Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

GOP Settles on Tough Test for Hate Speech

The sullying of civil discourse remains one of the most gratingly persistent reminders of our degraded democracy, and now Republicans in Washington are ready to set a floor on how low one of their own can go.

It's a pretty tough barrier to break through. First off, the offender must be a public official who's already on the fringes of the GOP, who engenders minimal fear or goodwill among colleagues and has almost no power to shape conservative policy or steer debate.

Plus, he must have been known for incendiary and often racist rhetoric for at least a decade – without engendering hardly a word of colleagues' criticism – before coming up with a comment that outdoes all his others.


And he must do so just when his bosses in the House are confronting two years out of power, and realizing that a strategy of ignoring the electorate's growing diversity is not a viable long-term strategy.

In other words, this high-bar tolerance test was tailor-made for the ostracizing of Steve King, an already peripheral player in the congressional Republican ranks who's been saying things offensive to African-Americans, Muslims, gays and lesbians, and especially Latinos since soon after he was arrived to represent northwestern Iowa in the House in 2003.

But he has never been sanctioned by his colleague until now, with the House GOP leadership kicking him off all three of his committees (Judiciary, Agriculture and Small Business) and several senior GOP senators urging his resignation after King publicly questioned why the terms "white nationalist, white supremacist" were considered offensive.

There is almost no chance this week's sanctioning of King will be a harbinger of a tougher line toward more prominent members of the party. In fact, making an example of a single congressman may even offer the party some short-term cover as it continues its collective enabling of the incendiary speaker-in-chief.

President Donald Trump, in fact, has not said anything critical of King, who has been a loyal ally on almost all fronts and has been especially enthusiastic about Trump's border wall and other hard-line immigration policies.

The new minority leader, Kevin McCarthy of California, moved to sideline King by saying his most recent statements, to the New York Times, did not reflect the values of "the party of Lincoln and it's definitely not American." But he did not articulate why this was a tipping point and why the party did not sanction King after any of his earlier comments – such as the first headline-grabber, when he said in 2006 that people crossing the border illegally should be treated like wayward livestock and electrocuted until they turn back south.

King won his ninth term in November by just 3 percentage points, his narrowest victory ever, after reports that he met with a far-right Austrian group founded by a former Nazi officer following a trip funded by a Holocaust remembrance group.


Read More

Woman holding out an empty wallet at a table.

Many Americans wrongly associate poverty primarily with Black and Hispanic communities. Explore how this misconception influences public opinion, politics, and anti-poverty policy.

skaman306 / Getty Images

More Whites Live in Poverty than Either Blacks or Hispanics - Correcting the Perception of Poverty

From observing people and politicians over the years—I can find no data on this—I have the impression that liberals as well as conservatives think that the typical person living in poverty is Black or Hispanic. The image most Whites have of people of color is someone who is poor—except for celebrities—with little education; they are not aware of many people of color who are middle class. On the other hand, they are not aware of many Whites who are poor and so they think their number is low.

Why is the perception of poverty important? The perception of who is poor has significant impact on the support for government programs that aid the poor. Given the extent of racism in this country, whether subtle or violent, (see my post, “Whether the Issue is Gun Violence or Inequality, It Always Comes Back to Race/Racism”), it’s not surprising that support for anti-poverty programs is non-existent among MAGA Republicans and for that matter has always been weak among Republicans; 45% of Republicans would even cut food stamp support. Their attitude is "it's your fault;" so government has no responsibility to help. They feel the causes of poverty are personal: bad life choices, drugs, lack of work ethic, and the breakdown of families—all negative perceptions of Black culture.

Keep ReadingShow less
The All-America City of San Antonio Collaborates to Address Teen Pregnancy and Other Issues
person in green pants sitting on white textile
Photo by Vanessa on Unsplash

The All-America City of San Antonio Collaborates to Address Teen Pregnancy and Other Issues

San Antonio, TX, has been working to reduce teen pregnancy for over two decades, making considerable progress through collaborations among the city, county, nonprofit organizations, and the University of Texas. A nine-time All-America City, one of San Antonio’s key community collaborations, SA 2020, harnessed civic muscle to create and achieve dozens of measurable goals, including a significant reduction in teen pregnancy.

The San Antonio Teen Pregnancy Collaborative (SATPPC) was formed in 2010 in response to news that Bexar County had one of the highest rates of teen births in the United States. The SATPPC brought together an impressive list of cross-sector organizations, including public entities, community-based organizations, and faith-based and secular institutions. The group’s overall goal was to reduce the Bexar County teen birth rate among females ages 15 to 19 by 15% by 2020, and it exceeded this goal even before that date.

Keep ReadingShow less
Anti-gerrymandering sign

Anti-gerrymandering sign

Bill Clark/Getty Images

Don't Hold Your Breath Waiting for Politicians or Their Consultants to Fix Gerrymandering

2018, a nonprofit worker in Michigan named Katie Fahey posted a message online asking if anyone else was tired of politicians drawing their own districts. She had no campaign experience and no political base.

Within two years, the ballot initiative she built, called Voters Not Politicians, had written an independent redistricting commission into the Michigan constitution. Hollywood eventually made a documentary about it, Slay the Dragon, which is a fairly accurate description of what she had actually done.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red rock formations in the "Valley of the Gods."

Red rock formations in the "Valley of the Gods" on April 22, 2026 in Bears Ears National Monument, Utah. Bears Ears has been a controversial Monument since it's creation in December of 2016.

George Frey / Getty Images

When Public Lands Become Real Estate

Last week, in his latest attempted liquidation of our shared heritage, President Trump signed two executive orders eviscerating protections for close to three million acres of our national monuments: Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante. From the Oval Office, a president who has never even seen these sacred sites reduced them by roughly 90%, dwarfing his 2017 attempt at a similar land grab by about a million acres, leaving only 300,000 acres of protected land. These cuts will directly threaten critical wildlife habitats, put nearly 100,000 irreplaceable archaeological sites at risk of destruction, and fracture an interconnected indigenous homeland that has been stewarded by Native tribes since time immemorial. To Trump, it’s just another real estate deal.

The Trump regime has tried to portray this set-up to sell off as an effort to restore public access. During the Oval Office photo op where the president signed the proclamations, he said of the monuments: “You can’t go hunting. You can’t go fishing. You can’t do anything. You can virtually not even walk on it.” That is, to put it mildly, a malicious lie. All your favorite forms of outdoor recreation—from hiking and camping to fishing and hunting—are allowed there, which Trump might know if he had ever visited the land he decided is not worth preserving. In fact, the Antiquities Act doesn’t limit ordinary public use but rather the extent to which an area can be subject to mining and drilling. So much for the land of the free. Trump wants to make it a whole lot easier for extractive industries and private development interests to privatize and pillage these sacred lands for financial gain. Home of the brave? Not an ounce of courage to refuse the fuel lobby when it comes to our public lands. At least the law is on our side. As the President of the National Parks Conservation Association put it, this is both “a betrayal to the American people and illegal.”

Keep ReadingShow less