Violence in the Cities

VV

Save Our Cities————————–

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

Three months after the brutal killing of George Floyd while in police custody in Minneapolis, violence still plagues many of our major cities in America. It receives scant coverage from the liberal mainstream media because to publicize it more would distract from the righteous cause of seeking racial justice and risk losing some support for it. But there’s too much violence for the media to ignore completely, so when it is covered, the accounts always include the same detailed description of how Mr. Floyd died with the knee of a White policeman pressed against his neck as he struggled to breathe and pleaded for his life while three other policemen involved did nothing to help him.

The horrific scene is, or should be by now, etched in the minds of everyone who watched the TV images of George Floyd’s final moments of life, so why the repetition? Possibly because Americans need constant reminding of what initially sparked the demonstrations against police brutality which sometimes turned violent. The public has a short attention span and can easily be distracted by other concerns that affect us more directly and personally like living with a deadly pandemic, losing a job or a business, school closings, paying bills, caring for elderly parents and feeding our families.

What started out as a protest against excessive use of force by police against Blacks has since morphed into a much broader movement against systemic racial injustice. The former can, and hopefully will, be addressed effectively and promptly by sensible and needed reforms to law enforcement such as better training, better psychological testing of potential recruits and more effective recruiting methods. The latter requires transformational change and will take much longer, despite the urgency and the demands of activists, because it involves changes to our very culture. It also requires the creation of economic opportunities which will be especially challenging now in an economy that will be struggling to recover from the effects of the pandemic.

The anger and rage precipitated by the death of Mr. Floyd was understandable but acting out the rage did not honor his memory and the violence and destruction that followed was unproductive because violence and destruction do not attract genuine support or sympathy, even for a righteous cause. Indeed, the organizers of the rioting that resulted in burned and looted businesses, attacks against police and bystanders, blocked streets and highways, harassed and terrorized motorists and occupied sections of cities probably cared little about George Floyd, his memory or the cause of racial justice. They simply seized an opportunity to highjack a movement that was commanding national attention.

The initial anger and rage led to some senseless and unrealistic demands, the worst of which was to defund and even abolish police departments. Officials who supported such demands, mostly in Democrat-run cities like Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Austin and New York, simply surrendered to mob mentality or, to put it more politely, group thinking. A recent Gallup poll indicated that 67% of Americans and 61% of Black Americans wanted police presence in their neighborhoods to remain the same and about 20% of both groups actually wanted it increased. Just 15% said they wanted to abolish the police. Nevertheless, Democrat leaders in those cities, yielding to the demands of activists, took steps to reduce police department budgets or, in the case of Minneapolis, to abolish the police department altogether in spite or sharply rising crime rates that are affecting minority communities the most. Voters should remember this when they cast their ballots. Those politicians that failed to keep their citizens safe, which is their primary responsibility, should be held accountable.

The violence and destruction is occurring mostly in Democrat-run cities. But instead of condemning the violence and acting promptly to protect the victims and public and private property, they have too-often just stood by, declined to use National Guard forces or accept federal law enforcement assistance and sometimes even sympathized with the perpetrators of the violence. To compound this malfeasance, they are making matters worse by reducing police budgets and imposing additional restrictions on police use of non-lethal force. To institute needed changes in law enforcement, including increased training will require more, not less funding. Since resignations and early retirements are increasing due to lack of support and violence against police, salary and benefits will almost certainly need to be raised, not reduced, in order to attract qualified people. And increased restrictions on the use of non-lethal methods like tear gas and rubber bullets will almost certainly result in greater reliance on lethal methods.

What was a just cause, racial justice, has been highjacked by those who want to achieve power and radical change by first creating chaos. Many of the organizers are university-educated White elites who probably care as little about George Floyd or his memory as those criminals who burned and looted stores did. The Democrat mayors who have failed to control this have allowed their cities to become crime and gang-infested cesspools of violence. Residents and business owners who can afford to are already abandoning these cities or are planning to. Their city officials have already abandoned them, so why should they stay?

Dr. Kelly is a freelance writer and retired Navy Captain who commanded three San Diego-based ships and a personnel research and development center and taught ship handling, seamanship and navigation at Naval Base San Diego. He earned his doctorate in education at USD, taught graduate students and was a senior vice-president at Great American Bank. He has written over 1500 newspaper and journal articles and has been a regular contributor to the Eagle&Journal since 2001.

August 20, 2020

Voting by Mail

After the Voting Is Over—————–

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

Whenever President Donald Trump warns about the risk of fraud posed by voting by mail, Democrat leaders and the media are quick to respond that he makes such warnings without evidence and that fraud associated with voting by mail is rare. I guess that would depend a lot on how one defines “rare”. And even if actual fraud is a rarity, there are a number of other things that can go wrong in dealing with voting by mail, primarily because of the large number of people ultimately involved in handling mailed ballots.

What’s the worst election outcome imaginable? It probably isn’t a decisive defeat of your preferred candidate. At least that would settle the matter or at least that used to be the case. It’s a contested outcome which neither candidate accepts, both refusing to concede defeat. This could plunge our deeply-divided nation into a constitutional crisis, possibly resulting in chaos and disorder that could make the recent racial justice unrest seem mild by comparison.

Such a scenario is more likely with increased voting by mail, which is not the same as absentee voting. The latter usually requires an application stating the reason why the applicant can’t vote in person and creates a paper trail. Claims that there is no evidence to support the risk are simply not true. In a recent address to the Coronado Roundtable, Ruth Weiss, vice-president of the Election Integrity Project of California said that their election observers, acting as whistleblowers operating under penalty of perjury, have reported numerous cases of voting irregularities with mail-in ballots. California’s voter rolls are not well-maintained, she said, and may contain numerous duplications and include persons who have moved or are deceased. Then there is the matter of harvesting ballots, when almost anyone, including non-citizens, can be used to collect ballots and submit them later. They may even offer to help voters in completing their ballot. Ms. Weiss cited senior living facilities as particularly vulnerable to such practices. There may be no formal chain of custody when ballots are collected in this manner. There is also no way of knowing how many eligible voters did not receive ballots, how many received multiple ballots and how many were sent to people who have moved or are deceased.

Errors can occur in the counting process and in attempting to resolve them. Such errors are more common in voting by mail than in person, Weiss said. Also, there may be no postmark date, especially if bulk mail with prepaid postage is used. In short, there is no positive assurance that a mailed vote will arrive in time or be counted at all. Although I consider the U. S. Postal Service to be fairly reliable, nearly everyone I know has had experience with lost, delayed or damaged mail. The new postmaster general, moreover, has announced new cost-cutting measures including the elimination of overtime for postal employees designed to address longstanding financial problems which could delay mail delivery.

New York City’s recent election in June provides an example of the problems involved in mail-in voting. Six weeks after the election, two closely-watched congressional elections remained unresolved with major delays experienced in counting 400,000 mailed-in ballots. Many may have been wrongfully rejected because of no postmark and thousands more disqualified for minor errors. Imagine problems like this occurring on a national scale in November with widespread voting by mail. Voting procedures vary widely from state to state. Some states will send ballots to every registered voter. But it takes time and effort to update voter rolls and errors will surely occur. On a national level, large-scale early voting by mail could be a disaster if election and postal authorities are not fully prepared to deal with the challenges.

This year, early voting by mail will begin even before the first scheduled debate in September, lessening the importance of the debates. Also, much can happen between the time a voter casts a vote by mail and the election date which could cause the voter to change his or her choice had he or she not already voted.

Protecting voters and poll workers from COVID-19 is certainly a priority and the likelihood that there may be a shortage of election workers because of the pandemic argues for increased voting by mail.  But election integrity is important also and to dismiss the increased risk to election integrity posed by it is irresponsible. The last thing our divided nation needs is a contested election result in November.

Dr. Kelly is a freelance writer and retired Navy Captain who commanded three San Diego-based ships and a personnel research and development center and taught ship handling, seamanship and navigation at Naval Base San Diego. He earned his doctorate in education at USD, taught graduate students and was a senior vice-president and director of training and development at Great American Bank. He has written over 1500 newspaper and journal articles and has been a regular contributor to the Eagle&Journal since 2001.

August 16, 2020

 

 

Election 2020

A Few Campaign 2020 Issues——————————

                A commentary

                By J. F. Kelly, Jr.

With only three months to go before the most important election of my lifetime, it’s time to get serious about the issues. Yes, I know that I’ve said every presidential election, of the 17 I’ve voted in, has been the most important, but this time I really mean it. We have to restore some peace to our cities, some civility to politics and some semblance of normalcy to our lives. The question most voters will be trying to resolve is “Which of the two candidates for the nation’s highest office is most able to facilitate the achievement of these goals?” Unfortunately, many voters, instead of weighing the issues facing the nation, will simply be voting either for or against Donald Trump or purely according to party loyalties. I wish we had better choices to choose from, same as I wished in 2016.

The primary issue with most voters in the recent past has been the economy. President Donald Trump had a robust economy and historically low unemployment figures going for him before the COVID 19 pandemic struck, and every poll I’ve seen shows a majority of voters think he would do a better job of restoring economic growth than Joe Biden. But the economy may not be the biggest concern on their minds this time as they worry about health care, surviving the pandemic and the violence, destruction and crime roiling many cities. Mr. Trump, sensing increasing concerns among prospective voters over the safety of their families, homes and neighborhoods amid rising crime rates in Democrat-run cities while calls to defund the police continue, increasingly is portraying himself as the law and order candidate.

In areas other than economic policy, Mr. Biden appears to have a decisive edge in almost every major poll at this point. But three months is an eternity in these troubled times and a lot can still happen to change voter preference. With an increase in early voting by mail, however, it will probably need to happen earlier rather than later. And polls have gotten it wrong before. Also, the 77-year-old Mr. Biden, by his own word, is a one-term president. If elected, he would be the oldest sitting U. S. president ever and a lame duck from day one. His choice of a running mate is, therefore, critical. She needs to be ready from day one to ascend to the highest office in the land and voters need to have confidence in her leadership ability. If he selects a left-leaning progressive to satisfy Bernie-backers, he could lose some support among those who supported his nomination as a supposed moderate. He has already moved far enough to the left since his nomination to concern many of them.

Much depends on the debates, of course, but they may not change as many minds as they used to, given our political polarization and the fact that many people will have already voted early by mail.  I’ve always felt that debate performance played too large a role in determining voter preference. We are not, after all, electing a debater-in-chief. Unfortunately for Mr. Biden, who is not a strong debater, debates do play an outsized role in influencing voters. If Mr. Trump was able to demolish a large slate of candidates for the GOP nomination in 2016, many of whom were better qualified than he, he should do well against the gaffe-prone, sometimes forgetful Mr. Biden who has twice failed in previous attempts to seek the presidency. There has been some speculation that Biden may even decline to debate in person, citing the pandemic.  That would not enhance Mr. Biden’s chances, any more than seeking a delay in the election for the same reason would enhance Mr. Trump’s.

The performance of Democrat mayors in major cities suffering sharp increases in violent crime on top of the rioting, destruction, endless demonstrations and confrontations with police, all amid calls for defunding or eliminating police departments, certainly won’t help Democrat candidates, especially when they refuse to condemn the violence and sometimes even rationalize it. Like the debates, TV political ads play a huge role in influencing potential voters whose only source of news may be TV. Mr. Trump is using dramatic images of violence, arson, attacks on police, boarded-up businesses and scenes of warlike destruction in American cities and reduced police protection in his campaign ads as vivid evidence of the failure of Democrat mayors and governors to maintain order and provide for the safety of the people they govern which is their paramount responsibility. But something that will continue to help Democrat candidates, is an overwhelmingly liberal mainstream media which too-often excuses or ignores the violence, describes chaotic scenes as peaceful demonstrations and which would endorse any candidate over the despised Donald Trump.

Finally, in a close election, a lot could depend upon who turns out to vote. Many of the demonstrators and organizers appear to be generation Z youths, born after 1995, who apparently have a lot of free time on their hands. This age group is, as we often say, the hope of the future. They are well-endowed with energy, emotion and a sense of self-importance, less so with experience, judgment, restraint and respect for other opinions. Many see themselves as revolutionaries of the Bernie Sanders mold. Many of us were rebels also, at that age; it was fashionable and attracted attention.  Most of us grew out of it and, hopefully, so too have many of the adoring and magnanimous parents of today’s youthful demonstrators. Perhaps they may even still exercise some degree of influence over them, but I’m not overly optimistic. As Dean Andrew Michta of the College of International and Security Studies at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies put it in a recent op-ed, “Children are rampaging through the cities because the adults have left the room.” That youthful energy and enthusiasm is not necessarily indicative of intelligence, judgment and maturity in those whose brains are not yet fully developed. A key factor in a close election may be whether or not those of them who are eligible to vote will bother to take the time to do so.

Dr. Kelly is a freelance writer and retired Navy Captain who commanded three San Diego-based ships, a personnel research and development center and taught ship handling, seamanship and navigation at Naval Base, San Diego. He earned his doctorate in education at USD, taught graduate students and was a senior vice-president and director of training and development at Great American Bank. He has written over 1500 newspaper and journal articles and has been a regular contributor to the Eagle&Journal since 2001.

-August 7, 2020