, by Linkin Park, in which the repeated refrain is: “I tried so hard and got so far. But in the end it doesn’t even matter.”The tempo picked up with the Village People’s Macho Man to introduce the warm-up act, 76-year-old Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, who called for the election to be resolved through “trial by combat”.A smartphone video of the Donald Trump Jr filmed inside the marquee backstage showed him and his girlfriend, Kimberly Guilfoyle, giddy with excitement. Guilfoyle breaks into a hip-thrusting dance and then shouts into the camera: “Have the courage to do the right thing! Fight!”Trump’s 74-minute speech began close to noon, and was a grab-bag of familiar resentments against the media (the “enemy of the people”), Democrats, “weak Republicans” and his latest target, his own deputy, Mike Pence, who had minutes earlier declared to Congress he had no power to reverse the election result.“We’re going to have to fight much harder and Mike Pence is going to have to come through for us,” Trump declared. “If he doesn’t, that will be a sad day for our country.”He told the thousands of people before him to march down Pennsylvania Avenue the mile and a half to the Capitol, to put pressure on Congress “peacefully and patriotically”. But in an address that used the words “fight” and “fighting” 20 times, from the mouth of a leader who had consistently winked at violence by his followers, it had the weight of a caveat tacked on as an afterthought.The crowd was certainly primed for conflict, after years of hyperbole and demonisation of enemies by their leader, who had convinced them he was their solitary hope in a looming existential struggle.Kasey Botelho, a young woman from Rhode Island sitting under one of Washington’s many cherry trees with her boyfriend Mike, speculated on what would happen if Congress did not bend to the president’s will.“Honestly, I’m not 100% sure, because the supreme court failed us. I think Trump’s only option he really has left is to call military action into it because he has the right to do that,” she said. “I think we’ve waited enough and dealt with enough shit … to go through with it, get it over with.”Jacobb Lake, a contractor who had driven overnight with his teenage son from Joplin, Missouri, was standing on Constitution Avenue with a handmade sign bearing the insignia of the QAnon conspiracy theory subculture, and declaring “My vote is not for sale. This will not be forgotten.”He had an even more dire prediction than Botelho for America’s future if the effort to overturn the election failed, and Biden took office.“World war three,” Lake said, adding that the nation “might split up”.Trump had said he would accompany his supporters to the Capitol but as soon as he finished speaking, he left in his motorcade for the 100-metre drive back to the White House.Some of the crowd peeled away and scattered across the city, but many thousands made their way across the lawns of the National Mall heading eastwards towards Congress.By that time, the day had already taken on a much darker hue. Two pipe bombs had been found at Republican and Democratic party offices near Congress and the assault on the Capitol had begun. Those who had gathered there in the morning were a harder-edged crowd than the Ellipse – more male with a lot more paramilitary gear. Someone had hung a rope noose on a frame on the Capitol grounds, and the vocabulary was noticeably more violent.“I heard at least three different rioters at the Capitol say that they hoped to find Vice-President Mike Pence and execute him by hanging him from a Capitol Hill tree as a traitor,” Jim Bourg, news pictures editor in Reuters’ Washington bureau, recalled on Twitter. “It was a common line being repeated. Many more were just talking about how the [vice-president] should be executed.”Some of the gathering mob turned on journalists, demanding to know their affiliation, and in several cases attacking them. Some were thrown to the ground, and one photographer was thrown off a low wall.As it became clear they would not be fired upon, the attackers gained in confidence. A few scaled a wall up to a terrace and then used scaffolding to climb higher still, where they could start smashing windows. By 2pm, they were inside the building.Members of Congress had been holding a joint session in the House of Representatives chamber to certify the electoral college results – something that was a half-hour formality in normal times but which had been prolonged by the objections from Trump loyalists.Vice-President Pence, in the chair for the session, was abruptly whisked out of the room by his security detail and a security officer strode into the centre of the chamber to declare an emergency. Plainclothes officers rammed a wooden chest against the main door to the chamber and drew their pistols.Senators and representatives in the well of the chamber were ushered out of a back exit, while members and press in the gallery were told to duck down and don the gas masks kept in bags under each seat. Lisa Blunt Rochester, Democratic representative from Delaware, began to pray out loud for “peace in the land, peace in this country … right now in the name of Jesus … Protect America.”The tiled corridors outside the chamber were filling up with insurrectionists. Some police officers kept up efforts to contain them, while others simply gave up and even waved them through. At least one policeman was caught on camera taking a selfie with an insurgent.One man unfurled a Confederate flag, a reminder that the US had its own long history of political violence which has snaked above and below the surface for decades and was now strutting unashamed in broad daylight in the heart of political power.Finding the main door to the House chamber blocked, a group of rioters found their way to a side entrance, smashing the glass out of the doors leading to the Speaker’s Lobby.First through the breach was Ashli Bobbitt, a 35-year-old air force veteran from San Diego. She had once been an Obama supporter but during the Trump era, had been drawn into a parallel culture of QAnon conspiracy theories. Wearing a Trump flag around her waist and a Stars and Stripes backpack, video footage shows her climbing through the damaged wooden door, ignoring the shouted orders from inside to retreat, when a plainclothes police officer emerged from an office on the other side and shot her once in the neck. She fell backwards on to the floor and died, soon afterwards at about 2.45pm, illuminated by the mobile phones of other rioters filming her last moments.Elsewhere in the building a Capitol police officer, Brian Sicknick, was fatally injured in a melee with rioters, reportedly by being attacked with a fire extinguisher. He died of his wounds on Thursday night. Three other people died of “medical emergencies” in the course of the breach, at least one of them from a heart attack, bringing the full death toll to five.Back in the White House, the president and his aides were transfixed by the unprecedented scenes they could see on their television screens. The Washington Post cited an aide as saying Trump was “bemused” by the spectacle. He saw the rioters as fighting for his cause but found them aesthetically distasteful and “low-class”.According to this account, the president was characteristically focused on his own grievances: that Pence had betrayed him, and that his followers were being judged more harshly than the anti-Trump demonstrators in the summer. He refused to condemn his own people, despite the desperate pleas from his erstwhile allies on Capitol Hill to call off the assailants.When Trump was finally persuaded to send a calming presidential message, it was on his terms. He began by repeating his groundless claim that he was the victim of a fraudulent election. He told people to go home but added: “We love you; you’re very special.”Witnesses said he was oblivious to the gravity of what had occurred: the five deaths, the unprecedented violation of Congress, the irrevocable damage to America’s reputation and the very real possibility his vice-president could have been lynched in response to Trump’s vilification.It was only after White House counsel, Pat Cipillone, made clear to Trump the extent of his legal liability for the storming of the Capitol, that Trump adjusted his tone in a second video on Thursday night, finally conceding defeat in the election two months earlier, and denouncing the insurrection.By then, the backlash had already begun. Congress had certified the result, his congressional supporters were being shunned by fellow Republicans, Facebook and then Twitter banned him indefinitely and Democrats prepared for a second impeachment, likely to begin this coming week.The Trump era is not quite over, however. There are still 10 days of this presidency left, and reports from the Oval Office suggest he no longer feels chastened, regretting having agreed to an orderly transition. He has flatly refused to attend his successor’s inauguration on 20 January. No one who knows Trump is betting he will now just slink quietly out of the back door of history. More

  • in

    Police officer dies after pro-Trump mob attack on US Capitol

    A US Capitol police officer has died of injuries suffered during the attack led by a pro-Trump mob, the force said in a statement late on Thursday.The officer, Brian Sicknick, had been with the US Capitol Police (USCP) since July 2008, and most recently served in the department’s first responders unit.Sicknick became the fifth person to die in the attacks. Among the four others killed was a demonstrator shot by authorities. Three died in what police called “medical emergencies”.Wednesday’s breach of the building came as Congress was certifying the victory of President-elect Joe Biden.“Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots … and was injured while physically engaging with protesters,” police said in a statement.He died on Thursday after being taken to hospital following his collapse upon returning to his divisional office, it added.Metropolitan homicide officials, along with the USCP and its federal partners, will investigate the death of Sicknick, police said.Democratic leaders of the House appropriations committee said the “tragic loss” of a Capitol police officer “should remind all of us of the bravery of the law enforcement officers who protected us, our colleagues, congressional staff, the press corps and other essential workers during the hours-long takeover of the Capitol by pro-Trump protesters”.More than 24 hours after he incited a mob to attack the US Capitol, Donald Trump urged an end to the violence and acknowledged there would be a new administration on 20 January.With Reuters and Associated Press More

  • in

    'Defund the police' slogan risks turning voters away, says Obama – video

    Former US president Barack Obama has criticised Democratic political candidates for using ‘snappy’ slogans such as ‘defund the police’, arguing they could turn voters away and defeat the original objective. In an interview with Good Luck America, a political show on social media platform Snapchat, Obama said the slogans can isolate potential voters. ‘You lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done,’ he said. ‘The key is deciding, do you want to actually get something done, or do you want to feel good among the people you already agree with?’
    Barack Obama criticizes ‘Defund the Police’ slogan but faces backlash More

  • in

    Barack Obama criticizes 'Defund the Police' slogan but faces backlash

    [embedded content]
    Barack Obama chastised Democratic political candidates for using “snappy” slogans like “defund the police” that he argued could turn voters away, in an interview released this week.
    “You lost a big audience the minute you say it, which makes it a lot less likely that you’re actually going to get the changes you want done,” the former president told show host Peter Hamby in an interview with Good Luck America, a Snapchat political show.
    “The key is deciding, do you want to actually get something done, or do you want to feel good among the people you already agree with?” Obama added.
    However, Obama also defended the place of young progressives as important “new blood” in the Democratic party, singling out Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – who has spoken out strongly on the phrase and the essence of defunding police departments to boost social spending.
    Former Obama campaign operative Ben LaBolt shared part of the president’s interview with Hamby online on Tuesday before the full interview went live on Snapchat on Wednesday.

    Ben LaBolt
    (@BenLaBolt)
    President Obama, about the best message architect there is, suggests a thoughtful alternative to “Defund.” Via @PeterHamby. https://t.co/ai64FDPgTI pic.twitter.com/UABXL5yLmr

    December 2, 2020

    The remarks drew immediate backlash from notable, Black progressive Democrats – including the Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, who stressed “defund the police” was not about mere words but a “demand for equitable investments and budgets for communities across the country”.

    Ilhan Omar
    (@IlhanMN)
    We lose people in the hands of police. It’s not a slogan but a policy demand. And centering the demand for equitable investments and budgets for communities across the country gets us progress and safety. https://t.co/Vu6inw4ms7

    December 2, 2020

    “We didn’t lose Breonna because of a ‘slogan’,” said Kentucky state representative Charles Booker, referencing Breonna Taylor, the Black, Louisville woman who was shot dead in her own apartment by police in March during a botched raid.
    Booker broke barriers in 2018 when he became the youngest Black lawmaker elected to the Kentucky state legislature in nearly a century. And he ran a close contest for the Democratic nomination to challenge – ultimately unsuccessfully – the Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell’s seat in the November election.

    Charles Booker
    (@Booker4KY)
    We didn’t lose Breonna because of a slogan. Instead of conceding this narrative, let’s shape our own. It’s time we listen to the people, organize and build coalitions around our own message, and cast a vision that inspires us all to lead for change at the ballot box and beyond. https://t.co/mBg7wanaR6

    December 2, 2020

    Cori Bush, who made history last month by becoming the first Black woman elected to represent Missouri in Congress shot back at Obama that “Defund the Police” was “not a slogan. It’s a mandate for keeping [Black] people alive.”
    “With all due respect, Mr President – let’s talk about losing people,” she said. “We lost Michael Brown Jr. We lost Breonna Taylor. We’re losing our loved ones to police violence.”
    The Black Lives Matter movement member’s rise in politics stemmed from her work as a community activist during protests against the shooting death of Mike Brown in Ferguson in 2014.
    Bush is also the only candidate to formally run on a platform of defunding the police – a point many analysts say make criticism of the movement unwarranted.
    Defund the Police has been a widely used phrase and policy initiative that gained traction over the summer as racial justice and anti-policing protests erupted in response to the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police in May.
    As a policy initiative, defunding police departments involves the reallocation of local and state resources away from law enforcement into public services, designed to address issues of poverty, inequality and mental health – factors that contribute to crime.
    The former president’s comments echoed other moderate Democrats who have taken issue and consider the phrase polarizing, prompting criticism of a progressive movement led by what some have called radical messaging.

    Jamaal Bowman
    (@JamaalBowmanNY)
    Damn, Mr. President.Didn’t you say “Trayvon could’ve been my son?” In 2014, #BlackLivesMatter was too much.In 2016, Kaepernick was too much.Today, discussing police budgets is too much.The problem is America’s comfort with Black death — not discomfort with slogans. https://t.co/DJUSZebgW5

    December 2, 2020

    In South Carolina, where the Democratic base is largely composed of Black Americans who skew older and moderate, the Democratic incumbent Joe Cunningham lost his House seat to Republican Nancy Mace in the November election.
    In the days following, the South Carolina congressman and House minority whip James Clyburn, who was regarded as instrumental in turning around Joe Biden’s flagging campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination when the moderate was behind leftist champion Bernie Sanders, told NBC News the slogan hurt some Democratic candidates.
    “If you instead say ‘Let’s reform the police department so that everybody’s being treated fairly,’” Clyburn offered alternatively. “Not just in policing, but in sentencing, how can we divert young people from getting into crime?’”
    While Obama took issue with progressive slogans, he also criticized moderate leadership for failing to recognize the increasingly powerful influence of young, progressives such as Ocasio-Cortez.
    The former president chastised the Democratic National Committee for only briefly featuring such democratic socialists in their opening montage during their national convention in Milwaukee in August.
    “She speaks to a broad section of young people who are interested in what she has to say, even if they don’t agree with everything she says. You give her a platform,” he said, adding that across political ideologies “new blood is always good” for the party. More

  • in

    Here's what interviewing voters taught me about the slogan 'defund the police' | Danny Barefoot

    Joe Biden won the electoral college, leads the popular vote by millions, and will be sworn in as the 46th president of the United States. Taking down an incumbent president is no easy feat and Biden deserves credit for his disciplined and effective campaign.
    But there is no question Biden underperformed vis-à-vis the consensus of pollsters and pundits. In Congress the underperformance was even more stark. Democrats expected to make gains in the House of Representatives. Instead, they are poised to return to Washington with an unexpectedly pared-down majority. In the Senate, Democrats were considered favorites to retake the chamber and deliver their party unified control of the federal government. Instead, they made only modest gains. This isn’t where the party wanted to be.
    I run a Democratic political consulting firm and wanted to immediately get to work to understand why this underperformance happened. While there are certainly multiple answers to that question and various dynamics at play, we decided to start our inquiry with voters who leaned towards voting for Joe Biden in the last weeks of the election, but ultimately voted to re-elect Donald Trump. We put together a focus group to discuss the election with these voters and explore what changed their minds.
    It will be easy for some to dismiss these participants as Trump voters (and they are!) but 70% of them told us they have a negative view of Donald Trump and at some point they supported Joe Biden before ultimately casting their vote for Trump. These aren’t Maga hat-wearing folks.
    One of the major takeaways from my discussion with these voters was their distaste for the slogan “defund the police”. While 80% agreed racism exists in the criminal justice system and 60% had a favorable view of Black Lives Matter, only one participant agreed we should “defund the police”. Another participant was exasperated, “That is crazier than anything Trump has ever said.”
    We tried to explain the actual policies behind the slogan “defund the police”. We noted that many activists who use this phrase simply want to reduce police funding and reallocate some of it to social services. One woman interrupted us to say “that is not what defund the police means, I’m sorry. It means they want to defund the police.” “I didn’t like being lied to about this over and over again,” added another woman. “Don’t try and tell me words don’t mean what they say,” she continued. The rest of the group nodded their heads in agreement.
    Ultimately 50% of people in our focus group said they thought Biden was privately sympathetic to defunding the police. While Biden and many Democrats rejected this framing, it is clear the calls from some on the left were louder than those denials.
    We followed up by asking if participants supported reducing police funding and reallocating it to social services and other agencies to reduce police presence in community conflict. Seventy per cent said they would support that proposal.
    It is almost beyond parody that progressive activists would build popular consensus on police reform only to slap on a slogan that is deeply unpopular with voters and doesn’t accurately communicate our policy goals. We don’t want to abolish the police. We don’t want to zero out funding for law enforcement. So we should forcefully reject slogans that imply we do. We should instead run on the broadly popular policies behind the slogan. It’s policy that changes lives. Unpopular framing that makes reform harder does favors to no one but those who want to protect the status quo.
    Representative James Clyburn, the Democratic whip and an activist in the civil rights movement, was blunt regarding his opinion of “defund the police” saying he believes it cost Democrats seats. “Stop sloganeering. Sloganeering kills people. Sloganeering destroys movements,” said Clyburn.
    My party won this election. We’ve now won the most votes in seven of the last eight presidential elections. But we live in a political system that would allow Republicans to block all reform and rule through the courts if we merely repeat this year’s performance in perpetuity. Some people’s response to that is to argue we need to abolish the electoral college or some other version of structural reform. I agree. But we need unified power to even begin that discussion.
    So the conversations happening about the direction of the Democratic party aren’t about “how do we win a majority every election” (we have mostly figured that out!) they have to be “how do we win by enough to make real change in a system that is rigged against us”.
    Some have noted that Republicans would never have this debate after they won an election. That’s probably correct. But Republicans can govern through minority rule. A majority is icing on the cake for them. They don’t need to have this debate to get what they want. Democrats do.
    The first thing we should do is forcefully reject slogans, branding and messaging that is deeply unpopular with voters.
    Danny Barefoot is the managing partner at Anvil Strategies, a Democratic consulting firm and advertising agency. Danny has a juris doctorate from Georgetown University Law Center More