Culture Wars
Princeton Finally Realizes Woodrow Wilson Was Racist POS
University removes Wilson’s name from places of honor.
June 29, 2020 01:25 PM
Princeton University announced this weekend that it's removing noted racist crackpot President Woodrow Wilson's name from its public policy school and one of its residential colleges, where presumably some Black students live. Princeton's board voted in 2016 to keep the 28th president's name on campus buildings and programs, despite student protests, so this is four years and a few dozen dead Black people late. But it's something.
Princeton's president, Christopher L. Eisgruber, released a statement acknowledging that Wilson wasn't just racist “for his time" -- a cop-out statement that diminishes the victims of racism at that time -- but was exceptionally racist.
Wilson's racism was significant and consequential even by the standards of his own time. He segregated the federal civil service after it had been racially integrated for decades, thereby taking America backward in its pursuit of justice. He not only acquiesced in but added to the persistent practice of racism in this country, a practice that continues to do harm today.
Wilson's segregationist policies make him an especially inappropriate namesake for a public policy school. When a university names a school of public policy for a political leader, it inevitably suggests that the honoree is a model for students who study at the school. This searing moment in American history has made clear that Wilson's racism disqualifies him from that role. In a nation that continues to struggle with racism, this University and its school of public and international affairs must stand clearly and firmly for equality and justice.
<blockquote></blockquote><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQyMzExNy9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0Njg0OTA0NX0.l2l4zUwLMufuYHyleZ2HJSOijHoi_ZsuDFvLEluDz6M/img.png?width=980" id="2603c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="aa9b2a7ca764c7ae94f5ec7ffcac9f91" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="Add Photo Caption...">How things change (or don't) in five years</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="Add Photo Credit...">Twitter</small></p><p>Wilson, who in formal photos always looks as if he'd just learned his daughter was engaged to a Black man, actively worked to roll back whatever meager gains Black people had made since emancipation. Wilson tried to justify his segregationist policies during a <a href="http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5719/" target="_blank">1914 meeting</a> with civil rights activist and newspaper editor <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Monroe_Trotter" target="_blank">William Monroe Trotter.</a> Wilson said there was “great prejudice against colored people," which Trotter probably already knew because he was Black. The president claimed it would "take one hundred years to eradicate this prejudice," which seems like both a threat and overly optimistic in hindsight. <br></p><blockquote><strong>WILSON: </strong>Segregation is not humiliating, but a benefit, and ought to be so regarded by you gentlemen. If your organization goes out and tells the colored people of the country that it is a humiliation, they will so regard it, but if you do not tell them so, and regard it rather as a benefit, they will regard it the same. The only harm that will come will be if you cause them to think it is a humiliation.</blockquote><p>That's some absurd racist double talk, worthy of <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/tucker-carlson-furious-black-lives-matter-more-popular-than-reads-list-of-white-people" target="_blank">Tucker Carlson,</a> and Trotter stated firmly that the facts didn't support Wilson's racist actions. This pissed off Wilson, who said Trotter's “manner" and “tone" offended him.</p><blockquote><strong>TROTTER:</strong> But I have no passion in me, Mr. President, you are entirely mistaken; you misinterpret my earnestness for passion.</blockquote><p>Despite what old movies might have you believe, Black folks in the past weren't running around singing "Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah." We had enough sense to oppose racial discrimination even when it was still filmed in black-and-white. The following year, Wilson would host a White House screening of KKK propaganda film <em>Birth of a Nation</em>, which he said was like “writing history with lightning." (Trotter <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/the-black-activist-who-fought-against-d-w-griffiths-the-birth-of-a-nation" target="_blank">led protests</a> against the film and was arrested at one outside the Tremont Theater in Boston, Massachusetts.)</p><p><em>Birth of a Nation</em> even quotes Wilson's <em><a href="https://time.com/3699084/100-years-birth-of-a-nation/" target="_blank">History of the American People,</a> </em>which claimed pro-Black congressional leaders had attempted "a veritable overthrow of civilization in the South … in their determination to put the white South under the heel of the Black South" -- presumably by letting us vote and hold elected office. Wilson wrote that “white men were roused by a mere instinct of self preservation ... until at last there had sprung a great Klu Klux Klan." (The Klan was not great.)</p><p>So, regardless of whatever he might have contributed to Princeton as its 13th president, Wilson was in fact a “racist pig" who is not worth honoring. Princeton's decision apparently devastated Texas senator and Princeton alum Ted Cruz, whose name will only ever appear on the inside of toilet bowls. Cruz tweeted the shocking news that Wilson was a <strong><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfh4Mhp-a6U" target="_blank">Democrat.</a></strong></p><div id="f167e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3c8f86b8fc75b47b398e932259a7491e"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1277010130819854338" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The same party that stands up for your wife more than you do. Next question. https://t.co/DqstuYMCq9</div> — Rep. Eric Swalwell (@Rep. Eric Swalwell)<a href="https://twitter.com/RepSwalwell/statuses/1277010130819854338">1593297915.0</a></blockquote></div><p>He's got us there! Wilson was a Democrat. He even supported many progressive policies that are less “progressive" considering they would exclude Black Americans, whom he barely considered human. Cruz should understand -- or admit that he understands -- that political parties and ideologies aren't set in concrete. They can shift over the years. One major realignment was after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Cruz is currently soaking in another one. Donald Trump's overt white nationalism and the GOP's enabling of his grossness has caused many decent -- if there are such -- Republicans to abandon the grand old party. This growing list includes but is not limited to Steve Schmidt, Ana Navarro, <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/msnbcs-nicolle-wallace-says-gop-is-sad-now-and-shes-no-longer-a-republican-video/" target="_blank">Nicole Wallace,</a> and <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/heres-why-i-left-the-gop" target="_blank">Sophia A. Nelson.</a> Even Joe Scarborough has admitted he was <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkqgDoo_eZE" target="_blank">wrong</a> to freak out at even the<em> idea</em> of Princeton scrubbing Wilson's dirty name from its buildings. Maybe Cruz still thinks there's a political future in defending Confederate monuments and white supremacist presidents, both dead and <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/trump-retweets-video-of-supporter-shouting-white-power-because-its-another-sunday-with-this-asshole" target="_blank">alive,</a> but the senator's sailing on a Titanic with primarily white-robed passengers.</p><p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/27/nyregion/princeton-university-woodrow-wilson.html" target="_blank">[New York Times]</a></p><p><em>Follow Stephen Robinson on </em><em><a href="https://twitter.com/SER1897" target="_blank">Twitter.</a></em></p><p><a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons</a>.</p><p><strong>Yr Wonkette is 100 percent ad free and entirely supported entirely by reader donations. Please click the clickie, if you are able!</strong></p><blockquote></blockquote><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Healthcare
Trump Asks Supreme Court To Hurry Up And Strip Healthcare From 23 Million Americans
Has all those 'Make Healthcare Scarce Again' hats to sell.
June 26, 2020 01:13 PM
Thursday, as newly diagnosed coronavirus cases smashed previous daily records, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to please invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act, because nothing spells electoral victory like arguing for taking healthcare away from 23 million Americans during a pandemic. But yesterday was the deadline for the White House to submit a brief in the case, so an hour before time expired at midnight, the administration got its homework in, siding with the lawsuit filed by Texas and 17 other Republican-run states in arguing that the entire law must be thrown out for reasons that legal experts have called really fucking stupid. Although they tend to dress it up in more lawyerly terminology, like "If it please the court, this is really fucking stupid."
<p>The argument, as we've outlined previously <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/federal-judge-just-reaally-wants-to-strike-down-obamacare" target="_blank">here </a>and <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/nutcase-appeals-court-judges-just-voided-yr-obamacare-should-you-be-worried" target="_blank">here</a>, is that when Republicans zeroed out the tax penalty for not having health insurance — the individual mandate — as part of the 2017 tax cut bill, that secretly undid the entire ACA. The reasoning, such as it is, goes like this: When the Supremes upheld the ACA in 2012, the Court held that the law was constitutional, because Congress has the authority to levy taxes. The individual mandate, which taxed anyone who didn't have health insurance, was a tax, and therefore the law was A-OK. </p><p>So Texas and the other Republican states claim that without that tax, the entire law falls apart. In December, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/nutcase-appeals-court-judges-just-voided-yr-obamacare-should-you-be-worried" target="_blank">held </a>that a $0 penalty can't be considered a tax, and since the entire constitutional case for Obamacare was based on its being a tax law, the whole law goes "poof" into nothingness. Not just the portions involving the individual mandate, but all the other stuff too, like Medicaid expansion, the provision letting children stay on their parents' insurance until they're 26, and of course the protections for people who have preexisting conditions. As our Jamie Lynn Crofts <a href="https://www.wonkette.com/another-day-another-republican-trying-to-take-away-my-health-insurance" target="_blank">put it</a> last year, "A change Republicans made to the law is, Republicans argue, reason to strike down the law Republicans changed." </p><p>Again, there's no shortage of legal scholars, including right-leaning people who don't support Obamacare one bit, who find that argument some specious fucking bullshit. Libertarian legal scholar Jonathan Adler, who's no fan of Obamacare and has supported other lawsuits against it, <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/8/17441512/obamacare-lawsuit-texas-trump" target="_blank">said in 2018,</a> as the case was first being heard in federal court, that just because Congress in late 2017 reduced the tax penalty, that has no effect on the rest of the law. If Congress had intended to kill the entire program, it would have to actually repeal Obamacare, which as you may recall from <em>all of Trump's first year in office,</em> it didn't manage to do.</p><p>The<em> New York Times</em> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/obamacare-trump-administration-supreme-court.html" target="_blank">explains</a> the Supremes have </p><blockquote>agreed to consider three legal questions in the case: whether Texas and two individual plaintiffs who have joined the suit have standing; whether Congress rendered the individual mandate unconstitutional; and, if it did, whether the rest of the law must fall with it.<br><br>If the court strikes down only the mandate, not much will change, according to an analysis by the <a href="https://www.kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/explaining-texas-v-u-s-a-guide-to-the-case-challenging-the-aca/" target="_blank" title="">Kaiser Family Foundation</a>, which wrote that the "practical result will be essentially the same as the A.C.A. exists today, without an enforceable mandate." But if the court decides that all or part of the law must be overturned, it would affect "nearly every American in some way," the foundation wrote.</blockquote><p>While the Court hasn't yet scheduled oral arguments in the case, the <em>Times </em>says they'll likely be heard sometime this fall, right in time for Americans to be paying attention to the presidential election, and for that matter, assessing whether they want to return a majority of Republicans to the Senate. The <em>Times</em> quotes GOP strategist Joel White, who recently said he thought it was"pretty dumb to be talking about how we need to repeal Obamacare in the middle of a pandemic."</p><p>Ya think? Not that there's a particularly <em>good </em>time to eliminate healthcare for 23 million Americans, but maybe if it happened during the Super Bowl nobody would notice because of the funny beer advertisements. Also, let us remind you one more time that for all their "repeal and replace" sloganeering, Republicans have never, not once, ever had a real plan to replace the ACA. It's always just something that will be terrific and stupendous and much better than <em>Cats</em>, but no, they don't have any specifics. </p><p>In a statement today, White House spokesperson Judd Deere <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-strike-down-obamacare-amid-pandemic-n1232203" target="_blank">said </a>there's never a bad time to eliminate something Barack Obama did, because it's such a clearly illegal failure and nobody likes it with all those socialist cooties on it, ew. </p><blockquote>"It limits choice, forces Americans to purchase unaffordable plans, and restricts patients with high-risk preexisting conditions from accessing the doctors and hospitals they need," Deere said. He added that the president has sought to improve health care by cutting red tape to allow more choice and called on Congress to work with the administration to make further changes.</blockquote><p>Before anyone could ask how the hell eliminating all protections for patients with preexisting conditions would somehow be an improvement, Deere flinched, stared intently at reporters, and bounded away into the deep woods. He startles easily. </p><p>Democrats retook the House in 2018 thanks in large part to anger at Republican attempts to gut Obamacare and make jerky out of it, so it should be no surprise Dems plan to make this latest threat to the ACA a central part of the fall campaign. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/obamacare-trump-administration-supreme-court.html" target="_blank">scheduled a vote</a> for Monday on a bill that would strengthen Obamacare, because unlike Donald Trump, she is not stupid. In a statement Thursday, Pelosi said, </p><blockquote>"President Trump and the Republicans' campaign to rip away the protections and benefits of the Affordable Care Act in the middle of the coronavirus crisis is an act of unfathomable cruelty." [...]<br><br>"If President Trump gets his way," she added, "130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions will lose the A.C.A.'s lifesaving protections and 23 million Americans will lose their health coverage entirely.</blockquote><p>Republicans, on the other hand, are so excited by the prospect of backing up their party's lawsuit against the ACA that Ted Cruz spent last night<a href="https://www.wonkette.com/the-chicks-just-drove-old-dixie-down" target="_blank"> yelling at women in a country western band,</a> and Donald Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1276312029360541698" target="_blank">insisted </a>that he must be reelected, because he will never ever make a verbal slip like Joe Biden recently did. (He said 120 "million" Americans had died of COVID-19, which is far worse than letting 120,000 Americans actually die like Trump has.)</p><p>We don't mind if Biden occasionally says "million" when he means "thousand," especially when it's clear what he meant. At least he'll never say "I'm protecting people with preexisting conditions" while demanding millions of people lose all such protections. </p><p>[<a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-strike-down-obamacare-amid-pandemic-n1232203" target="_blank">NBC News</a> / <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/obamacare-trump-administration-supreme-court.html" target="_blank">NYT</a>]</p><p>Yr Wonkette is 100 percent AD FREE, which is a pretty good preexisting condition to have. Please comply with your individual mandate to send us a donation, if you can afford it! </p><p></p><p><a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Environment
Do Californians Dream Of Electric Trucks?
Yes, yes they do.
June 26, 2020 10:28 AM
California regulators are fixing to issue the nation's most ambitious mandate to replace diesel trucks with electric vehicles, with a regulation that would require half of trucks sold in the state be zero-emission by 2035, and all new trucks to have zero emissions by 2045. The move is expected to push technology development and clean the air, not to mention helping the state reach its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent of 1990 levels by 2030.
Not surprisingly, the oil and trucking industries oppose it because just pumping out filth has been profitable up until now, and who cares about a planet that's habitable by our descendants when there's a third-quarter profit goal to meet? Besides, COVID-19 has already been bad for business and now you want trucks to not make low-income areas hell to live in?
<p>The push for clean trucks isn't just part of the fight against global warning; in California, moving away from reliance on diesel is literally a quality of life issue since trucking is essential to the tech industry. As the <em>New York Times</em> notes, </p><blockquote> On one freeway in the Inland Empire region of Southern California, near the largest concentration of Amazon warehouses in the country, a community group recently counted almost 1,200 delivery trucks go by in one hour. [...]<br><br>Transportation makes up 40 percent of California's greenhouse gas emissions, and is a major contributor to smog-causing nitrogen oxides and diesel particulate matter pollution, which are linked to health problems including respiratory conditions. Of those transportation sector emissions, as much as 70 percent of smog-causing pollution and 80 percent of particulate matter are from diesel trucks, even though they make up just 7 percent of the 30 million vehicles registered in California.</blockquote><p>California's Air Resources Board <a href="https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health" target="_blank">estimates</a> that currently, particulates from diesel engines "increase statewide cancer risk by 520 cancers per million residents" along with killing people via heart disease and hospitalizing people for asthma and other heart and lung diseases. Getting diesel trucks off the road <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/climate/zero-emissions-trucks-california.html" target="_blank">could result</a> in </p><blockquote> at least $9 billion in public health benefits. California also estimates that the rule will lower the state's carbon dioxide emissions by 17 million metric tons, roughly the same amount as pollution from burning almost 100,000 rail cars' worth of coal, and save truck operators $6 billion in fuel costs.</blockquote><p>Yeah, yeah, those fuel savings come after they've sunk a load of money into new fleets. But it has to be done, and also just think of all the manufacturing jobs, plus the long-term benefits of a population that<em> isn't dying from dirty air.</em> </p><p>That truck survey in the Inland Empire was conducted by the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, whose president, Anthony Victoria, points out that with over 20,000 trucks driving around the area on the busiest days, "Children oftentimes can't play outside on certain days because the air quality is so bad," and not even the coronavirus has led to less traffic, since more people are ordering stuff online now. The <em>Times</em> also notes that in 2018, the area </p><blockquote>exceeded federal smog standards for almost 90 days straight. In its latest assessment, the American Lung Association warned residents of wider San Bernardino county: "<a href="http://www.stateoftheair.org/city-rankings/states/california/san-bernardino.html" target="_blank" title="">The air you breathe may put your health at risk</a>." </blockquote><p>The new rules would set clean-vehicle requirements for all categories of commercial trucks, from highway-going big rigs to local delivery trucks. The percentage of zero-emissions trucks sold would be required to increase each year until it reaches 100 percent in 2045. California has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/14/climate/california-electric-buses.html" target="_blank">already committed</a> to purchasing only electric buses for public transit systems by 2029, with a goal of making all public buses electric by 2040.</p><p>And California hopes to be at the center of clean-vehicle manufacturing, too; electric truck builder Rivian will be expanding its operations in California, shifting its product development team from Michigan. Last fall, <a href="https://www.motortrend.com/news/rivian-electric-delivery-van-amazon-photos-specs/" target="_blank">Amazon ordered 100,000 electric delivery vans</a> from Rivian, with the first units expected to hit the road in 2021, 10,000 in service by the end of 2022, and the full fleet on the road by 2030. Unless Donald Trump is reelected and requires Amazon to switch its entire delivery fleet to coal. </p><p>And yes, there really are electric big rigs currently being developed; <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/06/25/883233434/california-regulators-set-to-approve-nations-1st-electric-truck-mandate" target="_blank">this NPR story</a> lets you hear one, sort of, because it makes virtually no sound at all. </p><p><br></p><div class="rm-embed embed-media"><iframe frameborder="0" height="290" scrolling="no" src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/883233434/883233435" title="NPR embedded audio player" width="100%"></iframe></div><p>For Crom's sake, get some of those great big trucks to the White House so Donald Trump can pretend he's driving one. "It doesn't make any noise at all! Who would believe it? Next it'll be invisible like the stealth fighter!"</p><p>One of the tricks in getting to an electric vehicle future, of course, will be making charging easier, and for a look at the challenges and opportunities involved there, see <a href="https://www.niskanencenter.org/electric-vehicle-chargers-build-it-and-they-will-come/" target="_blank">this article</a> on the House's latest infrastructure bill, which would provide $1.75 billion over five years to build public electric vehicle charging stations. It's a circular problem: Consumers would buy more electric vehicles if there were more options to charge them while traveling. BUT companies are reluctant to invest in charging infrastructure because there isn't enough demand yet. The good news? Build public charging infrastructure, and people will use it: "After Kansas City built 1,000 charging stations, there was a subsequent increase in electric vehicles, from <a href="https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kcp-l-reaches-goal-to-install-1-000-electric-vehicle-charging-stations" target="_blank">80 to at least 5,000</a>."</p><p>The relatively small amount of funding in the infrastructure bill amounts only to a pilot program; it would pay for about 7,000 new fast-charge stations to supplement the 14,000 charging stations that currently exist. (Tesla's nearly 2000 "Supercharger" stations only work for Tesla cars, also too.) What we <em>really </em>need is more like 300,000 to 1.6 million of 'em (for a fleet of 50 million EVs in the US) by 2030 to meet decarbonization goals. Hell yes, it's daunting, but it would also create jobs and economic growth, plus the nice benefit of keeping the planet habitable for big mammals who drive cars and trucks. </p><p>[<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/climate/zero-emissions-trucks-california.html" target="_blank">NYT </a>/ <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/06/25/883233434/california-regulators-set-to-approve-nations-1st-electric-truck-mandate" target="_blank">NPR </a>/ <a href="https://www.motortrend.com/news/rivian-electric-delivery-van-amazon-photos-specs/" target="_blank">Motor Trend</a> / <a href="https://www.niskanencenter.org/electric-vehicle-chargers-build-it-and-they-will-come/" target="_blank">Niskanen Center</a>]</p><p>Yr Wonkette is energized entirely by reader donations, and that keeps us AD FREE, if not yet carbon neutral. Help us bring you more snark per minute with a donation, won't you? </p><p></p><p><a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Immigrants
Bye-Bye Legal Immigrants, Economy, Trump Is Bored Of Both Of You
Running America like a (badly mismanaged) business.
June 23, 2020 11:26 AM
Donald Trump signed an executive order Monday extending what was a 60-day moratorium on granting green cards through the end of 2020. It also greatly limited most forms of legal immigration for workers to the US, because, after all, there's an election issue he needs to flog, regardless of near-universal opposition from the business community. The restrictions will only apply to new applicants; legal migrants already in the US would not be affected. Yet.
The new restrictions would apply to a wide range of work visas, most notably the H1-B visa program that allows hiring skilled employees, largely in technology fields. It would also freeze H-4 visas, which go to spouses of foreign workers, and L visas, which allow companies to transfer international employees, often executives, to work in their US operations.
In addition, the order would suspend most H2-B visas for seasonal workers, like landscapers and restaurant workers, and J visas for "cultural exchange" workers like camp counselors and au pairs. Exceptions would be allowed for seasonal agricultural workers, as well as for medical workers who are directly involved in care and research related to COVID-19.
We're betting that once Trump realizes he's just banned seasonal workers from his own hotels and resorts, he'll find a national-security reason to exempt them, too.
<p>As the <em>New York Times</em> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/22/us/politics/trump-h1b-work-visas.html" target="_blank">notes,</a> the restrictions on legal immigrant workers are a longtime dream of Trump's immigration <em>sturmbannführer </em>Stephen Miller, who was calling for a purge of foreign workers even before the coronavirus pandemic. The piece notes that Trump and Miller had originally wanted to end virtually all immigration, full stop, back in April, because what a convenient excuse, but "bowed to pressure from the business community to avoid imposing limits on the worker visas," at least until now. </p><p>Most business interests, from big tech companies to the far-rightwing US Chamber of Commerce, said the visa restrictions would be far more likely to slow the economic recovery from the coronavirus shutdown than to boost American jobs. Chamber President Thomas Donohue <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/trump-immigration-workers-coronavirus/2020/06/22/3b969e88-b489-11ea-9b0f-c797548c1154_story.html" target="_blank">told </a>the <em>Washington Post,</em><br></p><blockquote>"Putting up a 'not welcome' sign for engineers, executives, IT experts, doctors, nurses and other workers won't help our country, it will hold us back," said Chamber President Thomas Donohue. "Restrictive changes to our nation's immigration system will push investment and economic activity abroad, slow growth, and reduce job creation."</blockquote><p>We are particularly in love with Reuters this morning, for <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-workers/trump-suspends-entry-of-certain-foreign-workers-despite-business-opposition-idUSKBN23T2ZW" target="_blank">its framing</a> of comments by an unnamed "senior administration official" who briefed reporters in a conference call yesterday, claiming the visa restrictions would create 525,000 job openings for American workers: <br></p><blockquote>The official, who did not explain how the administration arrived at that figure, said the move was geared at "getting Americans back to work as quickly as possible."</blockquote><p>The Reuters piece also notes the official said freezing green cards "freed up roughly 50,000 jobs for Americans, but did not provide details." That's good skeptical reporting, thank you very much. </p><p>The whole premise that restricting foreign workers will create half a million jobs for Americans is deeply flawed, which is to say, pure bullshit, as actual experts on labor and immigration pointed out to Reuters: </p><blockquote>Sarah Pierce, a policy analyst with the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute, estimated that the new ruling would block 219,000 foreign workers through the rest of the year. [...]<br><br>"The administration is making the assumption that these companies did not already look at the U.S. labor market, which most of them do before they get involved in a complicated process of trying to bring in foreign workers."<br><br>Mitch Wexler, a managing partner at law firm Fragomen, said the order would hurt his social media and wireless communications clients and other tech companies.<br><br>Employers "wouldn't pay a lot of money to file these applications and hire lawyers like me if they could hire an American for these positions," he said.</blockquote><p>But don't worry, with the work visas gone, the firms will have no choice but to hire whatever Americans they can scrape up, unless of course they can't. A <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2019/10/02/restrictions-on-h-1b-visas-found-to-push-jobs-out-of-the-us/#35c30a5a5a85" target="_blank">study released last fall</a> found restricting H1-B visas <em>didn't </em>lead to more hiring of US workers. Instead, the restrictions meant companies just moved more operations to their non-US locations, so they could hire the workers they wanted.</p><blockquote>Foreign affiliate employment increased as a direct response to increasingly stringent restrictions on H-1B visas. This effect is driven on the extensive and intensive side; firms were more likely to open new foreign affiliates abroad in response, and employment increased at existing foreign affiliates. The effect is strongest among R&D-intensive firms in industries where services could more easily be offshored.</blockquote><p>Hooray for Donald Trump's plan to save the American economy by shooting it in the foot and driving more jobs out of the country! </p><p>Reuters <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-workers/trump-suspends-entry-of-certain-foreign-workers-despite-business-opposition-idUSKBN23T2ZW" target="_blank">points out</a> that the "immediate effects" of the new restrictions may be limited, since most US visa offices at embassies and consulates around the world are still closed because of coronavirus concerns. </p><p>In addition to hurting the economy with these new restrictions, the <em>Washington Post </em><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/trump-immigration-workers-coronavirus/2020/06/22/3b969e88-b489-11ea-9b0f-c797548c1154_story.html" target="_blank">reports</a>, the administration is also rolling out another measure aimed at increasing pain for people who fled persecution and violence in their home countries. As with Reuters, bonus points to WaPo for pointing out just how insane that is: </p><blockquote>Trump administration officials also said Monday that they would issue new regulations denying work authorization to asylum seekers with pending claims for one year, arguing that the humanitarian program is being exploited by migrants seeking better work opportunities in the United States. Administration officials have not said how asylum applicants will be expected to support themselves financially while they await a court decision.</blockquote><p>Well if if we make asylum-seekers unable to support themselves, they'll clearly be drags on the economy, so maybe we can just deport them as undesirables! Yet another creative solution from the Trump administration where as ever, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/the-cruelty-is-the-point/572104/" target="_blank">the cruelty is the point.</a> </p><p>[<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-workers/trump-suspends-entry-of-certain-foreign-workers-despite-business-opposition-idUSKBN23T2ZW" target="_blank">Reuters </a>/ <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/22/us/politics/trump-h1b-work-visas.html" target="_blank">NYT </a>/ <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/trump-immigration-workers-coronavirus/2020/06/22/3b969e88-b489-11ea-9b0f-c797548c1154_story.html" target="_blank">WaPo </a>/ <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2019/10/02/restrictions-on-h-1b-visas-found-to-push-jobs-out-of-the-us/#35c30a5a5a85" target="_blank">Forbes</a>]</p><p>Yr Wonkette is supported entirely by reader donations. Please help us stay AD FREE by making a donation if you can! Filthy foreign money also welcome! </p><p></p><p><a href="https://amzn.to/33mKzZe" target="_blank">Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><form name="donation" method="post" class="donation-form"><p class="subheadline">How often would you like to donate?</p><div class="form-row row--plan"><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="once" class="plan-type" required="" checked> Just once
</label><label class="plan-type__label"><input type="radio" name="plan_type" value="monthly" class="plan-type" required=""> Monthly
</label></div><div class="form-row row--amount"><p class="subheadline">Select an amount (USD)</p><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="200" data-value="2.00" data-amount="Two Dollars">$2</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2500" data-value="25.00" data-amount="Twenty Five Dollars">$25</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="500" data-value="5.00" data-amount="Five Dollars">$5</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="5000" data-value="50.00" data-amount="Fifty Dollars">$50</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1000" data-value="10.00" data-amount="Ten Dollars" checked>$10</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="10000" data-value="100.00" data-amount="One Hundred Dollars">$100</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="1500" data-value="15.00" data-amount="Fifteen Dollars">$15</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="50000" data-value="500.00" data-amount="Five Hundred Dollars">$500</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="2000" data-value="20.00" data-amount="Twenty Dollars">$20</label><label class="amount__label"><input type="radio" name="amount" class="amount" value="100000" data-value="1000.00" data-amount="One Thousand Dollars">$1000</label></div><div class="row--buttons"><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="strip"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208879/2000x.png" alt="Credit cards" class="donate-button__img"></button><button type="submit" class="donate-button" data-payment="paypal"><img src="https://assets.rbl.ms/18208880/2000x.png" alt="PayPal" class="donate-button__img"></button></div></form><p></p>
Keep reading...
Show less
Newsletter
©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc
