Rush to Judgment

What’s the Rush?

Do it Right this Time

What’s the rush to hold a vote on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the United States Supreme Court?

The Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing on Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s

 accusations of sexual assault against the nominee for this coming Monday. Dr. Ford’s requested a short delay and rules to ensure a fair hearing and her safety. Grassley already rejected her request for an FBI investigation into her allegations but has offered to have the hearing next Wednesday with questioning to be conducted by an independent lawyer. Dr. Ford is still considering this offer. Committee Chairman Sen. Charles Grassley seems hell bent on getting the distraction caused by Dr. Ford over with so his committee can vote to confirm Kavanaugh’s nomination and pass it on to the full Senate. 

This is no longer 1991 when Prof. Anita Hill leveled sexual misconduct accusations against another Supreme Court nominee, Clarence Thomas. Hill’s appearance before the same committee in that year played out on TV and showed the nation what little regard the male Senators had for issues of sexual violence against women. Some of the same Senators who dismissed Prof. Hill then still sit on the Judiciary Committee today and we will soon learn if they have made any progress on women’s issues in the decades that have passed. 

Dr. Ford’s life has already been turned upside down after she revealed her claims publicly in an interview with the Washington Post. She has received death threats, had her email hacked and had to leave her home for the safety of her family. She has every reason to request an independent investigation into her allegations so that there is more than a “she said, he said” record before the Committee hearing. While Kavanaugh’s original FBI background check has been completed, all President Trump has to do is ask that it be re-opened to include Dr. Ford’s claims. So far, Trump has failed to make that request.

Prof. Hill correctly pointed out in an opinion piece in the New York Times on Tuesday that the Senate lacks any kind of protocol for handling claims like those she and Dr. Ford have made. She suggests the outline for one that makes a lot of sense and would take much of the partisanship out of the process.

Prof. Hill suggests that Senators make both claims of sexual violence and the integrity of the judiciary priorities and craft rules that acknowledge the importance of both. Next, she proposes that a neutral body, well versed in sexual violence cases, be tasked with investigating the claims and issuing a report for the Committee to use when it develops questions for a fact-finding hearing. The Committee should also rely upon advice from experts in the field of sexual violence as the hearing unfolds to avoid many of the myths often raised to counter women’s claims, like the “failure to report, therefore she’s lying” claim Trump made Friday. Hill joins the voices calling for a delay in the fact-finding hearing so that a proper investigation of Ford’s claims can be conducted. Finally, Prof. Hill suggests calling Dr. Ford by her name and not referring to her as an accuser or other loaded terms. 

Unfortunately, Prof. Hill’s suggestions are likely to fall on the tone-deaf ears of highly partisan Senators who need Judge Kavanaugh confirmed before the Supreme Court’s new term begins on the first Monday in October, not to mention the mid-term elections that take place a little over a month later. The shaky GOP Congress does not want a slew of 4-4 votes from the Court when a clear 5-4 majority is close at hand. 

There are substantial downsides for the GOP rush to confirmation looming as well. Confirming Kavanaugh’s nomination without holding a meaningful investigation and a fair fact-finding hearing on Dr. Ford’s claims will further alienate suburban women who are already jumping from the GOP ship in droves over Trump’s treatment of women. If the male-dominated Senate pushes Dr. Ford aside, many of those up for re-election in the up-coming mid-terms will not fare well in the backlash.

The #MeToo movement and the passage of time since Prof. Hill was raked over the coals must have had some impact on those in the Senate with any compassion for women who have suffered from sexual violence. Hopefully, Senators Collins and Murkowski will join with Sen. Jeff Flake and slow the train by voting “no” if Kavanaugh’s nomination comes up for a speedy confirmation vote in the full Senate. The ten democratic Senators facing re-election in states that Trump won will have to stand strong as well. A dismissive treatment of Dr. Ford’s claims will make that an easier vote for them all. 

We have reached a pivotal moment in our history. We will soon see how those we elected to represent us choose to treat women’s claims of sexual violence by the prominent and important. They need to start taking women seriously. 

Trump Must Go

The President Must Resign

The hijacking of our democracy continues. Alarm bells ring loudly, but none in the corridors of power with the power to stop it seem to be paying attention. What will it take for those who can bring the madness to a peaceful conclusion to take decisive action?

This week one of the nation’s most respected and trusted journalists published a book on the failings of the Trump presidency only to be ridiculed and dismissed by Trump and his minions. This week one of the most trusted and respected newspapers in America published an anonymous op-ed piece that revealed serious resistance to Trump’s presidency inside the White House at the highest levels only to be called “gutless” by Trump. This week Trump’s nominee to fill a vacancy on the United States Supreme Court refused to answer basic questions from United States Senators charged with vetting his qualifications in advance of a confirmation vote. At the same time, the White House withheld tens of thousands of documents related to the nominee’s background and views from those who need them in order to do their work effectively. 

First, there was Bob Woodward’s book, “Fear: In the Trump White House.” Woodward was part of the team that broke the Watergate burglary and cover-up story at the Washington Post that helped end the Nixon presidency. His reputation since has been beyond reproach. His writings then and up to the present were and are always backed up by recorded interviews with multiple sources who have first-hand knowledge of the matters discussed. He follows up all of the leads and resolves the conflicts between different perspectives of the same event. His work is always documented and vetted. If Woodward makes a claim or puts a statement in quotes, he can back it up with ease when challenged. 

Woodward’s book has been excerpted from advance copies to other media outlets and many of his more telling descriptions of the Trump presidency should raise serious concerns and questions, especially for the members of the GOP in Congress who support the Trump presidency. Woodward’s reporting shows a White House run by fear and a president out of control. These GOP members, many of whom are up for re-election in the coming mid-term elections, stand with Trump at their peril.

On Wednesday, the New York Times took the highly unusual step of publishing an anonymous op-ed piece by a senior Trump White House staff person. The Times’ editors know the writer’s identity and must have believed what their source provided or they would not have published it, at least without attribution. The writer disclosed the existence of a “soft resistance” in the White House staff and, apparently, in the President’s own cabinet, that actively works against the worst of Trump’s ideas and plans. Trump is variously described as morally and politically adrift, issuing contradictory demands and proclamations while favoring America’s enemies over long standing allies and unable to look beyond his own selfish goals to see what the people of America need. The discussions of what this “resistance” should do to protect the country included consideration of the provisions of the 25^th Amendment to the United States Constitution that make it possible for the Vice-President and a majority of the cabinet to declare the President unable to perform the duties of his office and have the him removed from power. Never before in our nation’s history has there been such an active resistance within the White House against a sitting president.

Finally, we have the three-ring circus of the confirmation hearing for D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the seat on the Supreme Court vacated under questionable circumstances by Justice Anthony Kennedy. Here we see the partisan gridlock in full bloom. The republicans have the votes to confirm Judge Kavanaugh by the slimmest of margins. To keep their members in line, the leadership ramrodded the scheduling of the confirmation hearings before much of the Judge’s record could be examined. The White House invoked a claim of Executive Privilege and refused to release over 100,000 pages of documents related to Kavanaugh’s work in the Bush White House. The night before the hearing, the White House delivered 40,000 pages of Kavanaugh related documents to Congress, leaving no time for review or analysis before the hearing began. No previous Supreme Court nominee has had his or her record stonewalled like that. 

Even if one is compelled to forget all of the other atrocities committed by this President during his short tenure in the Oval Office, the events of this week alone should be enough to compel Americans of conscience to rise up and demand the President’s resignation.

Guns Won’t Win Elections

Guns won’t win elections

Voters want more

There was a surprising twist in the recent Republican primary election for the Washington County Sheriff. Jason Guslick staked out a “I’m tougher on crime” position and won the endorsement of Tim Schmidt, owner of Delta Defense. Both lost to the more moderate and experienced Marty Schulteis who wisely steered clear of both issues. 

Guslick apparently believed local voters would buy into the fear of criminals invading from the inner city of Milwaukee pushed hard by Delta Defense/NRA elements who believe that the Second Amendment gives everyone the right to tote whatever kind of fire power they want to defend themselves from the hordes of “others” bent on doing them harm. Voters clearly rejected that message.

Had Guslick been paying attention, he would have remembered the most recent Wisconsin Supreme Court election where Rebecca Dallet refused NRA money and handily defeated the NRA backed judge who opposed her. Most Wisconsin voters no longer see an NRA endorsement as a sole reason to cast their vote. Thankfully, the Delta Defense endorsement did not fare any better.

Guslick might have been better served to look at the national polls that show a strong majority across party lines wants sensible and stricter gun control measures, especially in the wake of the mass shooting incidents that show up all too frequently in the headlines. 

The post-Parkland shooting millennial voter registration drive aimed at new voters opposed to guns for everyone everywhere has raised the stakes and mounts a significant challenge to NRA positions. These new voters want candidates who will refuse pro-gun money and commit to sensible gun control legislation once elected. They have already swung the discourse away from the Second Amendment purists.

Political candidates, especially in law enforcement, need to walk a fine line. It is perfectly acceptable to stress public safety and the need for public support for law enforcement. Fear based campaigns cross the line, especially when they are tinged with racism and stereotypes. Most voters now want to see effective and fair law enforcement that does not play favorites or support white supremacy.

Anti-Immigration arguments often cross the line as well. Washington County is home to many immigrant families who work hard every day on local dairy farms and behind the kitchen doors in our restaurants. 

Let’s have a nuanced discussion on immigration reform that recognizes the substantial contributions immigrants make to the local economy. We need to encourage a path to citizenship to recognize the sacrifices those newly in our country have made to start their new lives here. 

Claiming support for a southern border wall will not garner as much support as it once did for President Trump in light of the economic reality of our need for immigrant labor. 

Law and Order is a great name for a 1990s television show. Voters have moved beyond the buzz words and slogans and are looking for realistic, sensible solutions to the problems in our society. 

We cannot win any war on addiction, especially opioid addiction, with just a lock ‘em up and throw away the key mentality. Law enforcement can disrupt the supply chains all day long. Without effective medical and mental health treatment programs to help the addicted and their affected families, law enforcement interdiction efforts will always fail. 

Law enforcement that partners with community-based resources offering treatment, homeless solutions, medical care and other social services will be more effective in reducing criminal activity than driving around in armored SWAT vehicles with automatic rifles at the ready.

Washington county voters appear ready for these changes in our law enforcement strategy. Hopefully, the new Sheriff understands and will act accordingly.

Waring Fincke is a retired attorney and serves as a guardian for the elderly and disabled with a Sheboygan County non-profit agency.

Guns won’t win elections

Voters want more

There was a surprising twist in the recent Republican primary election for the Washington County Sheriff. Jason Guslick staked out a “I’m tougher on crime” position and won the endorsement of Tim Schmidt, owner of Delta Defense. Both lost to the more moderate and experienced Marty Schulteis who wisely steered clear of both issues. 

Guslick apparently believed local voters would buy into the fear of criminals invading from the inner city of Milwaukee pushed hard by Delta Defense/NRA elements who believe that the Second Amendment gives everyone the right to tote whatever kind of fire power they want to defend themselves from the hordes of “others” bent on doing them harm. Voters clearly rejected that message.

Had Guslick been paying attention, he would have remembered the most recent Wisconsin Supreme Court election where Rebecca Dallet refused NRA money and handily defeated the NRA backed judge who opposed her. Most Wisconsin voters no longer see an NRA endorsement as a sole reason to cast their vote. Thankfully, the Delta Defense endorsement did not fare any better.

Guslick might have been better served to look at the national polls that show a strong majority across party lines wants sensible and stricter gun control measures, especially in the wake of the mass shooting incidents that show up all too frequently in the headlines. 

The post-Parkland shooting millennial voter registration drive aimed at new voters opposed to guns for everyone everywhere has raised the stakes and mounts a significant challenge to NRA positions. These new voters want candidates who will refuse pro-gun money and commit to sensible gun control legislation once elected. They have already swung the discourse away from the Second Amendment purists.

Political candidates, especially in law enforcement, need to walk a fine line. It is perfectly acceptable to stress public safety and the need for public support for law enforcement. Fear based campaigns cross the line, especially when they are tinged with racism and stereotypes. Most voters now want to see effective and fair law enforcement that does not play favorites or support white supremacy.

Anti-Immigration arguments often cross the line as well. Washington County is home to many immigrant families who work hard every day on local dairy farms and behind the kitchen doors in our restaurants. 

Let’s have a nuanced discussion on immigration reform that recognizes the substantial contributions immigrants make to the local economy. We need to encourage a path to citizenship to recognize the sacrifices those newly in our country have made to start their new lives here. 

Claiming support for a southern border wall will not garner as much support as it once did for President Trump in light of the economic reality of our need for immigrant labor. 

Law and Order is a great name for a 1990s television show. Voters have moved beyond the buzz words and slogans and are looking for realistic, sensible solutions to the problems in our society. 

We cannot win any war on addiction, especially opioid addiction, with just a lock ‘em up and throw away the key mentality. Law enforcement can disrupt the supply chains all day long. Without effective medical and mental health treatment programs to help the addicted and their affected families, law enforcement interdiction efforts will always fail. 

Law enforcement that partners with community-based resources offering treatment, homeless solutions, medical care and other social services will be more effective in reducing criminal activity than driving around in armored SWAT vehicles with automatic rifles at the ready.

Washington county voters appear ready for these changes in our law enforcement strategy. Hopefully, the new Sheriff understands and will act accordingly.

Blue Waves in Wisconsin Too

Blue Waves Are Building

In Wisconsin Too

Recent primary elections continue to sweep left of center Democrats into November general elections against Trump supporting far right Republicans. Progressive Democrats pushing Bernie Sanders’ agendas have forced more establishment leaning candidates to adopt more populist positions than ever before. While the progressive wing of the party does not control the party apparatus yet, its positions on the issues facing the state and country have become the mainstream of the party platform.

The primary in the governor’s race in Michigan demonstrates the point. The more traditional Democratic candidate won the primary. Gretchen Whitmer, a former State Senator, beat Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive former director of Detroit’s health department. Sanders and other national progressives endorsed El-Sayed. Even though he lost, Whitmer’s campaign took its direction straight out of Sanders’ playbook on most issues except for universal single-payer healthcare. 

Whitmer’s positions on major issues are very progressive. She led the fight for Medicaid expansion in the state senate and saw it approved even though Republicans controlled the legislature and the governor’s office. She supports a $15-an-hour minimum wage and wants to repeal Michigan’s anti-union “right to work” laws. She supports legalization of recreational marijuana and taxing sales to fund roads and public schools. She is staunchly pro-choice and wants to restore state funding for Planned Parenthood. She wants public schools to adopt a “yes means yes” consent public school sex-ed curriculum. Whitmer wants civil rights laws expanded to protect members of the LBGTQI community. She wants to establish the state’s first universal pre-school program.

Whitmer’s platform would not be what it is were it not for the grassroots efforts by progressives who built a solid base in Michigan’s politics. 

Kansas voters picked a Sanders’ styled progressive out of a crowded field to try and flip a red congressional seat. Sharice Davids, a Native American mixed martial arts fighter and out of the closet lesbian looks to take a congressional seat come November. She built as solid grass-roots campaign on a progressive platform that resonated well with voters. Independents swung away from the right and help propel her victory.

The most surprising result came in Tuesday’s special election in Ohio’s 12^th Congressional district. Progressive Democrat Danny O’Connor took on a Trump endorsed republican in a district Democrats have not won since the 1980s. At this writing, this election is too close to call. Provisional ballots remain to be counted and the margin currently stands at 0.9% in favor of the Republican. If that margin goes under 0.5%, there will be an automatic recount. 

O’Connor’s showing clearly demonstrates voter dissatisfaction with President Trump and his policies and finds echoes across the country.

In our fair county, Democrats are fielding more candidates that ever before in state assembly races. None face primary opponents next Tuesday and all will advance to the November contests against Walker/Trump allied opponents. 

Progressive Democrat Dennis Degenhardt, the former President and CEO of Glacier Hills Credit Union, is running against Republican Rick Gundrum in the 58^th district in a rematch of last November’s special election. Degenhardt actually won the City of West Bend vote last fall and has expanded his campaign to reach voters in Slinger and other parts of the district. His work on the doors and phones is receiving positive voter feedback. 

Chris Ralf, a Navy veteran and project management consultant, is running a strong progressive campaign in the 60^th Assembly District. She is focused on listening to everyone she meets to learn what they believe is important to Wisconsin’s future. She believes in rebuilding our infrastructure while taking care of our environment. She advances a solid-plan for state investment in universal healthcare. Chris is visiting communities, large and small in our area talking to voters.

Emily Siegrist, a veteran, nurse and instructor at MSOE, has put together a strong progressive campaign in the 24^th Assembly race focusing on infrastructure, healthcare, veteran’s issues and education. Look for her in the southern part of the County working the doors and speaking with voters. 

These three strong candidates are in a position to give Washington County voters real and positive alternatives to the business as usual GOP office holders they are challenging. All three are building on the progressive vision Washington County’s Democrats have been sharing while they have been Building Community Through Action since 2011. Come join the Blue Wave building across Wisconsin and the nation.

Waring Fincke is a retired attorney and serves as a guardian for the elderly and disabled with a Sheboygan county non-profit agency.

Trump's Troubles

Turning on Those You Trust is Dangerous

Secret Recordings Come to Light

President Trump’s longtime personal attorney and “fixer,” Michael Cohen, secretly recorded some of his private conversations with Trump. When the FBI searched Cohen’s offices, home and apartment, they seized lots of recordings. Cohen’s attorney recently released one of those recordings and it reveals a conversation between Cohen and Trump where they discussed how to buy and bury a story from a former Playboy Bunny who claims to have had a sexual relationship with Trump before he ran for President, but after he married his current wife, Melania.

Trump long denied knowing anything about efforts to hide the Bunny’s story and Cohen’s lawyer released the recording to counter Trump’s current claims that Cohen should not be believed. Trump badly needed to make Cohen out as a liar because it appeared that he was changing sides and cooperating with prosecutors looking into many of the Trump family enterprises. 

Trump then tweeted about how unusual and illegal it was for Cohen to have recorded their conversations. He asked, “what kind of lawyer records conversations with his client?”

As a former criminal defense lawyer, I can make an educated guess why Cohen would have recorded conversations with Trump. Having represented people with mental health issues, a heavy dose of “I can do no wrong” and a less than firm grip on reality, I can tell you that many with those afflictions will gladly turn on their lawyers when their cases go south. Hoping to save themselves, they try to implicate their lawyers with prosecutors anxious to sweep up criminal activity with a broader net. Defendants caught with the evidence against them try too often to offer up their lawyers in order to avoid a lengthy stay behind bars. When the conduct of the client and the lawyer approaches or crosses legal or ethical lines, it is even easier to tempt prosecutors with the defense lawyer’s scalp. 

Experienced lawyers understand what’s involved in representing prominent, but mentally or morally challenged, clients in high stakes matters. They know that one day the advice they gave may come into question and often seek protection by secretly recording their private confidential conversations where strategies are discussed just in case the client later tries to blame the lawyer for the client’s actions. 

Cohen’s recordings were completely legal where they were made. New York law allows for secret recordings when just one party to the conversations, Cohen in this instance, consents to the recording. Wisconsin has a similar rule. Any ethical duty not to disclose the otherwise confidential contents of the recording vanishes when they are legally revealed to others or when the client later makes claims against the lawyer that can be contradicted by the recording.

Trump’s continued attempts to distract and deflect attention away from his own behavior just makes his situation worse. He will soon pay the dictator’s price for following the old patterns telling supporters that his is the only “truth” and all of the mounting evidence of his duplicity, venality and depravity is nothing more than “fake news.”

In Trump’s unreality world, Cohen just joined the conspiracy of false prophets already populated by the mainstream media, the FBI, Courts, Democrats, Republicans who are beginning to question his actions and the “rogue” special counsel investigating him. 

Republicans facing re-election bids in the upcoming mid-term elections have a tough choice to make. They stand with Trump at their peril. Moderate Republicans who have had enough of Trump are challenging them from the center in primaries and progressive Democrats are winning their elections with impressive numbers running anti-Trump, anti corruption, populist campaigns. If GOP legislators seeking re-election repudiate Trump, the financial support his team control goes away, leaving them swinging in the wind. Recent polling puts Trump’s approval rating at an all time low, making their choice all the more difficult.

Trump’s days are numbered. The chief financial officer of the Trump family businesses who has been at Trump’s side for decades was just subpoenaed by the special counsel to appear before the grand jury investigating allegations of criminal activity. He knows where Trump’s money came from and where it went.  He’s a cagey sort and I would not be surprised to find out he has secret recordings too and a second set of books detailing Trump financial dealings. 

Trump is learning the hard way that trusting people and then stabbing them in the back is dangerous business. 

Beware the Federalists

Federalist Society Judicial Ideologues

Injustice Rules

Supreme Court Justices were originally envisioned as impartial arbiters of what the United States Constitution required when disputes arose between people or those between people and their governments, large and small. The Justices are supposed to be legal scholars and put themselves above the partisan fray of their times. The nine who sit on the highest court in the land, after all, have the final say in those disputes they choose to resolve. 

From time to time in our nation’s history, the Court has strayed from its lofty mission of impartial decision maker and become a player for one side or another, diminishing its stature and credibility as a result. We are now caught up in one of those times. Partisanship does not become the blindfolded lady Justice.

The latest assault aimed at capturing the Court’s power and prestige was launched decades ago with the formation of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies. It has become one of the most powerful and little known organizations in our political system. 

Funded by libertarians and conservative business interests, the Federalists have for years been recruiting and training lawyers to become judges in our state and federal courts. Those recruited are groomed to be conservative legal thinkers bound by the literal texts in constitutions and amendments. They give no room to modern notions of constitutional interpretation that take social and cultural changes into account when making important decisions. 

Take the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution for example. It was written to allow slave owning white citizens to keep arms against possible slave insurrection at a time when the average muzzle loading rifleman was at the top of his game if he could get off one shot a minute. Federalist literal constitutional interpretation of this Amendment makes ignores the facts that no one can own slaves anymore or that AR-15 rifles with high capacity magazines and bump stocks can deal death at hundreds of shots a minute. To these limited legal thinkers, this translates easily into banning most forms of gun control legislation as a violation of the original text. 

Our whole system of law is designed to maintain the status quo and apply the brakes to legal innovations. Unfortunately, the maintenance of things the way they are is not sufficient for the Federalists who want to return to a time long past when hierarchical gender roles were clear, white supremacy was the law of the land and government was supposed to stay out of your business.

With the election of conservative legislatures and executives, Federalist judges in waiting have finally achieved their nirvana. With Trump acolytes in control of the Senate, we will soon see a solid majority of Federalist trained or sympathetic Justices in control of the United States Supreme Court. 

Conservative controlled legislatures in state and federal governments will soon pass more laws challenging established precedents involving abortion rights, civil rights, gay rights, women’s rights, voting rights and many governmental regulations setting up disputes for final resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

The Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade provides another example. It established a framework to end illegal abortions and save women’s lives. It did not allow unlimited abortions on demand, as many countries do. It has been used to strike down state and federal laws that limited access to early term abortions. We will soon see outright bans passed in many so-called “pro-life” states and the challenges to them will ultimately be heard by the Federalist dominated Court where they will receive a friendly reception. 

The only potential brake on the wholesale revision of constitutional law the Federalists embrace is found in an often-overlooked canon of judicial interpretation known as “Stare Decisis.”  Simply put, it means the Court should not overturn a prior decision of the same body unless there is a compelling reason to do so. A decision must have been so wrongly decided in the first place that no present court would make the same decision. As with most rules governing interpretation of the laws, there are many exceptions that the Federalists will use to rid us of those pesky precedents they do not like.

This brings us to President Trump’s recent nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh brings not only impressive Federalist Society credentials and experience, he also penned an impressive law review article advancing the startling proposition that a sitting president should not be subjected to criminal investigation or prosecution for illegal acts committed in office. For Judge Kavanaugh impeachment is the only remedy. This had to be seen as a “get out of jail free” card for this president. 

Needless to say, the partisans will pull out all the stops to pressure those few GOP Senators who don’t fear Trump’s tweets and those Democrats elected in Trump country.  It should make for an interesting confirmation process in the Senate. Stay tuned.

Fear Not

The Only Thing We Have to Fear

Is Fear Itself

During some of its darkest hours President Franklin Delano Roosevelt told the country that, “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” Those words ring with even more truth today than they did during the depths of the Great Depression in 1932.

Today’s politics of division and supremacy are primarily based on nothing but fear. Our leaders and some of their followers would have us fear each other, fear those whose skin is a different color, fear those who come to our shores escaping violence, fear those who believe in a different supreme being, fear those who love differently, fear those who seek to control their own reproductive systems, fear those who believe in science as a basis for sound policy, and fear those who follow different economic or political systems.

We need to own firearms in even greater numbers because we fear the “bad guy” who might come to take what is ours. Second Amendment purists and those who profit from it, base their beliefs and business model on the myth that there is some “other” out there who is looking to bring us harm. Virtually every email I see from the NRA and its local offspring, Delta Defense, promotes their platform based on fear. 

Recent fervor supporting immigration bans prohibiting people entering our country from neighboring countries to the South is mostly based on fear of the Mexican criminal who will deal drugs, rape our women and steal our children. Many cling to this myth even in the face of clear proof that most immigrants come here to work and make a better life for themselves and their families.

The rise of newly emboldened white supremacy groups is based upon the irrational fear that somehow Anglo European immigrants will soon be forced from power and become an under class as America becomes more multi-ethnically diverse. Genetically, human beings are much more alike than different. Skin color differences do not translate into a better or worse human being. It makes no difference, yet too many of us are taught to fear based just on this element of the human condition. 

Fear of those who love those with similar gender characteristics is another one of those irrational emotions used to divide. Folks attracted to those like themselves are not trying to kidnap children or lure them into a heretical lifestyle. Same sex couples can be just as good or just as bad at parenting as opposite sex couples. Gender fluidity will never upset the social order. 

The recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding President Trump’s travel ban unfortunately gives it an aura of legitimacy it does not deserve. The travel ban prohibiting Muslims from certain countries from entering our country is based on another irrational fear, that all who share that faith from those countries are bent upon committing terrorist acts on our soil. Most people who practice Islam are just as anti-terror as anyone else who disavows its use. To ban entire populations based upon a few dangerous individuals does nothing to advance world peace and a belief in a common humanity.

Fear of women becoming hyper-sexualized and running amok was one of the original motivations for limiting access to birth control and opposing reproductive choice.  Fear of feminism is based on outmoded notions of women’s’ inequality and inability to think and act for themselves without male guidance. 

Fearing the erosion of Christian belief systems led to challenges to science-based policy decisions in education. If you teach evolution as a fact proven by the scientific method, the underpinnings of beliefs in divine creation will evaporate. If you challenge the way we live because we know humans have created climate change and must wean ourselves from the use of fossil fuels in order to survive, I will lose my livelihood. Therefore, acting on climate change is an evil to be feared.

Fear of communism, socialism, tribalism, cooperatives and the other economic and political systems that compete with capitalism drives current political thought away from our being able to choose aspects of those competing systems that might be beneficial to our continued prosperity. Universal healthcare and food security come to mind as rational ways to maintain the species. We seem to fear them just because they have worked in different political systems than our own and threaten certain capitalistic institutions. 

As we approach the annual celebration of America’s founding on July the Fourth, let us resolve to banish fear as a reason to act or fail to act. Let us boldly embrace the other, the different, the new and the experimental so we truly can make America greater than she was before.