Community Responses to the GRPD violence against Honestie Hodges and the limits of reform politics
It has more than a week since the news that several Grand Rapids police officers handcuffed at gun point and 11 year old black girl while looking for a suspect.
Initially, Police Chief Rahinsky and other members of the Grand Rapids City Commission responded with concerns about how this 11 year old black girl was treated, with Rahnisky even saying he felt “nauseated” after watching the body cam footage. Our post last week made the point that the city and the police department would not make any fundamental changes because this is how policing is designed, especially when interacting with communities of color and poor working class white people.
Since then, the Grand Rapids Police Union has made it clear that they felt the officers responsible for handcuffing Honestie Hodges at gunpoint followed standard protocol.
According to MLive, on Friday, At the press conference, Rahinsky said he thought there was “good police work” at a quickly evolving scene where officers were responding to a stabbing with unknown factors in play. He also said they followed proper training. But at the same time, he hoped for a better outcome that would not traumatize an 11-year-old.
While the police union says it doesn’t think that Rahnisky has their trust, the responses from Rahinsky make it clear that he believes the officers involved with handcuffing the 11 year old black girl at gunpoint was how cops should handle this situation. We should not by lulled into believing that Chief Rahnisky has the community’s best interest in mind, just because he felt “nauseated” when viewing the video footage. Again, this is how the police function.
Community Responses
There have been several community responses since the GRPD handcuffed at gunpoint Honestie Hodges on December 6. On Tuesday, December 12 and last night, people spoke out against the way that this 11 year old girl was treated. In both cases, these comments came during the open public comment period, as there has not been a forum public hearing on this police abuse by the GRPD.
Last Wednesday, some 30 local clergy gathered at Brown-Hutcherson Ministries in Grand Rapids to discuss what the faith community ought to do in this case. According to a WOOD TV 8 story, the clergy stated:
“We are not asking for change now, we are cohesively demanding to have the Department of Justice to review the police practices and training mechanisms,” said Jerry Bishop, pastor of Lifequest Ministries.
One additional response is a campaign, initiated by Dana Knight, to have people donate gifts to Honestie Hodges, by dropping them off at the LINC office.
Linc also is calling for the suspension of all the GRPD officers involved in handcuffing at gunpoint Honestie Hodges, based on a Press Release from yesterday.
Lastly, at a press conference held yesterday at City Hall, the NAACP stated:
“The officers involved violated Honestie Hodges’ Fourth Amendment Constitutional right, in addition to using excessive force,” the Grand Rapids branch of the NAACP said in a statement.”
“The NAACP Grand Rapids Branch is greatly concerned with the disturbing trend in which officers have aggressively traumatized youth of color. Recently, five African American males between the ages of 12-14 were ordered to the ground, held at gunpoint and handcuffed for over 10 minutes on their way home from a community center.”
“The regional, state and national affiliates are also closely watching, expecting appropriate disciplinary actions be taken.”
The Limits of Reformist Politics
All of these responses are understandable given the current political culture we live in. We want the police department to be held accountable and to adopt policies and procedures that will not allow for this kind of behavior in the future. However, when we take a step back and look at what happened, do we honestly believe that there will be any real change because we ask the police to do better?
If we read Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow, or familiarize ourselves with the Black Lives Matter movement, it becomes clear that the analysis that these people bring to the table, in addition to their own lived experience, should suggest to us that reformist politics are inadequate as a response to the function of policing in the US. Now, I’m not suggesting that we not make demands from local officials and the GRPD. We should, but we have to be more strategic about it.
What if, instead of just going to a City Commission and expressing our collective anger at what the police are doing to black people in this city, we went with the intention of not leaving until certain demands were met? What if we had 100 people willing to do civil disobedience and stay in city hall until we got what we wanted? This of course would mean we would need to devise a list of demands, which should really be part of a robust community conversation that questions the actual function of police departments.
Would it be wiser to ask for some kind of reprimand against the officers who handcuffed at gunpoint the 11 year old black girl or should we demand some radical shifts in how policing functions in this community and whether or not there are community-based solutions to safety that do not require heavily armed individuals that are trained to protect private property, power and privilege?
Of all the community responses so far, the best one is giving gifts to Honestie Hodges. I say this because, it is always good to practice mutual aid, where those who are victimized by systems of oppression (yes, the GRPD is part of a system of oppression) get some relief and care from the larger community.
What has happened in the past couple of years, both nationally and locally, with greater attention given to police violence against the black community, is that it has forced us to question the role of police departments. This violence by cops against the black community is nothing new and in fact, it is consistent with the history of policing from the beginning. What we need to do is to collectively come up with a strategy to challenge the way we think about cops and the way we think about public safety. Until then, we are not likely to change much of anything, since our responses are too often reactionary and reformist in nature.
DACA recipients organize protest in front of Rep. Huizenga’s office to demand renewal of the Dream Act
On Monday, about 30 people gathered outside the Grandville office of Rep. Bill Huizenga’s to demand that he support a renewal of the Dream Act.
The action was organized by DACA recipients, young Latino/Latinix activists who have been the beneficiaries of the Dream Act that was passed during the Obama administration after immigrant youth hounded the former President in cities across the country to adopt some protections for the children of immigrants who wanted to go to college.
The new Dream Act is similar to the one passed in 2012, with some notable changes that one can find at this link.
The action on Monday was organized by Dreamers, with several of them speaking with a megaphone. Two young Latinix organizers shared their story and spoke passionately about their dreams of getting a good education. These two young Latinix women (pictured here) demonstrated the courage it takes to be public with their demands of immigration justice, especially in a climate of tremendous anti-immigrant hostility, as was reflected in the hateful comments from a few white people driving passed the protest on Wilson Ave. in Grandville.
We were able to do a short interview with one of the other organizers, Danny Caracheo, who also organized a similar action in front of Rep. Justin Amash’s office last week.
There were a few other people who spoke at the action, notably 2nd Congressional Candidate Rob Davidson, who is challenging Huizenga in the 2018 election. Davidson has a few moderate positions on immigration at his website and did say that he would make the Dream Act a priority of elected next November. However, it has been a long time since the 2nd Congressional District has been won by a Democrat and Huizenga already has more than 10 times the amount of campaign money that Davidson has, according to the Center for Responsible Politics.
Class Action Lawsuit, Corporate Polluters and Erin Brockovich bring out hundreds to forum
On Saturday, hundreds of people came to Comstock Park High School to hear environmental activist and consumer advocate Erin Brockovich.
The forum was hosted by three law firms, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, Miller Law and Weitz & Luxenberg. The forum was designed to present information on a class action lawsuit filed jointly by these three law firms, a lawsuit that was filed on December 1st. A Press Release by the three law firms states:
A national team of law firms today announced a new class action lawsuit against Wolverine WorldWide, 3M Corporation and Waste Management Inc. for dumping toxic waste and polluting groundwater in Belmont, Rockford and other areas in Kent County. This is the first environmental class action lawsuit filed against these companies, and it seeks immediate blood testing, monitoring, and damages for residents who have been harmed by the pollution.
The fact that all three corporations – Wolverine Worldwide, 3M and Waste Management Inc – were the targets of the lawsuit was encouraging to many, since it recognizes the fact that while Wolverine Worldwide used the toxic chemicals which now plague area residents, 3M and Waste Management Inc also are complicit in the contamination. To read the full complaint filed in US District Court, to to this link.
There were several lawyers who spoke, but the main presenter was Erin Brockovich. She spoke to those in attendance for about 20 minutes, talking a little bit about her history, the types of chemicals used by Wolverine and why it is so important for people to be part of this class action lawsuit.
After Brockovich and the lawyers spoke, the forum was opened up for Q & A. Nearly two dozen people got up to speak. There were several people who just had clarifying questions about the lawsuit and the contamination. Many people asked about their children, the potential longterm health effects and whether or not their kids would benefit from the lawsuit, even if they no longer lived in the area.
There were a few people who believed that their current health condition is the result of the corporate pollution coming from Wolverine Worldwide, with 3M and Waste Management complicity. One woman said she had stage 4 cancer and was part of a citizens group that was demanding answers and demanding justice. Several people were with the group called Demand Action From Plainfield Township Regarding Unsafe Drinking Water. Some members of this group were handing out information as people entered the gym at Comstock Park High School.
Information that is being posted on the Demand Action From Plainfield Township group seems consistent with what the lawyers and Brockovich were saying in regards to how long Wolverine Worldwide has been using the toxic chemicals for shoe manufacturing and how long there has been evidence that the chemicals used were toxic. Brockovich said that as early as 1939, Wolverine Worldwide has been dumping waste from production that included the toxic chemicals that are named in the lawsuit.
There were others who were critical of the lawsuit and of Brockovich, but most people who asked questions were in favor of the legal action being taken against the 3 companies. However, there were several legitimate concerns raised about not limiting the lawsuit to the PFAS and PFOS chemicals, as there are other toxic chemicals that are showing up when people are testing their water. You can see from the map below, how large an area the toxic plume is, based on what is known now.
There was also some discussion at the forum about how people might be able to filter their water, once it has been tested. However, some responded with concerns about cost and the fact that the contamination may not show up now, because of the complexity of the underground aquifer in the area. All of the concerns raised by people were completely understandable and they demand to be answered.
There was one thing that left me feeling a bit concerned after leaving the forum. While I support the class action lawsuit that is seeking to hold Wolverine Worldwide, 3M and Waste Management Inc. accountable for their crimes, there was no real discussion or suggestion from anyone who spoke about other tactics and strategies that could be pursued in conjunction with the lawsuit. It seems that in this case, with the amount of people the contamination is impacting that it would be critical to think about and develop additional strategies that could be used in this struggle. It is possible that the Demand Actions from Plainfield Township Regarding Unsafe Drinking Water may be one of the places to discuss other tactics and strategies, but regardless of where these ideas are discussed, they need to be developed in order for justice to be realized.
Chief Rahinsky gets nauseated, but defends police violence against the black community in Grand Rapids
Let us be clear from the get go. What the GRPD did to the 11 year old black girl in Grand Rapids was violence. It was physical violence to put cuffs on her, it was psychological violence and it was emotional violence that will likely cause this 11 year old black girl to suffer for years to come.
What has been interesting to observe are the GRPD response to their act of violence and the local news media’s coverage of the police violence. In fact, a great deal of the reporting has centered around Chief Rahinsky’s response, like this channel 8 story. In fact, most of the comments in the coverage of this incident have been from Chief Rahinsky, which should tell us something about how power functions and who’s voices are important.
If you can stomach it, watch this video that is from a Press Conference that Rahinsky did on Tuesday, where he engages in a great deal of rhetorical jiu jitsu.
What Rahinsky is essentially saying is that they need to have more discussion and do more trainings in order to “fix” this problem. The problem with this approach is that it means that the GRPD will ask for more money that will not change anything about how policing is done. There is plenty of research that has been in recent decades on bias training for cops and that research concludes that it doesn’t change the outcomes of how cops engage in policing, especially in communities of color.
Alex Vitale, in his important book, The End of Policing, states: 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.
In virtually every story that has come out about the police violence against the 11 year old black girl, has the Police Chief saying he was nauseated when he saw the body cam footage. So what. This should not be about Rahinsky’s feelings, but about the harm done to Honestie Hodges and her family. Even city leaders have been getting all emotional about GR cops abusing the 11 year old black girl and it doesn’t mean shit. It doesn’t mean shit, because the city leaders continue to give one third of the city budget to policing every year.
Part of the problem, which is both a liberal and conservative problem, is that people think that police department exist to protect people. This has never been true, from their role of rounding up people who escaped slavery all the way up to the present where police killings of black and brown people are outrageously high. Think about it. The last time you were at a protest, any protest, the function of the police to maintain order, to protect property and the interests of those in power. Cops are never on the side of those rising up, never! and it never will be. Police officers kill black and brown people all the time and all the bias training, body cams and other false solutions will not change a damn thing.
What we need is a serious discussion about community safety that is community-based. There are a lots of really good models that work, models that have been mostly developed by black and brown communities because they do not put their faith in the cops. A great resource on this topic of community-based solutions comes from the group INCITE! and it is entitled: Law Enforcement Violence Against Women of Color and Trans People of Color, as well as the resources that are provided by the group Safe OUTside the System Collective.
For those of us who are not likely to be victims of police violence, we need to begin to rethink the nature and function of policing, do our own investigations and particularly listen to the voices from black and other communities of color. White people shedding tears over the news that the police killed or brutalized another person of color won’t change a damn thing, but our willingness to dismantle White Supremacy is a step in the right direction.
3 Questions for ICCF since they acquired 177 homes in recent deal worth $14.5 million
In March, we reported on the corporatization of rental housing in Grand Rapids, based on a study we did in part of the southeast area of the city. We found that the private equity firm known as RDG Fund-5 LTH LLC, owned the most rental units in the Garfield Park area.
Then in May of this year, Michigan Radio came out with a documentary called Pushed Out, which also looks at how private equity companies and larger property management companies began buying hundreds of properties after the 2007/2008 economic crash. The Michigan radio documentary made the point that the corporatization of rental properties is one of the major contributing factors to the increased cost of rent.
A few months ago it was announced that the Inner City Christian Federation (ICCF) was in the process of buying all the homes that RDG Fund own in Grand Rapids and Lansing, a total of 177 homes. Last week, MLive reported that the deal has been finalized between ICCF and RDG Fund, totaling $14.5 million. After reading the MLive article, I have several questions for ICCF about the deal.
First, ICCF lists several “affordable housing agencies,” including LINC, the Kent County Land Bank, Habitat for Humanity and AmplifyGR. When did AmplifyGR become an affordable housing agency? AmplifyGR has no history of promoting or offering affordable housing, so why are they listed as an affordable housing agency? AmplifyGR has only existed for about 1 year and already has been questioned by many in the community on their intentions around development issues and transparency in the Boston Square and Cottage Grove neighborhoods.
Second, the MLive article lists several area foundations as contributing to the cost of the purchase of the RDG Fund properties – The Barnabas Foundation, CDV5 Foundation, Peter C. and Emajean Cook Foundation, Dick and Betsy DeVos Family Foundation, Doug and Maria DeVos Foundation, Frey Foundation, National Christian Foundation West Michigan, David and Carol Van Andel Foundation, Jandernoa Foundation and the Wege Foundation.
Most, if not all, of these foundations were founded by members of the capitalist class and many of them, especially the DeVos, Van Andel and Jandernoa families all have a history of supporting public policies that benefit those with wealth and punish individuals and families who are struggling financially. These families have a history of funding political candidates which are supported policies like Right to Work, attacks on 
public sector pensions and doing away with minimum wage laws. You can see from this chart, that these families have been major contributors and those they contribute to have supported policies that promote austerity measures. (See the Michigan Campaign Finance Network report)
One question for ICCF, based on their funding sources for this deal, is how much money did they receive from each foundation and under what criteria did these foundations donate money?
The ICCF director is quoted in the MLive article as saying. “the foundations are investing in the housing market instead of the stock market or bonds, in what VerWys calls program related investment.” A third question would be, what does the ICCF director mean by program related investment? While the city of Grand Rapids is experiencing gentrification in many of the neighborhoods, what does it mean to have the most powerful families contribute to the ICCF deal?
These questions are particularly relevant considering the lack of transparency in the case of the AmplifyGR process, where millions of dollars were spent purchasing properties in two neighborhoods without people from those neighborhoods even being aware this was happening.
These questions arise from my own experience of working with those who have experienced homelessness and have been forced out of their neighborhoods because of the impact that gentrification has had. These questions are rooted in the spirit of housing justice, which not only includes the principle that housing is a right, but that the entire community should have a say in what happens with housing and development in this city. I am sharing these questions with ICCF and see if they respond.
Betsy DeVos Watch: The Education Secretary once again speaks to an organization that the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation gives money to
One pattern, which has emerged in the first year that Betsy DeVos has served as Secretary of Education, is that she has a tendency to speak at events hosted by organizations that she and her family foundations have provided substantial funding to.
In July, DeVos spoke at the American Legislative Exchange Council’s (ALEC) annual gathering. Betsy, and several members of the DeVos Family have been a financial contributor to ALEC over the years. Then, just a few months ago, the Acton Institute hosted their annual gathering, where DeVos was again the keynote speaker. Betsy DeVos and other members of the family have contributed substantially, but the Secretary of Education used to sit on the board of the Acton Institute. Betsy’s mother, Elsa Prince Broekhuizen, is a current member of Acton’s board.
Less than two weeks ago, DeVos was the keynote speaker at the annual education summit hosted by the Foundation for Excellence in Education. DeVos was a member of the Foundation for Excellence in Education board of directors, until she was chosen by President Trump to run the Department of Education. As in the case of the other examples, the Dick & Betsy DeVos Foundation have contributed significantly the Foundation for Excellence in Education.
The Foundation for Excellence in Education is a group founded by former Florida Governor, Jeb Bush. The mission and focus of the group is around so-called School Choice, which essentially means they promote charter schools and school privatization. 
Like many of these right wing think tanks, the Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEE) works closely with the American Legislative Exchange Council on education reform policies. FEE also is a member of the State Policy Network, which provides resources and guidance on implementing neoliberal policies at the state level.
You can read the speech that DeVos delivered at the annual education summit, but there wasn’t anything new or terribly interesting. DeVos continued her usual talking points around making students and parents her priority and why education reform – charter schools, school privatization – are necessary.
There were two things that DeVos said, which are worth pointing out. First, DeVos thanked the woman who introduced her, Denisha Merriweather, was a recipient of at FEE scholarship while attending school in Florida and is now working for Betsy DeVos at the Department of Education.
The other comment from DeVos worth mentioning, also came at the beginning of her speech, when she said:
I’m happy to be back with so many friends at Excel in Ed, especially as you celebrate the 10th anniversary of this National Summit on Education Reform. The Summit has welcomed visionary and inspiring leaders from across government, business and academia, and, as those of you who attended the 2011 Summit in San Francisco will remember, even some friends from Sesame Street made an “unscheduled” guest appearance! I hope they’re not joining us again today!
What DeVos inadvertently does, is to acknowledge that people have been resisting the school privatization agenda for as long as she has been promoting it. Here is a short video, featuring the first Foundation for Excellence in Education summit speaker, Rupert Murdock, being interrupted in 2011.
When Betsy DeVos spoke at this year’s Foundation for Excellence in Education Summit, teachers again rallied to protest her visit to Nashville, where the summit was held just 2 weeks ago.
A Media Release from Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) from this past Friday begins by saying:
A Mexican national in the country illegally, who has a prior conviction for assault on a law officer, is among 27 foreign nationals taken into custody during a four-day operation conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) this week in western Michigan, targeting at-large criminal aliens, illegal re-entrants and other immigration violators.
Such statements from ICE are standard, as they want to communicate to the news media and to the public at large that what they are doing is to, “focus its enforcement resources on individuals who pose a threat to national security, public safety and border security.”
These media releases from ICE always make sure that they highlight the “worst” cases of immigration violations and in this case it was a Mexican national who had a prior conviction for assault on a law officer.
However, the reality is that most people that ICE has been targeting are people who entered or re-entered the US without documentation. There are many others with minor offenses, like driving without a license and other misdemeanor charges. For the most part, ICE is not arresting people who are a threat to national security. The people being arrested by ICE are often primary income earners with families and people who do work in the service sector, like migrant workers, food packers, janitors and restaurant workers.
This view that immigrants are portrayed as dangerous criminals is a strategy that was recently being promoted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). An article published in October by the independent publication, The Intercept, which included declassified e-mails from DHS, begins by saying:
“A directive to immigration officials across the country to try to portray undocumented immigrants swept up in mass raids as criminals came directly from then-Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, The Intercept has learned.”
Unfortunately, when ICE raids, the public will rarely get a perspective outside of government sources. As we have reported on in the past, the local news media relies almost exclusively on the information provided to them by the Department of Homeland Security. Here is the ICE Media Release, which is repeated in one form or another by MLive, WOOD TV 8, WXMI 17 and WZZM 13. The TV stations don’t have any video, since none was provided to them by ICE and only MLive has a picture (here on the right), which they sourced as being from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
What this means is that the public only gets to hear what government sources have to say and those sources are not questioned or challenged. In addition, the public is not provided any commentary from those who were arrested, their family members, immigration organizations or members of the immigrant community.
Since the news media recycles the perspective of ICE on these arrests, the public rarely is provided with information on immigration policy, the feat that these raids create in the community and how is impacts immigrant families.
In addition, since the news media does not question or challenge ICE officials, there are no follow up stories or investigation into the policies and practices of ICE. The news media could cite a new report from Human Rights Watch that was released last week, which challenged the ICE raids narrative.
Another simple connection on this issue would be for local news media to look at the upcoming vote that will impact DACA recipients and their families. However, such stories are not likely to appear in local news sources and we end up with only a very bias government perspective.
Protests planned today in West MI against FCC efforts to destroy Internet Neutrality
Today, there will be hundreds of protest against the FCC plans to gut what is often referred to as Net Neutrality. If FCC Chairman Pai gets what he wants, the internet will be under greater corporate control and people will have to pay extra for access to websites, downloads and apps that are currently free. Here is a useful video that makes it clear why Net Neutrality needs to continue.
Now, battles over Net Neutrality are not new. In fact, they have been going on ever since the internet became accessible to the average person. However, the pressure to limit public access to the internet is getting another big push from companies like Verizon, Comcast and AT&T. FCC Chairman Pai is a former Verizon lawyer, which is why the protests today are being held at Verizon stores all across the country and in West Michigan.
There are protests scheduled in two locations in West Michigan today, at different times:
- 11:00am at Holland’s Verizon store – 3351 W Shore Dr Ste 10 Holland MI 49424
- 4:00pm at the Verizon store – 3850 Alpine Ave NW Comstock Park MI 49321
A sample of what could be handed out at these demonstrations, which are being coordinated by the group FreePress.net, states the following:
Net neutrality is the First Amendment of the internet. It protects our free speech in the digital age. Members of Congress must call on Chairman Pai to abandon his current plan to kill net neutrality because it will allow Internet providers to control what we see and do online.
“Title Two” is the legal foundation for net neutrality protections. It prevents companies like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from charging us all extra fees to access the websites, apps, and online services we depend on, and manipulating what we see with throttling, blocking, and censorship.
Net neutrality gives more people a voice than ever before. It’s what has made the Internet such a powerful platform for anyone who wasn’t given a voice or fair treatment by mainstream media. Without net neutrality, vulnerable communities would lose access to a critical platform for organizing and storytelling. Net neutrality repeal would be particularly devastating to communities of color, rural communities and low-income communities.
At this point, Rep. Justin Amash has not taken a position on Net Neutrality, but Rep. Bill Huizenga is supporting the end of Net Neutrality. Michigan Senators are split on the issue, with Sen. Stabenow supporting Net Neutrality, while Sen. Peters supports the corporate takeover of the internet.
It is not a stretch to say that the GOP Tax Bill will continue to war on working people, the poor and disproportionate communities of color. This graphic here, makes it clear who the primary beneficiaries are with the tax bill.
However, in addition to how this tax bill will benefit the rich, there are other aspects of it that we should pay attention to. For instance, there is a provision on page 289 that, “would exempt certain colleges from a special tax on university endowments. It would only apply to colleges that: 1. Did not accept federal funds, and 2. Had an endowment of at least $500,000 per student.”
There is actually only one college in the entire country that meets this requirement – Hillsdale College, located in the southern part of Michigan.
Hillsdale College has an interesting history and is one of the colleges in the US that is deeply committed to far right/reactionary neoliberal economic policies. They boast of night taking any money from the federal government, as can be seen in this video that Hillsdale College created.
Investigative journalist Russ Bellant, has written several books on far right organizations and movements in the US and in Michigan. Bellant wrote the book, The Religious Right in Michigan Politics and The Coors Connection: How Coors Family Philanthropy Undermines Democratic Pluralism.
In The Coors Connection, Bellant describes the politics of Hillsdale College. Bellant says the school’s supports are a who’s who of the far right in US politics. Indeed, one of the former presidents of Hillsdale, was George Roche. Roche, while serving as President of Hillsdale College was also a member of the World Anti-Communist League (WACL).
“Longtime Hiilsdale President Roche is opposed in general to social engineering plans, among which he includes affirmative action and public education. Roche has attacked the Civil Rights Restoration Act as frightening federal intervention. He calls affirmative action “the putrid backwash of all the tired social engineering schemes and complains that its advocates are so hypersensitive that a school’s unwillingness to set up advanced bongo drum programs is called racist.”
Bellant goes on to say:
“The selection of contributors for Hillsdale’s monthly magazine, Imprimis, also relfects the school’s far right political views. In one issue, Gerda Bikales, a founder and former executive director of the English Only organization, US English, condemned the advocates of cultural diversity and bilingual education. She attacked the skilled language planners and other militant advocates who promote bilingual education, as well as those who aggressively pursue diversity and cultural pluralism.”
However, don’t just take the word of Bellant, even a recent article in the New York Times made it clear that the politics of Hillsdale College are reactionary and far right.
Because Hillsdale College does not accept federal money, they do not have to follow federal policy, like Title IX. As a result, the college does not follow Title IX guidelines on sex discrimination and the handling of sexual assault cases and it has refused to engage in the otherwise required reporting on student race and ethnicity, let alone develop an affirmative action plan. Not surprisingly, the school’s “race blind” admissions policy results in an overwhelmingly white student body.
In 2013, Dr. Arnn was castigated by Michigan legislators when, during testimony against the Common Core, he made a remark about officials who questioned Hillsdale’s racial record. Years before, he said scornfully, Michigan officials had come to the campus with clipboards, trying to count faces and prove, he said, that the college “didn’t have enough dark ones.” He later issued a barbed apology: “No offense was intended by the use of that term except to the offending bureaucrats.”
The New York Times article goes on to say:
It is no coincidence that Justice Clarence Thomas, an advocate of strict “originalist” interpretation of the Constitution, delivered the commencement address last spring, likening Hillsdale to a “shining city on a hill” for its devotion to “liberty as an antecedent of government, not a benefit from government.”
West Michigan Connection
So, in addition to the proposed tax bill being nothing short of class warfare, it also benefits a far right college that has connections some of the most powerful families in West Michigan.
The Van Andel Family has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Hillsdale College. Van Andel’s son, Steve, was a 1978 graduate of Hillsdale. In 2013, after he donated to graduate school scholarships and operations, Hillsdale named it’s graduate school of statesmanship in his honor. Lastly, Erik Prince, the founder of the private mercenary army, Blackwater, also graduated from Hillsdale in 1992, just prior to working on Patrick Buchanan’s campaign that same year.
Because of some push back, the provision to include Hillsdale College was defeated last Friday, just prior to the Senate vote on the GOP tax plan.
Criminalizing panhandling again in Grand Rapids
The City of Grand Rapids once again is proposing a “ban” on panhandling in Grand Rapids, despite the fact that the ACLU has won a case against the city for a previously attempting to stop people from engaging in street panhandling.
In the name of public safety, 1st Ward City Commissioner Dave Shaffer, is proposing a new policy be adopted by the City of Grand Rapids, which would limit where and when people who are street panhandling can solicit financial support. (see new proposal)
However, this new proposal continues to sweep under the rug the harsh reality that there are plenty of people in this community that are struggling to survive. We know that Grand Rapids has the largest wealth gap in the state, according to a recent report from the Economic Policy Institute but such acknowledgements in Grand Rapids are hard to come by for a city that likes its claims to a booming housing market, ArtPrize and of course its Beer City status.
Now, I don’t want to over-simplify the issue of “street panhandling,” but the fact of the matter is that there are thousands of individuals and families in Grand Rapids who are living on the edge and thousands more who are one pay check away from ending up on the street. We cannot ignore or pretend that economic disparity in this community doesn’t exist and we must stop putting emphasis on charitable responses and start thinking about longterm strategies that actually create equity and respect the dignity of all people.
First, I use the term street panhandling, because it is important to acknowledge that the city leaders object to people in the street asking for financial assistance. Grand Rapids, like all municipalities, loves to give public money to the private sector is what are often referred to as tax breaks or subsidies. Just last week, the Grand Rapids City Commission awarded $29 million to a new theater and housing project in the downtown area. This is what we might call white collar panhandling, since those with economic privilege are taking money from the public. The major difference, besides the amount of money that is being given away to white collar panhandlers, is that the public usually finds out about the give-away after the fact. At least with street panhandlers, we all can chose to give or not give, instead of having someone else make that decision for us.
Now, people might argue that this is a good use of public money, because it creates jobs or serves a specific need, like housing and entertainment. We all know that the jobs argument is weak, since most of the jobs that will be created in the downtown theater/housing project will not pay enough to people so they could actually live in the housing units being constructed.
In addition, why is it that within this economic-driven world there always has to be priority given to what development projects will “give” us? Why can’t we say that participating in economic justice is a good, smart, just and compassionate thing to do just because it says we value the dignity of everyone in this community…….even if there are no strings attached?
Recommendations on what Grand Rapids could ban that didn’t mean shitting on people
Of course, I do not expect or think that this is what governments actually do. Therefore, those of us who give a damn about these struggles will have to be the ones to make these bans become a reality.
Back to Street Panhandling
The Grand Rapids City Commission will be hosting a Public Hearing on Tuesday, December 12 at 7pm during their regularly scheduled commission meeting. This would be a good time to communicate with those who run city hall, both before and during the commission meeting. However, again, I think we would be better off organizing to change things than simply appealing to those in power.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 