Humpty Trumpty Sat on a Wall. Humpty Trumpty . . .

Of all the craziness emanating from the White House this year, the one thing that has truly surprised me is the executive orders relating to big law firms. Trump has stripped security clearances from several firms, restricted their access to federal buildings, and ordered that no federal agency can do business with them. All of this because these targeted firms have worked on behalf of Democrats or others who have challenged Trump’s actions. 

Surely this is illegal? Isn’t it? I guess we will find out. Some of the firms have buckled under the pressure and made deals, generally involving a lot of pro bono work for clients Trump cares about. Frankly, I’m shocked that any law firm would hesitate to sue Trump. But I guess that if competitive firms and circling your partners and employees like vultures checking to see if they can pick off some of your best and brightest, if your treasured clients are hesitant to do business with you in the Trump era, then the illegality may not be your top concern.

Or maybe this isn’t illegal. Surely, everyone deserves a lawyer if you find yourself in court, but perhaps you’re not entitled to very high priced lawyers. And, honestly, how could I feel sorry for the most expensive lawyers in the country? Actually, I don’t. It’s just that if Trump can target these big, pricy law firms and get away with it, then why would any lawyer defend clients on any issue that might offend Trump? 

Many of Trump’s actions have prompted legal challenges; some challenges have merited restraining orders; some are on appeal. But it will take a while (months? years?) before we get final words of wisdom. Meanwhile, we live in a waiting game, just as we do with tariffs. Yes, tariffs have been announced, but not all have gone into effect. For many items, the impact will only be felt when new shipments of whatever arrive on our shores. Again with the waiting game. 

Trump’s decisive actions have not led to immediate changes except with regard to layoffs of federal employees. The people losing their jobs will feel the effect immediately. But again, when research contracts are terminated, only those in the midst of clinical trials will feel anything. I can’t imagine being part of a clinical trial and having it terminated just because The Doge said so! The rest of us will never know which research was never completed. 

My question: Will the effects of Trump 2.0 be felt convincingly by 2026 and 2028 so that we can vote our way out of this chaos?

What is this DEI thing we love/hate?

Did DEI actually cause the recent crash of a plane and helicopter over the Potomac? No. Then why can President Trump score political points by claiming that DEI is at the root of such events? Do people believe him?

My friends and I do not believe him, but Trump gets away with such rhetoric because it’s true that DEI programs were out of control at all levels of government and in many corporations and non-profit organizations. How do I know this? I’ve had the privilege of meeting people whose careers were side-tracked because of DEI assumptions. I’ve had direct experience participating in DEI training with a non-profit that shocked me and brought me to my senses.

The notion of cultural appropriation somehow got tangled up with DEI jargon and one result was a decision that a white woman could not use a hip-hop video she produced to instruct college freshmen on how to use the campus library services. Bonkers. An entrepreneur was shut down for serving Asian noodles while white. Bonkers.

During the training I participated in, I learned that as a white person, I must let a person of color speak until she has said all that she wants to say. Why is that bad, you should ask. Of course it’s rude to interrupt people in a meeting. Let the person finish, for heaven’s sake. But what if the person who chairs the meeting is white? Can she interrupt the person of color in order to keep the meeting on track or enable others to speak? No, she cannot. I’m not sure what should happen if more than one person of color is present as we only ever had one in my training.

I also learned that Robin D’Angelo and Ibram X Kendi are gods. Thou shalt not challenge D’Angelos’s assertion that white people are fragile if they express discomfort with any of the new rules of the road such as let the POC talk until she has exhausted herself. Kendi asserts that any and all gaps in participation, income, achievement, etc. are evidence of racism, end of discussion. If Asians achieve higher scores than whites, it’s because they are white-adjacent, not because their families promote reading, writing, and arithmetic at home.

The fallout from this way of thinking are policies that work to the detriment of all. If schools find that fewer black and brown kids are taking advanced math classes, the solution is not to provide extra support to those are want to learn math yet struggle with it. The solution is to eliminate advanced math classes so that there is no visible disparity. If black students have lower scores on the tests that guide college entrance policies, just eliminate the tests. Base college acceptance on essays in which applicants can attest to their struggles with systemic racism and their efforts to achieve despite these barriers.

Policing, of course, has been the focus of DEI thinking for many years. We all know that police kill black men in disproportionate numbers and that this is a result of racism. Except that this bit of common knowledge is not true. If you are a black professor with actual evidence that this is not true, and if you publish this information, your funding will be cut, your programs suspended, and your ability to teach will be restricted. The good news is that you will survive this punishment and that the administrator who inflicted these punishments will herself be demoted.

People who are policing the police focus on statistics such as the number of calls to certain neighborhoods and the number of interactions with police tallied by race. A “good government” organization will accuse police of racism if data show that police are called to neighborhoods with more people of color more often than to predominately white neighborhoods. That organization will adopt a policy calling for elimination of disproportional policing in which POC neighborhoods are surveilled more than others. A citizen who asserts that police might be called to some neighborhoods more than others because more crime occurs in those neighborhoods will be shut down.

People my age remember when affirmative action was necessary. It began during an era when discrimination on the basis of race was common and visible. The good old boys controlled hiring in companies, departments, and organizations large and small. I got my first job because my dad knew a guy who was able to pull my application out of a stack of applications and tell someone to hire me. The original plan of affirmative action was to eliminate actions such as that and to solicit applications from many more sources on the assumption that qualified applicants of all colors were out there, We just needed to find them, encourage them to apply for jobs they were qualified for, and hire more of them.

In recent years, however, as disparities have persisted in many fields, HR departments began to tighten the scews and insist on hiring fewer white men and more people of color even if that meant lowering standards. I totally get that “standards” are not equally relevant to the task at hand. It’s not necessarily true that a person with a straight A record is the best person for a certain job. Yes, people skills, motivation, and willingness to try a new approach might be more valuable to a company than an academic record. I get that. I get that I should not have had the privilege of getting my application pulled from a stack of equally qualified applicants just because my dad knew a guy. I really do want employment to be based on fair standards and unbiased screening.

But. But young white males cannot be put at the bottom of the pile because they are white and male. Where will that get us? And: white women should be able to participate in a group that is mostly white women. Yes. DEI has gone too far. It absolutely needs to change. Perhaps it needs to be trashed completely. Can agencies and companies and organizations hire and promote people responsibly without the DEI police? I like to think so. I wish DEI programs had not bought into Kendi’s assertion that all disparities are due to racism. (Does anyone really believe that professional sports teams should be racially balanced? Good grief.)

The backlash against DEI is due, in my humble opinion, to the irrational zealotry of recent years. Does that mean that blind air traffic controllers are responsible for the recent crash? No. But people who are legally blind often have some sight and can do normal things with the right technology. We should not assume they can’t do a certain job. If they apply, interview them. Find out what supports they need. Do the same with anyone with a disability. Find out what they can do. Talk to them! Give them a chance.

I wish Trump were not blaming DEI for everything. He’s just a jerk when behaves this way. I hate that crowds of his supporters cheer him on. And yet: DEI programs absolutely need to change.

Should I Be Freaking Out?

Our dear president is giving us an amazing buffet of issues to freak out about, and I’m just chilling out on the sofa, turning on Netflix before dinner, even cleaning house just a bit. In fact, I’m more nervous about the possibility of a serious discussion with friends than about what Trump will do next. How can this be?

Am I so chill because the world didn’t come to an end during Trump’s first term? Not really. I do think that Trump – and especially his “friends” – were not really prepared to exploit the power that was suddenly at their fingertips. This time, they’re rarin’ to go. That said, some initiatives will be stopped by the courts, some will simply take a bit of time to have an impact, and if our guardrails don’t hold, the rest of the world will gear up to resist at least the tariffs. Will Denmark send its mighty navy to protect its hold on Greenland? Will China take over Panama to prevent the US from doing so? Interesting possibilities!

I guess I’m chill because I’m just immensely curious to see what unfolds! My 80 year lifespan has occurred during a time when the “rules based order” has prevailed, not everywhere, but over the oceans at least, and I’ve recently come to appreciate the importance of peace on the open oceans. Yes, land wars have been a constant during my life, not at home, but often involving US troops. Yet, the shooting has occurred in places that have not disrupted my life beyond the price of gasoline. Shopping, still good. Food, still good. Income, still good. Travel, still good. Access to information, still good. Yes, the price of eggs, not so good, but that’s more because of avian flu than armed conflict.

So. No, I don’t like Trump’s approach to immigration, but I do want some control of our borders. I don’t like his attitude toward the Department of Justice, but will the Supreme Court truly permit him to do anything he wants to do? I don’t like his approach to dismantling DEI, but I also don’t like DEI. I don’t like his heavy handed approach to trans issues, but I think there are just two sexes. I’d prefer to have a competent Secretary of Defense, but a little shakeup at the Pentagon might be needed.

I actually think Trump might not give in to Putin as we all expected him to do – because I’m guessing he now sees Putin as weak and ineffectual. If Trump thinks he has the upper hand with Putin that could work to the advantage of Ukraine. We’ll have to wait and see.

Elon Musk worries me, and I don’t want to give him the keys to anything. But mostly I’m curious to see how long he and Trump will put up with each other. And if one of them has to go, it won’t be Trump. So, yes Elon could do a lot of damage, but will he last long enough to do so?

Part of my patience with Trump this time around comes from my disillusionment with the Democrats over the last four years. Pick an issue, any issue, and I probably disagree with how the Ds handled it. I actually liked Kamala Harris, and had she been elected I think I might have liked her refreshing presence as opposed to Old, Creaky, Impaired Biden and Orange Man Bad. But no female president is likely in my lifetime. Oh, well.

So, folks, I’m chill for now. Curiosity dominates my brain. How are you holding up?

Stress Testing Our Democracy

With the election of Donald Trump once again in 2024, we have opted to run a stress test on American democracy. Some thought we did this in 2020 with Trump’s first election. But guardrails in human form prevented Trump from doing all of what he wanted to do. Some think that the success of those guardrails are what brought us to Trump 2.0. His supporters were able to claim that his bark is bigger than his bite, so not to worry.

Human guardrails will be largely absent from his cabinet and other positions in the executive branch this time around. Now it will be up to people in Congress to protect us from the impulsive Trump who doesn’t listen to his Presidential Daily Briefings or bother to learn about the complexities of various issues. The first opportunity for the Senate to act will be regarding Trump’s cabinet nominees. Will Senators roll over and approve people who are unfit for their positions? Or will they hold hearings, require background checks, and actually reject some who might pose a danger to the country?

Biden has faded from public view, and Trump seems to be our acting President – or acting co-President along with Elon Musk. Score one for Elon this week as Trump has come out in favor of the H1B visa program that enables tech companies to import clever people from abroad to power their various creative endeavors. The question today is what will the MAGA wing do now? Will those who are opposed to almost all immigration, most especially of brown people, begin to lose their faith in Trump? Will anything at all cause them to rethink their support?

Some people fear, while others cheer, the notion of Trump as a wrecking ball. I’ve heard the call for more efficiency on the part of federal agencies for as long as I’ve been a voter. No one really delivers. Do we need a DOGE initiative to simply eliminate a variety of agencies, perhaps whole cabinet departments such as the Department of Education? That’s not my inclination. Long ago, I decided that government agencies are not going to be efficient, but that their functions are needed, and I would just tolerate inefficiency. 

After coming to that conclusion, I was pleased when some state and county agencies seemed to do some housekeeping. For sure, employees got some sort of customer service training. Also, some employees gained the ability to help with two things at one visit! E.g., “Would you like to change your voter registration information along with the address on your driver’s license? We can do both!” Well, yes I would, and thank you very much! Are similar improvements possible on the federal level?

Perhaps. Ten years ago, when we wanted to remove a culvert on a small stream on our property, several agencies at different levels of government needed to approve this project even though removing culverts is generally a good thing. But, the various agencies had at least cooperated by creating just one set of forms that could be submitted to all, plus they had designated one person to make the final approval! Still tedious, but much less tedious than in prior years. 

I favor incrementalist approaches to change, at least as it relates to governments. Revolutions just don’t always turn out well. Consider Russia. Or Iran. Or Cuba. Sure, get rid of Assad in Syria. But if the violence of a revolution can be avoided, I think that would be a good thing. Those who support Trump acting as a wrecking ball might have fantasies of a peaceful transition to a much smaller government. My vision is one of chaos with the loss of environmental protections and the minimal safety net that exists today. 

Will the Senate and the House of Representatives develop a spine and reclaim their authority to hold hearings on Cabinet nominees. Will they actually perform any oversight of any agencies? Will courts become too political or will they mind the Constitution?

For now, I remain curious – and anxious. We shall see.

P.S.: The news of Jimmy Carter’s death has just come out as I’m finishing this piece. I’m confident that if Kamala Harris had won the election, he would have lived long enough to see her inauguration. 

Hope and Fears as I Cast My Ballot

I’ll be voting a split ticket today, some Rs, some Ds. Historically, I’ve voted straight tickets, but this year I just can’t. I’ll be voting for Harris/Walz on the national scene, but for Dave Reichert for governor of WA and probably for the Republican for attorney general. Reichert is the most normal, reasonable Republican to make it to the general election ballot in years, and I am anxious for a change in Olympia. 

My concerns at the state level are with a too-soft approach to crime and a too-woke approach to education. Not to worry, lefty friends, there is no chance that Reichert will win. I’ll continue to be a lonely centrist in a far left state come January.

The national election is too close to call as of today, October 22, 2024. I am anxious about it. My curious streak wants to see what would happen if Trump were to win. Would our fears be realized? Would the world as we know it vanish before our eyes? I’m not willing to risk it, so I’ll be voting for Harris, but I’m anxious about the future even if she wins. 

I have a wild set of hopes and fears if Harris takes the oath in January. Yes, I’d love to see a capable woman become president! And Harris is good enough for me. The long row of white men who have preceded her in the office have not necessarily been the best men in the country at their time. They’ve succeeded in winning for a variety of reasons. Most of them grew in competence while in office. (I can’t imagine that anyone is ready to assume the job of leader of the free world on Day 1.) Harris will be a fast learner, and her values and goals are fine with me…

…With a couple of concerns: Just how woke is she? Can she support the rights of trans adults while accepting the need to temper the demands of the most extreme trans activists with regard to children? Can she temper the enthusiasm of public schools to denigrate both our history and the legitimate accomplishments of western culture? Can she address concerns about the criminal justice system the way she did in her book, “Smart on Crime,” rather than follow the radicals who ruled in 2020? 

On the international scene, I have hopes that Harris will be more supportive of Ukraine than Biden has been, and by that I mean I hope she will support the goal of winning in Ukraine, not just fighting until everyone is exhausted.Trump would just give the Donbas and Crimea to Putin and wash his hands of it all. At least, if she wins, we won’t be pulling the rug out from under Ukraine immediately. 

As for Israel, I don’t have confidence in either Trump or Harris. No one knows what Trump would do. He has insisted that October 7 would not have happened if he’d been in office, Ukraine would not have been invaded, no bad things at all. BS, in my mind. I don’t think his craziness, which he now cultivates as an asset, will prevent all bad things. So what would he actually do for the Middle East? I’m confident that even he has no idea.

What about Harris? More restraints on Israel? Fewer restraints? Could she find moderate Muslim partners to rebuild Gaza? Two States for Two Peoples! Yada, yada, yada. Create a Palestinian state without a complete change of heart by Palestinian leaders willing to accept Israel vocally, in public, risking assassination by doing so – that would mean two states armed sufficiently to maintain order, but also armed for self defense. Personally, I think it will take at least a generation of calm, perhaps longer, before Israel would again consider two equal states. But a Palestinian “starter state?” We should at least talk about it.

People can change. I’ve seen it. My father’s family was just fine with Jim Crow. Separate drinking fountains? Fine with them. Separate schools, of course. Separate public accommodations, sure. And then? They let it go. They didn’t all accept the equality of black and white, but they let go of Jim Crow, and many black Americans have taken advantage of opportunities afforded to them. Remember, though, that we were not rushing to bomb shelters, within our homes, when rockets were fired at us by the victims of Jim Crow. No one had armed them hoping to obliterate us. Rather, we had a leader who spoke courageously of judging people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

Palestinians who might have had the potential to become voices for peaceful coexistence have been systematically “taken out” by Hamas and others. Will any surface from the rubble of Gaza? I trust Harris much more than Trump to find them if they are there and work with them. 

Hopes and fears. I have some hopes and many fears as I cast my ballot this year. How about you?