Follow the Money: Which politicians received money from the Auto Insurance Industry in Michigan?
Anytime the West MI Policy Forum endorsed legislation, we all should pay attention. I say that because, the West Michigan Policy Forum is made up of many of the members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure.
Two weeks ago, the West Michigan Policy Forum posted this statement on their Facebook page, endorsing the GOP-led auto insurance legislation.
So, what exactly is the proposed legislation in Michigan and who is lobbying state legislators on the matter?
The Michigan State House version of the bill can be viewed at this link. However, finding out who the auto insurance industry has been lobbying or more accurately, what politicians the auto industry has been contributing money to, is the more relevant issue.
According to recent data from the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, there are numerous auto insurance company PACs, along with other Political Action Committees, like the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, that have been spending a significant amount of money to influence politicians on this issue.
Of the 18 PACs examined for this report, two connected to the Michigan Chamber of Commerce were among the biggest spenders in support of current lawmakers.
The Michigan Chamber, which lobbies on a variety of issues, has spoken out of support of Senate Bill 1. Rich Studley, the chamber’s president and CEO, called it “bold action to drive down Michigan’s highest-in-the-nation car insurance rates.”
The Michigan Chamber’s traditional PAC has made about $703,350 in contributions to current lawmakers’ political accounts over the last five years. The Michigan Chamber’s super PAC, which acts independently of candidates to purchase advertisements to benefit candidates, spent $1.04 million in support of current lawmakers over the last five years.
Nearly half of the super PAC’s fundraising haul in 2018 can be traced back to insurance interests, including the Michigan Insurance Coalition, which gave $410,000, the Auto Club Group, which gave $35,000, and the Insurance Alliance of Michigan, which gave $32,500, according to disclosures.
Anyone can look at all the data, by going to this link and downloading the spreadsheet.
What follows is a listing of West Michigan politicians and how much money they have received around the issue of auto insurance policy.
As you can see, the only politician who has not received money in an effort to sway how they vote on auto insurance, was Rep. Rachel Hood. As with most issue that are voted on, no matter what level of government, it is always useful to Follow the Money.
On Monday, May 20th, MLive ran a story headlined, Grand Rapids mayor says possible Census citizenship question a concern.
The article in MLive cites the Mayor of Grand Rapids, and a few officials with the Grand Rapids Public Schools, over the issue of whether or not Citizenship Status will be a question on the 2020 Census. The Mayor, a City Commissioner and representatives from the Grand Rapids Public Schools met last Friday to talk about the concerns they have over how the possible Census question of Citizenship Status might impact the immigrant community.
The city officials are concerned about those in the undocumented community not filling out Census forms, for fear that it will put them at risk. In the MLive article, Mayor Bliss is quoted as saying, “We know that there is a lot of fear and mistrust in the community and that’s what’s most concerning.”
However, what is interesting is that the MLive article, nor the sources cited in the article, ever refer to specifics about why there is fear and mistrust in the immigrant community. In other words, there is no mention of the fact that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been arresting, detaining and deporting immigrants at an alarming rate. There is also no mention in the article about the cooperation between the GRPD and ICE in recent years, based up FOIA’d documents related to the Jilmar Ramos-Gomez case.
Much of the concern from City officials has to do with the relationship between how many are counted in the 2020 Census and how that translates into potentially more federal funding. In other words, the Mayor of Grand Rapids wants immigrants, undocumented or otherwise who live in fear of police & ICE, to fill out the Census data, since it will result in the City getting more federal dollars.
The problem with money being an incentive for the City of Grand Rapids is twofold. First, it demonstrates how the City is either minimizing or denying the actual fear that immigrants face every day in this community, the fear that they will suffer state violence and experience family separation. If the City of Grand Rapids and the Grand Rapids Public Schools wanted to reduce the level of fear in the immigrant community then they need to make it a policy that the GRPD will in no way cooperate with ICE agents. In the MLive article, the Mayor of Grand Rapids is talking about holding educational forums in the community so that people will understand the importance of being counted in the Census. If that is true, then the City of Grand Rapids needs to demonstrate to the immigrant community that they will no longer play a role in the arrest, detention and deportation of immigrants living in Grand Rapids by ending their relationship with ICE.
The second reason why money as an incentive for the City of Grand Rapids is problematic, has to do with a position they have taken since December of 2016. In early December of 2016, City officials hosted a meeting with immigration lawyers, members of the faith community and community organizers over the issue of whether or not the City of Grand Rapids would be a Sanctuary City.
The Chief of Police at that time (Rahinsky), the Mayor of Grand Rapids and the City Manager at that time (Greg Sundstrom) each made it clear that the City would not declare itself a Sanctuary City because they would put millions of federal dollars at risk by making such a declaration.
Therefore, it seems that the City of Grand Rapids didn’t want to risk federal funding by making a public commitment to immigrants in 2016, but now they want the immigrant community to participate in the 2020 Census to get more federal dollars, without making any commitment to reducing the fear and terror the immigrant community experiences daily because of ICE and the GRPD’s cooperation with that federal agency.
Seems like a double standard to this writer.
On Friday, US Education Secretary Betsy DeVos once again spoke to an audience that shares her ideological positions, the Young America’s Foundation (YAF).
The speech that DeVos delivered was held at Rancho del Cielo, formerly known as the Ronald Reagan Ranch or the Western White House.
DeVos didn’t really share any new ideas or thoughts, since she mostly talked about freedom, God and again used the phrase “education Cabal” in referring to teacher unions and other organization committed to protecting public education. DeVos also talked about the Education Freedom Scholarships, which is federal education funding that states can apply for and can be used for Charter Schools and other education systems outside of Public Education.
Beyond the repetitive comments in her speech, what is most important to talk about was who the Secretary of Education was speaking to. The Young America’s Foundation not only embraces deeply conservative values, it actively promotes them on campuses across the country.
Founded in 1960, at the home of William F. Buckley Jr., YAF has been a leading entity in promoting US imperialism around the world and far right domestic principles. The Young America’s Foundation has been a leader in the anti-Muslim movement even before 9/11, helping to craft the Anti-Muslim playbook.
YAF has always embrace deeply nationalistic and xenophobia values, as is evidenced in their recent statement on President Trump’s immigration reform plan:
The President’s plans for immigration reform will:
- Fully secure the border
- Protect American wages
- Attract and retain the best and brightest talent
- Prioritize immediate families
- Strengthen our workforce
- Preserve our humanitarian values
The President’s proposal will protect our nation by continuing to add to the 400-plus miles of border wall underway in key locations.
The proposal will empower immigration officials to protect American communities, increasing their ability to remove criminal aliens and alien gang members. It will also restore integrity to our asylum system and expedite the asylum review process for immigrants.
The President’s proposal will stop the deluge of child smuggling and quickly reunite unaccompanied children with their families back home.
The President’s proposal will put our country’s interest first—like so many other nations do for their own citizens—moving to a merit-based immigration system to protect American workers.
Today, vulnerable Americans are the ones hurt the most by the current immigration system, which undercuts wages and drains our social safety net programs.
The President’s proposal includes the “Build America Visa,” which selects immigrants based on high-skill categories: extraordinary talent, professional and specialized vocations, and exceptional academic track records.
The Young America’s Foundation provides a who’s who list of speakers that students can bring to campus. The list includes John Ashcroft, Ward Connerly, Steven Crowder, Dinesh D’Souza, Newt Gingrich, Jonah Goldberg, David Horowitz, Michelle Malkin, Oliver North, Ted Nugent, Karl Rove, Rick Santorum, Jeff Sessions and John Stossel……just to name a few. These speakers represent the worst of the far right and include war criminals and white supremacists among them.
If it hasn’t been clear to people before, it should be clear that in addition to radically restructuring the US education system in America, Betsy DeVos makes it a point to address organizations that embrace far right politics in order to reassure these entities that she is equally committed to the far right agenda and to rally the base of the far right and white supremacist organizations that are absolutely necessary for the capitalist class (like the DeVos family) to remain in power.
While people are very angry about the attack against women’s reproductive rights in Alabama, the Michigan legislature is doing very similar things.
According to MLive:
Both the Senate and House had floor votes scheduled on legislation to define the procedure as “dismemberment abortion” in law and ban it, making it a two-year felony for a physician to perform one unless it was to save the life of the mother.
While it is true that both the Michigan House and Senate were adopting bills that would undermine women’s reproductive rights and punish physicians who believe that women have control over their own bodies, MLive also uses the Right to Life language.
On Tuesday, the Senate voted 22-16 along partisan lines on the legislation, Senate bills 229 and 230. The House passed similar legislation, in House Bills 4320 and 4321.
The politicians who voted for these anti-women’s choice bills should be the subjects of massive protests immediately. None of them can be voted out for at least 20 months, so why wait to confront them, where they work and live?
However, we should never forget who funded these politicians in the first place and their far right agendas. There are several names from the West Michigan community who contributed significantly to the politicians who just voted to take away women’s control over their own bodies, names like John Kennedy, Peter Secchia, Michael Jandernoa and members of the Meijer family. However, the West Michigan name that contributed more than anyone else from this area, was DeVos.
In fact, the DeVos family, for many of these state legislators, were in the top 10 of contributors. In addition, if you include those who received money from the Senate and House Republican Committees (most did), then you also have to recognize that with both of these GOP entities, the DeVos family was the number one contributor. Since 2011, the DeVos family contributed $1,121,000 to the Republican Senate Campaign Committee and $1,880,000 to the Republican House Campaign Committee.
What follows is a list of the Michigan Senate and Michigan House who voted to undermine women’s reproductive rights and how much money they have received from the DeVos family and the GOP Senate and House Campaign Committees. Data is from the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, the Follow the Money page.
The various DeVos family foundations certainly contribute to groups like Michigan Right to Life and the Pregnancy Resource Center. Those contributions are much smaller than their collective political contributions. However, it is important to note that their foundation contributions also go to think tanks which promote and sometimes create the legislative framework for bills that do the kind of harm that SB 229 and SB 230 will do. Therefore, it is important that we understand how strategic DeVos money is used – changing the cultural narrative about reproductive rights, funding groups that are explicitly anti-Choice and then direct political contributions to politicians who will pass legislation that fits their ideological agenda.
Yesterday, the Civilian Appeals Board held a meeting to specifically address the issue of the conduct of Captain Kurt VanderKooi, as it relates to him contacting ICE on former US Marine and US citizen Jilmar Ramos-Gomez.
The meeting began at 4pm, however, the board chair asked for a recess to give time for the board members to read interviews that were conducted by the GRPD’s Internal Affairs of Captain Kurt VanderKooi. This action got many in the audience questioning the validity of the Civil Appeal Board (CAB) process and whether or not the GRPD was pressuring the CAB to allow the Internal Affairs investigation on the matter to stand.
In March, the ACLU & MIRC had filed a request to the Civil Appeals Board, asking to be able to present at their next public meeting, in order to challenge the GRPD’s Internal Affairs decision to re-instate Captain VanderKooi.
At this point one of the City Attorney’s provided a summary of the case involving Jilmar Ramos Gomez, which the ACLU has documented throughly.
During the summary of the case, it was acknowledged that there was no formal training of the GRPD as it relates to when they should be contacting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The City Attorney then stated that the ACLU & MIRC had requested to give a 30 minute presentation regarding the case of GRPD conduct and Jilmar Ramos-Gomez. The board chair of the Civilian Appeals Board then wanted to address the issue of transparency, because he had been forwarded numerous documents. The members of the CAB then discussed the merits of allowing or disallowing the ACLU request.
Several members of the CAB stated that they did not support allowing the ACLU/MIRC present their case. There were two board members, Russ Olmstead and Dick Bulkowski, who stated that the ACLU/MIRC should be allowed to present, both because of the seriousness of this case as it relates to the broader community and because the GRPD provided new information that board members read, so why couldn’t the ACLU/MIRC present information as well. The board chair then suggested that the board should vote on whether or not to allow the ACLU/MIRC to present. Once again, the board took a recess to confer amongst themselves on how to proceed.
Once the board resumed, the City Attorney said that after conferring with city staff and labor relations, they recommended to deny the ACLU/MIRC an opportunity to present. Board member Bulkowski then reversed his decision and stated he thought that the ACLU/MIRC should not be allowed to present. There was a great deal of confusion about what to do at this point, to such a degree that numerous members of the public found the proceedings both frustrating and comical. Russ Olmstead made another motion, but it was never seconded, thus denying the ACLU/MIRC to present.
At this point members of the Civilian Appeals Board were given the opportunity to ask questions to the GRPD officers who investigated Captain VanderKooi. The first question asked had to do with why there was no formal policy of the GRPD when dealing with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The GRPD was now crafting a policy, to which a board member asked why now. The GRPD stated that they felt it was necessary to have a formal procedure, based on this case.
There was further discussion about whether or not Captain VanderKooi could or should have contacted ICE. The GRPD official stated repeatedly that VanderKooi contacting ICE was the right thing to do, considering what Jilmar Ramos-Gomez was doing at the Spectrum Hospital at the time of his arrest.
Additional questions centered around VanderKooi making calls, based on what information and who he contacted. At one point the GRPD officers stated that the criticism of VanderKooi calling while he was off duty, was unfair, because the police are “never really off duty.”
Another question posed to the GRPD had to do with the e-mail communication by the GRPD & ICE that was racial in make-up. One board member didn’t seem to think that there was adequate analysis of racial bias in the communications. Russ Olmstead asked that since there was no formal policy for the GRPD to contact ICE, whether or not there was any racial bias in this case. Olmstead continued to press the GRPD on this matter and the GRPD responded by saying “you are trying to press whatever agenda you have.” This statement elicited a response from the public, which pointed out the irony in the statement, since the GRPD doesn’t have any “agenda.”
The issue of status was raised as well, where one board member wanted to be clear that this was referring to immigration status. The GRPD responded by saying this was true, along with any other information on the person in question. Russ Olmstead asked a follow up observation that in virtually all of the e-mail communications immigration status was the primary concern. Olmstead pointed out to the GRPD that this was a pattern and that there didn’t seem to be any acknowledgement of this fact.
Another question was asked about when the Captain VanderKooi knew that Jilmar Ramos-Gomez is a US citizen. The GRPD stated they did not know when he knew, which seems rather ridiculous, since this issue is critical to determining whether or not there was bias or not.
Lastly, the GRPD was asked why the GRPD contact a certain department within ICE, one that was listed in the majority of the e-mails. This question also demonstrated the selective aspect of the GRPD’s investigation.
The board chair made the observation that even though VanderKooi had been in the ICE liaison position for two years, there was never any formal policy or training as it relates to ICE.
One additional comment was made by a board member, pointing out that the investigation was done correctly, but that the GRPD’s conclusion to exonerate VanderKooi, that was the wrong conclusion. The board member said that it seemed clear that based on the disability that Jilmar Ramos-Gomez was experiencing, the actions of VanderKooi were clearly biased and wrong.
At this point, the board needed to determine whether or not their was sufficient information regarding Captain VanderKooi’s case and whether or not he violated the GRPD’s impartial bias policy. The majority of the board members voted by saying there was sufficient information.
George Storms made a motion to reverse the findings by Internal Affairs of exonerating Captain VanderKooi, in regards to the Impartial Policing policy. The vote was 6 – 2 in favor of reversing the findings.
Throughout the proceedings, there were two overriding themes that this writer heard. First, that the GRPD conducted a weak investigation, which was evident since when questioned by the CAB members, the two cops involved in the investigation either couldn’t answer the questions or had vague responses. Secondly, to many people in the room, even without seeing all the documentation that the Civilian Appeals Board had, it was clear that Captain VanderKooi demonstrated significant bias during the Jilmar Ramos-Gomez case.
There was a proposal by the Civilian Appeals Board to meet on May 22nd to determine the next steps, although it was made clear by one of the City attorney’s present that the City Manager will now have the power to determine what to do about Captain VanderKooi.
“Silence is the voice of complicity.” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Since the beginning of 2019, there have been numerous demands coming from communities impact by police/ICE violence, demands presented to the Grand Rapids City Commission.
This effort began when the ACLU & MIRC sent a letter to the Grand Rapids City Commission, confronting them on the role that the GRPD played in the arrest of former US Marine and US Citizen, Jilmar Ramos-Gomez.
In early February, Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE first presented a list of demands during at Grand Rapids City Commission meeting, demands that primarily centered around the relationship between the GRPD and ICE.
This effort was intensified at a late February City Commission meeting, where activists shut down the proceedings. The Grand Rapids Police Officers Association reacted to these demands and claimed that City officials were being “held hostage” by immigration activists.
In the second week of March, the ACLU and MIRC filed an appeal with the City over the Jilmar Ramos-Gomez case. At this point two other groups from the African American community, who have also been deeply impacted by police violence, joined Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response in a Press Conference that was held outside of City Hall in late March. At this press conference, the list of demands placed before the City had expanded.
In April, the coalition of four groups attended by City Commission meetings, with one of the meetings centered on a proposed Human Rights Ordinance. Then, just before the end of April, the ACLU & MIRC held a press conference based on a FOIA request about ICE and GRPD interactions. The FOIA documents revealed not only racist elements of the GRPD in their dealings with Jilmar Ramos-Gomez, but also that the relationship between the GRPD and ICE was significant.
The four community groups that have presented a list of demands several months ago, had put an April 30th deadline for a response from City officials about the demands.
Last night, in response to the City’s failure to meet the demands, the coalition of community groups released the following statement:
Statement from Movimiento Cosecha GR, GR Rapid Response to ICE, 360 Movement and Together We Are Safe
The Memo
Our coalition has been making an achievable list of demands (listed below) for the City of Grand Rapids since February of this year. We gave the City a clear deadline of April 30. The City of Grand Rapids has NOT directly responded to our demands for holding GRPD accountable and responsible for the police brutality and other incidents involving officer’s misconduct that violates public safety concerns along with ending all cooperation with ICE.
We are disappointed in the City’s actions. The failure of the City sends a message to our groups and to the oppressed populations from which these demands came – the Black and brown residential citizens as well as immigrant communities in our city.
Instead of a direct response, we received a copy of a memo from the Grand Rapids City Manager to the Mayor and the Commissioners. The memo vaguely addressed our overall concerns, but resulted in policy decisions that are counter to our demands. We asked for justice and the City responded with more bureaucracy. The City Manager has proposed:
• Creation of a five-person evening shift of community policing services.
• Addition of a crisis intervention and behavioral health specialist.
• Creation of a position in the Executive Office to work on public safety community relations.
There is no accountability, no money for trauma inflicted, no end of cooperation with ICE, and little support for community care.
The March
The city agreed to bring the issue of Driver’s Licenses to the Secretary of State and the West Michigan Delegation, yet for the Cosecha May 1st march for Driver’s Licenses the city demanded that Movimiento Cosecha GR obtain a permit.
This was the 3rd year for the march and the City has never required a permit in the past. The City threatened the immigrant community with arrest if we marched in the streets. This was a clear message that they were going to step up the repression against communities most affected by police and ICE violence. We continue to push for a formal resolution supporting Driver’s Licenses for All from the City of Grand Rapids.
Our Movements
While these responses from the City are disheartening, they in no way will impact our commitment to seeking accountability and transformative justice for Black, brown and immigrant communities.
If anything, the response from the City and GRPD has energized our movement to continue to fight for justice and to radically imagine a world where police, ICE agents, prisons, detention centers, and borders are no longer used as agents of oppression.
The City has postponed voting on their Human Rights Ordinance tonight. We believe that such an ordinance has no meaning if the GRPD can continue to harm Black, brown and immigrant communities and get away with it. Yet bureaucratic delays are dragging out even this basic symbolic gesture. It is more important than ever that we continue the fight for justice.
Original statement of demands
To the City Commission and GRPD:
We in the community, Movimiento Cosecha GR, GR Rapid Response to ICE, 360 GR Movement, and Together We Are Safe demand the following:
1. Support Driver’s Licenses for All in the State of Michigan.
2. Fire police officers who have committed brutality by beating and kicking Black drivers. Fire Captain Curt VanderKooi who has a long history of discrimination based on race and is not safe for our neighborhoods.
3. Stop all cooperation with ICE and use no city resources to do the work of ICE. There should be no police role of “ICE liaison.”
4. Release the code of conduct for officers and the track record of each officer’s misconduct report, including complaints against them. Release the reports of their investigations so that the public can track their accountability processes. Create an accountability reprimand policy for all officers that stand by during instances of beatings or other harm.
5. Create subpoena powers and investigative powers for our Civilian Appeals Board.
6. Give a vote of No Confidence to Acting Chief Kiddle.
7. Create a program whereby GRPD pays for at minimum 5 years of trauma-related therapy especially for any youth interaction deemed inappropriate regarding harassment, profiling, excessive force etc.
8. Regarding the million dollars over five years that the city has set aside to deal with community police relations: appropriate that to the community to keep our neighborhoods safe.
Nearly three weeks ago, we posted an article about the Jerry & Marcia Tubergen Foundation. Jerry Tubergen is the CEO of RDV Corp, sits on the board of directors of every DeVos family foundation and essentially manages all of the family investments through Ottawa Private Capital LLC.
Today we want to look at the last three years of the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation, with the three most recent 990 documents the foundation has submitted being 2015, 2016 & 2017. We also want to see if there has been any major changes, since Betsy DeVos became the Secretary of Education in early 2017.
While there are dozens of entities that received funding from the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation between 2015 – 2017, there are a few causes that received larger sums of money. The major groupings to receive substantial funds from the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation were conservative think tanks, pro-Charter School/private education groups, christian entities and pro-capitalist/entrepreneurial groups. These four sectors demonstrate Dick & Betsy DeVos’ commitment to radically altering the education landscape in the US, plus their deep ideological commitment to the religious right and neoliberal capitalism.
Think Tanks push a far right neoliberal agenda
The Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation has always supported conservative think tanks, since these organizations develop neoliberal platforms and then push neoliberal policy at the state and federal level.
At the federal level, the think tank that has consistently received the most money from the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation is the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). In 2015, AEI received $1,750,000 from Dick & Betsy, $750,000 in 2016 and $1,000,000 in 2017.
At the State level, there are two main think tanks that have received support from the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation. First, is the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. This neoliberal think tank received $75,000 in 2015 and $900,000 in 2017. Then there is the Acton Institute, based in Grand Rapids. The Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation contributed $305,000 in 2016 to the Acton Institute and $150,000 in 2017.
Pro-Charter School/Education Privatization groups
A second major area the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation has contributed to is an area that they have been deeply committed to since the Reagan years. One group is the Alliance for School Choice, which received $100,000 in 2015, $290,000 in 2016 and $1,000,000 in 2017.
Another group fighting for Charter Schools and the privatization of education is the Great Lakes Education Project (GLEP), which Betsy DeVos founded. Dick & Betsy gave GLEP $56,000 in 2015, $200,000 in 2016 and $100,000 in 2017.
A third group in this sector is a group called Partnership for Education Justice. The Partnership is essentially an organization dedicated to providing legal defense and legal support to families and groups within the public school system that wants to bring religion into school or push Charter School-like agendas within public schools. The Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation contributed $400,000 to this group in 2015.
Conservative Christian organizations
The DeVos family has a long history of financially backing the religious right, specifically the Christian Right. In Grand Rapids, some of the main groups they have contributed to are Potters House School, where the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation gave $200,000 in 2015, $1,200,000 in 2016 and $200,250 in 2017.
The Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation also contributed money to the Grand Rapids Christian Schools, giving $300,000 in 2015, $350,000 in 2016 and $300,000 in 2017. Another conservative Christian entity the DeVos family loves is the Willow Creek Association. In 2015, the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation contributed $600,000, in 2016 another $600,000 and in 2017, just $500. The reason for the major drop in funding was the news about Willow Creek founder being caught in a sex scandal.
Giving Money to Make Money
The last major sector that the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation has contributed to is the neoliberal capitalist entrepreneurial groups. These are organizations that invest money into start up companies or projects that not only get them great PR, but allows for them to profit off of these new start ups.
In 2015, the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation contributed $1,875,000 into the Xprize Foundation, along with an additional $3,750,000 in 2016. Then there is the Grand Action Foundation, which received $50,000 in 2016 and $2,550,500 in 2017. Lastly, there is the group E-merge (which is now part of Start Garden – founded by Dick & Betsy’s son Rick), which received $200,000 in 2016 and another $150,000 in 2017.
Like the other DeVos family foundation, the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation gives a great deal of money to organization that promote right wing and neoliberal capitalist policies that hurt working class families and communities of color. Many of the same people who are negatively impacted by these negative policies often seek out the charity services of organizations that the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation contributes to (although in smaller contributions), without being aware of the fact that the DeVos Foundation funding was part of the root cause of their suffering.
Herein lies the beauty of foundations. The rich members of the capitalist class get to place millions of dollars into tax-free entities called foundations and then they are allowed to contribute to organizations which promotes class warfare to benefit themselves.
The public relations and advertising industries are more often than not, just straight up propaganda. The father of the PR industry, Edward Bernays, once said:
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.
Bernays, before he began working on ad campaigns, was part of the Creel Committee. The Creel Committee was tasked with convincing the American public that the German’s were evil and that the US needed to get involved in World War I. The propaganda campaign that the Creel Committee deployed worked and public opinion shifted in a short period of time.
A recent advertising campaign that has been airing on the radio in the West Michigan market, is an ad from Huntington Bank. You can watch the ad online, at this link, but essentially what Huntington Bank wants us to believe is that they are looking out for us.
You read that right, a bank wants us to believe that they are looking out for us. The ad shows little acts of kindness between people. Early on in the ad, the narrator asks us how we ever lived without it…….looking out for each other. I’m sorry, but human kindness is as old as humanity. Does Huntington Bank really think want us to believe that human kindness just now came on the scene, with their quaint little ad campaign? And, does Huntington Bank really want to look out for us?
The function of banks is hold on to people’s money, supposedly keeping it safe. However, the reality is that banks invest in all kinds of things, using our money, generally to fund projects that will make the rich more money. Banks invest in things like the Dakota Access Pipeline or the Enbridge Pipeline that runs through Michigan, known as Line 5.
Those who sit on the board of directors of banks are also those who represent big business, thus making sure that there is an interlocking system of financial power. Then there is the issue of how banks are always seeking to influence federal and state policy. According to OpenSecrets.org, the banking industry has contributed a little over $388 million to political campaigns in the US and commercial banks spend on average $60 million a year lobbying Congress.
Huntington Bank is no different, they just are not as big as other banks. However, since 1990, Huntington Bank contributed a little over $3.5 million to political candidates and they have contributed millions to lobby members of Congress on financial legislation.
So, when Huntington Bank tells us that they are looking out for us, don’t be fooled by their quaint ads. Huntington Bank is looking out for themselves, because that is what corporations within a capitalist system do……they look out for themselves and their shareholders.
During the April 25th Kent County Commission meeting, a policy was adopted that will allow the board chair to decide whether or not a person’s public comment needs to be translated. The current board chair is Mandy Bolter, who was quoted in an MLive article stating:
“I would commit to do that at any time that we need to do that, and at any request.”
There was a proposed amendment to this policy, which would make it policy for translation of all public comments during County Commission meetings and not leave it up to the discretion of the board chair. You can watch the video of that conversation between Kent County Board Commissioners at a link that was posted on the Latino Community Coalition. The Latino Community Coalition was encouraging people to attend last night’s commission meeting to speak out on the weak application of translation for content during commission meetings.
If you want people to actually participate in local government, then providing translation of all content being discussed and public comment is absolutely necessary. Kent County is an ethnically and linguistically diverse community, and that diversity grows every year. This is especially true for the Spanish speaking population, which comprises 10% of the population in Kent County. If one out of every 10 people identify Spanish as their first language, then providing translation during Kent County Commission meetings should be required and not left up to the discretion of the board chair. However, it should be policy that the county provides translation of all content and comment during the commission meetings regardless if 10% of the population speaks a certain language or if .01% of the population does. If you want people to be able to participate in local government, then you need to provide these kind of basic services.
Commissioner Robert Womack said since the county would not make it a requirement, he has committed to paying for translation services for those who speak Spanish, according to MLive. While I can appreciate the intent of offering to pay, Comm. Womack and those who supported the amendment should have taken a different approach to making the necessary policy changes. Those who supported the amendment, should have reached out to the Latino/Latinx community, the Asian American community, the Arab American community, those who are from the varying African countries that live in Kent County, the indigenous community, those who speak Portuguese, Creole, Mayan, Slavic languages or any number of the languages that people speak in Kent County, and invited them to attend the meeting, to speak their language and make it clear to the commission that not only do residents of Kent County speak a multitude of languages, but demand to have the content of all commission meetings translated.
Imagine what the discussion that began last June about the Kent County’s Sheriff Department’s contract with ICE would have looked like, if those from the immigrant community would have known that their voices, in their languages, would have been heard during the months that Movimiento Cosecha GR and GR Rapid Response to ICE had been pressuring the county to end that contract?
However, too often local politicians and local governments are content with the idea that their meetings are open to the public and if people want to participate, they can. This is an elitist position to take, because it not only doesn’t take into consideration that people speak other languages, but that the times that commission meetings are held do not take place at a time when most people would even be able to attend.
Then there is the issue of representation. Of the 19 Kent County Commissioners, seventeen are white, with only two African Americans and no latino, Asian American, Arab American or indigenous representation on the commission. What would the Kent County Commission look like and act like, if the make up of the commission was more reflective of the county? Imagine what kind of perspectives would be represented? Imagine if the lived experiences of the multicultural communities that make up Kent County were taken seriously about the issues and concerns that they face on a daily basis?
Lastly, while we are imagining possibilities……..what would it look like and feel like if we didn’t have a representative form 
of government, but a governance structure that allowed for direct, participatory democracy. Image if everyone who lived in Kent County could vote on every policy decision that was proposed? Imagine what it would look and feel like, especially for communities who are the most marginalized, if they had direct control over their lives?
Let us all push the county to provide translation for all content and public comment of commission meetings as a good first step. Once that is won, then we can imagine and demand more. Another world is possible!
I make it a point to monitor the Facebook pages of the Grand Rapids Police Department, the Grand Rapids Police Officers Association and Friends of GRCops.
I do this for a variety of reasons. First, they monitor my FB page and the pages of numerous other organizers and autonomous community groups. Second, I think it is important that we are aware of how they present themselves to the public, since there is a clear propaganda war being waged by the police, their supporters and those in the community that are critical of police. Lastly, I think it is important to track what they are posting, since it can help us dismantle the idea that policing as it currently exits is normal and necessary. It is to this last point that wanted to address a recent post of the page Friends of GRCops. I found this post the other day:
This post is instructive in some many ways. Such a statement is not only misleading, it presents the world through a binary lens, where you only have the good guys (cops) and the bad guys (criminals) in society. Presenting police in this binary fashion also serves to remove all historical context, thus erasing the origin and history of policing in the US.
In Kristian Williams’ important book, Our Enemies in Blue: Police and Power in America, we discover that the origin of policing in the US has its roots in the organized violence of slave patrols. The function of slave patrols was to police slaves, and if necessary, capture and return them to the slave plantations. After the Civil War, police forces spent a great deal of their time forcing newly freed blacks into subservient economic and political roles. During the Jim Crow period, local police departments made it their business to enforce Jim Crow laws as well as to either participate or stand by as white people lynched black people.
In addition, if anyone is even remotely familiar with the history of labor organizing in the US, then you would know that in almost ever instance, local police departments sided with robber barons and bosses, often beating and arresting workers who were on strike or engaged in other militant tactics to win worker demands. (see Jeremy Brecher’s book Strike!)
Another way to look at the real function of police departments is to look at any social movements in history – civil rights movements, indigenous movements, environmental, animal rights, LGBTQ or anti-war movements – then ask yourself how the police interact with these movements. Overwhelmingly, the function of police is to subvert, harass, intimidate and arrest those who participate in social movements. In other words, the police protect power and maintain the status quo.
A second major reason that the Friends of GRCops meme is instructive, it that it also dismisses the lived experience of those who have been the targets of police, those who have been harassed and those who have been abused. Black and brown communities have suffered the most at the hands of the police. This does not mean that people “want to make war” against the cops, it simply means that the police have a long history of targeting communities of color. As Alex Vitale, author of the recent book, The End of Policing, says:
Well-trained police following proper procedure are still going to be arresting people for mostly low-level offenses, and the burden will continue to fall primarily on communities of color because that is how the system is designed to operate – not because of the biases or misunderstandings of officers.
The Friends of GRCops meme is ridiculous and arrogant, even if we just look at what has happened in the past few years in Grand Rapids. The anger and frustration with the GRPD is completely understood when we think about the fact that the police have been pulling guns on black youth, latino youth, beating people who do not comply and the fact that the most recent study conducted once again demonstrates that the GRPD racially profile black and brown motorists.
One additional reason why the Friends of GRCops meme is instructive, is that it wants us all to believe that the police are the only one who can provide public safety. Again, such a notion is ridiculous, since the function of the police has not historically been about public safety. However, even if we accept that notion, there are plenty of examples where communities provided their own safety.
For instance, during the famous 1919 General Strike in Seattle, which saw over 100,000 workers actively striking, labor organizers actually patrolled the streets to keep people safe. In the south in the 1950s, Robert Williams and other military veterans, responding to white nationalist violence, organized gun clubs to defend the black community. This same tactic was expanded to many other black communities in the south, where eventually groups formed for self defense, called the Deacons for Defense and Justice. We often forget that the Black Panthers were called the Black Panther Party for Self Defense, since one of their primary goals was to provide safety for their communities.
In 1970, the Black Panthers hosted the Revolutionary People’s Convention, which included delegates from the American indian Movement, the Brown Berets, the Young Lords, the Gay Liberation Front and the Students for a Democratic Society, One of the proposals that came out of this convention was that the existing legal system would be replaced and that policing would be done by each community, utilizing volunteers in what Huey Newton called a community-controlled “peace force.”
More recently the Movement for Black Lives continues this tradition, with more community control and accountability, stating that they want:
Direct democratic community control of local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, ensuring that communities most harmed by destructive policing have the power to hire and fire officers, determine disciplinary action, control budgets and policies, and subpoena relevant agency information.
In fact, there are more and more groups that are advocating that when a problem arises, groups are advocating that people shouldn’t call the cops, rather they should seek out other sources, of which there are many.
Lastly, there was a fabulous example of how people can keep each other safe, which took place during the May 1st A Day Without Immigrants march. Movimiento Cosecha allies have been offering crowd safety trainings over the past 2 years so that immigrants feel safe coming to actions. People learn skills and tactics on how to practice community safety, especially for marginalized populations. Those of us who have white privilege can leverage that privilege to benefit the safety of immigrants in any number of ways and the May 1st march was a great example of this, as can be seen in the meme here, which is a perfect counter to the meme at the top from Friends of GRCops.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 