Author Archives: Nicole Sanders

It’s good to hear he is finally being treated as the criminal he is.  It was a good day–the day that Donald Trump was finally hauled in front of a judge and called into account for one of the numerous wrongs he has committed in the name of gaining and holding onto power.  And, for the record, I do not think that hush money payments are in any way a trifling matter.  However unlikely, it might have changed the direction of the campaign. Even if it wouldn’t have, there is a principle at stake.  Trump succeeded in doing something that helped him lie his way into the White House.  But as soon as I say that, I have to say that illegal record keeping about an affair with a pron star is not enough.  God help us, let this be the beginning not the end.  

I admire Alvin Bragg for sticking to his guns in the face of all the pressure he is receiving.  I think that there is little more he could be doing under the circumstances.  If no other good comes out of his investigation, maybe the Republicans will show their true colors when they try to grill him.  Maybe it will become apparent how little respect they have for the fact that it isn’t their place to interfere.  But Bragg doesn’t have enough evidence to really make a dent in the movement Trump spawned.  Even if he does take Trump down, “MAGA” Republicans remain.  

Bragg can change the political calculus surrounding Trump.  But that doesn’t do much good for those of us who care about democracy.  What we need is a way to get at Trumpism, and that is going to take something more than improper bookkeeping and an adult film star.  What is needed is a way to go after Trumpism, and the way to get to Trumpism is through the Big Lie.  That means all roads lead to Georgia or the Justice Department.  The best possible outcome for the hush money investigation is that it creates a momentum which propels other investigations forward.

It is important to not get lost in hating Trump and not see the big picture.  Trump is a man.  But he represents a movement, and it is that movement that is truly dangerous; that movement is the real threat that the nation and the world faces.  It will not go away when Trump does.  It will change form; it will find a new person.  In many ways, Ron DeSantis is far more dangerous to American democracy than is Trump, because he represents the same movement with the same dangerous ideas without the baggage of hush money and porn stars and the absolutely politically idiotic mishandling of classified documents.  Trump’s indictment may indeed be welcome, but it says little about what will be needed for the fight ahead against his movement and ideas.  Those who care about democracy must not rest.  This indictment is the beginning of the struggle, not the end.

The recent ceremony between Russia and China reaffirming their military and diplomatic bond was disturbing but not surprising.   Putin now has, in Xi Jinping, another dictator at his side, one that might be willing and able to defy Western sanctions.  If anything, the unintended consequences of sanctions have the possibility of making circumstances worse instead of better over the long haul.  The West now runs the risk of igniting a new Cold War.  Already some in the global south are lined up on two sides– China vs. America and NATO.  Already, some like India and Brazil are finding it politically impossible to remain neutral.  And for a long time now, China has been the chink in the armor of Western sanctions.

 China is giving Putin the thing he needs most–more than money or arms–time.  Putin now has the advantage of being able to sit on his hands and hope that the rest of the world will tire of a conflict of attrition.  If the world community fails to act more aggressively now, we risk Ukraine becoming yet another forever war; decisive Ukrainian victories are needed soon.  Ukraine will have to make some headway or we risk the conflict becoming a quagmire.  Putin is waiting out the world community.  And the world community is letting him do it.

In the meantime, most concerning are calls from many Republicans, including a potential frontrunner for the Republican primary, for America to pull out of a “territorial dispute” with absolutely no understanding of the broader implications of a Russian victory.  

If anything, the world community still doesn’t understand how much is at stake.  The situation is much more dire than people are now recognizing.  We risk both Russia and China learning that if they test the West hard enough, they will win.  In the name of not being escalatory, America and the West are actually increasing the possibility that there will be a nuclear threat in the future, because China is learning that nuclear saber rattling is effective as a deterrent.  Now China is upping the ante in the Taiwan Strait, and investing in more nuclear technology.  In the name of not provoking Putin, we risk a broader conflict with an emboldened China in the not too distant future. 

Ukraine needs a lot more help, and they need it now.  The biggest problems we have now stem from not having given Ukraine the things they wanted and needed in the first place.   Much has been lost by delaying sending things like tanks; further delay could cost us the war.  Give Ukraine what it needs.  And prepare for a scenario where China gives Putin what he needs.  We told ourselves Putin wouldn’t really invade.  Let’s not fool ourselves into believing he won’t really get help from China.  Give Ukraine everything it needs to prevail, even if it does mean doing things that are “escalatory.”  If it means sending troops; send troops.  Bring the conflict to an end.  Further delay will only strengthen the Russia-China relationship.

 If America claims to be rich enough to afford to not have the rich pay their fair share, rich enough to create a financial crisis purely for political reasons–then it stands to reason that it ought to be able to deal with the closing of one small bank.  But the situation is again being mishandled with negative consequences for the American taxpayer.  I am incredulous that over the long term no taxpayer money will be spent in an attempt to deal with this crisis.  Eventually, in some way, the American people end up paying, even if it is indirectly.  The only real way to shield taxpayers from this kind of fallout is to not let things like this happen in the first place.  Once they do, there is little that can be done to avert a catastrophe without government money, which inevitably has to come from somewhere.

One can blame the Trump administration, but one should be careful to remember that the deregulation that was at least part of how we got ourselves into this mess had bipartisan support.  The easy money and the bowing to Wall Street have spanned multiple administrations.  Now is a moment to stop and ask people who were involved, and ourselves, what we were thinking.   

No one doubts that the Fed is well intentioned.  Jerome Powell, in his mind, was attempting to put people back to work after the most serious economic crisis that the nation, and the world, has ever faced.  But good intentions are not enough.  It has been clear for a decade that the Fed is unable to maintain its independence from the markets.  Instead of stepping up and encouraging better regulation of these banks, it has simply gotten into the habit of bailing them out.  America has got to find a better way,  because the current path of bailouts every time a bank takes unnecessary and unwise risks cannot continue. There were warning signs after warning signs that something was going wrong at SVB, and that the failure of this bank would lead to contagion.  The Fed cannot afford to continue to drop the ball.  Eventually, a financial melt-down will occur that no amount of bailouts and “quantitative easing” (i.e. giving Wall Street everything it wants) will be able to resolve.

America needs fiscal policy truly directed at common and low-income people who are trying to make ends meet and put food on the table, not fiscal policy that cow-tows to Wall Street every time it throws a temper tantrum.  We need a policy that acknowledges that Wall Street isn’t the end all and be all of the American economy and finds a way to decouple the rest of the economy and Main Street from the banking sector so that banks that make financially unsound, and excessively risky investments are allowed to fail.  For years progressives have heard that we shouldn’t invest in the most vulnerable because it is contrary to principles of capitalism.  Allowing bad banks to fail–isn’t that capitalism?

Sometimes the most important budget proposals are DOA.  For whatever criticism I have had of Biden, (and it has been quite a lot) one has to admire him for sticking to his guns and “picking a fight,” as the New York Times recently put it, with house Republicans.  Sometimes the most important bills are the ones that aren’t going to pass.  More than anything else, they make a statement about principles.  As the Republicans gear up to disinvest in America’s future–it’s children, Biden is taking a stand in the face of some very senseless dislogic from the other side of the aisle.  It remains to be seen whether he will be able to protect America’s children from going hungry or slipping into poverty.  The Republicans are poised to create an economic crisis surrounding the debt ceiling in the name of not wanting the ultra-rich to pay their fair share.  It also remains to be seen if congress will be able to come together to pass some kind of sensible reform.  

The Republicans are right about one thing–we cannot go on as we are.  Change in the way America finances itself must come.  But even as they complain vociferously about deficits and the debt, the Republicans ignore the one thing that is absolutely essential for getting America out of the fiscal hole it has dug itself into–raising taxes on the rich.  We know trickle down doesn’t work.  We have proved that taxes on the very wealthy can be levied in such a way that it will not slow economic growth.  In reality, the rest of the developed world redistributes wealth in this way and provides for the basic needs of its people so that they have a much better quality of life overall.

It’s called investment.  If you think about it, what does it mean to pay less in taxes if it means you will be more likely to become a victim of violent crime when your government refuses to reduce poverty or invest in crime prevention initiatives.  How much are you willing to pay for safer streets?  Fighting climate change is expensive and necessitates raising taxes. But tell the people affected by catastrophic and repeated flooding in Northern California that it isn’t worth a few extra hundred dollars at the end of the year.  We pay for the things we don’t fund.  We pay for hungry children who turn their back on society.  We pay for floods caused by global warming.  Our children will pay if the debt keeps rising.  If Republicans really do want answers, they will have to face financial reality–there is no way to deal with the debt without raising taxes on the rich.  It simply cannot be done.  The math just doesn’t add up.  It is ridiculous to think that having more kids hungry and in poverty will save America money.  The consequences of this critical disinvestment will be felt for generations to come. It will create a financial ticking time bomb left for America’s future.  

The recent onslaught on bills directed at transgender youth coming from the Iowa legislature (and many other Republican legislatures) is downright disturbing.  It isn’t that Republicans don’t have a point.  There are risks associated with puberty blockers and other forms of gender affirming care for young people seeking to transition.  But for a party that is supposed to believe in small government, it is hard to fathom how and why they would propose government step in and make a decision both so complex and so personal. If the governor doesn’t believe in puberty blockers no one is forcing her child to take them.  It is equally wrong to tell the family of a young person they cannot have access to them.  These decisions are being made with doctors who understand risks and benefits.  Nowhere in the Republicans arguments is there room for the benefits of gender affirming care.  Nor is there any mention of the risks of doing nothing when a young person is struggling with their gender identity.  

What the Republicans argue is essentially that the adults in the life of this young person should sit on their hands and wait.  For depression and suicide?  For social isolation?  Do we want to return to the days when transgender people had to lie and hide who they were for fear of the repercussions?  

I am not old enough to remember the Stonewall uprising.  I have been blessed to live in a time where I could watch the transgender rights movement flourish.  I have personally benefited from the struggles of those who came before me.  But I am also old enough to remember how different it was to be young and transgender a generation ago.  We cannot roll back progress.  These backward laws will mean that once again transgender people will have to live in fear of their own government, and perhaps even their own families.

Republicans are free to believe transgender people are obscene.  They are not free to make an intimate, personal decision for someone else because they hold onto antiquated, backward ideas that have no place in a modern society.  What gender someone is is a decision that cannot be made by any other person, much less a government, even when someone is still young.  Simply not reaching out to transgender youth is not an option.  They need support if they are to successfully navigate a most difficult transition.  They do not need their personal decisions politicized, or controversy surrounding them.  

Rather than making sure people know about some young person’s gender dysphoria, what these bills really do is force transgender young people and their allies into the closet and onto the fringes of society.  And that is what this all comes down to–a question of individual liberty.  Lost in the debate is the right of an individual, even a young individual, to choose for themselves what they believe about their gender identity.  In the final analysis, it is not a decision anyone can make for them.

It should just be said outright for all the world to hear.  Joe Biden is a decent guy that would make an excellent candidate if he was 10 years younger.  It isn’t just an issue of electability; it is an issue of capability.  It isn’t just the gaffs.  One can visibly see that Biden is slowing down.  The demands of the world’s toughest job are already beginning to show in him. We will see what plays out over the next few weeks as Biden faces the grueling schedule that campaigning always is.  I am not hopeful.  Granted, Biden seemed vigorous enough at his State of the Union address, but who knows where he will be in 2 years, much less 6 if he wins reelection and completes his term.   

  The greatest problem is the specter of a constitutional crisis.  Whatever Joe Biden’s mental state now, it could change a lot and quickly.  We risk having him at the helm when he experiences a sudden decline.  This could spell disaster.  Republicans are already lining up to find a pretext to impeach Biden.  Even a small decline would give them ammunition.  This might not only spell the end of his presidency, his ability to advance his agenda would grind to a halt and the government would become distracted from the business at hand.  This isn’t a far-off prospect.  If Biden cannot withstand the pressures of campaigning this could become a problem in the immediate future.  And many may come to feel they are potentially voting for Biden’s vice-president, and that could be disastrous for the campaign–not because Kamala Harris is not an able leader, but because people need to know who they are voting for or they won’t vote at all.

All of this leaves the Democratic party wide open to potential contenders who represent a new generation of the up-and-coming alt right.   2024 will be won by the party that can get out the vote, that can fire up the base.  There are a host of Republican contenders who have shown they can do just that–all of whom are a potential threat to American democracy.   I am afraid that if Biden runs people will do negative voting.

In light of all of this it is difficult to see why Biden’s age is now the proverbial elephant in the middle of the room.  Surely, if a concerted effort was made he could be persuaded not to run, for the benefit of the broader progressive movement.  Progressives have other alternatives.  Progressives need a young, forward-looking face that represents the future of the party.

That doesn’t mean Biden needs to disappear from the scene or that we should disrespect him.  But let him take up his proper place within the progressive movement as elder statesman spending the last years of his life as a respected and able advisor.  Joe Biden is a decent man and an excellent politician, but he needs to step aside and allow a new generation to claim the presidency.

It is a moment to defend “woke.”  If Ron DeSantis wants to use the term derisively, he is free to do so.  He, and others like him, (who are far more dangerous than Trump at the moment) should not be free to bully the Advanced Placement committee into weakening past recognition a curriculum that is vital to the youth of the entire nation. However, neither do the people charged with preparing our young people for college have the right to let themselves be bullied.  As much as I abhor the way that DeSantis thinks, the blame for this failed curriculum falls squarely on the shoulders of the people who created it.  I am not willing to believe that they were not allowing themselves to be pressured by DeSantis and the like.  Even if it is true, as they say, that changes to the curriculum were completed before the Florida Department of Education refused to offer the course; it is clear that the changes were made to appease the movement that DeSantis represents.

And that movement is one of the most dangerous that America has ever faced.  DeSanis had the gall to ask if the African American studies course taught, “Black Panther ideology”.  This is a blatant insult to African-Americans.  DeSantis seems to think that members of the African American community who want students of all colors to understand African-American history better are instead a “woke mob” out to brainwash white children into self-shame.  His conspiracy theories border on the delusional; he has fear-mongered his way to political power.  

Meanwhile, in reality, many Americans of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds simply want high school students to have an opportunity to really delve into the history of how African Americans have shaped this country.  And to learn about the good and the bad.  If we don’t teach this history, we risk back-tracking on the gains the civil rights movement of my father’s generation made.  If an instructor believes studying Black history means understanding the role of Black power in the political developments of the civil rights era, that instructor should be supported.  

Nobody is attempting to brainwash Florida’s children.  We, the “woke mob,” want them to understand their history so as not to repeat it, and African-American history is their nation’s history no matter what color they are.  It says a lot that one of the items removed from the curriculum was Michelle Alexander’s book The New Jim Crow.  The premise of this book is that history is repeating itself.  That, in part because we do not take seriously enough our understanding of Black history, we are now making the same mistakes that were made at the end of Reconstruction–that now, as then, a huge step forward is becoming progress rolled back.  Anything that we can do as a society to stop the erosion of progress from happening is a worthy endeavor.  This curriculum is a missed opportunity to help in that worthy endeavor.

The appalling conduct of the officers in the tragic death of Tyre Nichols should give us pause and cause us to re-evaluate what it is actually going to take to get a handle on rising violent crime.  One thing we have learned, the hard way, is that specialized units designed to be “tough on crime” can end up killing the people they are supposed to be protecting.  Where did Scorpion go wrong?  For one thing, nobody listened.  There were warnings.  The people who didn’t heed those warnings, whatever their good intentions, then or now, are responsible. It will be impossible to move forward without accountability.  

But there is an even deeper problem.  The design and concept of Scorpion was dangerous.   The stigma that comes from setting aside one particular place and scapegoating it as the source of crime, instead of seeing crime as a community wide problem, does something to the human psyche, something that just isn’t good.  It sends the message that crime is the responsibility of a handful of people who are somehow less than the rest of us because of their zip code.  Instead, we need to be sending our cops the message that crime is the responsibility of the entire community.

America seems to be enamored of the approach to crime exemplified by Scorpion.  Let’s “get tough,” let’s focus on “troubled areas,” let’s have highly specialized, highly trained, and highly militarized cops.   America as a whole needs to come to grips with what it is teaching its police officers by fighting crime the way it does.  They learn to see crime as a Black problem, a problem of the ghetto, a problem confined to a few “bad neighborhoods.”   It leads to a dehumanizing criminalization, and a powder keg that only needs a spark to set it off.  

This should be a moment of reckoning.  Let’s hope that Davis will think hard and reconsider the entire approach to crime that led her to create Scorpion in the first place, because it is inherently flawed.  The nation does not need anymore specialized tactical elements that target and scapegoat only particular neighborhoods.   It needs cops who are listening to the communities they serve.  If Memphis wanted to set aside a particular area as a source of high crime, it should have invested in wrap-around schools, community centers, and after school programs.  Davis should have told her community, and most importantly her cops, to focus on why that neighborhood has so much violent crime and what the police force could do to partner with the community to find lasting solutions to the problems that community faced.

Memphis needs to take a hard look at itself.  It needs to ask itself what the real root causes of crime are.  Scorpion was designed to shut down this process.  Instead of looking at the reasons certain areas had such high rates of crime, the police facilitated the scapegoating of Black communities, to disastrous effect.  The concept was wrong; the results were heinous.

Gov Reynolds latest “school choice” bill, her most extreme yet, is being billed as a way to provide a way out of failing schools for students in poverty.  As someone who spent my primary and secondary education moving back and forth between overcrowded, underfunded public schools and small, private schools, I believe this bill is utterly misguided.  I spent elementary school and the first part of high school at private Catholic schools, and middle school and the last part of high school at under-resourced public schools.  As someone who was one of those kids that came from a working poor family whose parents wanted to get them out of a failing school, I can tell you that “school choice” may not live up to its promises.   For me, at least, it was ultimately my underfunded public high school with its high proportion of students who qualified for free or reduced school lunch that prepared me for college, and provided me with a supportive environment.  Without it I would not have graduated.  I have a question for Governor Rreynolds: What about the very many kids for whom private schools don’t work?   What about the students who need a public school? and need the public school they choose to be properly resourced?

I was a poor kid with a disability, who had no interest in Catholicism, and was struggling with my gender identity.  Private school was a toxic environment for me.  Diagnosed with severe depression at a young age, I encountered discrimination from students and faculty alike.  Many spoke openly about my illness being sin.  There was absolutely no concept of diversity.  I could count on one hand the people of color.  There was no presence of, and no tolerance for, any faith other than Christianity.  I knew of no openly LGBTQ person except for the lunch lady who was fired after being outed as a lesbian.  I was one of a handful of students who were not upper middle class.  If there was any special education at all, I did not encounter it.  

This situation was just considered a normal part of attending a Catholic high school.  I often heard students say that their parents sent them to private schools to avoid educating their children in diverse environments.  Racism was everywhere.  Although I am very sure that my experiences do not mirror the experiences of many students in private schools in any way, I also do not believe that my experiences were in any way unique.  The circumstances at my school were the product of long entrenched systemic exclusion.  I feel very confident that there were many other schools in similar situations for the same reasons; the products of the same system that allowed people with money to create an insular environment.  

At 16, I was afforded something very much like the school choice bill.  I was awarded a scholarship to continue at a private school.  I also had the option to transfer to the public high school whose district I was in.  I was in the less socioeconomically advantaged district.  It took me less than 15 seconds to choose public education.  Looking back on it, it was one of the best decisions I have ever made.

I attended private school in 1994, and I would imagine that today things are different, but my experiences speak to a history of private schools that should give us pause as we turn hundreds of thousands and perhaps even millions of dollars over to these institutions.  It would be good to take a moment and remember that many private schools have a history of taking advantage of children attempting to escape impoverished schools.  Some of the institutions that will be receiving this money have long been bastions of elitism.  I am extremely concerned that the state is handing a blank check to these institutions without so much as ensuring that they are actually committed to serving children in need.  In my experience, private schools took my family’s money and not only did not provide an education, but left me in an environment so devoid of diversity it wasn’t emotionally safe.  

The thing that troubles me most about this bill is its naive lack of oversight.  My high school is sure to receive some of the money allocated in this bill.  Is the state of Iowa going to ensure that my school and schools with its kind of history have changed enough?  Is anyone going to ensure that today schools receiving government funding are committed to diversity and inclusion?  Will taxpayer dollars end up supporting institutions where a history of racism, homophobia, and religious intolerance has not been adequately addressed?  If we are going to commit millions of taxpayer dollars in the name of giving poor children better options, then someone needs to ensure we are putting them in environments with such low diversity that they cannot find a sense of belonging.  Giving kids the “choice” to go to private schools may make a good sound bite, but the devil is in the details.  

The state of Iowa does not have the right to make a failing public school and a private school a student’s only options.  If a student wants to attend a private school, it should be because that school is right for them, not because quality public education is not an available option.   A situation arises where a parent seeks out a private institution for their child, only to find something very wrong.  If we fail to invest in public schools, what kind of options do we give parents in this position?  

School choice should mean other good options besides private schools.  The state should not be creating a situation where parents have to choose between failing public schools and private schools that may not be right for their child.  That’s not “school choice.”

 I know that there are many very good private schools out there.  I know many students get good educations from them and that many schools have come into the modern era.  It is very possible that these institutions are part of the solution to broken education structures.  But they come with problems just as much as they have promise.  

The idea that parents should be made to choose between failing public schools and private education for their child is inherently false, inherently dangerous, and not about giving anybody good options.  We need to keep our public schools strong for those for whom private school is not a good option.  Governor Reynolds wants to improve school choice.  She seems to have forgotten the students who are choosing the backbone of American society–the public school.

Biden has finally made his way down to the border, but I fear it may be too little, too late.  The crisis has festered for decades.  It is going to be a long time before anyone is going to be able to get a handle on the situation to the extent that we can say the crisis has been resolved.  Meanwhile, people suffer.  Every month tens of thousands of people risk everything to find what America promised to the whole world–give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses.  Well, America got what it asked for; the question is can it live up to that promise.

What is certain is that more enforcement just isn’t going to work, and just isn’t right.  More people armed and with law enforcement powers is going to make a bad situation that much more terrible.  It ignores reality– people wouldn’t be coming in the first place if they had anywhere else to be.    

The situation is a failure on every level.  It is not the fault of any one administration or political party; neither is there any administration or political party not at fault.  The most important thing that needs to be done now is for everyone to acknowledge the wrongs done to immigrants over the course of many years by American government and society as a whole, and stop shifting blame.  Biden could and should start here now.  This isn’t to say that Trump era policies like family separation were not far more inhumane than current policy; it is to say that no one, at this point, has the right to claim to be without fault in this humanitarian crisis.  Accepting responsibility is the first step forward.  I am deeply disappointed that Biden hasn’t taken that first step.  Nothing productive can get done on the border until he does.  I am afraid that Biden may try to shift the blame rather than find concrete solutions.

What it all boils down to, is that America has a responsibility to be better than this.  You don’t get it both ways.  You don’t get to see yourself as a land of opportunity for immigrants, indeed see yourself as a nation of immigrants, and then show a disregard for the life and dignity of people who risk everything for a shot at the American dream.

 If America really feels it must turn away from its border people who are so desperately afraid to live in their own country that they would spend all the money they have and risk their lives and the lives of their children–if it is true that America really cannot make a place for these people within its society, they are at least afforded the right to a safe and humane process by which to be told no.  As part of acknowledging their humanity, America can find a way to ensure they are treated with respect, and not seen as common criminals, just because they too wish for the American dream.