The fate of our Democracy is on the ballot this fall. Get the inside story on how a coalition of Democrats, independents and Liz Cheney Republicans can combine forces to stop the Trump faction from winning big offices in swing states and gaining control of future elections. The media treats the 2022 campaign like the rerun of a traditional mid-term election where the in-party takes a shellacking and loses control of Congress. But smart voters know the stakes are much higher than that this year.
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
Kiwis/Getty Images
The elderly need protection from financial abuse by family members
Nov 18, 2024
A mentor once told me that we take better care of our pets than we do older victims of mistreatment. As a researcher, I have sat across from people, including grown men, crying while recounting harrowing experiences of discovering and confronting elder financial exploitation within their families — by siblings, sons and daughters, nieces and nephews, girlfriends and neighbors. Intervening and helping victimized older people comes at a tremendous cost to caring family members. Currently, no caregiving or other policy rewards them for the time, labor, or emotional and relationship toll that results from helping to unravel financial abuse.
Only one out of an estimated 44 financial abuse cases receive service in the formal system (help other than from family and friend networks). This obscures the labor involved in helping older victims of family financial abuse. Older adults are reluctant to report to authorities to avoid embarrassment or menacing perpetrator’s aggravation.
Despite the private and hidden nature of the problem, some extreme cases of family financial exploitation have made public headlines. In January, Maxine McManaman, the Transportation Security Administration’s assistant federal security director, was arrested on charges of financially exploiting a family member with dementia. Eight years ago, a case of financial exploitation by David Vanzo, a “caregiving” son, made headlines due to suspicion of his mother being dead in a wheelchair when he brought her to a bank to withdraw money. In 2011, actor Mickey Rooney testified before a special U.S. Senate committee recounting his own financial exploitation by family members.
Unlike policies protecting vulnerable children, policies protecting vulnerable older adults have historically lacked direction, assessment tools, national reporting system, federal response and, importantly, funding. The Credit for Caring Act, introduced in January 2024, would give qualifying caregivers, of whom there is an estimated 53 million, a federal tax credit of up to $5,000. But this credit is not associated with caregiving related to financial abuse. It is associated with frailty and illness-related caregiving, aggregated by the National Institute on Aging in a 27-item caregiver task list.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
There is no such organized list, enumeration of tasks or estimate of caregiving associated with elder family financial exploitation despite intervening family and friends spending countless hours of personal time, time off work and personal financial resources, to help and care for exploited aging family members. For some reason, our concept of caregiving does not include the care provided to help victimized older people. Yet, $28.3 billion is lost annually by older victims to financial exploitation of which 72 percent is lost to family and friends. In many cases, caregivers perform financial abuse-related caregiving in addition to illness-related caregiving as many perpetrators take advantage of the older person’s deteriorating health to start exploiting.
One might ask, isn’t helping victimized older people what families are supposed to do? Well, isn’t illness-related caregiving what families are supposed to do, too? In fact, many groups do not call illness-related caregiving “caregiving.” They call it being there for your family. Still, distinct policies reward illness-related caregiving valued at $600 billion annually. Consider the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Caregiver Advise, Record and Enable Act as examples.
When older adults lose money and resources, taxpayers also lose. Older victims may need to draw on public programs such as Medicaid to fund their costly long-term care because their own resources were depleted by financial exploitation.
By 2035, older people will outnumber children at 23.4 percent versus 19.8 percent for the first time in the nation’s history. At the same time, an estimated $53 trillion in wealth will be transferred from households in the baby boomer generation to heirs and offspring. These conditions foretell disputes over what happens to the deceased person’s money and property, and foreshadow financial exploitation. We may all know someone with a related family scenario.
We need formalized policies that acknowledge caregiving labor related to elder family financial exploitation. The Financial Exploitation Prevention Act of 2023 would allow “for the delay of the redemption of a security” if an investment company “reasonably believes the redemption involves the financial exploitation of an individual age 65 or older.”
Such policies are a step in the right direction. Estimates and policies related to informal caregiving associated with family financial abuse should account for efforts aside from health care as family members navigate adult protective services, social services, the courts, law enforcement, financial institutions, attorneys, community-based agencies, Area Agencies on Aging, long-term care settings and many more.
Kilaberia is an assistant professor at New York University’s Silver School of Social Work and a public voices fellow with The OpEd Project.
Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
A woman watches Vice President Kamala Harris' concession speech on Nov. 6 after Donald Trump secured enough voters to win a second term in the White House.
Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images
Political grief: A U.S. epidemic stimulated by Project 2025
Nov 15, 2024
When most people think about grief, they associate it with the death of a loved one. They reflect on past memories, shared experiences and precious moments of life. It is natural for one to yearn for the past, the comfort and safety of familiar times and stability. Now, with the promise of a second term for Donald Trump and the suggested implementation of Project 2025, thousands of U.S. citizens are anticipating a state of oppression driven by the proposition of drastic, authoritarian political policies.
This feeling of overwhelming loss of safety and trust in the government is known as political grief. Minority groups — such as individuals who identify as LGBTQA+, immigrants who are currently residing in the United States with or without visas and women of child-bearing age — are currently experiencing political grief due to the possibility of bills being passed in support of Project 2025’s initiatives.
New concerns about adherence to checks and balances have arisen due to Trump’s suggestion that Republican Senators consider agreeing to recess appointments. This is problematic for two reasons. First, recess appointments allow the president to bypass the time taken by the Senate to vote on the appointment of the presidential Cabinet, judicial openings or any vacancies within the executive branch that may occur when the Senate is not in session. In doing this, Trump could authorize temporary appointments to his Cabinet and expedite Senate legislative action.
Second, by encouraging Republican Senators to adhere to recess appointments, Trump is essentially suggesting that he will be more willing to consider endorsing their rise up the leadership ladder. Additionally, the new Trump administration will be operating with a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, increasing the chances that bills regarding initiatives from Project 2025 could be approved.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
With these developments, fear of what is to come is now plaguing LGBTQA+ and immigrant families, as well as women and their right to reproductive health. For non-heterosexual families, the possibility of losing their right to marriage, having fostered or adopted children removed from their care or requiring transgender teachers to register as sex offenders are just a few concerns.
Project 2025 also calls for state and local law enforcement to adhere to stricter federal immigration laws. Families of immigrants will now be at risk of expedited deportation following Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids of public areas such as schools and religious institutions. These non-violent immigrants would be placed in massive detention centers for months or years while waiting for deportation. Further, immigrants could expect the elimination of visas for children and adults who have come to the United States for education or seeking asylum from war-torn countries, as well as complete denial of access to the U.S. from the southern border.
Project 2025 aims to restrict access to birth control, and eventually eliminate access to medication abortion by nullifying Food and Drug Administration approval for safe, effective and commonly used drugs such as mifepristone and misoprostol. Hospitals will be allowed to deny abortion care to women who are at risk of losing their lives due to pregnancy complications, placing more pressure on already overwhelmed and under-funded clinics. Businesses will also be prosecuted for transportation and dissemination of abortion pills and associated medical supplies.
If passed, bills and laws solidifying Trump’s plans will harm hundreds of thousands of citizens, immigrants and women. Project 2025 will instigate the separation of loving families, cause the death of thousands of women, incite nation-wide trauma, displace hundreds of thousands of people and potentially provoke economic collapse due to the major loss of workforce. Even U.S. citizens who are not in these minority populations have begun to experience political grief for their friends, neighbors and colleagues.
In preparation of events to come, many individuals are seeking resources and services to protect their rights. Immigration and LGBTQA+ lawyers will soon be in high demand, as immigrants, residents and citizens fight to maintain their rights in the United States. If you or someone you know is in need of legal or mental health services during this time, please reach out for assistance.
Resources
National Mental Health Hotline: 9-8-8
National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 800-273-TALK (8255)
The Trevor Project (LGBTQA+ Crisis and Suicide Prevention Hotline): 866-488-7386 Lambda Legal (LGBTQA+ Legal Support System): 212-809-8585
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: 800-375-5283 (TTY 800-767-1833, VRS 877-709-5797)
Liley publishes editorial content as well as peer-reviewed scientific publications in the field of behavioral neuroscience.
Keep ReadingShow less
A model of an internet cable that is laid along the seabed to transmit high-voltage electricity and the Internet via fiberglass.
Serg Myshkovsky/Getty Images
We need bipartisan cooperation to protect the internet
Nov 15, 2024
Your internet access is dependent on the security and resiliency of garden-hose-sized underwater cables. More than 800,000 miles of these cables criss-cross the oceans and seas. When just one of these cables breaks, which occurs about every other day, you may not notice much of a change to your internet speed. When several break, which is increasingly possible, the resulting delay in internet connectivity can disrupt a nation’s economy, news and government.
If there were ever a bipartisan issue it’s this: protecting our undersea cable system.
Nearly all internet traffic goes through this cable system. The fiber optic glass at the core of the cables allows the internet to operate at incredible speeds. The alternative — relying on satellites — is nearly five times slower. That’s why protecting these cables is essential, especially for countries with fewer cables.
The hundreds of cable systems around the world are not equally distributed. Whereas the United States has dozens and dozens of cables on both coasts, some countries have less than a handful, or none at all. Those latter countries are especially vulnerable to diminished internet upon a cable break. Take, for example, Japan in 2011. The tsunami that struck the island nation caused seven of its 12 transpacific cables to break. If one more cable had been severed, internet traffic between Japan and the U.S. may have come to a halt.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Reducing the vulnerability of this system is not easy. It’s not a matter of governments simply laying more cables. For lack of a better phrase, governments are not in the cable laying business. Nearly all undersea cables are privately owned. Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon are the ones laying cables at a historically unprecedented rate.
It’s also not as simple as sending out more repair ships. There’s only a couple dozen ships outfitted to repair cables. This small fleet is made up of a small, aging labor force.
Finally, it’s not as straightforward as hiding cables from bad actors who might want to intentionally break them. Making cables harder to find might actually increase the number of breaks. The plurality of breaks are caused by fishers accidentally dropping nets, anchors and other equipment on cables. If fishing boats do not know where cables are laid, they may cause breaks on an even more frequent basis.
All potential ways to make the undersea cable system more resilient come with tradeoffs. New Zealand and Australia, for example, have developed cable protection zones, in which all cables must fall. These zones decrease the odds of unintentional breaks by making more actors aware of cable locations. Yet, by concentrating cables in a single area, the odds of a single storm or bad actor causing several breaks increase. Cables made of more resilient material may withstand more severe storms, but upon a break may be even harder to repair. This is just a short list of proposals that come with pros and cons but merit more investigation.
While the next best step to protecting undersea cables is unclear, what’s obvious is that the status quo cannot persist. The public must make this an issue. Elected officials on both sides of the aisle ought to prioritize this critical infrastructure. And, cable owners like Google should embrace the public service they are performing by making the cable laying and repair process more transparent and participatory. That’s a tall order for each set of actors; it’s also one that should inspire and motivate us all to rally in defense of the undersea cable system.
Frazier is an assistant professor at the Crump College of Law at St. Thomas University and a Tarbell fellow.
Keep ReadingShow less
PM Images/Getty Images
Why a loyal opposition is essential to democracy
Nov 15, 2024
When I was the U.S. ambassador to Equatorial Guinea, a small, African nation, the long-serving dictator there routinely praised members of the “loyal opposition.” Serving in the two houses of parliament, they belonged to pseudo-opposition parties that voted in lock-step with the ruling party. Their only “loyalty” was to the country’s brutal dictator, who remains in power. He and his cronies rig elections, so these “opposition” politicians never have to fear being voted out of office.
In contrast, the only truly independent party in the country is regularly denounced by the dictator and his ruling party as the “radical opposition.” Its leaders and members are harassed, often imprisoned on false charges and barred from government employment. This genuine opposition party has no representatives at either the national or local level despite considerable popular support. In dictatorships, there can be no loyal opposition.
In fact, the term “loyal opposition” was coined during the 19th century in democratic Great Britain. It referred to members of parliamentary opposition parties who, as long as they pledged loyalty to the crown, could criticize the incumbent government’s policies. This allowed members of the British Parliament’s loyal opposition to dissent without fear of being accused of treason.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
The concept of a loyal opposition also exists in our country albeit in somewhat different form. Members of Congress as well as those who serve in government and the military swear an oath of loyalty not to a president, but rather to the U.S. Constitution. Protected by the First Amendment, the party out of power as well as the media, civil society and citizens are free to oppose policies of the president and members of his party by doing so peacefully and abiding by our laws.
But this has not always been the case. In 1798, Congress enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts and the Alien Enemies Act, which not only imposed restrictions on immigration, but also limited free speech. Specifically, the Sedition Act criminalized what the Federalist Party then in power deemed to be false and malicious statements against it. Members of the opposition Democratic-Republican Party, as well as journalists supporting them, were sometimes prosecuted. After the Democratic-Republicans came to office, Congress repealed the Sedition Act. But this was not the last time the U.S. government used its power to repress free speech in violation of the First Amendment.
The Sedition Act of 1918, passed during World War I, threatened prosecution of anyone who expressed opinions viewed as undermining the war effort. Beyond that, it prohibited language judged to be “disloyal, profane, scurrilous or abusive” against the U.S. government, the American flag and the U.S. armed forces. Justified as necessary in wartime, the act was repealed in 1920.
Sadly, this history could be repeated. At an October rally in Colorado, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump announced Operation Aurora. He said his plan would employ the Aliens Enemies Act of 1798 to arrest and deport criminal gang members allegedly here illegally. And while Trump has not called upon Congress to pass new sedition laws, he has threatened to abridge free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. This includes silencing domestic critics he claims are “enemies from within” who imperil U.S. security. Additionally, the president-elect has said he may cancel broadcast licenses of network-affiliate television stations due to their “unfair” coverage of him and his campaign.
In the coming months, Trump will assume the presidency, and his Republican Party, which already has a Senate majority, is likely to control the House of Representatives as well. For this reason, it is essential they regard the Democratic Party as the loyal opposition. In a democracy, there is a distinction between “enemies” and “adversaries” that should never be forgotten.
Democrats will certainly differ with Republicans and President Trump on major policy issues, but this does not mean the Democratic Party will be “disloyal” in its opposition. Although in the minority, Democratic lawmakers have the right to be heard. Along with President Joe Biden, they are committed to the peaceful transfer of power as required by the U.S. Constitution.
The bedrock of U.S. democracy is showing respect toward political opponents who are loyal to our system of government, its values and our country. Regardless of how you voted, this is what must unite us as Americans.
Asquino is a retired career diplomat and author of “Spanish Connections: My Diplomatic Journey from Venezuela to Equatorial Guinea.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More