NHJ to UNC: Tenure or GTFO
Wed., June 23: Bipartisanship is bad, actually + Tillis and Burr vote against voting + deets on Durham’s budget + NC Senate power-play + Dreamville returns, eventually
CORRECTION
Yesterday, I said the Livable Raleigh virtual forum on a recall election was canceled. That’s because, at 7:12 p.m. on Monday night, I got this notification from Facebook.
As several readers pointed out, that notification referred only to the stream that was going to run on Facebook. The one hosted on Livable Raleigh’s site still happened, with 369 registrants and 171 participants, according to Stef Mendell.
I also misunderstood how Raleigh’s recalls work, Mendell says. The election isn’t a strict referendum on the incumbent; it includes challengers on the ballot as well.
I got those things wrong, and I’m sorry.
+TODAY’S TOP 6
1. NHJ to UNC: Tenure or GTFO
Tired of being jerked around, Nikole Hannah-Jones’s lawyers gave the UNC Board of Trustees an ultimatum Monday: Grant her tenure, or she’s not coming.
NC Policy Watch has the scoop.
Nikole Hannah-Jones will not join the faculty at UNC-Chapel Hill without tenure, according to a letter from her legal team to the university this week.
According to the letter, Hannah-Jones will not begin her position as Knight Chair in Race and Investigative Journalism on July 1, as scheduled, and will not take the position without tenure.
The letter says that the acclaimed journalist expected the BOT to take up her tenure application in November. It didn’t. It was then supposed to do so in January, but didn’t. She was never given an explanation.
In February, she accepted a five-year appointment “in an effort to minimize the monetary damages she incurred, as well as damages to her reputational standing.”
But, the letter continues, she didn’t know that the BOT’s refusal to consider her tenure application was the result of political pressure exerted by megadonor/objectivity purist Walter Hussman Jr. and right-wing groups mad about the 1619 Project.
Since signing the fixed-term contract, Ms. Hannah-Jones has come to lean that political interference and influence from a powerful donor contributed to the Board of Trustees’ failure to consider her tenure application. In light of this information, Ms. Hannah-Jones cannot trust that the University would consider her tenure application in good faith during the period of the fixed-term contract. …
The inferior terms of employment offered to Ms. Hannah-Jones in the fixed-term contract resulted from viewpoint discrimination in violation of the freedom of speech and expression, secured by the United States and North Carolina Constitution; race and sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of federal and North Carolina state law; unlawful political influence in violation of North Carolina state law; and other unlawful grounds. Under these circumstances, any appointment of Ms. Hannah-Jones without tenure is unacceptable.
Despite facing a possible lawsuit—and massive fallout in terms of national reputation and discontent among Black faculty, both from this and other instances of conservative political interference—the BOT has not scheduled a meeting on Hannah-Jones’s tenure application.
RELATED: The Senate’s proposed budget, discussed in more detail below, includes $11 million to move the UNC System HQ away from those lefty academics in Chapel Hill and over to a government complex in Raleigh.
2. Against Bipartisanship
The Group of 21, split between Democrats and Republicans, is about to unveil its infrastructure compromise—which is, according to Democratic Sen. Chris Coons, proof that American democracy is not irrevocably broken.
“Nothing will showcase that the United States is back like seeing Republicans and Democrats coming together around a bold infrastructure package that will make us more competitive around the world.”
There are sticking points to be worked out: namely, how to pay for the bill without raising taxes on rich people, a Republican demand, or hiking the gas tax or charging fees for electric vehicles, a White House red line.
But assuming that can be worked out, they might have a deal in principle this week. If Mitch McConnell doesn’t bait-and-switch the White House and House Democrats don’t rebel, Congress could pass a bill this summer.
Here’s the problem: Voters give no points for bipartisanship. They give points for results.
The reality: This compromise bill is crap.
The media’s focus is on the revenue side—that’s where the disagreement is—but look at the little we know about how the money will be spent.
Begin with the fact that President Biden wanted over $2 trillion in infrastructure spending, which included not just roads and bridges but addressing climate change as well.
The compromise offers just $579 billion in new spending—about a fourth of the original proposal. Democrats have already bargained themselves down by three-quarters.
Here’s how these senators plan to distribute the money:
The group proposes spending $360 billion for roads, bridges and major projects; $48.5 billion for public transit; $66 billion for rail; $55 billion for water infrastructure; $65 billion for broadband and $73 billion for power infrastructure. In addition, the group is proposing spending $47.2 billion on climate resiliency, $25 billion for airports, $10 billion on electric buses and $16 billion for ports.
It also outlines bringing in pieces of a large Energy Committee bill that Manchin is working on to deal with abandoned mines, weatherization and power and climate related provisions.
This is the director of Transportation for America:
Media criticism aside, the spending balance is obscene. Highways and bridges need attention, sure. Power and water infrastructure do, too. But the U.S. has really fallen behind the world in broadband, urban public transit, and rail transportation—things that promote connectivity and take people away from daily commutes. That’s the future.
But that’s not a future that appeals to Republican senators, whose voters tend to be exurban and rural. So bipartisanship means an infrastructure bill that reflects their priorities, not the city-centered priorities of tomorrow.
Oh, and less than $50 billion for climate “resiliency”? You’re kidding, right?
The simple fact is that the White House’s original proposal was better legislation. It would have been better for the economy in the short and long terms, better for the climate, better for underserved communities.
It was a lot of money, granted, but it still wasn’t nearly enough—our infrastructure deficit is that deep, and everyone knows it.
We’re doing this dance because a handful of Democrats in the Senate believe bipartisanship is a goal unto itself, even if it leads to poorer policy outcomes. They don’t have to care what Republicans think. But by refusing to nuke the filibuster, they’ve given them a veto.
If Democrats lose Congress next year, they can’t say they weren’t warned. Voters don’t care how you get results. They just want results.
Then again, Republicans’ steadfast commitment to not raising taxes on rich people might ultimately save Democrats from themselves.
OTHER POLITICIANS-DOING-STUPID-THINGS NEWS
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, is trying to defend his family’s membership in a private beach club that, according to a local media outlet, is whites-only by saying that “the club has informed me that it does in fact have a diversity of membership,” but also, “they're working on improving diversity,” and while he’s sure “diverse” people have been members, he doesn’t know who they are because “I don’t spend a lot of time there.” (NBC News)
Fifty years on, the Drug War needs more War, says Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas.
3. Tillis, Burr Vote Against Voting
Speaking of obstruction: Yesterday, Thom Tillis and Richard Burr joined their 48 Republican Senate colleagues in voting to block debate on the For the People Act, a bill that seeks to protect voting rights from state-level assaults in places such as Arizona, Georgia, and Florida.
“There is a rot at the center of the modern Republican party,” [Chuck] Schumer said. “Donald Trump’s big lie has spread like a cancer and threatens to envelop one of America’s major political parties. Even worse, it has poisoned our democracy, eroded faith in our elections, which is so detrimental to the future faith people need to have in this democracy.”
All 50 Democrats—including Sen. Joe Manchin—voted to proceed with debate on the bill. But Republicans used the filibuster to enforce a 60-vote threshold, protecting GOP restrictions on ballot access that target people of color.
The Democrats could vote to eliminate the filibuster, but they’d rather play nice.
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema says in an op-ed that eliminating the filibuster could lead to restrictions on voting rights.
Would it be good for our country if we [passed the For the People Act], only to see that legislation rescinded a few years from now and replaced by a nationwide voter-ID law or restrictions on voting by mail in federal elections, over the objections of the minority?
As Greg Sargent points out in the Post, Sinema fails to see the hole in her own logic:
Imagine a world in which legislative majorities could pass voting restrictions over the objections of minorities!
Oh, wait, we already live in that world. In state after state after state, voting restrictions of all kinds are being passed into law by Republican-controlled legislative majorities, over the objections of minorities. Crucially, this is happening almost exclusively on partisan lines.
As infuriating as it is to watch Democrats own-goal the country into authoritarianism, it’s worth remembering that every single Republican voted in support of this yesterday, including Richard Burr and Thom Tillis:
This year, 18 states have enacted more than 30 laws described as “anti-voter” by the nonpartisan Voting Rights Lab, which tracks developments in state election rules. The restrictions affect roughly 36 million people, or 15 percent of all eligible voters, the group stated in a report last week.
The laws restrict access to mail voting, create new hurdles to register to vote, impose new voter ID requirements and expand the definition of criminal behavior by voters, election officials and third parties, among other changes. (WaPo)
On that note: More than 900 political scientists have signed an open letter asking Congress to pass the For the People Act.
The crisis of American democracy is upon us, with consequences none of us can or should ignore. The window of opportunity for reform is likely to be brief. Congressional inaction will not simply preserve the status quo—it will invite further attacks on American democracy. …
The Republican Party’s attacks on voting rights weaken democracy for all Americans, but they disproportionately burden communities of color, the poor, young people, and less frequent voters. This is by design: the purpose of these laws is to ensure that Republican-leaning voters constitute a majority of votes cast, even if they are a minority of the electorate.
Six UNC profs and three Ph.D. students signed on. Six Duke professors and one Ph.D. student did as well.
4. Durham Raises Taxes, Might Cut DPD Positions and Make Electeds Full-Time
The Durham City Council unanimously passed its annual budget Monday night. The budget book hasn’t been posted yet, so there are a few details I’m waiting to see, but quickly, here are a few important things:
The city will spend just shy of $530 million. It also authorized:
$431.6 million in general capital improvement funds
$874.7 million in wastewater CIP funds
$59 million in stormwater CIP funds
$20 million in solid waste CIP funds
$27.7 million in parking CIP funds
$20.1 million in transit CIP funds
$1.5 million in DPAC CIP funds
Property taxes are going up 2 cents, to 55.17 cents per $100 of property value. In the business improvement district downtown, add an extra 7 cents. Most of it will go toward paying off the affordable housing bond voters passed in 2019.
Since city manager Wanda Page laid out her initial recommendation, the council added a few suggestions:
$45,000 for an Immigrant Refugee Coordinator position, split with Durham County.
$78,876 to fund full-time salaries for council members, should the council later decide to make themselves full-time.
An additional $187,600—a total of $250,000—for We Are the Ones, a proposal from council member Pierce Freelon to invest in “mutual aid centers and grassroots organizations in embattled Black and brown neighborhoods.”
$500,000 for a tax grant program for longtime homeowners, meant to protect against gentrification.
$1 million for the Community Health and Safety Task Force, which will work with the Community Safety Department.
Freezing 15 vacant police positions; the council has the option to shift them to the Community Safety Department in six months.
FWIW, making the council full-time is one of those good ideas no one wants to support because it looks self-serving.
SORT OF RELATED: As Durham begins to rethink policing with the Community Safety Department, cities nationwide are dealing with a surge in homicides.
Officials and criminal justice experts offer abundant reasons: A nation awash in guns, now more than ever. Deep mistrust between police departments and the communities they serve, particularly in high-poverty areas. The still-painful stresses caused or exacerbated by the pandemic. A cycle of violence that, once set in motion, is hard to break.
While the cop unions are blaming Defund the Police, no city has actually defunded the police. Some cities have reduced police budgets, but usually by small amounts, and those reductions are mostly illusory.
Seattle, for instance, “cut” police funding by moving parking enforcement to another city department.
The increase in homicides is also taking place in cities that increased police funding—Houston, to name one.
SORT OF RELATED: Charlotte banned single-family-only zoning—which every other city should do, IMHO—and Pat McCrory is Big Mad about it.
5. NC Senate Budget Tries to Curtail Cooper’s Powers
Here’s a poison pill in the state Senate’s budget: After trying umpteen times to overturn Governor Cooper’s emergency pandemic orders, Phil Berger went ahead and put a provision in the budget to do just that.
Under the provision (see page 286 of 426):
Any executive order issued by the Governor that exercises any of the powers granted under … this section shall expire 10 calendar days after issuance unless the Council of State concurs …. If the Council of State fails to concur, the Governor shall not issue a substantially similar executive order arising from the same events that form the basis to issue the initial executive order that failed to receive a concurrence of the Council of State.
If the Council of State concurs with the executive order … the executive order shall expire 45 calendar days from the date of issuance, unless the General Assembly extends the executive order by the enactment of a general law.
In other words: Within 10 days of an emergency, Cooper has to grovel before the Council of State. If he somehow swings that, within a month, he has to grovel again before the General Assembly, where Republicans can end the emergency orders by doing nothing.
If this were the law last year, a lot more people would be dead.
As much as Republicans tried to turn Cooper’s handling of the pandemic into a political football last year, projecting competence, steadiness, and vanilla-wafer boringness worked to his benefit.
Republicans say this has nothing to do with that.
Bottom line: I’ll eat my hat if Coop signs a budget with this in it.
RELATED: The Senate’s budget doesn’t include a penny for a Black history monument Republicans previously supported. And do you know why?
The Senate’s lead budget writer, Autryville Republican Sen. Brent Jackson, said the Senate decided not to put it in the budget this time, even though it had proposed funding the project in a previous year’s proposal and in a different bill last year.
“That was discussed, and the decision was since the monuments were being taken down, or they got vandalized during all the protests and they were being taken down on the Capitol square, we just felt like this was not the time to put something back up there of any type,” Jackson told The N&O on Tuesday. (N&O)
Which is to say: They’re butthurt about their Confederate heroes being defaced, so Black people can’t get their monument either. (Stick out tongue like five-year-old.)
6. Dreamville Is Back (Next Year)
J. Cole’s first attempt to pull off Dreamville, in August 2018, fell victim to a hurricane. He rescheduled for April 2019, and the inaugural daylong fest went over really well. Dreamville was going to come back last year, but nothing happened last year. So here comes attempt no. 4.
But … you’ll have to wait until April 2022.