politics

Pulling Back the Curtain

Dale Seufert-Navarro1 Comment
181214-ocasio-cortez
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – New York Post

One of the biggest complaints about Congress is that it is too out of touch, unable to understand the basic needs and struggles of everyday Americans. The halls of Congress are filled with elitist millionaires with bank accounts larger than what most Americans will ever see. The average net worth of a Senator is $3.2 million and $900,000 for a Representative in the House. Studies have shown that Congressional offices give preferential treatment to large campaign donors while ignoring calls from everyday citizens. While most members of Congress are unattainable, there is one freshman congresswoman making waves and changing the way members of Congress interact with their constituents. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has become a political rockstar ever since she beat longtime Democratic incumbent, Joe Crowley, in their June primary. From the very beginning of her campaign, she has shown that she will be beholden to her constituents and the movement behind her. In a debate with Crowley she was asked if she would support and endorse her opponent if she lost her primary challenge. Her response was brave and honest. She said that decision would not be up to her alone. She was representing a movement and would therefore need to go back and discuss what would be best for the larger movement. This is what it means to be the leader of actual people and not special interests. As it turns out, honesty and sincerity are still important to voters.

Now that Ocasio-Cortez will officially be a member of Congress, she intends to be a different kind of politician, one that sees herself as part of, instead of above and seperate, from a community. Ocasio-Cortez has been very open and honest about her struggle to find affordable housing in the D.C. area, where housing prices are some of the highest in the nation. Many in the media, and on the right, have criticized her and made a joke out of her financial situation. In pointing to, in their minds, her inadequate savings, they have revealed how out of touch they really are. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the median American household has less than $5,000 in savings, with about 30% having less than $1,000. What makes her appealing and relatable is the fact that her situation is more like the lived experience of everyday Americans than the wealthy beltway pundits laughing at her bank account or lack thereof. This is especially true of millennials. Millennials get a very bad rap when it comes to the job market and the housing market, but what some fail to acknowledge is that this generation – my generation – came of age during a time of financial crisis; a time and economy very different then our parents’ generation. Wages have stagnated, the types of jobs have changed, the labor market has become less unionized, the cost of living has increased, the cost of education has skyrocketed, and housing has become very unaffordable. That equation has been very difficult for younger generations to maneuver, and Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez is speaking truth to power about this experience. Unless more millennials and young people run for office and become politically engaged, the political system will not be prepared to speak to the problems affecting a new economy.

Society is changing and calls for making all aspects of it more democratic grow louder, as it should. One part of this is social media (although there are many downsides to this platform as well). Social media has become a very prevalent part of our society, especially for young people. Her strategic use of the platform is smart and builds on the innovations of the Obama and Sanders campaigns. If you are not following her on Instagram, then you are truly missing out. The voters sent her to Washington and now she is bringing everyone along for the ride. Her posts narrating congressional freshman orientation will put a smile on your face and are very useful in lifting the mysterious veil over Congress. Even before heading to Washington she regularly live-streamed herself cooking dinners at home while discussing politics with her followers.

IMG_1779
Via Twitter @Envisioned_One

These Instagram live-streams are comparable to the FDR fireside chats during his presidency in the 30s and 40s. Roosevelt knew that accessibility was important to the general public, and Ocasio-Cortez knows this as well. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez brought us along with her as she navigated her first week of orientation, fangirling her meetings with other members of Congress. The videos of her discovering underground hallways in the capital building and the Congressional train remind you of an excited kid starting at a new school.

Instagram
Instagram
Instagram

But don’t let this excitement fool you, Alexandria is an articulate and gifted fighter. Recently she revealed that a panel for congressional orientation was packed with corporate CEO’s and lobbyists, but conveniently excluded labor and activist representation.

IMG_2181

Via Twitter @Envisioned_One

How often do our elected officials reveal how intertwined and compromised our politicians are to business interests? Many times, candidates run on a platform of change and populism only to abandon those promises once elected. Ocasio-Cortez appears to be sticking to her guns. What she is doing is very important. She is lifting the veil on a mysterious institution clouded in mistrust and showing ordinary people that Congress and politics is not just for rich old white men but can and should be for anybody. I can’t wait to see what she does with her new-found power and platform. I see a long and exciting career ahead of her, even living in a certain famous house one day.

Dale Seufert-Navarro

Are you there America? It’s me, Democracy.

Dale Seufert-NavarroLeave a comment
5c062fc65b135.image
Protests outside of Wisconsin Legislature – Omaha World-Herald

The Republican party has truly become an anti-democratic political party that increasingly relies on underhanded tricks and deceit. From voter suppression to political gerrymandering, the party has created a situation in which they continue to control state legislatures while receiving less votes statewide. Election after election Republicans lose more of the popular vote. As the GOP has failed to win voters over with ideas, they have resorted to outright cheating. While all political parties play games, Democrats included, the blatant power grabs by Republican controlled state legislatures are unprecedented.

This past November the Republican Incumbent governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, lost his bid for a third term to Democrat Tony Evers. Next door in Michigan, Democrat Gretchen Whitmer will be replacing the term limited Republican Rick Snyder. The GOP-led legislatures of both states are quickly going to extreme lengths to weaken the powers of the two incoming governors.

Wisconsin and Michigan Republicans are taking a page right out of North Carolina’s playbook. In 2016 the North Carolina state legislature attempted to strip the governor-elect, Roy Cooper of many of his executive powers. Now Wisconsin and Michigan Republicans are aiming to do the same thing.

Due to a heavily gerrymandered political map, the Wisconsin State Assembly will remain under Republican control even though they only received 46 percent of the overall popular vote and lost every major state-wide office in the 2018 midterms. Now, in what is being called a legislative coup, the Republicans are trying to shift power to the themselves while stripping power from the incoming Governor, Tony Evers, and Attorney General, Josh Kaul. Lawmakers are aiming to essentially neuter the Attorney General by requiring legislative approval for decisions usually up to the discretion of the state’s top lawyer. One key component of the campaign, Kaul and Ever’s promise to withdraw the state from a lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act, will now be prevented from happening. The bill would also allow the legislature to hire its own private lawyers to defend state laws that the Attorney General does not wish to defend. This is very problematic because a private law firm, hired by lawmakers, will not have the same interests and accountability that an elected Attorney General is supposed to have. The state legislature also wants to prevent Evers from disbanding an economic agency that has long been seen as a way to funnel taxpayer funds to large corporations with no real value to state interests. Evers campaigned on eliminating the agency. In more voter suppression efforts, the bill cuts early voting from six weeks to two weeks. The Republican majority remains unabashed by public protests. The state House Speaker even stated, “We are going to have a very liberal governor who is going to enact policies that are in direct contrast to what many of us believe in.” This is not how elections and democracy work. The people of Wisconsin voted, and clearly the state legislature is trying to subvert the will of the people.

In Michigan, Democrats won contests for the Governor, Attorney General, and Secretary of State. The GOP-led state legislature there is also trying to restrict the powers of the newly elected officials. Jocelyn Benson, the Secretary of State-elect, ran on election and campaign transparency and now lawmakers are trying to take her power of overseeing campaign finance law and shifting it to a commission controlled by the state legislature. Similar to the Wisconsin bill, Michigan Republicans want to weaken the Attorney General’s office by giving lawmakers the ability to intervene in any stage of a legal battle over passed laws. As the state’s top lawyer, this right is granted to the Attorney General. The most appalling part about the actions of Michigan Republicans is their efforts to reverse or scale back ballot initiatives designed to help working class people. Before the election, citizens gathered enough signatures to add initiatives on minimum wage and paid sick time to the ballot. Supporters dropped the initiatives after the legislature agreed to pass bills first. Now Republicans are trying to scale those back. An amendment to the minimum wage bill pushes the timeline for increasing the minimum wage to $12 from 2022 to 2030, and no longer links the minimum wage increases to inflation. Another amendment changes the paid sick time. The old bill allotted an hour of sick time for every 30 hours of work, capped at 72 hours. The new bill changes to an hour of time for every 40 hours, capped at 36 hours. The goal of the legislature is to get all of the changes passed and signed by outgoing governor Snyder, so the new incoming governor won’t be able to veto the new bills.

Back in North Carolina, Republicans once again lost the popular vote but was able to hold on to majorities in the state legislature. Thankfully, the GOPs voting suppression efforts didn’t completely succeed. Republicans lost seats and will no longer hold a ‘supermajority’, preventing them from overriding a veto from Governor Cooper. For all of the GOPs unsubstantiated claims about voter fraud, it is ironic that Republicans are wrapped up in a allegations of election fraud. The details about North Carolinas 9th congressional district remain unclear, but all fingers seem to point to a coordinated effort to collect absentee ballots in such a way to favor the Republican candidate, Mark Harris. What is known is that a large number of absentee ballots from two counties were requested, but not all of the ballots were returned. It seems that many of these ballots were collected by an operative paid by the Harris campaign. Investigations are underway, and the state board took an unprecedented move of not certifying the election. Now it looks likely that a new election will be held.

The assault on American democracy is real and intensifying. While there are many factors and groups contributing to this threat, the Republican party has completely thrown its support behind efforts to restrict voting and any real democratic input from the American people. The American people will have to be vigilant and contiue to push back.

Dale Seufert-Navarro

Historical Amnesia and George H.W. Bush

Dale Seufert-NavarroLeave a comment
bush
George H.W. Bush – POLITICO

George H.W. Bush was a member of the House of Representatives, a United States Ambassador to the UN, director of the CIA, Vice President under Ronald Reagan, and finally the 41st President of the United States from 1989-1993. On November 30th Bush died at the age of 94. Since his death the media has showered the former president with adoration and praise, painting a very favorable picture of his time in the White House while glossing over the more inconvenient aspects. Columnists have said the late president represented civility and dignity. During his campaign and presidency Bush Sr called for a ‘kinder, gentler America’, but did his actions reflect this belief.

While there were some good things to come out of the Bush presidency — presiding over the end of the Cold War, standing up to the NRA, and signing the Americans with Disabilities Act — there are many problematic details about the first Bush’s term in office. Bush Sr was one of the most important men in modern history and to only focus on the positive parts of his legacy while ignoring the negative parts is dishonest and disingenuous.

As a gay man, the way Bush dealt with the AIDS crisis in the early 90s was disgraceful. The HIV/AIDS virus was discovered in 1981 but it took Ronald Reagan almost 4 years, not until the year 1985, to even utter the word AIDS in public. When Bush took office in 1989 he continued this policy of inaction and indifference. Although Bush signed the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act, his administration lacked urgency. As thousands continued to die, and activists demanded funding and treatment, Bush’s main response was of ‘personal responsibility’. LGBTQ activists famously sprinkled the ashes of fallen loved ones on the lawn of the White House in an effort to call attention to the epidemic.

George Bush Sr devastated Iraq in the Gulf War based on half-truths and lies and helped to ensure that American military intervention would be the default foreign policy for decades to come. At the time, Bush claimed the U.S. had no choice but to use force because Saddam Hussein had invaded Kuwait. Yes, the invasion of Kuwait violated international law, but many commentators now believe that the U.S., through its ambassador to Iraq, essentially gave Hussein the green light to invade Kuwait in order to have an excuse to invade Iraq. The U.S. bombed the Amiriyah Shelter, knowing full well that the site was being used for civilians, killing over 400 innocent lives. The Iraqi civilian infrastructure was devastated, also violating international law. Electrical power stations and food plants were bombed in an effort to cripple the country’s infrastructure in order to make Iraq dependent on international assistance after the war. Post-war sanctions further devastated the country. The administration also said that Saddam was preparing to invade Saudi Arabia with troops being deployed at the border. This turned out to be a lie as well. A reporter, at the time, purchased commercial satellite data and saw that in fact there were no troops at the Saudi border. Like his son to come, the administration used lies and misinformation to lead us into a war that cost the U.S. and Iraqi countless lives.

Many in the media have neglected to point out that Bush was criticized for helping to cover up potential crimes involving the Iran-Contra during the Reagan Era. During Ronald Reagan’s presidency the administration facilitated arms sales to Iran, in clear violation of an arms embargo, in order to raise money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua. At the time the Contras, favored by Reagan and the U.S. government, were in a struggle against the ruling Sandinista party. Right before the trial of Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, Bush issued pardons to him and many other individuals involved with the incident. The president also refused to cooperate with the investigation in which he was directly involved as Ronald Raegan’s Vice President. This seems all too familiar to the current situation with Trump and Robert Mueller.

Upon taking office Bush continued to ramp up the ‘War on Drugs’, which has had clear racial implications. During one of his first Oval Office press conferences, Bush displayed a bag of crack cocaine that he said was sold and confiscated right across the street from the White House. Bush wanted to show the American people that the crack epidemic was rampant in every corner of American society, but this was also a charade. The man that sold the crack cocaine to undercover DEA agents was in fact lured to the spot near the White House by agents in order to mislead the nation. The stunt was used by the administration to call for, in his words, more prisons, jails, and prosecutors. This was just the beginning of what was to become an incarceration nation, with the U.S. imprisoning more people than any other developed nation.

For all the talk of Bush being a civil and decent human being that wanted a ‘gentler and kinder’ America, journalists forget about the extremely racist Willie Horton ad during his 1988 presidential campaign. Even many Republican operatives at the time said that it went too far. The ad described a convicted rapist that was allowed a weekend furlough pass. While out he raped a young woman and killed her boyfriend. Their aim was to tie the incident to the Democratic candidate and stoke racial fear. Lee Atwater famously said at the time, “We’re going to talk about Willie Horton so much that people are going to think he’s Michael Dukakis’s running mate”. How is this not similar to the blatantly racist ad that the Trump administration put out before the 2018 midterm election about the traveling migrant caravan from Central America?

Let us also not forget that President bush sent troops into Panama to issue an arrest warrant for its leader, Manuel Noriega. The arrest warrant was for drug trafficking charges. Noriega was an ally to the U.S. and was even on the CIA payroll. We must remember that George H.W. Bush was once the director of the CIA, and during this period the U.S. government, through the CIA, frequently meddled in Central American affairs. Over 20,000 troops were deployed into the small Central American country, killing over 3,000 Panamanians. The move was seen by most of the international community as an illegal invasion of a sovereign country. The invasion of Panama was one of the first uses of military force after the end of the Cold War, and helped to introduce the U.S. policy of using force to ‘protect’ democracy around the world.

When any life is lost it always a somber time, especially for family and people close to the person lost, but death does not absolve a person of his or her sins. We must always be critical of our leaders and their legacies, no matter who they may be? The positive and the negative must be brought into the light. Introspection is a way to learn from our collective past. Journalists have a duty and responsibility to be critical of our leaders and current events, not just a mouthpiece for the government or the powerful. Patriotism does not mean that one must never criticize or question. Too often people use the threat of anti-patriotism or being anti-American has a way to crush dissent and debate. It is not blindly accepting the words and motives of our leaders. Instead, true patriotism is aspiring for your country to be better, holding it accountable to the ideals of freedom, respect, and liberty. We must never bow down to this threat and always strive to surpass even our own expectations. When we are gone, how will the next generation look back and judge our decisions?

Dale Seufert-Navarro

New Majority, New Priorities

Dale Seufert-NavarroLeave a comment
1543618755346
Incoming 116th House of Reps – Axios

In the 2010 midterm election, Democrats saw the highest loss of a party in a House midterm election since 1938. Republicans gained 63 seats that night. For 8 long years Republicans have controlled the House of Representatives, frustrating Democrats and progressives. On November 6, 2018 that finally changed. Democrats picked up at least 40 seats, regaining control of the House. After being locked out of every seat of power in Washington since the 2016 election, Democrats have the opportunity to legislate and put forth an agenda to the American people. The question now becomes what will the Democrats do with this new-found power? What should the priorities of the 116th congress be in January? Many people now hope that a Democratically controlled House will finally be a check on scandal ridden administration and a corrupt president. While congress should definitely investigate apparent corruption and hold the president accountable for any crimes that are revealed, it should not be the primary focus. The new Majority must not forget that their primary job in Washington is to govern and legislate.

The most pressing issue of our time is the threat of Climate Change. Earlier this year the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a committee convened by the United Nations, issued a report describing a world with worsening droughts and food shortages, wildfires, animal extinctions, and mass die-offs of coral reefs as soon as 2040. This date is far sooner than previously believed. In dealing with this threat, the report called for transforming the world economy at a rate and scale that has “no documented historical precedent.” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez joined Climate Action activists in Nancy Pelosi’s office to draw attention to the issue. Many other freshman members of congress have called for legislation, a Green New Deal, to combat Climate Change. The legislation would create a House select committee to come up with a definitive plan to move the U.S. economy towards 100% renewable energy and push lawmakers to stop taking political contributions from fossil fuel companies.

Campaign finance reform and voting rights should be at the top of a list of priorities of the new congress. Elections in this country are bought and sold to the highest bidder, with everyday citizens pushed out of the political discussion. The obscene amount of money pouring into our political system is having a corrupting effect. Congress should work towards a constitutional amendment reversing the disastrous effects of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision. The U.S. should start moving towards publicly funded elections in order to put all citizens on an equal playing field in our democracy. Instead of making it harder for people to vote, voting rights should be strengthened. The oversight and process of voting should be nationalized, instead of each state setting its own rules. The constitution gives congress broad authority over congressional elections. Automatic voter registration should immediately be instituted. Election day should be a national holiday with legislated opportunities for everyone to vote. Individuals that have committed crimes but have paid their debt to society should have their voting rights restored.

For additional input I implored opinions from Michelle Durney-Croniser, a progressive living in Seattle, Washington,

With the upcoming shift of power in congress there’s debate about what Democrats in congress should focus on in the coming year. Many people see this as a chance to finally check the president and his administration after having our hands tied for two years. Many more are thinking that we can finally go full steam ahead to get answers about what happened between the president, his campaign staff, and Russian leaders during the campaign. Then there’s the idea of worrying less about investigations and Russia, and more about moving important policy proposals forward. In my humble, non-expert opinion, no matter how the democratic controlled congress approaches the next two years, there will be political ramifications that will be tough to predict given that the outcome of the last presidential election defied all expectations. It is also essential to keep in mind that we need to be able to reach across the aisle if we are going to get anything done. Also, I’m tired of playing nice. It’s time to be sharks. I must restate, this is my humble opinion…

Let me start by highlighting policies I think we need to focus on over the course of the next two years and then explain why I think we need to head in this very specific direction. Gun violence is in the very front of my mind. While I understand that for many, this might seem like a secondary topic to things like corruption and reforming the justice system, we see and hear about gun violence on a daily basis. Many of us have been impacted or have had a close call. Furthermore, this is important to young voters and teenagers who will be of voting age by the next election. Not only do we need to focus on reducing gun violence so that we as Americans can feel safe at work, home, schools, movie theaters, church, concerts, and in hospitals, but we also need to make sure that American children don’t grow up in an era in which they ask themselves if today is the day, or if it’s their turn. Let me speak about the political ramifications of addressing gun violence. For the sake of politics alone, we need to address this issue. If we leave out one of the issues that is most directly impacting young and new voters before the next election, then we automatically cut our chances of winning back the White House. Democrats in congress should propose more comprehensive background checks, close loopholes in gun show purchases, and propose policies that allow for the removal of guns from individuals who are considered high risk due to mental health or relationship violence and draft those proposals in a way that will elicit bi-partisan support. To me, it’s really that simple. Remember the turnout of the March for our Lives protest in D.C. and around the country? They care. Young people are paying attention and know how to connect with each other to build a coalition. Do we want them to be civically active in future elections and vote for candidates who are fighting to end gun violence? Yes, we do. Also, republicans know that young voters care about this issue which increases the likelihood that some will attempt to cooperate when presented with proposed legislation.

The next issue I think we need to address is corruption. Maybe you’re confused about why I would think this is such an important issue, but may I point you to the person who makes this point most obvious to me, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Another person we cannot forget is Bernie Sanders. Why did we love him so much until the DNC took him out of play? He represented honesty in politics and was the only true representation of “by the people, for the people.” If we want people to believe that their vote matters, we need voices like Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders, and Beto O’Rourke. In the midterms, across this country, we elected people who ran honest grassroots campaigns. Yes, we also elected establishment politicians who received corporate money, but there’s a trend and if we ignore it we’ll regret it. This country is truly being run by the wealthiest and the rest of us are left to fight over scraps.

Other issues that it’s time to tackle include criminal justice reform, health care coverage for all, raising wages for all, infrastructure investment, renewable energy, and tax reform for the people. Our government is getting out of control and Democrats, as a party, have played nice for too long. It’s time to get down to business. We can be as ruthless as the GOP has been since Reagan was in office. Being nice has gotten us into this big mess and being nasty is the only way to get out. Use our system to back the GOP into a corner so that they have to play along, or they die as a party. Use the nuclear option. Stack federal courts in our favor. Educate the young so that they can rise up and continue to fight for the people of this country. 

Now, do we go after the white house for Russian interference and collusion? Absolutely. But, if it looks at all like that is all we’re focused on, we’re setting ourselves up for a big loss in 2020. We can’t afford to take that risk. We have to think about the next presidential election. We have to get things done. The GOP and specifically 45, will be breathing down our necks and exposing every failure for the next two years. It will be part of their campaign messages. What’s your opinion on this matter? I’d like to know what you think is most important right now. What did I miss or get completely wrong?  – Michelle Durney-Croniser

Progressives have been waiting for this opportunity since the House or Representatives was lost in the 2010 elections. There is practically a laundry list of things that Democrats need to do with their newfound power, and they should do them all. Yes, the Senate is still controlled by the GOP and yes, the White House is controlled by an incompetent aspiring dictator, but this is the time to force the Republicans hands. If they are going to oppose key reforms and legislation that will help American families, then force them to vote against them. Throw everything at them and put them on the record of selling out the American people. When 2020 rolls around the Democrats will have the upper hand and the higher ground. These votes will be what the political adds in 2020 will be all about. The ads will practically write themselves. The two years between now and 2020 are crucial. Will Democrats use this moment and fight for working families and the working poor or squander a chance at real change?

Dale Seufert-Navarro

Contributor: Michelle Durney-Croniser

(UPDATE: It has been reported that the first bill introduced by the new Congress, H.R. 1, will have sweeping reforms to campaign finance, elections, and voting)

 

 

 

Amazon… Can we talk?

Dale Seufert-Navarro1 Comment
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos AFP : Getty
Jeff Bezos, Amazon CEO Fortune 

With online shopping sales quickly outpacing brick and mortar sales, one online retailer stands above all the rest. As Amazon’s sales skyrocket so does their reach and influence. Amazon was founded by Jeff Bezos in 1994, and it quickly became a giant in the online shopping market. In 2017 Amazon brought in almost $180 billion dollars in sales, with Jeff Bezos’ net worth topping $100 billion. As its sales grew, so did criticisms about its business practices and its effects on local economies. Working conditions of its warehouse workers, potential monopoly accusations, and its effects on local housing markets have been the most frequent criticisms against the company. As the U.S. is currently in the midst of an affordable housing crisis, large cities all over the country are seeing a spike in homelessness and overpriced housing options. From San Francisco to New York city, gentrified neighborhoods and skyrocketing rents are outpricing residents, pushing them out of their own cities. As news is surfacing about Amazons new headquarters in Virginia and New York many people are wondering what will happen to the area in which these facilities will be built, especially since these two areas are already expensive at the moment.

For some insight into the potential effects of these new Amazon headquarters we can look to Seattle, Washington which has had an Amazon headquarters since 2007. A former classmate of mine, Shenetta Sims, has been living in the Seattle area since 2015.

It has now been some time since Amazon announced that its secondary headquarters will officially be split between Long Island, New York and Alexandria, Virginia putting home buyers, apartment owners, and businesses in a flurry to capitalize on the impending commercial boom. Virginia Tech has already announced a new innovation campus to offer a hub of talent to choose from. Amazon employees are rushing to buy homes in both cities (some before the official announcements), and some Metro stations are already in the process of obtaining facelifts to support this new influx of people. Things seem to be looking up for both cities in anticipation of the move, but some are rightly concerned as to what this could mean for the infrastructure of their respective cities. In order to understand the possible impacts of a behemoth company like Amazon, we only have to study Seattle’s rise in the past ten years from its reputation as a musically inclined fishing hotspot to a technological powerhouse. 

Amazon announced Seattle as its headquarters in 2007 during which time the city was home to nearly 600,000 residents and home sale prices hovered around a median of $390,000. It’s worth mentioning that while Microsoft already had an office about 20 miles away in Redmond and Google would also establish an office in 2009, 13 miles away in Kirkland, Amazon was the first major technologically based company to move centrally into Seattle. Since then the city has experienced a growth explosion that has yielded new restaurants and entertainment that people flock from all over the world to enjoy. This is reflected in tourism rates which have risen around 5% annually between 2010 and 2016 bringing billions in city revenue. It’s a great time to live in Seattle…if you earn well over the average income of $82,000 per household. Many of the new experiences coming to Seattle are cost prohibitive. Seattle’s median home sale prices have skyrocketed to a peak of $720,000 in January of 2018, rent prices have increased by 62%, and homelessness among people living without any sort of adequate shelter has more than doubled. The result is that many Seattleites who once called the city home are pushed farther into the suburbs and surrounding cities which are in turn experiencing their own cost of living increases and loss of diversity. The city of Seattle, realizing that they were facing a crises on their hands, did attempt to remedy this situation by passing a head tax bill which would charge any business grossing more than $20 million a year to pay a tax of $275 per Seattle employee which would then go towards helping combat the homeless and housing the problems the city was facing due to the business influx. However major corporations in the city protested by hiring a consulting firm with ties to President Trump’s campaign to gather signatures in protest. Amazon in particular shut down all construction in Seattle forcing the city to repeal the tax less than a month later.  This is leaving us with a city that is struggling to maintain its identity as it’s pushed closer and closer to something akin to San Francisco.

With these effects in mind, it is understandable to view the new announcement with trepidation if you are someone living in Alexandria or Long Island City. Amazon, like many other large-scale corporations, does have a history of less than ideal business practices and treatment of workers which both cities should anticipate and address as the move occurs. However, as someone who has moved to Seattle from Virginia, I believe that the experience will be much more positive in the new cities. Not only do they have what is essentially a play book of Amazon’s practices going back ten years, but the cities themselves are established in handling large scale industry that is much more diversified than what we have in Seattle. Infrastructure is already in place to handle the mass amount of people moving around two of the nation’s biggest cities, and the current transient nature of Seattle’s population would be nothing new to the areas. In addition, the main tech industry hubs have been largely centered on the West Coast until now, creating a specific culture that will be interesting to see with a more East coast influence. In conclusion, I believe that the move will be mostly exciting for the people in the affected areas. But it will be up to these people and their governments to not be blinded by the increase in revenue and to force companies to maintain a standard of doing business in the area that will protect the most vulnerable; something that would be best accomplished by all three cities working together to put pressure on Amazon to do the same.  — Shenetta Sims

While most commentators on the left are critical of Amazon and skeptical of the complete benignity of the company’s intentions there are some conservatives who are also weary of Amazons influence on local communities and the market at large. Patricia Neil is a conservative that lives outside of Boston, Massachusetts and works in the pharmaceutical industry. As a former resident of one of the newly announced Amazon headquarters in Crystal City, Virginia, she also has a good idea about the potential effects of the company’s new headquarters.

Being that Crystal City is a gateway to Washington D.C., it is already densely populated and congested. There are no shortages of job opportunities in the area as well. An Amazon site is going to be a traffic and population nightmare for Northern Virginia, which already has these issues. Since there isn’t an unemployment problem in Northern Virginia a windfall like this would have been more beneficial in other areas of the state or country. Since Northern Virginia is very expensive to live in already I would be very curious to see an impact analysis on the area. The majority of jobs that will be brought to the area will be lower to middle incomes. These people will not be able to afford housing in the area of the headquarters so will have to commute long distances to work. The commuters from the Fredericksburg area, central Virginia, and Maryland will tax the already maxed out highway system and Wilson Bridge.

Apart from the impact on local communities there is a debate to made about the use of subsidies by states when trying to entice corporations to move to a specific area. Any state that is giving subsidies to Amazon or the optics of Amazon even asking for subsidies is somewhat reprehensible given that they are now a $1 trillion company. As a conservative and a capitalist, unfortunately this is capitalism at its worst. The bottom line is when you’re that powerful you have a choice, you can have your power do something good or you can have that power run the table. I think Bezos is letting his influence run the table, otherwise why would he put a distribution center in Northern Virginia and take subsidies from New York. The part that really bothers me about this deal is that you know there was a room full of bean counters figuring out what the earnings per-share would be as a result of building in Northern Virginia and New York with the subsidies versus say going to a more economically depressed area. We’re talking about cents on the dollar for a company of this size. So, for a cents on the dollar impact on your earnings per-share they would rather have that earnings per-share be a couple cents more than put something in a place that could really benefit from it.

At the end of the day we’re talking about cents on the dollar translating into earnings per share and stockholder value. There is no question that Bezos could’ve gone somewhere that would have had a better economic impact on the local community. Honestly as a conservative I’m offended by how Amazon is behaving. I believe Amazons game is a monopoly, and it’s only a matter of time before the federal government steps in, not unlike the government did with Microsoft. Jeff Bezos should take a page out of Bill Gates playbook and learn from the example set forth by the monopoly rulings of Microsoft. — Patricia Neil

While Amazon, and its two-day prime shipping, has helped to foster a world of convenience, there needs to be a larger discussion about its effects on communities and our economic society at large. Do we really want a company as large as Amazon having as much power as it does, with its tentacles reaching far into every aspect of our lives? Is it time for the government to step in and more heavily regulate Amazon? Is Amazon slowly becoming a monopoly? These are hard questions that need to be asked and investigated. The real question is, will we as a society ask these questions before Amazon gains too much power and it is too late?

Dale Seufert-Navarro

Contributors: Shenetta Sims, Patricia Neil