RVA Mag

Richmond, VA Culture & Politics Since 2005

Menu

Sacrifice For Squalor

|

Topics: , , , , , ,

At Fort Lee and around the nation, military families are plagued by unsafe housing. Here’s how some Virginians are trying to solve the problem.

In the span of a career in the armed services, military families will move six to nine times. Each time, the family must reorient: new routes to work, new schools, and the various culture shocks typical for a cross-continental move. It can be exhausting. 

When Patricia Santos, her husband, and her three children moved to Fort Lee, they didn’t know what to expect. It was 2017, and this was their second move since Santos’ husband joined the Army in 2004.  

“When a young family comes into the service, they’re just happy to have a home,” Santos said. “They go throughout their daily life and take housing for their word. They don’t want to cause trouble.” 

However, when Santos worked as a temp at a military housing office a few years earlier, she saw glimpses of a darker side. “If they couldn’t find the move-in sheets, they’d throw it away,” Santos said. “If you refused to pay for a carpet stain that was there when you moved in, they would threaten to call the MP’s [military police].” 

The Santos family were hopeful that Fort Lee, 25 miles south of Richmond, would be different. Yet when they arrived, trash and debris littered their new home. Santos said Hunt Military Communities (HMC), who handle leasing for on-base housing at Fort Lee, insisted the home was cleaned — yet the family recorded six pages of damages during their inspection. 

Unfortunately, they had no place else to go. “It was a take it or leave it situation,” Santos said. “[HMC] said there were no other options.” 

A year later, Santos spotted a water leak and mold emanating from the water spout outside. Then her children got sick: her 5-year-old son developed dark rings under his eyes. She put in a work order. “They came, they turned it on, turned it off, said it was fixed,” she said. “They did nothing to fix the water spout.” 

A few days later, Santos discovered a major water leak entering the wall from the outdoor water spigot. She requested that HMC replace the floorboards and the wall ruined by water. Their request was denied. “He says, ‘We’re just going to paint over it,’” she said. “I said ‘No, this needs to be removed.’” 

In the meantime, the mold began to spread throughout the home. The housing office met with Santos and HMC Maintenance director Jeff Koch at the home. “He’s touching the exposed floorboards — no protection, no goggles, no gloves — saying, ‘Oh there’s nothing here.’” Santos said. “I said, ‘Sir, that black stuff, that’s mold.’” 

The leasing office at Fort Lee ultimately ordered Koch to remove the floorboards and siding, but with the mold exposed, the family couldn’t occupy the first floor. Families are typically provided another residence at an on-post private hotel during large maintenance, however, they must cover the cost. According to HMC’s Fort Lee Community Director, Charleen Herriott, there were no available accommodations. 

“They could not move us anywhere,” Santos said. “So we had to live upstairs the whole time it took for them to take everything out. It was about three weeks.”

During this time, the home was barely habitable. The family became severely ill, as did their babysitter. Santos dealt with flu-like symptoms, while her children — already on nebulizers — needed breathing treatments twice a day to combat upper-respiratory infections. 

A few days after the order was finished, Santos found a check for $100 in her mailbox. A HMC rep told her it was for, “Giving [you] a hard time on the mold.” She tossed it back in the mailbox. 

Under Virginia law, tenants in unsafe housing can exit their leases. They can make repairs themselves and deduct the cost from rent. They can notify their local agencies to enforce health codes. They can fight back. 

But on military bases, different rules apply. Tenants may not inspect homes prior to move-in; nor can they fight improperly-documented claims of damage reported when they move out. Tenants aren’t allowed access to the building’s history, and if issues arise and housing services refuse to act, service members can’t hold out on rent. 

“Military families don’t have recourse,” Shannon Razsadin, Executive Director of the Military Family Advisory Network, told CBS News. “They never even see the money. It immediately goes from [the military] to this privatized housing company. So they don’t have the ability to withhold rent when they’re dealing with a challenge.” 

In January 2019, the Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN) conducted a national poll for families who lived on base within the past three years, and received around 17,000 responses. The results were scathing: nearly two-thirds of respondents reported a negative experience with privatized military housing. Housing issues were reported at more than 160 military installations across the country, including at seven of the 10 largest military installations in the U.S. A third of respondents reported mold in their residences, and more than 1,500 reported problems with vermin or pest infestations. 

Families also reported that requests for repair are often denied or ignored — and when they report housing company reps to military command, they’re bullied into silence. Some even claim they received threats. 

“We were overwhelmed by the number of respondents that we had, and it really goes to show that these aren’t one-off issues,” Razsadin said. “This is a widespread problem, and it’s something that needs to be acted on.” 

Housing will push families to accept the home before even seeing it. And if they don’t accept, they have no alternative. For families with special needs or stationed for a short stay, on-base housing is their only option. 

“I want an apology,” said Leticia Lewis, a former Fort Lee resident. “My family wants an apology. Everyone here at Fort Lee is owed an apology by Hunt Housing.” 

Leticia Lewis and her family moved into a special-needs home at Fort Lee in April 2018. In the first few weeks, black mold accrued in her upstairs bedroom. Then mushrooms grew up from the floor. It took three weeks to remove it. 

“Would you allow your kids to sleep in a room like this? No. So don’t do it to someone’s family,” she said. “What we are all fighting for here is our health.” 

Meanwhile, her son was hospitalized in a pediatric ICU for three days, and had to be put on oxygen. “My son has missed so much school,” she said. “He needed to recuperate — he’s five years old.” 

What the Santos and Lewis families have experienced is not uncommon. Military families at Fort Lee and across the nation live in squalor: black mold, lead paint, faulty wiring, poor water quality, pesticides, and a slew of vermin, insects, and animals in their homes. And until recently, their concerns have largely been ignored. 

Fort Lee is the third-largest training post in the Army. One third of the Army’s soldiers will either train or be stationed at Fort Lee sometime in their career. The average stay for a family at Fort Lee is six to 12 months; few stay more than three years. 

“They are counting on us moving out quickly,” Santos said. “They are counting on the quick turnover rate, the high dollars they charge us for normal wear and tear. These profits come off our backs and our sacrifice.” 

A year into Amanda Vargas’s residency at Fort Lee, her carpets began showing clear signs of mold. According to her lease, the carpet was to be replaced by HMC every four years, but when Vargas contacted the previous residents, who lived there for four years, she learned the carpet wasn’t replaced during their stay. When she requested that it be tested, she was denied. 

“If I leave a water bottle out, I can see mold grow in it within hours,” Vargas said. Over the last year, Vargas’s five-year-old daughter has had constant upper-respiratory issues. 

“We live in these homes,” Vargas said. “These homes are not free, they come with a sacrifice. And our children pay the most sacrifice.” 

Hunt Military Communities, who runs the housing at Fort Lee, is one of America’s largest landlords. Of the 35 companies referenced in the MFAN survey, Hunt Military Communities was the third-highest cited of any property manager included. Several families have accused the company of fraud, conspiring to conceal dangerous conditions, breach of contract, and gross negligence. Service members describe feeling powerless, that they have little to no recourse. 

Housing privatization began in 1998, as an unofficial bailout initiative when the Department of Defense failed to provide adequate housing for approximately 200,000 military families. Competitions were held for developers to manage homes on more than 150 installations across the country; those chosen were signed to 50-year contracts. 

The initiative received wide bipartisan support, and worked at first with close attention from civilian and military leaders. But it was never projected to succeed — according to a 1998 pilot report by the Government Accountability Office, cost and earnings from privatization were overstated, and savings would not be as large as the DoD originally claimed. 

Despite these well-informed concerns, the initiative moved forward. But after a financial meltdown in 2008 and cutbacks in military staff in 2011, the military diverted its attention to other priorities, leaving housing companies without oversight. 

“I suspect that [military command] thought things would be better by putting it in the hands of private owners, but in the end they handed it over to a business. And like any other business, they’re out to make money,” Santos said. “They’re not truly fulfilling the mission that the army has entrusted them to do, and that’s taking care of military families.” 

Santos would like to see the DoD engage in more direct oversight of on-base housing and the companies that provide it. 

“I think it would make a difference, because it would make younger families have an idea, when they move in, [of] where their rights would stand,” she said. “That’s something that should’ve been proposed the first time they signed 50-year contracts with these people.” 

In response to the MFAN’s findings, Congress held hearings in February and March to address the concerns. “This issue seems to have caught us by surprise,” said Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Congressional leaders and top military brass toured homes and were appalled by the poor housing conditions and lack of responsiveness from housing providers. 

“We are deeply troubled by the recent reports highlighting the deficient conditions in some of our family housing,” stated Secretary of the Army Dr. Mark Esper. “It is unacceptable for our families who sacrifice so much to have to endure these hardships in their own homes. Our most sacred obligation as Army leaders is to take care of our people — our Soldiers and our family members.”

After the hearings, committee members drafted the Ensuring Safe Housing for our Military Act. The bill would require installation commanders to withhold the family’s rent from the landlord after notifications of potential health, safety or environmental hazards, until military housing officials and the families agree that it has been fixed. 

Senator Tim Kaine, a champion of the bill, stressed that it was the only way to combat malpractice by property managers. “There has been recent attention on the national scope of dangerous conditions in military base housing, including children poisoned by lead, and lapses in oversight that have put military families at risk,” Kaine wrote in an Op-Ed for the Daily Progress. “Military families make enormous sacrifices in service to our nation, and they deserve safe housing.” 

After Fort Lee completed its Congressionally-mandated assessment of on-post homes in March, work order numbers nearly quadrupled — from 194 to 850. As of the most recent town hall, 5,000 work orders had yet to be completed. 

Senator Mark Warner held a roundtable for military families in April. At the roundtable, Vargas and other Fort Lee families stressed their inability to hold HMC accountable, and their suspicions that important documents were being erased or withheld. 

“Hunt is to get work orders done within 10 days, but they rarely honor nor adhere to the appropriate response times for work orders,” Vargas said. “When they do come to do fix things, they leave jobs incomplete.” 

“My concern is, we may improve circumstances for all of you,” said Warner. “But if we don’t change the system, things will get better for a year or two and they’ll fade from people’s memories — and your successors will be sitting here, telling me the same stories.” 

Repairs to military homes nationwide could cost upwards of $386 million, according to a series of reports made between 2013 and 2016 by the Defense Department’s Inspector General. The report found these deficiencies stemmed from “a lack of adequate preventative maintenance and inspections being performed at the installations,” and recommended bi-annual inspections of all homes. 

But defense officials rejected the recommendations. They would “unnecessarily increase costs” and “impose more government intrusion into a private business enterprise,” the D0D said in its official response. 

Returning the responsibility of housing to the DoD (as it was before 1998) would involve enormous costs to U.S. taxpayers, and has potential to bring back the problems that led the government to privatization in the first place. Yet the current system is failing many families, and despite Congressional and military efforts to improve it, problems remain deeply entrenched. 

Many military families agree that a tenant’s bill of rights would be a good first step. But current legislative changes won’t take effect until 2020, and many don’t see themselves sticking around for it. Instead, they are leaving the service prematurely, for the sake of their families’ health. Vargas’s husband plans on leaving in July, on his 4-year anniversary of joining the military. For now, her daughter sleeps in a walk-in closet — the only room in the house without a mold-infested HVAC duct. 

Just before Senator Warner’s roundtable in April, Lewis got a call from the hospital. They informed her that TriCare, the Department Of Defense’s military health insurance provider, won’t cover her X-ray screenings for infections she contracted during her time at Fort Lee housing. But she doesn’t blame TriCare. 

“TriCare doesn’t need to be paying for my medical bills,” Lewis said. “Hunt housing needs to be paying for my medical bills.” 

Tim Kaine Hosts Local Forum About Gun Control

|

Topics: , , , , , ,

In a discussion featuring political leaders from around the Commonwealth, Richmonders voiced their support for gun control legislation in Virginia.

In a roundtable discussion on gun control legislation hosted by Senator Tim Kaine on southside Monday morning, Richmonders voiced their concerns about a lack of attention given to youth and education in underserved areas, and that lack of attention acting as a catalyst for gun violence.

Held at the New Life Deliverance Tabernacle, members of affected families and people from multiple organizations such as Moms Demand Action, participated in the discussion, along with General Assembly representatives including Delegate Dawn Adams and Delegate Schuyler VanValkenburg. Also in attendance were Mayor Levar Stoney and Brian Moran, Virginia’s Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security.

“We’ve been dealing with violence for a long period of time, and now it has reached its apex,” Pastor Robert Winfree said. “There ought to be some stipulations on [firearms].”

Kaine stated that two pieces of legislation addressing tighter regulation on background checks when purchasing a firearm are currently pending in the Senate.

“We lose almost three Virignians a day from guns,” Moran said. “What the Senator has put forward is really a robust piece of legislation to address the homicides, the accidental deaths, as well as the suicides.”

In preparation for a special General Assembly session to consider gun control legislation, set by Governor Northam for July 9, Kaine is visiting several towns across Virginia in order to involve local communities in the upcoming discussion with lawmakers.

“We are grateful for calling a special session on July 9, because we are sick and tired of the spineless leadership in the General Assembly,” Stoney said. “Black and brown people and families are affected the most by bringing firearms into underserved communities. Black and brown people are dying each and every day. So my question to the GA is, ‘How many more is it going to take?’”

Northam made this decision after the Virginia Beach mass shooting on May 31, when a disgruntled employee open fired in a municipal building, killing 12 people and injuring four more. Northam criticized majority Republicans in the General Assembly for killing gun control legislature in subcommittees before allowing them to reach the floor for a full vote.

The main concerns expressed by the citizens, families, and advocates in attendance were for children, education, mental health services, and cyclical poverty and drug dependence in underserved communities. Kaine listened intently to all these arguments, while maintaining his reasoning for more rigorous background checks, fewer rounds in magazines, increasing number of street cameras, and banning gun silencers.

“It don’t start with nobody but ourselves in the community,” said Mark Whitfield, a family member affected by gun violence. “I come from the projects, I come from the streets. I know what’s been really going on for a long time… You can’t talk about guns without talking about drugs. The drugs will change people’s attitude. I know people who went to college and drop out. They can’t get income, so what do they do? They sell drugs. You sell drugs? You got to have a gun for protection. That’s how it works.”

Whitfield, as well as several others, called for individual responsibility and more influential involvement with children. He cited a loss of summer programs and educational leadership as part of the cycle of gun violence.

“What burns our relationship with the police is these people who sell drugs, to provide for their children, go to jail,” Whitfield said. “In jail you’re supposed to get rehabilitation. No, don’t work like that, because when you get out of jail, no one’s going to hire you because you’re a class A felon. So now you’re back on the streets. It’s a repeating cycle.”

Local small business owner and children’s health coach Randy O’Neill noted that neither the Virginia Chamber of Commerce nor members of the Richmond City Council were included at the roundtable. Some members of City Council have criticized Stoney in the past for giving his attention to large public projects rather than allocating money into small, local economies, which could potentially initiate change within underserved communities.

“We better get on the block, in those kids’ lives immediately,” said O’Neill, owner of Virginia is for Education, a mobile gym that coaches children how to exercise in their own neighborhoods. “We need to create critical mass on the block, where youth services can actually be on the block where children need to be served. We have to stop taking kids out of their community and suggesting this is the only place you’re safe.”

Mental health professional Anthony Jones noted the lack of focused treatment for those with substance abuse or mental health difficulties, which may also contribute to gun violence.

Although many roundtable participants voiced real concerns from their own communities, few arguments were presented that had not been heard before. Some participants noted the solutions being presented were too short-term and based on reactionary attitudes, rather than actual long-term solutions.

“We have our own, exclusive, unique issues right here in Richmond and the surrounding area,” local radio news personality Clovia Lawrence said.

Two voices of opposition spoke out during the roundtable; they expressed fear that their Second Amendment rights would be infringed if any gun legislation were to pass. Kaine stressed that current legislation focused on more regulated background checks, that no piece of legislation conflicts in any way with Second Amendment rights, and that his legislation would in no way result in banning firearms.

“We really want to focus just on reasonable gun laws,” Moran said. “Thoughts and prayers are not enough. We need facts and laws.”

Photos by John Donegan.

Midterms Matter. Trumpism Cannot Withstand High Turnout

|

Topics: , , , , , ,

Progressive yard signs are visible throughout my neighborhood of Church Hill, declaring “Black Lives Matter” and “Hate Has No Home Here.” Those signs help to foster a sense of community; there’s comfort that comes from feeling that our neighbors are interpreting this moment in our country in similar ways. However, there is a danger of mistakenly assuming those shared assumptions are broader than they actually are. There’s a danger in thinking “everyone must view Trump’s election as a big mistake at this point.” From that assumption, it follows that Sen. Tim Kaine will easily defeat Corey Stewart, the candidate who says he is “more Trump than Trump.”

Virginia Commonwealth University’s Wilder School just released a poll of 802 likely voters that suggested a 23-point lead for Kaine. More reason to relax, the logic goes.

That’s what the conventional logic says, but if we step outside the bubble of Richmond, we start to see warning signs. My phone died last week, and in order to get a replacement, I headed to the Mechanicsville Verizon store. Stewart signs, big and small, lined the streets of my drive, prominently placed in front of homes and businesses.

It was a good reminder that Stewart has supporters, and that he represents a certain right-wing populist base that will show up politically. There is more of us, yes, but is that enough?

We have to overcome undemocratic structural barriers that exist as part of the legacy of systemic anti-black racism.

Towards building a progressively governed Richmond and nation, we cannot simply live with a Kaine victory; we need a full-scale repudiation of the Trumpism that Stewart represents, and that means a victory with as wide of a margin as possible. But, we should not get ahead of ourselves; as progressives, we should not assume it’s in the bag.

Hillary Clinton was expected by most pollsters to win. Those pollsters were wrong. However, equally relevant for us, it isn’t simply that we can’t put too much faith in the polls, it is also that Clinton lost the election despite winning the popular vote. Superior numbers did not matter.

With the midterms on the horizon, it’s a reminder that the fact there is more of us is not sufficient. We have to turn out in races that we have historically stayed home for. Further, we have to overcome undemocratic structural barriers that exist as part of the legacy of systemic anti-black racism, and that has often been put in place by lawmakers elected on those years we stayed at home.

There are two political forces in our country with a direct interest in political minority rule: one, the white nationalists who recognize the changing demographics of the country, and who tremble in fear at the prospect of a country that isn’t majority white, and, two, corporate elites who want their taxes low and their profits high, and as a result seek policies in diametric opposition to the interests of the majority who want and need fair wages, environmental regulations, and well-funded public schools, housing, and transportation.

President Donald Trump is uniquely dangerous precisely because he has the ability to unite these two different political forces into an aggressive political coalition with a shared agenda and strategy.

However, the Trump coalition’s ability to be successful is premised on two interrelated things; wide-scale voter disenfranchisement and low-voter turnout. That is why we have the ability to defeat Trump and Trumpism by turning out, doing the work to turn others out, registering voters, pushing for restoration of voting rights, and fighting against voter suppression effort.

Turnout in the Nov. 6 election may very well be the deciding factor in whether we win the future or get defeated by the past.

Donald Trump and the politics of the 19th century

There has always been a white nationalist minority which existed as part of the conservative coalition in the USA. During the Obama administration, key elements of this conservative, racist minority became emboldened. They could not accept that an African American had become President of the US—not once, but twice—and they wanted to do all that they could to reverse his legacy, even policies from which they benefitted.

Donald Trump, always politically ambitious and demagogic, seized on the moment. Watching the growth of the Tea Party movement that challenged virtually every reform advanced by President Barack Obama, Trump decided to go deeper into more dangerous terrain. He fanned the flames of what came to be known as the “Birther Movement,” those who suggested that Obama had never legitimately been a US citizen. Despite all evidence, Trump continued to ring the bell of birtherism. The real objective was to say, in coded words, that it was inconceivable that a Black American could (or should) become president of this country.

Trump’s 2016 campaign for president was noteworthy on multiple levels. His opening argument that Mexicans were bringing crime to the US ignored the reality of declining immigration and also the fact that immigrant communities commit demonstrably less crime, and are more likely to be the victims of crime than the perpetrators.

Or consider Trump’s attacks on Muslims and the suggestion that Muslim-based terrorism was the main threat to the US. What is worth noting is that since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the main form of terrorism to threaten the US has been right-wing, white supremacist terrorism.

Trump has been carrying out a well-crafted approach of divide and rule. He, and the corporate interests that he represents, want to ensure that they can move a very reactionary agenda that will reverse the victories that we, the broader American public, have won over the course of the 20th century. As one political theorist put it, they seek to take us back to the era of William McKinley and of the Spanish-American War.

Is the problem just Trump?

I wish that I could say that the problem was only or mainly Trump. After a while, people will tire of him and he will go off into retirement. But the challenges that we face—and that will be represented in the midterm elections—are much deeper.

As I mentioned, there are two very nefarious forces at work that seek to turn back the clock. One is represented by conservative corporate elites, such as the Koch Brothers, and political organizations such as the American Legislative Exchange Council. They are actively attempting to reverse various laws, court decisions, and regulations that have benefited poor and working people. They are using immigrants, Muslims, and black people as a way of distracting white people from what is really going on. After witnessing a blatantly racist act in Tennessee, President Lyndon Johnson told a young Bill Moyers exactly why many politicians nurtured and fed racist discrimination. “If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on and he’ll empty his pockets for you,” he said, speaking from his own experience as a former member of the Southern bloc.

Think about it. We have been subjected to a tax reform bill that is nothing short of a bribe for some, that directly benefits the elite. And everyone knows it! Yet, when Trump and his allies, including the corporate right, focus on immigrants, Muslims, etc., it is as if we are dealing with a magician who dazzles us with one hand while the real action is in the other. He’s playing upon inherited prejudices while robbing us blind.

In addition to the corporate right, there is a movement called “right-wing populism.” This is a mass movement. It is racist, sexist, xenophobic, militaristic, and highly authoritarian. It seeks to re-establish the idea that the US is a so-called white republic and that anyone not white is nothing more than a guest – an uninvited one. The corporate right has long sought with varying degrees of success to build a grassroots base out of right-wing populists. In fact, what is so dangerous about Trump, can be best understood as a unique ability to fuse these two right-wing elements. However, even before Trump, both of these elements had political strategies that relied on midterm elections – in other words, relied on low turnout from progressives.

So, what’s immediately at stake in the midterms?

There are many things that are at stake. First, control of Congress. As we have seen in these two years, Republican domination of Congress means that they pick the Supreme Court. They can cut regulations. They can fail to hold Trump accountable. They can keep their hands in our pockets. If even one house of Congress flips, that will give working-class people some breathing room. It prevents against another attempted repeal of Obamacare. It offers for some ability to prevent Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, from being sworn in. It may make or break whether the Mueller investigation can actually lead to an impeachment.

Low turnout and structural barriers to voting

There is something strange that happens during the midterm elections. More often than not, a different “America” shows up at the polls. Rather than the diverse country in which we live, full of growing numbers of young voters who elected Obama or supported Bernie Sanders, we see older, white, conservatives at the polls.

Worth noting is that the U.S. trails most developed countries in voter turnout, but of particular importance to us is the discrepancy in numbers from presidential election years to off years. There’s some fluctuation but generally speaking about 60 percent of the voter eligible population votes in presidential elections, while only 40 percent votes in the midterms. The impact of midterm elections can be dramatic, as we saw in 2010 and 2014. It can flip the country. The facts are demonstrable but, nevertheless, many people continue to stay home.

There is a vicious cycle of us not turning out, followed by those who end up in power as result pushing agendas and enacting laws that make it harder for us to turn out and win in the future.

Trump’s win and the victory of the new Trumpism coalition it represents comes in the first presidential election after the Supreme Court stripped out the protections of the Voting Rights Act, and in only the second presidential election after the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that corporations can spend unlimited amounts to influence elections.

On June 25, 2013, the conservative Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, overturned the protections of the Voting Rights Act. The significance of this cannot be overstated. The law had offered increase oversight and scrutiny to the voter practices of nine states, with a history of suppressing the black vote, including Virginia. Many of these states rushed in the days and months that followed to pass more restrictive voting laws.

After Obama carried Virginia in 2012, the Republican-controlled state legislature moved to enact tougher restrictions on a previously passed Voter ID law – while it would previously have accepted a large range of non-photo ID at the polls – things like utility bills, now it would only accept a driver’s license, voter ID cards, student IDs, and concealed handgun permits. It was a tactic designed to suppress Democratic Party voters and African Americans in particular. Under the Voting Rights Act, the shift would have required approval by the U.S Department of Justice; with the Voting Rights Act gutted it no longer needed to.

The Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizen’s United v. Federal Election Commission happened during President Obama’s first term, on January 21st, 2010. It ruled that the First Amendment doesn’t just apply to human beings but to corporations as well, and thus struck down any laws that limit the ability of corporate leaders to spend money advocating for or against candidates. The principle of one person one vote continues to exist in theory but in practice, politicians campaigning for office know that those with wealth have disproportionate influence on election outcomes, and so they spend more time courting the wealthy and are wary of advocating any policy the wealthy might disapprove of, even common sense ones like progressive taxation.

The result of Citizen’s United is a political class under extreme pressure to spend most of its time fundraising, which in turn means spending most of their time with moneyed interests and not working-class people. The amount of money in elections has increased, and with it the disproportionate giving and power of the super wealthy.

These two Supreme Court rulings are not isolated occurrences. They are representative of a policy regime at every level of our government that attempt to push progressive voters and particularly African American voters out of the political process while inviting wealthy special interests into disproportionate power over the political process. If it has been confusing as to why our city and state’s elected leadership won’t remove Confederate monuments, this might offer a clue.

However, it doesn’t have to be this way. Is there a future that focuses on justice, equal rights, preservation of the environment, well-funded public education, the rights of workers to organize and bargain, and an end to the fear that many have lived under since Jan. 20, 2017? The answer is yes. Here’s the understanding it requires: progressive and the majority of the country have been subjugated to a political cycle low turnout resulting in policies that hurt us, coupled with laws that make it harder for us to vote and represent our interests in the future.

Our task is to displace this reactionary cycle with a new progressive cycle; in our cycle, we turn out big for all elections, we register new voters, work with people to get their rights restored, and win elections. Then we build strategies at the grassroots level that involve the elected officials we put into office, to advance policies that benefit everybody and couple that with laws that undo the racist and undemocratic barriers to voting, replacing them with laws that secure the right to vote and policies that promote voting such as early voting and making election day a holiday

Midterms matter. Turnout matters. Let’s go make the future ours.

Virginia Republicans Flirtation With Extremism May Cost Them on Election Day

|

Topics: , , , ,

Senator Tim Kaine is almost guaranteed to win re-election this November against Corey Stewart, a controversial conservative firebrand who has implied that Republicans who support Medicaid expansion have erectile dysfunction syndrome, defended Roy Moore against credible accusations of pedophilia (and even campaigned for him), endorsed white nationalist Paul Nehlen, appeared at an event with the white nationalist Jason Kessler, who would go on to orchestrate the terror in Charlottesville last year, and has even threatened violence against Sen. Kaine.

It’s very, very improbable that Stewart beats Kaine this November. I’m no mathematician, but I’d say he has less than 1 percent chance of victory. Last November, Virginia was swept by a blue wave that rejected Ed Gillespie, who ran a campaign similar to Stewart’s gubernatorial bid after Gillespie unexpectedly barely won the primary. This November will probably be even worse for Virginia Republicans than last year since Stewart is now on the ballot and the establishment candidate isn’t.

County projections for Kaine/Stewart by Chaz Nuttycombe

What we’re going to see in the senate race this November is the largest statewide win for a Virginia Democrat since Mark Warner’s landslide victory in the 2008 US Senate race. It won’t be as big as that election itself though due to the polarization of America’s political parties. Whereas Warner won by 31 percent against Gilmore, Kaine is currently likely to win by ~18 percent against Stewart. This is two times the size of the margin of victory Northam had over Gillespie last fall.

Stewart, who looks like he will have a hard time cracking 40 percent of the vote this November, is a symptom of the Virginia GOP’s flirtation with extremist candidates. The state party has nominated several controversial figures for statewide office this decade, such as Ken Cuccinelli and E.W. Jackson, both in 2013. Since then, the state party has drifted into the abyss of the culture wars to reach their base, as we saw last year, instead of appealing to moderates and independents.

Kaine has a great opportunity this November to not only win by a slam-dunk, but also the opportunity to extend his coattails far enough to help Democrats flip several US House seats in Virginia. Five GOP-held seats are competitive: VA-01, VA-02, VA-05, VA-07, and VA-10. The bigger wins he has in these districts, the more likely the Democratic challengers are to win.

We’ll talk more about that next week.

Chaz Nuttycombe joined RVA Mag for the midterm elections to provide predictions and analysis on the state of the races.

Is Corey Stewart A Political Liability For Virginia GOP Candidates?

|

Topics: , , , , ,

Call it trickle-down repulsion.

GOP Senate candidate Corey Stewart, known for his fondness for Pres. Donald Trump and violent rhetoric, is already an unlikely challenger against Democratic incumbent Sen. Tim Kaine, but the Democratic Party of Virginia is hoping that his unpopularity will limit Republican turn-out statewide. The state party is trying to use Stewart as a wedge issue in other races statewide. In the second district, Democratic challenger Elaine Luria invoked Stewart, asking her opponent,  incumbent Rep. Scott Taylor, to either endorse or repudiate his fellow Republican.

“He should reject the fact that Corey Stewart stands next to racists and anti-Semites,” Luria said, according to Bill Bartel for The Virginian-Pilot. “If he doesn’t have the fortitude to reject those values, then I think he stands with him.”

On its face, it’s not an unusual request. In the Trump era, Taylor is seen as a more moderate Republican than Stewart, and even received Luria’s vote in his last election. If he disavowed Stewart, he’d join the ranks of national and local Republicans who have distanced themselves from the candidate. Stewart is known less for a specific platform–mostly, he’s just anti-immigration–and more for his close association with well-known anti-semites and alt-right extremists. In a recent tweet, he said he’d “kick @timkaine’s teeth in,” tagging Kaine’s twitter account.

Despite that, Taylor refused to commit yet, telling the Pilot that he didn’t “give a shit” about Stewart. “No one else does either way,” he added, although the state GOP seems to have been throw in to turmoil by Stewart’s candidacy. Just months before the election and days after Stewart’s victory, state chairman John Whitbeck, who endorsed Stewart’s opponent Nick Freitas, stepped down, along with two other party leaders. According to Jenna Portnoy and Laura Vozzella in a recent Washington Post article, even a long-time Republican fundraiser in Virginia sees Stewart as a liability that could hurt Taylor and Rep. Barbara Comstock, who is also seeking reelection this fall.

Taylor’s statements brought negative attention from national outlets like The Hill and The Root. Taylor told the Pilot that he isn’t racist, saying he named his son, Sterling, “after a black guy,” something Monique Jordan, news writer for The Root, highlighted in a recent article on the controversy. “For the tl;dr crowd, Taylor said there is no way he can be a racist because his son is named after a black man. Taylor’s son is named Sterling. It’s not the blackest name ever, but I guess?” wrote Jordan, adding, “Seems like it would be a lot easier for Taylor to say he doesn’t support Stewart.”

On Twitter, Taylor criticized The Hill for their coverage of his defense, noting that his son was named after fellow serviceman Sterling Sharpe, who was killed in the line of duty in Afghanistan.

Democrats have used social media to pressure Rep. Dave Brat, Comstock, and Taylor, but so far, the tactic has only seemed to stick with Taylor, possibly because of his response. Stewart’s likely impact is still debatable, but it appears that the Democratic strategy has had its intended effect, putting Taylor on the defensive and bringing national attention to a race that was considered an easy Republican victory by early polling and analysts.

Organizers Move To Protect Immigrants in the River City

|

Topics: , , , , , , , ,

On Thursday, June 20, after facing extreme political pressure from both parties, President Trump signed an executive order to end his administration’s practice of separating children from their families as they cross the border. However, the administration has no clear plan to reunite the more than 2300 children who have already been taken from their families. In fact, many of the separations could be permanent.

The humanitarian crisis at the southwest border is drawing much-needed national attention and resources, and it has many Richmonders wondering how recent changes to immigration policy and enforcement are affecting our local communities.

Immigrants in Richmond Face Increased Pressure 

According to the American Immigration Council, more than one in eight Virginia residents is an immigrant. One in six Virginia workers is an immigrant, and immigrant-led households in the state paid $6.7 billion in federal taxes and $2.7 billion in state and local taxes in 2014.

“These are our neighbors, our friends, our children’s’ friends,” said Jennifer West, a local immigration attorney and partner at Roth Jackson. “It’s overly simplistic to tell people ‘just get in line, wait your turn, follow the rules.’ The people presenting themselves at the border for asylum are doing things the right way, and they’re being arrested and detained anyway. Others may be fleeing dangerous situations in their home countries and may not always have the luxury of waiting years for paperwork to go through. “

“The sentiment in our community is increased fear and uncertainty,” said Tanya Gonzalez, executive director at the Sacred Heart Center, a hub for Latino communities in Richmond that focuses on education, social integration, empowerment, and success. “Members of the Latino community in Richmond have had an increased number of incidents of discrimination and harassment, ranging from things like being told not to speak Spanish in a public place to bullying in schools.” A recent report from Virginia police show hate crimes are up nearly 50 percent year-over-year in the state, including ten anti-Hispanic crimes.

Reports of ICE Enforcement in Richmond Have Increased

While Richmond has not yet seen the kind of sweeping, large-scale, military-style immigration raids that have taken hundreds of parents away from children in communities in California, Ohio, Tennessee, Iowa, and elsewhere, local immigration rights’ advocates have seen changes in our area and worry about what the future holds.

“In the last year or so, we’re seeing increased enforcement, more red tape, and much longer delays in general,” said West. “Both businesses and families going through legal processes have to wait much longer and jump through more hoops. Those delays can be a big hardship on a family waiting to be reunited and on local entrepreneurs who can’t find Americans to do their jobs.”

“We’ve heard several reports of ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] agents arresting immigrants at courthouses or nearby, including arresting people they didn’t have a warrant for,” said Phil Storey, an immigration attorney with the Legal Aid Justice Center. “That’s a relatively new and troubling practice.”

“Things are changing for this community rapidly,” said Alina Kilpatrick, another immigration attorney in Richmond. “I have clients on appeal who have been going to regular and routine check ins with ICE or with DHS contractors every six to 12 months who are suddenly being told to pack their bags and leave behind children and spouses who are legal citizens. I’m also hearing about increased arrests and detentions at routine ICE appointments in addition to deportations.”

The majority of immigrants living in Virginia are legally allowed to be here. More than half the immigrants living in Virginia are naturalized, and many more are eligible for naturalization. Over 10,000 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients live in Virginia.

Fewer than one-third of all immigrants are undocumented, but it’s an issue that affects many families since nearly 100,000 children in Virginia who are legal U.S. citizens live with at least one undocumented parent. Therefore anytime parents are swept up in ICE enforcement raids, they’re often leaving behind at least one child who is a U.S. citizen.

Child of Abbie Arevalo-Herrera. Photo by Carlos Bernate

One human example of the often arbitrary line between documented and undocumented immigrants is a Richmond mother named Abbie Arevalo-Herrera, a woman from Honduras seeking asylum in the U.S after escaping domestic violence in her home country. Threatened this week with deportation and now taking sanctuary in Richmond’s First Unitarian Universalist Church (information made public by her legal team), if she goes back to Honduras, she will be leaving behind her husband and two-year old son, both legal U.S. citizens. Although she is fighting for herself and for domestic violence survivors everywhere, her future in Richmond is uncertain.

How to Help Your Neighbors in Richmond

There are a number of national organizations dedicated to helping immigrant families at the Southwest border, but for people who want to help here in Richmond, here are a few ways to help.

Support Local Organizations

Central Virginia has a number of organizations dedicated to working to support immigrants while promoting equity, civil rights, and empowered, integrated communities. The following is a partial list.

Legal Aid Justice Center (LAJC):  The LAJC is a nonprofit organization with offices across Virginia, including Richmond, whose mission is to strengthen the voices of low-income communities and root out the inequities that keep people in poverty. In Richmond, they provide legal support, including individual representation, to communities facing legal crises, including immigrant communities. Statewide, LAJC is a leader in the creative use of litigation to demand the release of unaccompanied minors in detention and to push back on ICE practices such as so-called “collateral arrests.”

What they need:

Sacred Heart Center (SHC): SHC is a community hub for Richmond’s Latino community, and offers a variety of educational and human service programs to individuals and families, including educational opportunities for adults (including GED, ESL, computer, and leadership classes), programs for youth and children (including school readiness, school enrichment, summer camp, parenting classes and more), and strategic community partnerships (that help with food assistance, health care, support groups, tax preparation, and more).

What they need:

  • Monetary donations to their Family Protection Project, which seeks to prevent the separation of local families by offering low-cost or pro bono immigration services, assistance locating loved ones who have been lost or detained, and volunteer training.
  • Volunteers: opportunities range from cleaning to tutoring to photography to teaching ESL.    
  • Donations of gently used clothing, new stuffed animals and books, diapers and school supplies
  • Nonperishable food items for the Bainbridge Ministry Food Bank, open Monday through Friday, 9:15 am to 12 pm, Monday to Friday.

Central Virginia Sanctuary Network (CVSN): A project of the the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy, the CVSN is made up of interfaith congregational and organizational members, as well as individuals who volunteer through the Circles of Protection. Member commitments range from commiting to host guests facing deportation to supporting that work through fundraising, accompaniment, and hospitality.

What they need:

  • Monetary donations to the Sanctuary Fund, which provides for people fighting detention or deportation while in Sanctuary, and also covers bail and legal defense.
  • Volunteers: CVSN is looking for congregations and individual drivers (to take undocumented people who are not eligible for driver’s’ licenses to appointments), writers and communications professionals, legal resources, outreach, hospitality (arranging meals, entertainment, visitation, and counseling), accompaniment to court hearings (which often protects people from detainment), and other tasks.
  • Fundraising: Buy a t-shirt, tote bag, poster, or tank top with original artwork saying by Richmond artist Alfonso Perez reading “all are welcome here.”

Virginia Coalition for Immigrants Rights (VACIR): VACIR is a multi-racial and multi-ethnic coalition of organizations that exists to win dignity, power and quality of life for all immigrant and refugee communities. VACIR gives grants to other organizations, often to small and under-resources local organizations who mobilize quickly to do rapid response in emergency situations. VACIR has supported naturalization clinics, “know your rights” seminars, and DACA assistance programs.  

What they need:

Make Your Voice Heard Locally

Protests: There are a number of upcoming protests around Virginia aimed at fighting unjust immigration policies, advocating for reuniting the 2,300+ children who have already been taken, and ending the zero-tolerance policy that criminalizes and detains families.

Call your Senators and Representatives: Ask them to support common-sense immigration reform and insist on reuniting separated families. Check out Indivisible’s Guide on what to ask for when calling Republicans and Democrats.

Be an ally to local immigrants. Here’s how.

Use your privilege. If you’re not sure what that means, start here.

Elect, donate to, and work for people who hold views on immigration that you support. Vote in every election that you can. Volunteer to canvass, phone bank, and drive people to the polls. Give money.

In Virginia, Tim Kaine is up for reelection against Corey Stewart, a neo-confederate candidate for U.S. Senate. In the 7th House District, which covers much of the Richmond area, newcomer Abigail Spanberger is challenging incumbent Dave Brat, a Republican who has a strong anti-immigrant platform.

What else are we missing? Leave your comments if you have other ideas to support and defend immigrants in RVA.

Photos by Carlos Bernate.