Author Archives: See Below

Bernard Law and the civil rights legacy he squandered by covering up clergy sex abuse

On March 13, 1964, a tiny diocesan newspaper edited by a young Catholic priest with no prior journalism experience laid out the case for racial desegregation in Mississippi.

The editorial in the Mississippi Register, headlined “Legal Segregation is Dying,” was stunning for its controversial position at the time, particularly in a racially charged state at the center of the American civil rights movement. Only months before, a prominent civil rights leader had been shot in the back and killed.

In 862 words, the editorial’s author — the Rev. Bernard Law — argued that it was critical for the state to begin working immediately toward a “smooth and peaceful desegregation.”

“Mississippi has the leadership, if it can be freed, to push the state forward on many fronts,” Law wrote. “For too long we have been wasting time, talent, effort and money in a senseless, doomed struggle to maintain the corpse of enforced segregation.”

Any notion that sudden change would shatter society was “the construct of the racist,” he added, not mincing words.

Then 32 years old, Law was neither a seasoned politician nor an experienced civil rights activist. He had only a few years earlier moved from Ohio to Mississippi, when he was ordained a priest for the Diocese of Natchez-Jackson. Nevertheless, Law’s words were so powerful that his piece would later win the Catholic Press Association’s editorial of the year award in 1964.

That editorial was just one of many that Law penned while in Mississippi, where he ran the Register for five years and threw himself into civil rights activism. All signed “(BFL),” the editorials tackled a variety of subjects including the Voting Rights Act and the 1967 bombing of a synagogue in Jackson. Law, who was white, became known for his willingness to work with the local African American community and for taking firmly progressive positions on civil rights issues — to the extent that he reportedly received death threats.

But none of that, of course, would be Law’s legacy, although he climbed the ranks of the Catholic Church in part on the strength of his work in the South. Law died Wednesday in Rome at age 86 and is remembered overwhelmingly for his role in helping cover up widespread sexual abuse of children within the Catholic Church by moving abusive priests around from parish to parish. The scandal prompted him to resign as archbishop of Boston in 2002.

The Vatican announced Law’s death Wednesday with little comment about his role in the abuse and coverup scandal. The church also said Law would receive a Vatican funeral Thursday, with a “final commendation” by Pope Francis, plans that angered many of the church’s sexual abuse victims.

For his obituary, the Jesuit publication America magazine described Law as “the face of the church’s failure on child sexual abuse.” Boston Globe journalist Kevin Cullen, who was part of the Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative team that uncovered the pattern of abuse in the church, excoriated Law in a column Wednesday as “one of the greatest enablers of sexual abuse in the history of the world,” comparing him to Hollywood’s Harvey Weinstein.

Even at the height of the church scandal, however, many in Mississippi struggled to reconcile Law’s downfall with the work of young priest they remembered fighting for equal rights on their behalf in their state decades earlier. After the 1963 assassination of civil rights activist Medgar Evers in Jackson, Law was among the first to visit the Evers family to comfort and pray with them.

“I also personally saw him and the bishop walk in the ashes of a burned black church about 30 or 40 miles away from Jackson in 1964,” the late Bill Minor, a journalist who covered the civil rights movement and later befriended Law, told the Clarion-Ledger in 2002. “He did it because he was concerned about people — all people.”

Law would maintain his outreach with Mississippi’s African American community in ways large and small: The year after the notorious murder, Law joined Evers’s brother, Charles Evers of the NAACP, to help distribute Christmas turkeys to the poor in Jackson, according to a brief article in the Dec. 23, 1964, issue of The Washington Post. (Reached by phone Wednesday morning, Charles Evers, now 95, said he did not remember Law specifically. “We worked with so many people back then,” he added. Medgar Evers’s widow, Myrlie Evers-Williams, could not be reached.)

“I’ll always be grateful to him for the great constructive work he did in Mississippi in the 1960s in creating a more satisfactory racial climate in the state,” former Mississippi governor William Winter told the Clarion-Ledger in 2002, after Law resigned. “He actually got me involved in some activities and helped me open up my understanding to some of the issues we were confronted with at that time.”

By 1973, when Law was appointed bishop of the diocese of Springfield-Cape Girardeau in Missouri, his imminent departure from Mississippi made the front page of the Clarion-Ledger, where local religious leaders sang his praises.

“Mississippi is a better place because of his zealous labors,” Joseph Brunini, the bishop of Jackson, told the newspaper then. Mack B. Stokes, the American Bishop of the United Methodist Church, said he had known and admired Law for many years and held him “in high esteem.”

For the next decade, Law’s star would continue to rise until, in January 1984, Pope John Paul II appointed Law archbishop of Boston. About two weeks later, Judge Gordon Martin of the Roxbury District Court wrote a glowing guest column for the Boston Globe vouching for Law’s character. They had crossed paths in the early 1960s when Martin was a trial lawyer with the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Justice Department in Mississippi.

In the piece, Martin highlighted more than half a dozen of Law’s old editorials for the Mississippi Register.

“Fr. Law doubtless would not have won a popularity contest in Mississippi in the Sixties. His coverage of the march at Selma cost the Register subscriptions, but he was true to his faith and his conscience,” Martin wrote of Law in 1984. “Then he was a rising young priest. Today Bishop Law is an established member of the hierarchy, and the same qualities of courage and genuine concern for all people that he demonstrated then should make him an outstanding archbishop of Boston.”

It was on this reputation that Law moved to Boston, which was at the time emerging from its own racial problems related to school desegregation. Even the fact that he had chosen to become a priest in Mississippi was significant, James O’Toole, a history professor at Boston College, told The Post on Wednesday.

“Usually, when somebody becomes a priest, the most likely thing is for them to become a priest in the place where they were originally from,” O’Toole said. Law, who was born in Mexico and frequently moved throughout his childhood because of his pilot father, didn’t have such roots. “Because of his background, especially the civil rights activity, he really came to Boston with a great deal of promise.”

That promise would eventually crumble.

Law was soon elevated to cardinal and stayed in his role, acquiring great power and influence (among Catholics and generally in the Boston area), for nearly two more decades — until the Boston Globe exposed the extent to which church leaders had kept the child sexual abuse problem from being publicized. A 2003 report by the Massachusetts attorney general’s office was further damning to Law, stating that the cardinal “had direct knowledge of the scope, duration and severity of the crisis experienced by children in the Archdiocese; he participated directly in crucial decisions concerning the assignment of abusive priests, decisions that typically increased the risk to children.”

Law would eventually express remorse in public remarks at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston, just before his resignation in December 2002, as The Post reported:

[Law] said that “the forgiving love of God gives me the courage to beg forgiveness of those who have suffered because of what I did.”

He acknowledged the “devastating effects of this horrible sin” — substance abuse, depression, in some cases suicide — and sought to assuage the sense of shame many victims suffer by assuring them that the perpetrators were to blame. He urged anyone living “with the awful secret of sexual abuse by clergy or by anyone else to come forward so that you may begin to experience healing.”

“No one is helped by keeping such things secret,” he said. “The secret of sexual abuse needs to be brought out of the darkness and into the healing light of Jesus Christ.”

His attempt at contrition would not restore the reputation he had spent years building before Boston.

“I think the damage was so substantial and serious and evil that I think that really overshadowed everything,” O’Toole said. “The scale of the sex abuse crisis, as we all came to learn it, was just such that everything else had to be seen in that context.”

To this day, O’Toole is hard-pressed to understand why Law and other church leaders handled their knowledge of abusive priests the way they did.

“They were disposed to look at it as a moral problem, as individual cases instead of a bigger problem,” he said. “They would say, ‘Oh, well this is just Father so-and-so. We’ll take care of Father so-and-so and that’ll solve the problem.’ They couldn’t see a larger systemic kind of problem. Some of that obviously was, perhaps, they didn’t want to see it as a problem.”

That Law came up through the ranks of the church in part by passionately addressing one systemic problem — racism — only to utterly fail to address another one is an irony not lost on O’Toole.

“It is at odds with what you would think for someone who had been involved in the civil rights movement,” he said.


Roman Catholic Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston accepts his cardinal’s red cap from an altar boy during the cardinal’s weekly mass in the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston on Mar. 17, 2002. (Jim Bourg/Reuters)

Read more Retropolis:

Civil rights crusader Fannie Lou Hamer defied men — and presidents — who tried to silence her

Seeking justice for the mass hanging of black soldiers after the bloody 1917 Houston riots

Amid Trump’s NFL war, photos of Martin Luther King Jr. ‘taking a knee’ resurface

Death of ‘a devil’: The white supremacist got hit by a car. His victims celebrated.

Missouri v. Celia, a Slave: She killed the white master raping her, then claimed self-defense

Trump issues first commuted prison sentence

President TrumpDonald John TrumpHouse Democrat slams Donald Trump Jr. for ‘serious case of amnesia’ after testimony Skier Lindsey Vonn: I don’t want to represent Trump at Olympics Poll: 4 in 10 Republicans think senior Trump advisers had improper dealings with Russia MORE on Wednesday issued his first commuted sentence for a federal prisoner, freeing Sholom Rubashkin, the former owner of the country’s largest kosher meat-processing plant who in 2009 was sentenced to 27 years in prison for a litany of financial crimes.

The commutation had bipartisan support from lawmakers and had become a cause among many leading voices in the legal community, petitioning the Obama and Trump administrations to draw attention to a sentence they said was wildly disproportionate to the crime that had been committed.

Rubashkin, a father of 10, will have served eight years of his sentence. The commutation is not a presidential pardon — Rubashkin’s conviction will stand, as will his terms of release and the restitution payments he will be obliged to pay.

Still, the commutation will clear Rubashkin of the remaining 19 years of a sentence that had been condemned by politicians on the left and the right as cruel and unusual. 

“The President’s review of Mr. Rubashkin’s case and commutation decision were based on expressions of support from Members of Congress and a broad cross-section of the legal community,” the White House said in a statement. 

“A bipartisan group of more than 100 former high-ranking and distinguished Department of Justice (DOJ) officials, prosecutors, judges, and legal scholars have expressed concerns about the evidentiary proceedings in Mr. Rubashkin’s case and the severity of his sentence. Additionally, more than 30 current Members of Congress have written letters expressing support for review of Mr. Rubashkin’s case.”

Rubashkin was the CEO of a kosher meatpacking plant in Iowa, the largest in the country. Federal law enforcement raided the company in November 2008 and Rubashkin was found guilty of bank fraud and money laundering. Hundreds of Rubashkin’s employees were arrested for working in the country illegally.

Scores of the country’s leading legal experts, including four attorneys general, wrote to Trump earlier this year asking that Rubaskin’s sentence be commuted, arguing that the 27-year sentence was excessive because he was a first-time, non-violent offender.

“Essentially, Mr. Rubashkin was convicted of fraud offenses stemming from inflating collateral to obtain a higher line of credit for Agriprocessors, his father’s kosher meat business, and for paying some cattle owners 11 days late,” the lawyers wrote.

“Mr. Rubashkin is a devoted husband and father, a deeply religious man who simply  doesn’t deserve a sentence of this length, or anything remotely close to it,” the letter continued. “Indeed, his sentence is far longer than the median sentences for murder, kidnapping, sexual abuse, child pornography and numerous other offenses exponentially more serious than his.”

This is the first time Trump has used the executive power to commute a federal prisoner’s sentence, although earlier this year he pardoned Joe Arpaio, the controversial former sheriff of Maricopa County, Ariz.

Arpaio had been convicted of criminal contempt for disobeying a Justice Department edict against racially profiling Latinos.

US threatens countries with loss of aid over UN vote on Jerusalem

President Trump suggested Wednesday that billions of dollars in U.S. foreign aid could hinge on how countries vote on a U.N. resolution condemning his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the U.S. Embassy there.

In a Cabinet meeting at the White House, Trump said he would be “watching those votes” in the General Assembly when it meets in emergency session Thursday on the U.S. decision.

“They take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars, and then they vote against us,” he said. “Well, we’ll be watching those votes. Let them vote against us; we’ll save a lot. We don’t care.

“But this isn’t like it used to be, where they could vote against you, and then you pay them hundreds of millions of dollars and nobody knows what they’re doing.”

He ended by asserting, “We’re not going to be taken advantage of any longer.”

Palestinians place on the ground a representation of a U.S. flag during a protest Dec. 20, 2017, against President Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. (Mussa Qawasma/Reuters)

Trump’s remarks came after Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, warned on Twitter that “the US will be taking names” of countries that support the resolution. And in a letter she sent to more than 180 U.N. ambassadors of member nations, she said she would report back to Trump on how they voted.

“We will take note of each and every vote on this issue,” she wrote.

The hardball tactics used by Trump and Haley further raised tensions over the U.S. announcement on Dec. 6 to unilaterally recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and begin preparations to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv. Israel, which captured the eastern part of the city in the 1967 war and annexed it, considers the city its undivided, eternal capital. The Palestinians want to make East Jerusalem the capital of a future Palestinian state, and all countries that have diplomatic representation in Israel maintain their diplomatic missions in Tel Aviv to avoid taking a stand on the Jerusalem issue.

On Monday, the United States exercised its Security Council veto to block a resolution on the council declaring Jerusalem a final-status issue to be determined through negotiations and urging countries not to relocate their embassies in the city. All 14 other countries on the council, including U.S. allies Britain and France, supported the resolution.

Now, the nonbinding resolution is going to the General Assembly, where the United States does not have veto power.

In her letter to the U.N. ambassadors, Haley said the United States is not asking other countries to move their embassies to the city, “though we think it would be appropriate.”

“We are simply asking that you acknowledge the historical friendship, partnership and support we have extended and respect our decision about our own embassy,” she wrote.

Neither Trump nor Haley mentioned any specific countries that could be affected. Apart from Israel, only two other countries receive more than $1 billion in annual aid — Egypt and Jordan.

It is not clear whether the tough talk will swing any votes.

A spokesman for Haley said she had received positive feedback on her letter.

“Ambassador Haley has received numerous replies from ambassadors who are appropriately concerned about maintaining their friendships with the United States,” he said.

But the suggestion that U.S. aid would be linked to the U.N. vote was swiftly criticized by Turkey, which accused the White House of further isolating itself through its threats.

“We expect strong support at the U.N. vote, but we see that the United States, which was left alone, is now resorting to threats,” Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said before leaving Istanbul for New York. “No honorable, dignified country would bow down to this pressure.”

David Makovsky, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said the principle of taking U.N. votes into account in bilateral relations is sound, but he questioned whether the emotional issue of Jerusalem should be the place to take a first stand.

“Do you start a new policy on a vote that has the most religious resonance in the Muslim world?” he said. “I’m not against the principle. But you have to apply it more with a scalpel than a sledgehammer, given the issue at stake.”

Aaron David Miller, a Middle East analyst at the Wilson Center, said Trump’s rhetoric appeals to his supporters.

“The administration is doubling down after the Jerusalem decision, playing on the president’s aversion to the U.N., to allies that don’t pay up and stand up in support of Washington, and on long-standing commitments to have Israel’s back at the U.N.,” Miller said. “Being tough in New York plays well with the base and squares with the president’s tough-guy image.”

This is not the first time Haley has vowed to note which countries vote with the United States at the United Nations. On her first day, she told reporters that “for those who don’t have our back, we’re taking names.”

North Korean Soldier Defects Through DMZ, and Gunfire Erupts

Advertisement

Supported by

Image
The border between the two Koreas in the truce village of Panmunjom in April.CreditLam Yik Fei for The New York Times

By

Dec. 20, 2017

HONG KONG — A North Korean soldier defected to South Korea on Thursday through the heavily guarded demilitarized zone separating the two countries, leading to gunfire on both sides of the border, the South Korean military said.

The “low ranking” soldier was manning a guard post along the DMZ when he fled through thick fog, the South Korean military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said.

The escape follows a similar one last month, in which another North Korean soldier was shot by his colleagues as he successfully fled his DMZ posting.

In that case, South Korean border guards who heard the gunshots found the soldier 55 yards from the border line that bisects Panmunjom, the so-called truce village in the Joint Security Area, and carried him to safety. Doctors later found dozens of parasitic worms in his digestive system, some as long as 11 inches, which officials said was a sign of the poor hygiene and nutrition afflicting North Korea.

Officials said the soldier who fled Thursday was not fired upon. South Korean soldiers later fired 20 warning shots at North Korean border guards who were searching for the defector, which was followed 40 minutes later by gunfire in the North, the Joint Chiefs of Staff said.

More than 30,000 North Koreans have fled to South Korea since a famine killed at least a million people in the North in the 1990s. The country has recently been the subject of a tightening grip of sanctions that have curbed exports that provide urgently needed revenue, and it has been struggling with the impact of a drought that has reduced agricultural yields.

But it is extremely rare for people to flee across the demilitarized zone. The 2.5-mile-wide DMZ, considered the most heavily fortified border in the world, is guarded by minefields, sentry posts and tall fences topped with barbed wire, some electrified.

The soldier’s defection to South Korea on Thursday was the fourth this year, and the gunfire over the episode is certain to raise tensions on the Korean Peninsula just as hopes have grown for a thaw in relations between the South and North.

South Korean officials have recently held out the possibility that they might be willing to push back the timing of planned joint military exercises with the United States to reduce tensions.

Those exercises have traditionally drawn a fierce response from North Korea, which sees them as a preparation for military action against the North.

On Tuesday, South Korea’s president, Moon Jae-in, told NBC News that he was open to curtailing the exercises ahead of next year’s Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea, in February.

“It is possible for South Korea and the U.S. to review the possibility of postponing the exercises,” he said. “I’ve made such a suggestion to the U.S., and the U.S. is currently reviewing it. However, all this depends on how North Korea behaves.”

China and Russia have proposed a “freeze for freeze” agreement in which North Korea would halt its nuclear and missile tests in return for a halt to the military exercises.

But on Wednesday, the Pentagon distanced itself from Mr. Moon’s suggestion about delaying the exercises.

“The United States and our allies and partners in the region have long conducted routine exercises to maintain readiness,” Lt. Col. Chris Logan, a Defense Department spokesman, told Yonhap. “But it would be inappropriate to discuss plans for future exercises at this time.”

In a possible sign of worsening conditions in the North, the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff said that 15 North Koreans, including the four soldiers, had fled directly to South Korea this year, compared with five people, including one soldier, last year. Most defectors avoid such a perilous crossing to the South, instead fleeing through China.

Follow Gerry Mullany on Twitter: @gerrymullany.

Advertisement

Confederate Statues in Memphis Are Removed After City Council Vote

Around the country, cities have removed symbols ranging from the Confederate flag, to memorials of rank-and-file Confederate soldiers, to statues of prominent generals including Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson.

Within an hour of the Memphis City Council’s vote, police officers and cranes were deployed to Health Sciences Park.

Photo

Janet Jackson, left, and her daughters Janiah, 12, center, and Tatiana, 14, watch as the statue of Confederate general and early leader of the Ku Klux Klan is removed from a park in Memphis, Wednesday night.

Credit
Brandon Dill for The New York Times

Just after 9 p.m., the crane began to lift the statue into the air, the horse and rider dangling above the pedestal. Onlookers cheered. Someone yelled, “Now drop it!” Others chanted: “Hey hey! Ho ho! That racist statue has got to go!”

Kyle Veazey, a spokesman for Mr. Strickland, wrote on Twitter that the statue was lifted at 9:01 p.m., an apparent nod to the city’s 901 area code. One of the groups that led the movement to remove the statues was called Take ’Em Down 901.

“Just to finally get to this moment is overwhelming,” Tami Sawyer, a leader of the group, said.

“I looked Nathan Bedford in the eyes and shed a tear for my ancestors,” she said, recalling the history of African-Americans from slavery to modern incarceration.

Bruce McMullen, the chief legal officer for the city, said in an interview on Wednesday night that the parks had been sold to Memphis Greenspace, a nonprofit led by Van D. Turner Jr., a Shelby County commissioner.

The nonprofit seems to have been created expressly for the purpose of buying the parks: It filed its incorporation papers in October, Mr. Strickland said. Mr. Turner did not immediately return a request for comment.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

The city sold Health Sciences Park in its entirety, Mr. McMullen said, and it sold its interest in an easement in Memphis Park. Each was sold for $1,000, he said.

The transfer of the parks to private ownership effectively allowed the city to skirt the Tennessee Heritage Protection Act, a state law that prohibits the removal, relocation or renaming of memorials on public property.

In October, the Tennessee Historical Commission, a state agency that oversees the law, voted to deny the city’s application for a waiver of the law regarding the two statues, the television station WREG reported.

Photo

A memorial to Jefferson Davis in Memphis.

Credit
George Tames/The New York Times

Representative Steve Cohen, Democrat of Tennessee, praised the City Council’s move, calling the statues “not representative of Memphis today” and “an affront to most of the citizens of Memphis.”

“As we approach the 50th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, it’s important that these relics of the Confederacy and defenders of slavery don’t continue to be displayed in prominent places in our city,” Mr. Cohen said in a statement.

Mr. McMullen said another motivation for removing the statues was ensuring that they would not create an “incendiary type of environment” during the city’s commemorations of Dr. King in April.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

He dismissed the criticism of some groups, including the Sons of Confederate Veterans, who had accused the city of willfully violating state law. He said the city had been weighing the sale of the parks to a private group for a year.

“We’ve always felt that we had a right to sell city property. We have in the past, and we probably will in the future,” Mr. McMullen said. “And what we did was perfectly legal and right.”

At the news conference, Mr. Strickland echoed Mr. McMullen’s comments. The mayor said the City Council had undertaken a long, complex process to ensure that the handoff was done legally, including passing a law in September that allowed Memphis to sell the parks for less than their market value.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

But he also invoked the violent protests in Charlottesville, Va., in August as the “sea change” that spurred those efforts to success. One woman was killed after white supremacists rallied in Charlottesville to protest the planned removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee.

In the days after the deadly rally, Mr. Strickland said, “we saw an avalanche of support come together behind our efforts.”

“But this day, this day should be more about where we go from here,” he said. “I want to say this loud and clear: Though some of our city’s past is painful, we are all in charge of our city’s future.”

Follow Vivian Wang on Twitter: @vwang3


Continue reading the main story

With Tax Overhaul, Trump Fulfills a Campaign Promise and Flexes Republican Muscle

It is not clear whether Mr. Trump is going to sign the bill before the end of the year. Republicans need to work with Democrats to avert automatic spending cuts that could be set off as a result of the tax bill adding to the deficit. They need support from Democrats to avoid these spending cuts, and if they wait until next year, it will buy them extra time to reach such a deal. Republicans in Congress were struggling to reach an agreement that would keep the government funded into January and avoid a shutdown.

At the White House on Wednesday, Mr. Trump presided over a grand celebration on the South Portico, flanked by Republican lawmakers and members of his cabinet in a show of unity. A Marine Band played Christmas carols while the president and his party soaked up a moment long in coming.

Interactive Feature

Tax Bill Calculator: Will Your Taxes Go Up or Down?

This simple calculator describes a range of tax scenarios under the Republican tax plan. Find households like yours in five steps or fewer.


“This will indeed be a very big day, when people look back at our country. It’s a whole different attitude, a whole different way,” Mr. Trump said, congratulating the lawmakers behind him. “They have been working on this for years, years and years. And I just want to turn around and I want to thank them all. They are very, very special people.”

The lawmakers — many of whom face re-election next year — eagerly returned the favor as the president brought several of them to the lectern, where they offered a common refrain: paeans to Mr. Trump, his legislative victory and his presidency.

Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah and the chairman of the Finance Committee, said Mr. Trump might end up being one of the country’s greatest presidents. Members of Congress who have at times been on the receiving end of brutal Twitter posts made by the president, including Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, returned the president’s praise in kind.

“This has been a year of extraordinary accomplishment for the Trump administration,” Mr. McConnell said, as the president grinned broadly behind him.

But though Mr. Trump listed a series of accomplishments during his first year in office, he confronts a challenge in the new year of persuading more Americans to get behind him.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

His approval rating in polls of the American public is at historic lows, with a majority of people holding negative views of his presidency. Next year, he will face a Senate majority that will have shrunk to just one vote, making it even harder to win approval for the rest of the Republican agenda.

And while his lawyers have suggested that they believe the special counsel’s Russia investigation is winding down, there is evidence that Mr. Trump and his associates will remain under scrutiny for months, if not longer. Two members of Mr. Trump’s campaign team have been indicted, and two others, including Michael T. Flynn, his former national security adviser, and George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy consultant, have pleaded guilty to federal crimes and are cooperating with the special counsel.

The tax victory was a rare moment of legislative success for a president who has struggled to govern in a city that he derided as “a swamp.” He has repeatedly used Twitter, his favorite means of communication, to demean and belittle members of both parties, undermining Republican leaders and generating intense opposition from Democrats.

On Wednesday, he struck a different tone, posting on Twitter to praise Mr. McConnell for shepherding the tax bill through the bitterly divided chamber.

The president’s most significant legislative misstep was a failed effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act, a Republican pledge that he echoed repeatedly on the campaign trail. In May, the president and his Republican allies in the House held what proved to be a premature victory ceremony over the chamber’s vote to replace the health care law, a feat that the Senate never matched.

The tax bill that passed includes the elimination of the Obama-era requirement that people have health insurance, handing Mr. Trump and Republicans a talking point when they confront constituents who expected full repeal of the health care law. Speaking to reporters before a cabinet meeting Wednesday morning, Mr. Trump bragged about getting rid of the health care mandate, saying that it amounted to a full repeal of Mr. Obama’s signature law.

“We didn’t want to bring it up,” Mr. Trump said. “I told people specifically, ‘Be quiet with the fake news media because I don’t want them talking too much about it.’”

Whether that proves to be a political victory for Mr. Trump and Republicans is unclear. Many of his core supporters will appreciate the move. But the president’s eager declaration that “Obamacare has been repealed” also means that he will be held responsible if premiums rise or people struggle to secure health insurance.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

The tax overhaul also provides a break to owners of pass-through businesses, whose profits are taxed through the individual code, and lowers the top individual rate to 37 percent, down from 39.6 percent. It nearly doubles the standard deduction and doubles the child tax credit and the size of inheritances shielded from estate taxation.

In a move that drew significant criticism from lawmakers from states with high taxes, the bill caps the deduction for state and local taxes at $10,000. Twelve House Republicans voted against the tax bill, and 11 of those members were from California, New Jersey and New York, three states with high taxes.

It also opens the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil and gas drilling.

Polls suggest that most Americans view the tax overhaul with suspicion. In a Quinnipiac University poll released last week, a majority of people said they saw the plan negatively, with only about 16 percent saying they believe it will lower their taxes. Democrats predicted Wednesday that the political benefits for Mr. Trump would evaporate quickly.

“He hasn’t accomplished any meaningful part of his legislative agenda since the beginning of the year,” said Senator Michael Bennet, Democrat of Colorado. He added, referring to the fact that the cut is so large that independent analysts say it will produce a deficit for years to come, “As soon as the American people see what’s in the bill, and that it borrows from their children to pay for it, it they will reject it.”

Republican lawmakers said they believed the public’s opinions about the tax overhaul would improve as more people began paying lower taxes next year. If they are right, the party could benefit just as lawmakers face voters in the fall.

Speaker Paul D. Ryan, who spent most of his almost 20 years in Congress pushing for an overhaul of the tax code, said he was “excited” about making good on a core part of the Republican Party’s orthodoxy.

“We are going to launch next year this fantastic tax reform so that the American people can see how we can truly reach our economic growth and our economic potential,” Mr. Ryan said.

In remarks before the cabinet meeting, Vice President Mike Pence offered the kind of effusive praise that Mr. Trump is unlikely to receive very often, even after the tax bill victory.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“I want to thank you, Mr. President,” Mr. Pence said. “I want to thank you for speaking on behalf of and fighting every day for the forgotten men and women of America. Because of your determination, because of your leadership, the forgotten men and women of America are forgotten no more, and we are making America great again.”

For the president, passage of the tax bill could be even more important — depending on how people come to view the legislation. As a candidate, Mr. Trump pitched himself as a champion of working Americans whose interests had been forgotten or ignored by a political establishment that cared little about their fortunes.

If people conclude that the tax bill lowers their taxes, that could improve Mr. Trump’s dismal job approval rating. If they decide that rich people and corporations benefit most, the president could anger his own supporters.

“Trumpism, in the end, as a domestic policy, comes down to jobs,” Mr. Gingrich said. “As a baseline of the conversation, he has to produce a better economy for anything else he is doing to make sense.”


Continue reading the main story

Amtrak Inquiry Will Focus on Driver Distraction and Excessive Speed

Photo

A train car was removed from the scene of an Amtrak train derailment near Tacoma, Wash., on Tuesday.

Credit
Ruth Fremson/The New York Times

DUPONT, Wash. — The investigation into the fatal Amtrak crash near Tacoma, Wash., is focusing on the possibility that the engineer was distracted by a cellphone, another person in his cab or something else when the train barreled into a curve 50 miles per hour over the posted speed limit.

The crew did not activate the emergency brake before the derailment on Monday morning, said Bella Dinh-Zarr, the National Transportation Safety Board official overseeing the investigation, which might indicate that the engineer failed to perceive the danger.

At a news conference on Tuesday afternoon, she said the badly damaged cameras in the engineer’s cab — one facing forward, and the other inward, toward the person driving the train — had been sent to the safety board’s laboratory in Washington D.C. There, investigators will try to extract images showing what went on in the moments before the train plunged into a stand of trees and onto a busy highway, killing three people.

Ms. Dinh-Zarr stressed that the crew members — all of them hospitalized — had not yet been interviewed, and most of the evidence not yet analyzed. A data recorder on the train, carrying 77 passengers and seven crew members, indicated that it was racing at 80 miles per hour into a curve that is limited to 30 miles per hour, the safety board said. Excessive speed appeared to be the immediate cause of the crash, but the reason for that speed remained unknown.

“Distraction is one of our most wanted list of priorities at the N.T.S.B.” she said. “It’s protocol for us to look at all of the cellphone records of all the crew members whenever there is an accident of this type.”

There was a second person in the cab at the time of the crash, “a conductor who was getting experience and familiarizing himself with the territory,” Ms. Dinh-Zarr said. While that is common practice, rail safety experts say it can also be a distraction to the engineer, a possibility that she said would be investigated.

Drug and alcohol testing of crews is routine after train accidents, and the inward-facing cameras could show not only whether the engineer was distracted, but also whether he was impaired or fatigued — factors that have been blamed in other rail accidents.

Video

These Trains Outpace the U.S. on Speed and Safety

High-tech rail systems in countries like Japan and across Europe are reaching top speeds with strong safety records. But Chinese rail construction may be the thing to watch.


By SARAH STEIN KERR and CHRIS CIRILLO on Publish Date December 19, 2017.


Photo by Andy Haslam for The New York Times.

Watch in Times Video »

Amtrak 501, on the Cascades service between Seattle and Portland, was the first to carry passengers on a new, faster route between Tacoma and Olympia, on tracks recently upgraded for passenger service. The unfamiliar, 14.5-mile stretch includes a spot where southbound trains leave a straightaway on a downhill slope before reaching the crash site, where the tracks curve onto an overpass crossing Interstate 5.

On that new part of the trip, “crews have been operating for at least two weeks prior to the accident with nonrevenue trains,” she said, including the engineer who was at the controls on Monday morning. But she would not say whether they had enough training before hauling passengers.

The fact that the train was on its inaugural run — and that the tracks had only recently been improved — may have contributed to the derailment, said Allan Zarembski, a professor of railroad safety and engineering at the University of Delaware.

The accident mirrored a 2015 crash in Philadelphia that killed eight people, when an Amtrak train took a turn much too fast and jumped the tracks. In the 2015 Philadelphia Amtrak derailment, the N.T.S.B. found that the engineer had lost “situational awareness” of where the train was on the route.

In this week’s accident, “the operator may not have been 100 percent familiar with that route or misjudged where he was and didn’t start to slow down for that curve,” Dr. Zarembski said. “I’m sure there was some familiarization, but the question is, how familiar was he with it?”

Operators generally carefully study documents known as track charts, which describe the route’s speed limits and tricky areas, before stepping into the cab, he said.

A former safety board railroad investigator, Russell Quimby, said that while there was no national standard for how many dry runs a railroad had to perform before opening a line, it was common to run practice trains under a variety of weather conditions and other circumstances.

Video

Amtrak Train Derails South of Seattle

An Amtrak passenger train derailed and crashed into oncoming traffic on Monday morning. Multiple deaths were reported.


By BARBARA MARCOLINI, SARAH STEIN KERR and CHRISTOPH KOETTL on Publish Date December 18, 2017.


Photo by Ruth Fremson/The New York Times.

Watch in Times Video »

After a private briefing by investigators, Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington said, “there are a thousand unanswered questions about this right now.”

The safety board blamed the 2008 crash of a commuter train in Los Angeles, which killed 25 people, on the distraction of the engineer, who was composing a text message when he ran a red light and collided with a freight train.

That accident played an important role in evolving rail safety standards. It led the safety board to recommend inward-facing cameras in train cabs, and Amtrak committed in 2015 to installing them.

Newsletter Sign Up

Continue reading the main story

The crash also prompted Congress to require that railroads adopt a system called positive train control — which the safety board has sought for decades — that automatically slows or stops a train that is moving too fast, or is in danger of running a red light or hitting another train. The law originally set a 2015 deadline for positive train control, which uses sensors both on the trains and along the tracks, communicating by radio frequencies. But after lobbying by railroads, Congress postponed the requirement.

“Unfortunately, the deadline was the end of 2015, but Congress extended that deadline to the train companies, and allowed them to have until the end of 2018,” Ms. Dinh-Zarr said.

Richard H. Anderson, the president of Amtrak, said at a news conference in Tacoma on Tuesday evening that it was too early to know whether positive train control could have prevented the accident. While some Amtrak routes have the technology, the Cascades line is scheduled to have it by the end of 2018, he said.

“We have to keep this as a wake-up call,” Mr. Anderson said. “It is not acceptable that we are involved in these kinds of accidents.”

Photo

Investigators inspected the tracks at the scene of an Amtrak train derailment near Tacoma, Wash., on Monday.

Credit
Ruth Fremson/The New York Times

Sound Transit, the regional agency that owns the track where the train derailed on Monday, said the system had been installed along the line, and the Washington State Department of Transportation has said that the entire Cascades route will have the system by mid-2018.

“The locomotive was in the process of getting a P.T.C. system installed but it was not yet functional,” Ms. Dinh-Zarr said.

Last Friday, a Cascades train took local dignitaries on the new route, including Eric F. Corp, a DuPont city councilman. Long before then, he said, people who knew anything about the line knew that there was a big curve going over the highway, requiring a major slowdown.

“What speed we were going when we went around the corner I’m not sure, but it was slow and methodical,” he said. “It wasn’t like we were leaning or at no time did I think we were going too fast.”

Two of the people killed, Zack Willhoite and James Hamre, were close friends and rail enthusiasts, traveling together on the train’s first public voyage. Mr. Hamre, a retired engineer, was a volunteer for All Aboard Washington, a rail advocacy organization; Mr. Willhoite worked as a customer support specialist for Pierce Transit, a local transportation agency.

“It was just a given that they would be there,” said Lloyd Flem, a friend of the victims and the executive director of All Aboard Washington. “They had wanted to be on that very, very first run.”

In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Flem said that he had seen both men just a few days ago and that they were eager to board the train early Monday morning.

On Tuesday, the scene of the crash, surrounded by police and emergency vehicles, began to look more like a construction site than a disaster. In a steady rain, huge cranes moved into place and began to lift the wrecked pieces of the train, while the crumpled remains of cars and trucks were loaded onto tractor-trailers to be taken away.

The crash left at least two coaches tumbled onto their sides, one of them on top of another coach, and two dangling precariously off the edge of the bridge; the locomotive that was pulling the train came to a stop on the highway. Of the 14 cars in the train, only the locomotive at the rear, which was not in use at the time, did not derail.


Continue reading the main story

Virginia’s House is split 50-50. Here’s how they can break the gridlock.


The Virginia state capitol in Richmond. (Sue Kovach Shuman for The Washington Post)

The surprise victory of Democrat Shelly Simonds after a nail-biting recount has given Democrats yet another win in Virginia’s legislature, ending 17 years of Republican control.

But the question of who will be in control of the House of Delegates going forward is a bit up in the air. Simonds’s victory brought the House of Delegates to a rare 50-50 tie between the parties, a split that could change depending on the outcome of a couple of other recounts in the state. But the split raises questions about how the legislature will govern, given that Virginia has no official tie-breaking mechanism for its House of Delegates, if the results hold.

“It’s not a crisis,” said Larry J. Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center For Politics. “This happens almost every election in one of the 50 states.”

Some clues about how the state might proceed can perhaps be found by looking at how some recent partisan stalemates have been broken around the country. The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), which tracks the bodies, notes more than 40 state legislatures that have dealt with even partisan splits in the last 50 years.

These splits have been resolved through a few ways:

1) State laws. At least three states have laws that help break ties, according to the NCSL. In the event of a tie in Montana and South Dakota, the leaders of the chambers are chosen from the party of the governor, for example. In Indiana, the speaker must be chosen by the party affiliated with either the governor, or the secretary of state, if the governor was not up for election.

2) Lieutenant governor’s vote. In about half of the states in the country, a lieutenant governor presides over the senate and can break ties the way a vice president can in the U.S. Senate. The Virginia Senate has considered this option during previous splits — Republicans currently have a two-vote margin — but it is not available to the state’s House of Delegates.

3) Coin toss. Not kidding. The use of coin toss helped break a legislative tie in Wyoming in 1974 and remains the preferred method to dealing with partisan gridlock, according to the NCSL.

4) Negotiation The most common way to break a legislative gridlock is through good old-fashioned dealmaking.

“Most ties have been settled when the two political parties negotiate a shared power agreement,” the NCSL says. Many states have negotiated power-sharing agreements that involve co-chairing leadership and committee positions. These include the Washington House in 1978, 1998, and 2000, the Indiana House in 1988, the Michigan House in 1992 and many others.

“The dual leaders and committee chairs alternate the times during which they preside,” the NCSL said. Some power structures alternated daily; others monthly or bimonthly.

Another way to compromise is a division of power made in the spirit of balance, giving one party a presiding officer and the other leadership of the most powerful committees, according to the NCSL. For example, in a divided house in Minnesota in 1978, “the speaker of the House was Republican, but the chairmen of the powerful rules, appropriations and tax committees were Democrats.”

The NCSL writes that deadlocked chambers have generally performed better than many expect. “Cooperation rather than confrontation seems to be key to the success of shared power in a chamber, as well as good will and the personalities of the players,” it noted.

In Virginia, the Democrats could have a slight upper hand given the near landslide victory that swept them into power, Sabato said, beginning with Gov. Ralph Northam.

“They had a wave with Northam, who deserves a lot of the credit,” he said. “Trump deserves even more credit. If the state Senate had been on the ballot, I’m convinced Democrats would have one that too. The Republicans are narrowly in charge of the Senate mainly because they weren’t on the ballot.”

Defections from one party to another are possible but not likely, Sabato said. And in a highly partisan era, compromise is going to be hard to come by, he said.

“It’s not going to be easy because of the polarization,” he said. “They’re politicians, they make do. They pursue partisan advantage when they can. And the voters spoke. They have to live with it.”

Of course, the final makeup of the legislature may yet change. Two additional recounts are taking place this week for seats won by slim margins: a Democrat in Richmond and a Republican in Fredericksburg, where Democrats are pushing for a new vote after 100 voters were given ballots for the wrong district.

There have been some famously split legislatures federally, of course. What is referred to by the Senate Historical Office as the Great Senate Deadlock of 1881 ensued after the 47th Congress convened, with 37 Republicans, 37 Democrats and two independents on the Senate. Each side was able to persuade one of the independents to join, giving the Republicans an edge with a Republican vice president. The independent who helped sway the advantage for the Republicans was awarded with a plum position as the chair of the powerful Agriculture Committee.

In recent times, the Senate found itself in a similar position in 2000, after a contentious election awarded the presidency to George W. Bush. Democrats, who had evened up the seats in the Senate and seen their candidate, Al Gore, take the popular vote, argued that the committees should reflect an even divide.

“The agreement for equal shares of committee seats — Republicans held all the chairmanships — was reached largely through a direct conversation between the two Senate leaders at the time, Mississippi Republican Trent Lott and South Dakota Democrat Tom Daschle,” CNN reported.

And Republicans allowed Daschle to serve as Senate majority leader for 17 days until George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were sworn in, before handing the position over to Lott.

Gregory S. Schneider contributed to this report. 

Read more:

White House takes down ‘We the People’ petitions site before responding to a single one

This baby was born from an embryo frozen 24 years ago

Former Navy pilot describes UFO encounter studied by secret Pentagon program