Legally Speaking With Pamela Price

Pamela Y. Price, Attorney at Law

Who’s Killing Us?

Who's Killing Us? Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Protest, Parkland, Florida 2018
Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images News/Getty Images

Who’s Killing Us? No this is not a song. It’s a serious question that we need to answer in America. More importantly, we need to admit that too many people are being killed in America by guns.

The news this week is the same news we heard last week. The same insane incessant scourge of gun violence overwhelms us. The same “thoughts and prayers” that were issued by legislators around the country last week are re-issued this week. To a different family. To a different grieving community. To the same shocked nation.

Too Many Guns

Across this country, legal and illegal guns are everywhere. Despite efforts to regulate access to guns, the situation has gotten completely out of hand. Increased criminal penalties and harsh sentences have had no impact whatsoever on the access to guns or the number of people killed by guns.

According to one 2012 study, Americans own at least 270 million guns. The second gun-ranking country, India, a country over three times our population, only has 46 million guns. And, the vast majority of the world’s countries have fewer than 10 million privately-owned guns. This disparity is based on the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The devastation to our country because of this law should compel us to take bold action to address our national crisis.

Too many lives are lost, in schools, in our homes and on the street. There are so many preventable deaths that only happen because there is a gun available. In fact, there are always way more gun suicides than gun homicides in America. In 2012, 64% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides. 22,938 people committed suicide with a gun in 2016, while 14,415 people died in gun homicides. We broke a record in the number of deaths by gun in 2017, and two-thirds of those who died were by suicide.

A March 2016 study in the American Journal of Medicine found that 90% of all women, 91% of children under 14, 92% of young people from 15 to 24 years, and 82% of all people killed by firearms in the world were in the United States.

Who’s Killing Us?

We wake up every day to another mass shooting. The face of death by gun knows no boundaries of age, race, sex or religion. Our senses have been shocked over and over again since the Columbine High School shootings in April 1999. Over the last 20 years, we have watched this type of random mass shooting increase in frequency. The number of lives lost in each incident is completely unpredictable.

In December 2012, a gunman murders 27 people – including 20 six and seven year olds – at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. A gunman kills 49 people at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando in June 2016. Another gunman kills 58 people at a concert on the Las Vegas strip in October 2017.

Who's Killing Us? Nine victims killed at Emanuel AME Church
Nine victims shot & killed inside Emanuel AME Church, June 2015

Racially motivated attacks have become commonplace as well. In June 2015, a white man wanting to start “a race war” kills 9 Black people at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina. In October 2018, a man expressing hatred for Jews kills 11 people at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The shocking attack in El Paso, Texas this month was the latest one.

#EnoughIsEnough

Who's Killing Us? Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School parents
Parents wait for news after shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2018. (AP Photo/Joel Auerbach)

On Valentine’s Day 2018, a gunman kills 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. This one woke up young people across the country. #EnoughIsEnough. They took on the National Rifle Association (NRA) with fierce energy. Their attack on the influence of the NRA in the political and media world left that organization reeling.

Watching the young activists who survived the Parkland massacre step up and demand an end to gun violence in America was inspiring. They courageously rejected the stupidest idea that we should arm teachers as a solution to the problem. They have been uncompromising in their insistence that we stop the violence now.

For more than 20 years, Congress prohibited the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) from conducting any research on gun violence in America. It was NRA pressure that led to the restriction on research. The CDC interpreted the ban to include all research on gun violence prevention, and so has not funded any research on this subject since 1996. In April, however, a Congressional committee allocated $50 million dollars to study ways to prevent gun violence, giving $25 million to the CDC.

Every 16 Hours

A recent study found that “intimate partner homicides ― when a person murders their spouse or romantic partner ― increased each year between 2014 and 2017.” The reason: guns. The study found that since 2010, intimate partner homicides by gun increased 26% while the murder of women by other means has decreased. According to one estimate, a woman is fatally shot by her boyfriend, husband or ex every 16 hours.

Who's Killing Us? 6-year-old Millie Drew Kelly killed by her 4-year old brother
6-year-old Millie Drew Kelly killed by her 4-year old brother

Our children are also suffering from both legal and illegal guns. On April 11, 2019, 6-year old Millie Drew Kelly died after her 4-year-old brother accidentally shot her in the head. This kind of tragedy is a regularly re-ocurring event in America. In December 2018, a 6-year-old girl in Missouri dies after her 12-year-old brother accidentally shot her in the head. October 2018, in Virginia, a 7-year-old boy finds his grandfather’s gun and accidentally shoots his 5-year-old sister. March 2018 – an 8-year-old in Ohio loads a .22-caliber rifle and opens fire on his 4-year old sister. She miraculously survives.

Who's Killing Us? 4-year old Na'Vaun Jackson accidentally shot in head
4-year old Na’Vaun Jackson. Credit: Ramon Price

In Oakland, 4-year-old Na’Vaun Jackson accidentally shoots himself in the head when he finds a gun in the house. Although Na’Vaun survived, his family and the entire neighborhood are traumatized.

Repeal the Second Amendment

In this moment, we are having a national conversation about gun violence and gun control. Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens called for “the simple but dramatic action” of repealing the Second Amendment. He argues that will move us closer to stopping gun violence than any other possible reform.

It is long past time to repeal the Second Amendment. Repeal will remove the legal justifications that have thwarted every gun control measure ever proposed.

The Second Amendment is part of the Constitution as a compromise to protect the slave patrols in the South. The Founders knew the militias were necessary to keep slaves under control. Just like we abolished slavery, we need to abolish the Second Amendment. It is a vestige of our history, just like Jim Crow and mass incarceration, that is still killing us.

So, who’s killing us? It seems that we are all playing “russian roulette” with guns in America. Today, it’s Walmart. Tomorrow, it could be Safeway. Until we collectively decide that #EnoughIsEnough, our racist past will undermine our future. Once again, I say it is past time to Repeal No. 2.

Celebrity Fascism in America

I am so not impressed with news people and pundits coming forward lately to condemn Donald Trump. I’m trying to figure out where have they been? Were they in America in 1989 when Trump insisted that the innocent Central Park 5 should be put to death?

Trump’s 1989 Ad in the New York Daily News
Credit: Photograph: NY Daily News Archive

Were they in America in 2008 when Trump insisted that President Barack Obama was not an American-born citizen? Where were they in 2016 when he attacked Sen. John McCain? Where were they when he signed an Executive Order banning Muslims from entering the country?

The Media Embraced Trump

Yes, they were here. In fact, it was the media that gave Donald Trump his celebrity status as a Presidential contender. They turned Donald Trump into “just another candidate.” Trump was someone they knew – a television celebrity. The media respects Trump, much like Roger Ailes (his good friend) or Harvey Weinstein. According to writer Will Bunch, one study found that in 2015, Trump’s total airtime on network TV was 234 minutes. Compare that to just 10 minutes for Bernie Sanders. All the while, mainstream media maintained that Trump is not a fascist, and fascism could never happen here.

Yet, here we are. Not without warning. There were numerous writers who called the Donald out as an American-made celebrity fascist. For example, in July 2016, in the New Yorker Magazine, Adam Goplik pointed out that:

““Trump is unstable, a liar, narcissistic, contemptuous of the basic norms of political life, and deeply embedded among the most paranoid and irrational of conspiracy theorists. . . . he came to politics as a racist, a proponent of birtherism.”

We All Knew He Was A Celebrity Fascist

I can hardly believe that anyone else really, genuinely did not know that Trump has “a scheming mind, attuned very well to the ways in which hatred and intolerance can be manipulated.” His advocacy against the Central Park 5, his shrill birtherism slurs against Barack Obama were mere precursors to his recent attacks on the Squad and Rep. Elijah Cummings.

Indeed, people in New York were not under any illusions about who and what Trump is. In the past week, government officials around the world have acknowledged that they are not under any illusions about Trump’s threat to the world as a proponent of fascist ideas. The horrific chants in North Carolina on July 17, 2019 forced world leaders to come clean with their real views about Trump’s racist regime. They recognize celebrity fascism in America.

Credit: US Holocaust Memorial Museum

In 2016, in the wake of the presidential election, I wrote a piece entitled “Will He Keep His Promises?” Unfortunately, the answer 35 months later is “yes, he will, and yes, he is.

Celebrity Fascism Steals the Show

Donald Trump is a veteran entertainer. He likes nothing more than stealing the show. Donald Trump is very good at stealing the show, having been mentored by media moguls like Roger Ailes and Steve Bannon. So, every time he is threatened by bad news, he takes to Twitter and steals the show with outrageous tweets. Our attention is thus, not on the funding of inhumane concentration camps by the federal government, but rather on his ridiculous tweets.

SO what exactly did Rep. Elijah Cummings do to trigger Trump? Elijah Cummings is the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee. According to one investigator, Elijah Cummings “is probably the single most dangerous person to Trump” in this post-Mueller era.

The Oversight Committee has successfully won the right in court to subpoena Trump’s financial records from his accountant. The Committee plans to issue subpoenas for emails and texts that high-level White House officials sent on personal accounts discussing official business – subpoenas that apply to Ivanka Trump and her husband Jared Kushner. So Trump attacks Elijah Cummings (and an entire city) to deflect attention from an investigation that threatens to unmask his administration, his fraud and his family.

As we struggle against celebrity fascism in America, we must remember 3 very important lessons:’

  1. this period that writer Andrew Wood describes as catastrophic poverty, wealth inequality, and environmental degradation that has engulfed Ameria started long before Donald Trump decided to run for President;
  2. Trump is a master manipulator and his attacks on other elected officials for standing up to his immoral actions – such as incarcerating immigrants and using the government to enrich himself and his family – are designed to distract attention from the underlying atrocities and illegal actions that he is engaged in;
  3. last but not least, “Evil flourishes when good men do nothing.

Pelosi v. The People

Nancy Pelosi’s Purple Manolo heels, Pride Day SF 2019.
Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times

OMG, I love those shoes. Too bad, Nancy Pelosi stepped in so much SH-T wearing these beautiful purple shoes. These are the shoes Pelosi was wearing the day she trashed the Squad in an interview with NY Times Reporter, Maureen Dowd.

On July 6, 2019, Pelosi dissed the Squad big time. According to Pelosi, “All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world, but they didn’t have any following. They’re four people and that’s how many votes they got.”

What triggered Pelosi was the Squad’s courageous opposition to a Senate bill to fund Trump’s concentration camps. Pelosi rejected the Squad’s call for stronger protections for migrant children in the overcrowded border shelters and passed the bill. She clearly capitulated to Trump and Mitch McConnell. No doubt, she was embarrassed by the national news coverage of “her striking defeat” and the Squad’s public exposure of the conditions in the camps.

I think the story that really pissed Pelosi off, though, was the Huff Post article: “What The Hell is Nancy Pelosi Doing?”

The Tip of the Iceberg

Unfortunately, Nancy’s nasty step in those awesome purple shoes was not the first attack on the Squad. It started in January with Ilhan Omar and the Congressional attempts to censure her. Then, Pelosi and the Democratic leadership aligned with Trump to suppress any suggestion that Israel’s racist oppression of the Palestinian people might become part of the conversation in Washington. As VOX pointed out, Omar’s defenders “argued that she [was] being attacked in bad faith as a Muslim woman of color who dares to criticize Israel.” We all know it is absolute heresy in Washington to criticize Israel. We all know that Israel is “the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II.” Right? Rep. Omar apparently did not get the memo.

It appears that the Democrats are intent on taking down each member of the Squad, including Omar, AOC, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley. The party machine is highly upset that AOC took out Rep. Joe Crowley. The Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) is still likely embarrassed that it supported the white man that Ayanna Pressley defeated last summer. He was another long-serving Democratic incumbent who the people booted out. Pressley’s comment about “black faces that don’t want to be a black voice” probably hit a little too close to home for some long-serving CBC members.

Let’s face it – these are some badass sisters who are all about kicking a** and taking names. These upstart youngsters are clearly making more positive news than Pelosi has in decades. And, they are rallying the Democratic base in ways that she never has. This is not how Washington is supposed to work. Hence the backlash.

Pelosi v. The People

What is really disturbing, however, about Pelosi’s attacks are that she had to know she was in essence “colluding” with Trump. He is rabidly xenophobic, racist and sexist. Pelosi opened the door for Trump to attack the Squad. She facilitated it in February and had to know it would be repeated in July. Every member of the Squad has received death threats. Pelosi’s rebuke of Trump in more recent days does little to assuage the perception that Pelosi is “in bed” with the Republicans.

Notably, the sisters in the Squad were not the only ones that called out the Dems’ complicity with Trump. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus calls the measure “a betrayal of our American values.” It warned Pelosi that “[W]hat happened today is unacceptable, and we will not forget this betrayal.” The 90-member Congressional Progressive Caucus also issued a scatching rebuke of Pelosi’s work to pass the bill. So, it turns out that Pelosi’s attempt to isolate the Squad as outliers is neither appropriate nor accurate.

The Wrong Answer

“If the left doesn’t think I’m left enough, so be it, she said, breezily” to Maureen Dowd.  Well, Ms. Pelosi, that’s the wrong answer. Right now, the Democratic Party is in crisis because the old guard is too dismissive of bold progressives like the Squad. Like our own Barbara Lee.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Hakeem
Jeffries and Barbara Lee at a press conference on April 28, 2017.
Photo: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

We have not forgotten that Rep. Barbara Lee should have been the first Black woman to hold a leadership position as the Chair of the Democratic Caucus. Instead, Congressional Democrats selected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, an advocate for charter schools and admirer of Ronald Reagan. Pelosi’s decision to create a new position for Lee does not make it any less insulting to Black women that we are not considered “good enuf” to lead.

Pelosi’s actions to prevent Trump’s impeachment this year brought to mind Abraham Lincoln. Historians concede that Lincoln’s main goal was not to free the slaves but to maintain the union at all costs. In fact, Lincoln was prepared to protect slavery in order to maintain the nation. It seems that Pelosi is willing to accept violations of our moral and/or constitutional standards to maintain unity in Congress at all costs. Like Lincoln, I imagine that her efforts will fail.

Is Pelosi The Next Joe Crowley?

Congressional Democrats are feeling very threatened, for good reason. In most places, Democratic incumbents are selected by the party machine, and not by the people. As I noted last year, their “elections do not rest on the power of the people – their elections are assured by the power of incumbency.” Hence, Pelosi v. The People is a real statement as the progressive movement reflects the sentiments of local activists not aligned with the Democratic Party.

Here, at home, Pelosi faces an authentic challenger in Shahid Buttar. He is an immigrant of Pakistani descent and a Stanford-educated lawyer. Shahid is an activist for LGBTQ rights, sane environmental policies, immigrant rights, campaign reform and the peace and Occupy movements. His well-written Op-Ed piece on why Trump should be impeached has been widely publicized.

This is his second challenge to Pelosi’s seat. Last time, he started late, came from nowhere and got less than 10% of the vote. This time, if the Republicans run a candidate, he might survive the primary.

Pelosi currently appears invincible in her SF District. If she continues to step in sh-t, that could change. Even if she does it in those beautiful purple (and very expensive) shoes. STAY WOKE!

Only 16 Votes

Credit: Gabriella Angotti-Jones for The New York Times

Tiffany Caban’s Election – Part 1

Tiffany Caban is losing her election to Queens District Attorney by only 16 votes. Only 16 votes could decide the race. The criminal justice system in Queens impacts 2.4 million people. The race highlights the dangers of “provisional ballots” and the power of absentee ballots.

Election officials initially tossed out an estimated 2,500 provisional ballots. Some people registered too late to vote in the primary election. Others moved and did not re-register in time. Some voters forgot to sign and swear they were registered Democrats. On the flip side, usually the most reliable and conservative voters cast absentee ballots. Absentee voters vote early and those votes usually decide the race. That conventional wisdom may prove true in Queens.

What’s At Stake in Queens

Tiffany Caban’s race for District Attorney has captured the attention of the nation. Her story, in case you missed it, is an original American story. She’s young, a mere 31 years old, of Puerto Rican descent, a former Public Defender and the first in her family to graduate from college. Bringing all of her real life and world experience, she put together a broad coalition of progressives, formerly incarcerated folks, sex workers and undocumented immigrants.

New York based Working Families Party, Real Justice PAC, Color of Change, Our Revolution and Democrats for Socialist America (DSA) also supported Tiffany. Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krashner, Singer John Legend, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, former NY gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon and the New York Times newspaper all endorsed Tiffany.

Only 1 major labor union endorsed Tiffany Caban.

According to the New York Times, the Queens District Attorney’s office is woefully out of step with the community it serves. The office features high racial disparities in prosecutions and routine violations of the right to counsel. It has no dedicated unit to address wrongful convictions and no oversight of abusive landlords.

Who is Melinda Katz?

Melinda Katz, Tiffany’s opponent, is an established player in New York politics. Melinda has been the Queens Borough President for 6 years. She will be termed out when her term expires in 2021. She is running for her 6th elected office in 25 years. In her long political career she has not shown any interest in criminal justice reform. She has not led any challenges to mass incarceration in New York.

In 1995, Melinda voted as a member of the New York State Assembly to reinstate the death penalty. On the City Council, she voted to increase penalties for low-level offenses and create a new category of crime (gang recruitment). She also favors increased police surveillance in city schools. Every elected member of Congress from New York except one, and NY Governor Andrew Cuomo endorsed Melinda.

Not surprising, big labor unions like SEIU, Teamsters, Firefighters and the building trades all support Melinda Katz. Melinda has no courtroom experience even though she is a lawyer. Her last real gig was as a lobbyist for real estate clients at Greenberg Taurig. The firm has a scandalous history, including a$7.6 million fine in 2006 levied by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to settle allegations that the firm helped cover up a bank’s financial misconduct. Greenberg is also Rudy Giuliani, former NY mayor and current Trump surrogate’s old law firm.

The Democratic Party Favorite

Here’s how one local writer described Melinda’s ties to the Queens Democratic Party:

Katz has also cemented her ties to the Queens Democratic Party, which is often criticized as one of the last bastions of calcified political power in the city. The Party protects and promotes its own and, in any race, brings to bear a large cadre of local, state, and national elected officials that originated from its ranks or owe it some allegiance, as well as the allies of those officials, other local party officials like members of the state committee, political club members, and others.

The Queens Democratic Party was previously headed by Congressional representative-turned-lobbyist Joe Crowley, who lost to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and has been fundraising for Katz.”

According to one commentator, Melinda Katz ran on the traditional campaign of fear and racism. As she notes, “Law-and-order feminists have long used the idea of professional white women’s safety and reputation against young women activists of color.” Yet, she’s ahead by only 16 votes.

The Wrong Side of History

In August 2018, Shaun King lamented the absence of the Democratic Party in the fight for criminal justice reform. He asked “Does the Democratic Party really care about black people or do they just want our votes?”

The reality, reflected in the Queens DA race, is that the Democratic Party is very much present. On the wrong side of history. This was obvious in the 2018 Alameda County District Attorney race. According to the local Democratic Party Chair, Robin Torello, incumbent DA Nancy O’Malley “fights for our Democratic values of justice, equality and civil rights everyday.”

Credit: Pamela Price for District Attorney 2018

Every one of O’Malley’s answers are inconsistent with the California Democratic Party platform. Nonetheless, the Alameda County Democratic Party Central Committee, the Sierra Club and Senator Kamala Harris all endorsed O’Malley. After that, less than 100 days after winning re-election with financial and logistical support from the Democratic party machine, O’Malley endorsed the anti-choice Republican candidate for State Assembly over a Democrat. Fortunately, the Republican lost her seat.

Only 16 Votes

I pray that Tiffany Caban can get at least 17 more votes. Still, the hard lesson for progressives is that we have to “flip” the party. We have a chance to do just that in Alameda County in March 2020. If you are not a registered Democrat, you must re-register and do it early.

One estimate is that a million independent voters (registered as “no party preference”) in California risk not being able to vote for president or local Democratic party representatives in the March primary. In other words, independents who want to change the status quo in March 2020 best re-register to vote as a Democrat. You can change it back later.

In California, the drop dead date to re-register to vote by mail in the primary is January 15, 2020. So, you can only vote by mail for local Democratic party officials if you are a registered Democrat by January 15, 2020. If you want to vote in person, the final date to re-register to get a Democratic ballot is February 17, 2020.

Across the country, we see this is where “the petal meets the metal.” We really need everyone to “#DEM-ENTER” ASAP.

If you can please help Tiffany pay for the recount in the Queens DA race, go to her webpage at cabanforqueens.com and make a contribution. Tiffany is a corporate-free candidate.

Biden’s Baggage

Credit: Rex/Shutterstock

I started writing Biden’s Baggage weeks ago. At the time, there seemed to be just a trickle of information about his record on issues that are pivotal in this election. Issues of endless wars, mass incarceration and criminal justice reform, race and gender equality are all in play in the 2020 Presidential election. Suddenly, what was a trickle of bad news for Biden became an avalanche.

At the first televised Democratic debate, Biden did little to stem the tide of bad press. He seemed to fumble his answers on his 2002 Iraq war vote. He could not defend his opposition to integration and cozy relationships with segregationists. Three issues not even addressed in the debate are Biden’s leadership in creating mass incarceration, his inconsistent support for a woman’s right to choose and his dastardly treatment of Professor Anita Hill.

Why Are We Here?

This is Joe Biden’s third run for President. He first ran in 1988 and dropped out in disgrace after being accused of multiples instances of plagarism. Biden ran again in 2008 and dropped out after the Iowa Caucus. He won less than 1% of the delegates there. According to the Washington Post, it was a year in which voters said they were seeking change and Biden “struck Iowans as a little too familiar, fixtures of a Washington establishment that had grown stale from years of gridlock and partisan infighting.”

Joe Biden’s current cache stems solely from his role as Vice President to Barack Hussein Obama. But let’s be clear: Obama’s candidacy was so extraordinary and inspiring, we could care less who he picked as his Vice President. President Obama had a blank check. He could have written in Bozo the Clown and we would have said okay. Certainly Biden did not disappoint as the Vice President. But make no mistake about it: Barack and Michelle Obama excelled as the first couple and they didn’t need Joe Biden to do it.

Too Much to Overcome?

To be fair, Joe Biden is known as an ardent advocate for middle class America and the rights of workers. Since 2015, he has supported the ideas of free college and $15 hour/minimum wage. He introduced the first-ever climate bill in 1986 and understands that climate change is an existential threat to our future.

Still, while Joe Biden wants to talk about his achievements as Vice President, he has all this baggage. Indeed, the rest of us are looking at his record in the U.S. Senate. Biden voted for the Iraq war in 2002. Some consider that vote his “blackest mark” in his foreign policy past, and an “Achilles’ heel” of his candidacy. Based on blatant lies about “weapons of mass destruction,” the war cost us more than a trillion dollars and plunged Iraq into a devastating civil war. Biden apparently knew it was a lie but went with it anyway.

The Author of Mass Incarceration

Joe Biden has a long record of leadership creating the mass incarceration that continues to decimate Black and Brown communities. Over a 10-year period, Biden wrote multiple “measures to increase incarceration and prisons. He advocated for tougher prison sentences for drug offenses, particularly crack cocaine, despite its inherent racist impact.

In 1984, Biden worked with racist segregationist hero Sen. Strom Thurmond to expand federal drug trafficking penalties and civil asset forfeiture. Biden wrote and sponsored the 1986 crime bill that created sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. In 1989, he delivered a drug policy address that called for more police, more prosecutors and longer sentences. Biden helped write the 1994 federal crime bill that increased sentences and funding for state prisons. He sometimes refers to it as “the Biden Crime Law.

The Enabler of Clarence Thomas

Biden claims that he “did everything in my power to defeat Clarence Thomas.” The actual history is very different. It has long been known that Biden cut a deal with Republican Sen. John Danforth, Thomas’ main sponsor, to end the 1991 confirmation hearings quickly. Biden told a group of women legislators that he had promised Danforth “in the men’s gym that this would be a very quick hearing.”

Former Rep. Pat Schroeder (D-Colo.) and six other female Democrats asked Biden to conduct a complete investigation and delay Thomas’ confirmation. Instead, Biden kept his word to Danforth. Biden refused to allow three other women who would have corroborated Anita Hill‘s testimony to testify. Schroeder says “[T]o have railroaded that through and not listen to the other three women and let his colleagues absolutely tear [Anita Hill] apart was absolutely horrible.” Anita Hill believes that the #METOO movement might have begun in 1991 if Joe Biden had done his job. Anita has “made it clear that Biden is not her candidate for President.”

Pro-Choice or Not?

In this time, a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body is being taken away. Joe Biden is seen by many as “the unreliable pro-choice advocate.” Here’s why:

1970s-80: Biden voted for the Hyde Amendment which bars federal funding of abortions

1977: Biden supported the toughest anti-abortion measure ever – an amendment to deny abortions in cases of incest and rape

1981: He proposed the Biden Amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act which continues to bar U.S. aid from being used for biomedical research related to abortions

1982: He voted in favor of a constitutional amendment to allow states to overturn Roe v. Wade

1983: Biden voted five times to bar the Federal Employees Health Benefits program from funding abortions for federal employees

1988: He voted against adding a rape and incest exception to the Hyde Amendment

As late as 2003, Joe Biden’s score on support for abortion rights by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) Pro-Choice America was only 36%. It improved to 100% in more recent years, starting in 2006. The question is whether we can count on him to fight the battle for a woman’s right to choose or will he revert back to “states’ rights?”

A Supporter of “States Rights”

In fact, on Thursday, June 27, 2019, Joe Biden reverted to “states’ rights.” When challenged by Sen. Kamala Harris about his opposition to busing to integrate schools, Joe went back to his roots: “states’ rights.” The unmasking of Biden’s baggage on the issue of race is now complete.

Biden led the fight against school busing for at least a decade. He sponsored numerous measures to stop busing, working with notorious racist segregationists. In 1975, after Sen. Jesse Helms‘ amendment failed, Biden crafted his own bill to bar federal funds to help school districts integrate.

Sen. Edward Brooke (R. Mass.) (Credit: Getty Images)

Sen. Edward Brooke, the first Black man elected to the U.S. Senate after Reconstruction, called Biden’s bill “the greatest symbolic defeat for civil rights since 1964.”

Joe Biden’s baggage is real and should weigh heavily in any consideration of his candidacy for President. We owe those who fought on the right side of history to make the country a better place at least that much. #BlackWomenLead

The 2019 CDP Chair Race Ends

The 2019 CDP Chair race ended last Saturday. The CDP did not elect Kimberly Ellis to be the first Black woman to lead the party. The CDP delegates voted overwhelmingly to elect Rusty Hicks. What are we to make of this conclusion?

California or Calabama?

Among Black folks, California has earned the nickname “Calabama.” It means that far too often, Black people in California face the same deep racism they face in the South, in places like Alabama. As I watched the racial divide exposed in San Francisco last weekend, I was reminded of the struggle that Fannie Lou Hamer fought against the Democratic Party in 1964.

In 1964, Hamer helped co-found the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP). The regional Democratic party was racist and all-white. Hamer traveled with her delegation to the 1964 Democratic National Convention to stand as the official delegation from the state of Mississippi. Her plea to be recognized by the DNC went viral within a few days. It fell on deaf ears.

The DNC did not officially recognize the MFDP until the 1968 Convention.

At the CDP convention in San Francisco, I attended the Black Women’s Meet-up from 5-7. I don’t recall seeing any white women there. Later, from 10-12, I attended the New Girls Network reception. I counted less than 2 handfuls of Black women. I was greatly disturbed by how comfortable most of the white women appeared to be with the obvious absence of Black women. I’m not even sure that KE was invited to speak there.

Clearly, if every woman delegate had voted for KE, she would have easily won. But clearly, that did not happen. Full consideration of the culture of sexual misconduct and racial discrimination inside the CDP took a back seat to another agenda. That agenda was to preserve the privilege of white men in charge of the party. And it clearly appears that too many white women were ok with that. Much as they voted overwhelmingly for Roy Moore in Alabama despite the evidence that he molested teenage girls. What should have been a referendum on the white male patriarchy in charge of the CDP was weaponized against the Black male Chair candidate and otherwise ignored.

Who is Rusty Hicks?

Rusty Hicks seems like a nice fellow. But as I noted before the election, Rusty Hicks comes out of the same cesspool of sexism and white privilege that birthed Eric Bauman. Rusty is a longtime LA labor leader who worked closely with Bauman for the last 14 years. When Eric resigned in disgrace, it seems that his LA supporters came up with a replacement.

So now, Rusty Hicks is the face of the CDP. In his endorsement of KE, Jon Katz, the President of the Santa Monica Democratic Club, said “After extensive conversations with Mr. Hicks, I worry that his vision of the party would serve the protection of our elected officials above the need to push those elected officials to take bold stances and enact legislation that the grassroots of the party put them there to do.” 

So How Did Rusty Win?

How Rusty won an election that seemed like it was KE’s to lose will be debated for at least the next two years. We know that the elected officials went all out in January to reclaim the ADEM seats. Some believe the defeat of progressive ADEM slates by hand-chosen surrogates for the electeds in January cost KE the election.

For the first time in recent memory, the CDP Labor Caucus endorsed a candidate for Chair – Rusty. The motion to endorse created a huge uproar in the Caucus. The Labor Caucus, like many other Rusty supporters, was blind to the implications of its conduct. In rushing to push Rusty into the chair seat, labor crushed the hopes of any woman who believes after 128 years, it is long past time to have a Black woman chairperson. Labor failed to consider that a woman is far better equipped to redeem the party’s reputation from the sexually predatory conduct of Eric Bauman than an Eric Bauman surrogate.

As CDP Chair, Rusty will have to reassure Black people that Black women do matter to the CDP and change the culture of sexual abuse allegedly tolerated by the Party leadership. We will tolerate no less than that. The real question is whether labor or the electeds will support him in that quest as vociferously as they supported him in the Chair race. How they answer that question may well determine whether Democrats defeat Trump in 2020.

The 2019 CDP Chair Race-Part 2

Kimberly Ellis – 2019 CDP Chair Candidate

This is Part 2 of a two-part series on the 2019 California Democratic Party (CDP) Chair Race. For the full background on the 2019 CDP Chair race, check out Part 1 first.

Why Kimberly, Not Kamala?

Kimberly Ellis is a Black woman and the former Executive Director of EMERGE California. She is running for Chair of the California Democratic Party for the second time. Kimberly’s message about redefining what it means to be a Democrat is inspiring, particularly in light of the party’s failures for at least the past two decades.

Anyone who knows me knows that I am a strident advocate for the leadership of Black women. My favorite hashtag is #BlackWomenLead. Because I am a Black woman who has been on the front lines of the fight for civil rights for more than 40 years, I know how transformative our leadership can be. I supported Kimberly Ellis in 2017 and I support her in 2019.

So, you ask, how can you support Kimberly, but not Kamala?

The answer, unfortunately, is based on Kamala’s record and my own personal experience. In 2017, Kamala Harris did not support Kimberly Ellis. She did not endorse her or vote for her. In 2019, Kamala Harris still has not endorsed Kimberly Ellis. And Kamala controls at least 6 votes in the CDP Chair’s race. The fact that Kimberly Ellis is the only candidate in the race who can actually challenge the CDP’s pervasive culture of sexual misconduct is obvious. Yet, Kamala is standing silently on the sidelines watching the action.

Kamala’s Silence is Complicity

But then, standing by silently is Kamala’s habit and practice. In 2016, when Sen. Holly Mitchell was fighting like a demon to repeal California’s unjust sentence enhancement laws, Kamala stood on the sidelines. That year, Sen. Mitchell sponsored SB966, the 2016 version of the RISE Act. It died in the Legislature. It finally passed in 2018. Kamala did not support the bill.

Sen. Holly Mitchell is the most powerful compassionate inspiring Black woman to grace the California Legislature in decades. For more than a decade, she worked tirelessly with civil and human rights advocates to heal and restore our communities from the devastation caused by our racist and broken criminal justice system. Kamala Harris was silent on most of the groundbreaking criminal justice legislation sponsored by Sen. Mitchell.

In 2015, when Assemblymember Kevin McCarthy introduced AB86, a bill to make California the first state in the nation to have its top law enforcement officer independently investigate deaths in police custody, Kamala actually opposed the legislation. Under the plan, the state attorney general would appoint a special prosecutor to direct an investigation whenever the police kill a civilian. Several other states, including New York, have since adopted this policy.

Gwen Woods & her son, Mario Woods (Credit: Vic Lee, ABC7News)

In 2016, the Black community in San Francisco was incensed about the police killing of Mario Woods. In a series of community meetings, Kamala’s most loyal supporters called upon her to do exactly what AB86 called for – convene an independent investigation of the shooting. Kamala rejected their appeals and stood by silently on the sidelines of the controversy. I shall never forget how shocked I was when I learned that Kamala refused to meet with Mario Woods’ mother.

My Own Disappointments

In August 2016, a coalition of community organizations that I worked with called upon Kamala to convene an independent investigation of the Bay Area police sex trafficking ring. Seven law enforcement agencies were implicated in sex trafficking of a minor. Even when the young woman at the center of the police misconduct was spirited away in the dead of night by the Richmond Police to Florida and promptly incarcerated on felony charges there, Kamala rejected our appeals to get involved. She stood by silently as criminal cases were either never brought or quickly dismissed.

In 2010, I represented a group of 10 women sexually harassed at work. They were all employed at the California Dept. of Corrections. Two of my co-counsel were staunch Kamala supporters. When she became Attorney General (with our help), they thought she would listen to them. She did not. We had our clients write to her directly describing their pain and injuries. We thought she would listen to them. She did not. In fact, she turned their letters over to the lawyers in her office defending the case. Those lawyers used the letters to ridicule our clients.

By 2015, three of the cases had been dismissed and one of our clients had committed suicide. We settled most of the remaining cases in 2015 for almost $2.8 million. The estate of Judy Longo – the woman who committed suicide – received a mere $250,000, largely because Judy was not alive to testify about what happened to her. The lead plaintiff Martha Berndt lost her case at trial. The case was weakened both by the extreme passage of time (13 years) and our assignment to a ridiculously sexist trial judge. Kamala stood by silently as these women suffered years of unnecessary and cruel litigation.

But She’s a Black Woman

In my experience, with one exception, Kamala has not stood with progressive Black women.* In the 2018 race for Oakland Mayor, there were 2 Black women running for the seat. Kamala did not support either one of us. In the 2018 race for Assembly District 15, there were 2 Black women running for the seat. Kamala did not support either one of them.

Kamala’s prominent support for the incumbent DA in the 2018 race for Alameda County District Attorney is perhaps the most shocking. That DA’s record on racially-biased prosecutions is abysmal. I ran for DA in response to the lack of police accountability and racial injustices that have devastated our community for decades. Kamala did not ever respond to my request for a meeting. According to the President of Black Women Organized for Political Action (BWOPA), a statewide organization of Black women that has always supported Kamala, Kamala did not even return her calls.

The Struggle is Real

In conclusion, my decision to reject Kamala Harris as a candidate for President is based “empirical evidence” and real life experience. Perhaps she will have a last minute change of heart and decide to support Kimberly Ellis in her quest to become the first Black woman CDP Chair. If you support Kamala and believe she should stand with Black women, please reach out to her and let her know that Kimberly Ellis deserves and needs her help. Before the vote on Saturday, June 1st please!

Here’s how you can contact Kamala on Twitter, Messenger, by phone or e-mail:

Twitter: @KamalaHarris
Messenger: @SenatorKamalaHarris
Phone: (415) 981-9369
E-mail: erica@scnstrategies.com

I hope I live to see the first Black woman President. I know that she will be a woman with the courage of her convictions and the compassion of a queen. #BlackWomenLead

*Kamala endorsed Public Defender Genevieve Jones-Wright for San Diego District Attorney in 2018 less than 3 weeks before the June 2018 election.

The 2019 CDP Chair Race-Part 1

Kimberly Ellis, 2019 CDP Chair Candidate

Kimberly Ellis is a Black woman and the former Executive Director of EMERGE California. She is running for Chair of the California Democratic Party for the second time. Kimberly’s message about redefining what it means to be a Democrat is inspiring, particularly in light of the party’s failures for at least the past two decades.

On May 20, 2017, Eric Bauman was elected Chair of the California Democratic Party (CDP). Bauman narrowly defeated Kimberly. The CDP says he won by 62 votes. It really was a contest between “old school” Democrats vs “new school” Democrats. The delegates had a clear choice between (a) someone relatively new to the party and (b) someone who had waited years for “his turn.” I reported on this exciting contest in 2017. I supported Kimberly Ellis.

Bauman was Vice Chair of the CDP for almost 10 years (2009-2017) and Chair of the Los Angeles Democratic Party for 17 years (2000-2017). Not surprisingly, his endorsement by the LA Democratic Party was won with 94% of the vote. Bauman was considered the” consummate party insider.” Bauman resigned his position as CDP Chair in disgrace in late 2018.

Fast forward to 2019

On January 15, 2019, 3 current and former CDP employees sued the CDP and Bauman. They claim there is a culture of harassment and sexual misconduct at the CDP that is “well-known and apparently tolerated” by top officials. They describe a workplace where drinking during the workday and inappropriate sexual conduct and comments were tolerated, and party leaders retaliated against those who reported allegations of harassment. In April 2019, more staffers sued the CDP and Bauman for the same type of conduct.

Bauman’s former assistant at the LA Democratic Party filed the second case. William Floyd says Bauman sexually assaulted him at least three times and groped him on numerous occasions. Floyd says Bauman threatened him, telling him “if you cross me, I will break you.”

The fact that Bauman’s outrageous conduct was “widely known” and tolerated for whatever reason is deeply troubling. Bauman was clearly a sexual predator with “no shame in his game.” He abused his power openly in grotesque ways. He knew he could get away with it. Apparently, no one cared enough about sexual oppression, or felt empowered enough within the party to say or do anything about it until CDP staffer Kate Earley broke the silence.

The 2019 CDP Chair Race

Today, Kimberly Ellis is the front-runner in the CDP Chair race. If elected, Kimberly would be only the fourth female Chairwoman of the CDP in 128 years. She would be one of less than a handful of Black women Chairs of State Democratic parties. Rusty Hicks and Daraka Larimore-Hall, both men from Southern California stepped up to run against her.

In my view, Rusty Hicks comes out of the same cesspool of sexism and white privilege that birthed and fed Eric Bauman. Rusty is a longtime labor leader with the LA County Federation of Labor. There is little doubt that Rusty worked closely with Bauman for the last 14 years. Indeed, in 2017, Rusty supported Eric Bauman. I believe that Rusty had to know about Eric’s outrageous misconduct and said nothing. In too many ways in 2019, Rusty looks like Eric Bauman’s surrogate replacement.

Daraka Larimore Hall (Credit: Paul Wellman)

The other leading contender for CDP Chair is Daraka Larimore-Hall. He was elected as Vice-Chair in 2017 by winning 84% of the votes. The first sexual harassment lawsuit filed against the CDP and Bauman in January, however, names Daraka as a person who tried to dissuade the lead plaintiff from filing her complaint. As a result, Daraka has not been able to overcome the perception that he was complicit in Eric’s misconduct.

So why is Rusty not similarly disqualified? Maybe because Eric is a clean-shaven white man while Daraka is a Black man. In addition, Daraka is a former Democratic Socialist who supported Bernie Sanders in 2016. Therefore, Daraka’s political principles are not popular with the party elite. But, having listened to all 3 candidates, I can say that Rusty Hicks is the least impressive.

The Party Elite Have the Power

Kimberly’s greatest challenge is the power of the party elites. These “electeds” get between 2-6 votes each, depending on the size of their constituency. In addition, if they successfully ran a slate of candidates in the 2019 ADEM elections, they may have as many as 20 votes.

The California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) has 10 members. They have up to 60 votes. The Caucus has endorsed Kimberly. However, that is no guarantee that its members will vote in accord with the endorsement. At least two CLBC members – Assemblymembers Reggie Jones-Sawyer and Steven Bradford – have publicly supported Rusty. For example, in 2017, CLBC members Jones-Sawyer, Bradford, Mike Gipson, Autumn Burke and Chris Holden supported Eric Bauman over Kimberly.

The California Women’s Legislative Caucus has 36 members, including 31 Democrats. That’s a trove of at least 186 potential votes. But not all women support women. In 2017, Senator Nancy Skinner supported Bauman. Senator Kamala Harris did not vote for Kimberly in 2017 and she has not endorsed her in 2019. My commentary on Kamala Harris is in Part 2.

Statewide Constitutional officers like Betty Yee, Fiona Ma and Tony Thurman have all endorsed Rusty. It seems that they are progressive until it comes to supporting the leadership aspirations of a Black woman.

How Can You Help?

Many people outside the CDP question whether they can influence the race. The answer is yes! First, you know someone who knows someone who is a delegate to the CDP Convention. You just need to find that person and urge them to vote for Kimberly.

Second, you can reach out to the key legislators and ask them to vote for Kimberly. Hit them on Twitter. Message them through Facebook. Call their offices. Send a e-mail. Let them know that you are watching. Here’s how to reach the 10 members of the California Legislative Black Caucus:

Shirley Weber
Twitter: @AsmShirleyWeber
Messenger: @ShirleyWeberCaliforniaStateAssembly
Phone: (619) 531-7913

Steven Bradford
Twitter: @StevenBradford
Messenger: @stevenbradford62
Phone: (916) 651-4035 or (310) 412-6120

Sydney Kamlager-Dove
Twitter: @AsmKamlagerDove
Messenger: @AsmKamlagerDove
Phone: 323-291-5441
E-mail: assemblymember.kamlager-dove@asm.ca.gov

Autumn Burke
Twitter: @AsmAutumnBurke
Messenger: @AssemblywomanAutumnRBurke
Phone: (916) 319-2062 or (310) 412-6400

Holly Mitchell
Twitter: @HollyJMitchell
Messenger: Holly4LACounty
Phone: (916) 651-4030 or (213) 745-6656

Reginald Jones-Sawyer
Twitter: @JonesSawyer59
Messenger: @reggiejonessawyersr
Phone: (916) 319-2059

Mike Gipson
Twitter: @AsmMikeGipson
Messenger: @AssemblymemberMikeGipson
Phone: (310) 324-6408 or (916) 319-2064
E-mail: assemblymember.gipson@assembly.ca.gov

Jim Cooper
Twitter: @AsmJimCooper
Messenger: @AsmJimCooper
Phone: (916) 670-7888 or (916) 319-2009

Kevin McCarthy
Twitter: @AsmKevinMcCarthy
Messenger: @ASMKevinMcCarthy
Phone: (916) 319-2007 or (916) 324-4676

Christopher Holden
Twitter: @ChrisHoldenNews
Messenger: @AssemblymemberChrisHolden
Phone: (916) 319-2041

Here’s how to reach the 3 women who represent the Bay Area and will control at least 18 votes at the Convention:

Nancy Skinner
Twitter: @NancySkinnerCA
Messenger: @StateSenatorNancySkinner
Phone: (916) 651-4009 or (510) 286-1333

Buffy Wicks
Twitter: @BuffyWicks
Messenger: @AsmBuffyWicks
Phone: (916) 319-2015 or (510) 286-1400

Rebecca Bauer-Kahn
Twitter: @BauerKahan
Messenger: @RBKCalifornia
Phone: (925) 328-1515

In conclusion, the vote will take place on Saturday June 1st. We will see what the CDP really stands for!

#METOO WorldWide Movement

#METOO – “Ain’t I A Woman”

The Worldwide #METOO Movement came to Berkeley this week. Fifty speakers came from around the world to talk about global resistance to sexual harassment and violence. I am honored to participate in the conversation and the ongoing struggle against oppression based on gender.

The most important insight that I can contribute about resistance to sexual harassment and violence is that it is deeply rooted in the intersectional oppression and resistance of Black women.” And so I started to engage with this amazing group of activists, lawyers, professors and students. We are all committed to moving #METOO beyond the popular hashtag into real challenge and change. We must honor and appreciate the roots of this movement as we move “forward and beyond.”

The title “Ain’t I A Woman” goes back to Sojourner Truth’s famous speech on May 29, 1851 in Akron, Ohio. She spoke from her heart and the pain of slavery to challenge white women to “see” her. In 1981, Professor Bell Hooks in her famous book, “Ain’t I A Woman” challenged contemporary white feminists to “recognize” Black women in “their” movement. Ten years later, in 1991, Anita Hill‘s riveting testimony before an all white male Judiciary Committee (headed by Uncle Joe Biden) gave voice to the outrage of women everywhere. After that hearing, the battle cry was “I believe Anita Hill.”

#BlackWomenBuiltThat

The oppression and resistance of Black women created the
law of sexual harassment. In the fall of 1977, I joined the sexual harassment lawsuit called Alexander v. Yale. My political science professor sexually propositioned me. Yale’s band leader raped Ronni Alexander. Ronni’s case was dismissed. Mine was not. As a 21-year-old Black woman, I became the lead plaintiff in the first sexual harassment lawsuit ever litigated in this country in education. We gave sexual harassment a name and made Title IX apply to it.

I was not alone. In 1976, Diane R. Williams, a 23-year-old Black woman attorney won her sexual harassment case against the Dept. of Justice. Diane persisted after the case was overturned on appeal. She started fighting her case in 1972 and kept fighting until she finally won in 1980. Her case was among the first in employment to say that “quid pro quid” sexual harassment is sex discrimination.

Paulette L. Barnes, a Black woman, filed and lost her case against the federal government in 1974. Paulette persisted. On July 27, 1977, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. ruled that it was illegal to fire a woman who refused a supervisor’s advances. On the West Coast, Margaret Miller, a Black woman, sued Bank of America for sexual harassment. Margaret lost her case in the district court in 1976. But she persisted. She finally won her case in June 1979.

“Anita Hill’s Grandmother”

Sandra Bundy in 2018 (Credit: Lexey Swall)

Sandra Bundy‘s case was the first federal appeals court case to clearly say that sexual harassment in the workplace is illegal. Sandra sued the federal government in 1977. She lost at trial in 1979 and fought until she won in 1981. Because of Sandra Bundy, women everywhere can say that sexual harassment creates a hostile work environment. As a result, in 1986, Mechelle Vinson, a Black woman, won her hostile work environment case in the United States Supreme Court. She fought her case for almost 10 years, from 1978 to 1987.

From #METOO to #SayHerName

Fast forward 30 years to October 2017. That month, actress Ashley Judd went public with her story of sexual harassment by powerful Hollywood icon, Harvey Weinstein. Soon after that, Actress Alyssa Milano tweets “If you’ve been sexually harassed or assaulted write ‘me too’ as a reply to this tweet.” #METOO goes viral worldwide.

Tarana Burke, 2018. Credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Tarana Burke, a Black woman activist, created the phrase “MeToo” and an organization in 2006 to empower survivors of sexual violence. The worldwide #METOO movement to fight sexual harassment and sexual violence springs again from our oppression and our resistance.

It was my privilege this week to share our history with women and men from around the world. At last year’s conference, Professor Kimberle Crenshaw shared this herstory. Professor Crenshaw’s work on the urgency of intersectionality clearly points the way forward for our #METOO global movement. Black women must not be invisible in this movement. We are the veins in the “kaleidoscope of butterflies” that Professor Catherine MacKinnon so beautifully describes that gives our movement wings. Our power lies in our collective effort.

Pamela Price & Joelle Dzukou Epse Nwabueze
UC Berkeley Law School, 2019

Repeal No. 2

Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Protest, Parkland, Florida 2018

The news this week is the same news we heard last week. The same insane incessant scourge of gun violence overwhelms us. The same “thoughts and prayers” that were issued by legislators around the country last week are re-issued this week. To a different family. To a different grieving community. To the same shocked nation.

Someone asked me after reading “Every 16 Hours” last week, what is the call to action? The call to action is simple: Repeal the Second Amendment. Repeal No. 2. The Second Amendment is the hard rock that supports every argument that we should continue to allow people to be killed with guns.

The Second Amendment was added to the Constitution as a compromise to protect the slave patrols in the South. The Founders knew the militias were necessary to keep slaves under control. Just like we abolished slavery, we need to abolish the Second Amendment. It is a vestige of our history, just like Jim Crow and mass incarceration, that is still killing us.

The Second Amendment Is Killing Us

This week, two teenagers opened fire at a high school in Colorado. They killed Kendrick Castillo, 18, and wounded eight other students. A gunman killed Riley Howell, 21, inside a University of North Carolina-Charlotte lecture room. Two people were killed and four others were injured in the attack.  The national news is abuzz with tributes to these two young men for bravery. The media sensationalizes their lives and murders.

Less sensational but just as deadly are the events here at home in the Bay Area. In Oakland, on Friday night, someone shot and killed 30-year old Tristan Carson, a clothing designer and event promoter at the intersection of East 12th Street and 23rd Avenue. No suspects, no motive. Just another young life lost to gun violence.

On Tuesday morning, a gunman shot and killed a 47-year-old man in Pittsburg as he stood outside his car. The shooting was the City of Pittsburg’s 8th homicide in 9 months, and the 5th in less than 6 weeks.

Today, May 9th, in San Ramon, police and FBI descended upon California High School to investigate threats of a gun attack. Someone scrawled three graffiti messages threatening to shoot up the school on May 9th. Two of the messages included racist slurs about Black people.

In Oakland, 4-year-old Na’Vaun Jackson is still recovering.

Na’Vaun accidentally shot himself in the head when he found a gun in the house. He survived but his family and the entire neighborhood was traumatized. There is a GOFUNDME page to help the family survive the financial devastation of this tragedy. The man who left the gun in the house has been arrested and will likely go to jail.

It Is Time to Repeal No. 2

What do all of these events have in common? Guns. Across this country, guns are everywhere. Despite our efforts to regulate and control access to guns, the situation has gotten completely out of hand. Increased criminal penalties and harsh sentences have had no impact whatsoever on the access to guns or the number of people killed by guns. Legal or illegal, guns kill, wound and maim too many people every day.

It is long past time to repeal the Second Amendment. That will remove the legal justifications that have thwarted every gun control measure ever proposed. We have the highest gun ownership per capita rate in the world. A March 2016 study in the American Journal of Medicine found that 90% of all women, 91% of children under 14 , 92% of youth aged 15 to 24 years, and 82% of all people killed by firearms in the world were in the United States.

The United States stands alone in its allegiance to gun violence. In 2010, the number of gun homicides in the U.S. was at least 9,960. The Centers for Disease Control reported 11,078 firearm-related homicides that year. In comparison, there were only:

173 in Canada

155 in the United Kingdom

158 in Germany

142 in France

30 in Sweden; and

11 in Japan.

How Do We Repeal No. 2?

The devastation to our country because of the Second Amendment should compel us to take bold action to address our national crisis. It will not be easy – it may not be quick. Going through Congress requires a 2/3 majority in both the House and the Senate and approval by 38 states. Bypassing Congress means we need 34 states to call for a Constitutional Convention to pass the repeal legislation and then 38 states to approve it.

The last time a Constitutional Amendment was repealed was in 1933. It took legislators less than a year to repeal the 18th Amendment which prohibited the manufacture and sale of alcohol. It was a national conversation that led to the repeal of the 18th Amendment.

In this moment, we are having a national conversation about gun violence and gun control. In the words of retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the simple but dramatic action of repealing the Second Amendment will move us closer to stopping gun violence than any other possible reform.

To support the movement to repeal No. 2, sign a petition at MoveOn, find and support a youth group in your community that is committed to getting this done. In this season, young people are on fire to stop the violence and they should not listen to anyone who tells them it can’t be done. The future of this country is in their hands.

In the immortal and wise words of Nelson Mandela, “It always seems impossible, until it is done.” Let’s get this done as soon as possible. #RepealNo2.

Page 1 of 6

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén