Senate healthcare bill showed lots of heat, but little light

Mitch McConnell

In what has been a tumultuous week in Washington as the U.S. Senate revealed its revised version of the American Health Care Act, passed by the House several weeks earlier, amidst much protest for the cuts in Medicare affecting 24 million Americans, the Senate version differed little than the House, but received swift opposition by many of the nation’s most prestigious organizations: The American Medical Association, The American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association,and the American Hospital Association and Federation of American Hospitals, to name but a few.

With near equanimity, they opposed the nearly $800 million dollar reduction of Medicaid, a program that benefits prenatal women, up to and including the birth of a child, children’s health care, care for the indigent and for many older Americans, both low and middle income, that the bill contained.

The American Hospital Association and Federation of American Hospitals had this to say, “In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the AMA's CEO James Madara wrote, "Medicine has long operated under the precept of Primum non nocere, or 'first, do no harm.' The draft legislation violates that standard on many levels."

"We believe that Congress should be working to increase the number of Americans with access to quality, affordable health insurance instead of pursuing policies that have the opposite effect," Madara continued.

As this blog has noted, these bill proposals by the Trump administration have in actuality been wealth transfer bills, than true health care plans, yet the ruse has worked as a cover for the GOP as they attempt to maintain the appearance of moral purity, and insisted that the Senate version would provide REAL health care that is affordable and by retuning economic power to the states, and subsequently to the people themselves; yet, as we have seen nothing could be further than the truth as the Congressional Budget Office noted with its negative rating on both proposals, which aired on Monday, and found that the bill would leave 22 million more Americans uninsured by 2026 if enacted, noted CNN.

On the day of reckoning, Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell only had five reliable senators in approval as the rest peeled away their votes, under negative public reaction, as protesters across the country, were shown on televised news, in sit-ins, begging lawmakers to reconsider. And, certainly the sight of wheelchair bound activists across the country, in Denver, and in Washington, being arrested by police must have made an impact on their decision.

Now the hue and cry is for a bipartisan effort between the Republicans and the Democrats to act, in concert, something that no one has seen in recent years and that many doubt can happen. And, some far left Dems are urging, in retaliation, that the Dems not even come to the bargaining table, as they were shut out of the Senate deliberations. Yet, seasoned observers note that this helps no one achieve what the nation deserves - true and affordable health care.

As history has shown, those who try are often pilloried as socialist, communists, egoists and worse; as President Lyndon Johnson endured with Medicaid, and as First Lady Hillary Clinton was trashed in 1993, and of course, President Obama got the lion’s share with the Affordable Care Act, getting panned for putting his name on what was essentially a Republican plan, created by Mitt Romney as governor of Massachusetts.

But, a recent Marist poll found only 12 percent of Americans favoring the dead-on- arrival plan, and there are some efforts remaining to try, and try again. One option from the GOP is to retain one of the taxes on the wealthy to help stem the tide of opioid abuse.

Secondly, in a departure from precedent, they are willing to look at offering cheaper plans that are less comprehensive as long as there is one that contains the standards of the ACA, that meets consumer protection standards in the ACA, reported The New York TImes.

This would meet, while it was not in the House version, or even in the initial approach by the Senate, an opportunity to mute critics such as Republican Sen. Bob Corker, of Tennessee, who opposed the cuts, and Sen. Rob Portman.  

Yet, opposition, to even that has come from Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, and Democrat Senator Maggie Hassan who said the money for opioid treatment would be “a drop in the bucket,” with Collins wanting to distinguish between those taxes that increased premiums, versus those that didn’t, an unwelcome comment to those that want to cut deeper, and deeper, like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

it’s important to note that White House Economic Advisor Mick Mulvaney, in one of my earlier analysis said “The White House also needs the money from the repeal to help fund the tax overhaul and the tax code revision. In a sharp reversal from earlier statements from Trump, Mulvaney said that the president said he was going to do tax reform next, now says that has to wait. He said in an interview with Fox Business that if health care doesn’t happen “fast enough, I’ll start the taxes. But, the tax reform and the tax cuts are better if I can do health care first.”

Statements like these make it harder for those like Collins and Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, both with large expanses of rural areas, whose small network of federally funded providers, and many older residents facing a loss of Medicaid, revealing, once again, that this bill is not about health care, and these adjustments are mostly cosmetic adjustments to court opponents.

The rancor in the GOP has also evolved to the point that a super PAC was ready to denounce Sen Dean. Heller, of Nevada, whose vulnerability in 2018, made him low hanging fruit for an attack, but one that was repelled by his colleagues.

If this donnybrook can produce anything meaningful, and helpful, for the country, it remains to be seen, with these secret meetings, shutting out senior lawmakers from the deliberations, such as Collins, and then producing mean retributive measures like the attack on Heller. Can hope spring eternal?

Feds up interest rates for the third time in 6 months

As predicted by most economists, and government observers, the Federal Open Market Committee of the Federal Reserve Board approved on Thursday a rate hike of 25 basis points from 1 percent to 1.5 percent, in a move that Fed Chair Janet Yellen attributed to growing confidence in the U.S. economy. And, an outlook for the GDP of 2.2 percent, far less than the one President Trump has as a target, with his budget proposal.

With many saying that this was on target, it is also expected to offer a bit of a bump to consumer debt in the form of, adjusted rate mortgages, and revolving credit card debt, and home equity loans.

Traditionally, the prime rate will also increase for baseline interest rates, following this rate increase.

The Committee noted in their statement that “Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in May indicates that the labor market has continued to strengthen and that economic activity has been rising moderately so far this year. Job gains have moderated but have been solid, on average, since the beginning of the year, and the unemployment rate has declined. Household spending has picked up in recent months, and business fixed investment has continued to expand. On a 12-month basis, inflation has declined recently and, like the measure excluding food and energy prices, is running somewhat below 2 percent.”

In a prudent, and cautious vein, characteristic under Yellen’s rein,  they felt “In view of realized and expected labor market conditions and inflation, the Committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate to 1 to 1-¼ percent. The stance of monetary policy remains accommodative, thereby supporting some further strengthening in labor market conditions and a sustained return to 2 percent inflation.”

As has been often noted the Fed mandate is to reach the goals of maximum employment and price stability, a feat that in the last few years had proven to be difficult, and Yellen herself has chosen the prudent course. But, the sentiment of the FOMC does represent a slight departure from the traditional notion of an inflation target of 2 percent, they were, in fact, and were willing to look at one that was just below 2 percent; a change that may reflect a nod to an economy that has not always been on a predictable path, even among Keynesians.

Then there is the psychological beliefs of consumers, as Chris Gaffney, the president of EverBank World Markets noted: "You may start to see it weigh on consumer confidence in that they believe interest rates would continue to increase, which would make their [borrowing] more expensive.”

In a view not always held by other, he also said that "If we continue to not see any inflation, we could start to perhaps see it impacting their rate decisions going forward."

The Consumer Price Index was one blot on another wise rosy report, was weaker than expected, and caused some to side with Gaffney that this might be the last raise this year. In short the fault lay with weaker gas prices, and also costs for shelter, clothes and, vehicles. Personal consumption was only at 1.7 percent.

The job growth touted by the FOMC was moderate and added 100,000 jobs, but still reflected low labor force participations, just under 63 percent, and wages at 2.5 percent, hardly a cause for rejoicing, but one that seemed steady enough after the Great Recession,and okay for the Feds, as was the 4.3 percent unemployment.

But, the real news was the spin off of the heavily held balance sheet of market based securities and Treasury bonds, that many in Congress, especially GOP lawmakers objected to. While no deadline, was given, the Feds noted that they would start on a timetable that would begin to unwind, without reinvestment in the securities that they hold.

As Business Insider described it: “To shrink its nearly $5 trillion balance sheet, the Fed plans to gradually allow a fixed amount of the assets it owns to roll off, meaning it won't reinvest them. The Fed amassed bonds after the financial crisis to help keep interest rates low. Initially, up to $6 billion in Treasurys and $4 billion in mortgage-backed securities will be allowed to roll off monthly.

These caps will be raised every three months until they hit $30 billion for Treasurys and $20 billion for mortgage-backed securities. There was no indication of when this process would begin.

Comey testimony reveals credibility and patriotism

In his much anticipated testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, former FBI Director, James Comey, on Thursday, showed that he was a credible and competent patriot that told the truth, unvarnished, and with a folksy, patriotic air that made the most of an unenviable moment in American political history.

The 56 year old Yonkers, NY native gave a detailed testimony, in a mostly unhesitant manner, without notes, and with great candor, the detail of his meetings and dealings with President Donald Trump before his unexpected firing.

The most revelatory questions came early on, as ranking members of the SIC began their questioning. Perhaps the most startling came from Comey, in response to a question from the committee's Democratic co-chair, Sen. Mark Warner, of Virginia, who queried why he had taken the time to write memoranda of the meetings with the president.

The response: “Circumstances, first, I was alone with the President of the United States, or the president-elect, soon to be president. The subject matter I was talking about matters that touch on the FBI's core responsibility, and that relate to the president, president-elect personally, and then the nature of the person. I was honestly concerned he might lie about the nature of our meeting so I thought it important to document. That combination of things I had never experienced before, but had led me to believe I got to write it down and write it down in a very detailed way.”

Just in case anyone was in doubt the former FBI head said that he took notes, with the implication, that due to Trump’s personality, he was deemed to be a liar. Tough and strong words, from a no-nonsense, or, what was known to a previous generation, a “straight shooter.” Or, as women from that same generation would have acknowledged “a man’s man.” And, at 6 feet, 8 inches tall, he looked the part, and far from Trump’s characterization of him as “crazy, a real nut job.”

That set the tone of the testimony, early on, and made even the most somnolent of watchers, wake up and take notice. Perhaps,not since Watergate, has a controversy embracing an American president, been so compelling, to watch.

At issue, also, was that Comey felt that the president was attempting to instigate, rather, “build a personal relationship,” in order to manipulate him into dropping the investigation into former National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn, because it was a “cloud” over his administration, with the words, ”I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

For most listening, or watching, this was political theater at its best, but it also showed a deep level of patriotism, and an understanding of the American political process, and made Comey unassailable in his testimony.

With a total of nine meetings, on the whole, Comey, further elaborated, again when questioned by Warner, on the need to keep the memos. He said, “ I knew there might come a day when I would need a record of what had happened, not just to defend myself, but to defend the FBI and our integrity as an institution and the Independence of our investigative function. That's what made this so difficult is it was a combination of circumstances, subject matter and the particular person.”

With a bit of pressure, perhaps, Trump, at the infamous dinner a deux, in the Green Room of the White House, felt compelled to give the implication, that his job depended on a quid pro quo - maybe by dropping the Flynn investigation, something that confused Comey, “so I'm sitting there thinking wait a minute three times we've already met, you've already asked me to stay or talked about me staying. My common sense, again I could be wrong but my common sense told me what's going on here is, he's looking to get something in exchange for granting my request to stay in the job.”

Taking it one step further and educating those watching, Comey went on to explain, that “The reason that Congress created a 10-year term is so that the director is not feeling as if they're serving at, with political loyalty owed to any particular person. The statue of justice has a blindfolds on. You're not supposed to peek out to see there your patron was pleased with what you're doing. That's why I became FBI director to be in of that position. That's why I was uneasy.”

This does not bode well for Trump and it also says much of his ignorance of the political process and the branches of the government, and how they work, and interact. With a myriad of opportunities for interaction, a president that can’t, or refuses, to grasp the process, suggest that the future is ripe for abuse.

Comey, on several occasions, citing confidentiality, could not comment, in an open forum, but these were genuine responses, showing respect for the FBI, and not simply evasions.

Questioned by Sen, DIanne Feinstein, of California, why he didn’t simply tell the president  that his line of questioning was wrong, he replied, simply, and with true humility, “Maybe if I were stronger, I would have. I was so stunned by the conversation that I just took in. The only thing I could think to say, because I was playing in my mind -- because I could remember every word he said -- I was playing in my mind, what should my response be? That's why I carefully chose the words. Look, I've seen the tweet about tapes. Lordy, I hope there are tapes. I remember saying, “I agree he is a good guy,” as a way of saying, I'm not agreeing with what you asked me to do. Again, maybe other people would be stronger in that circumstance.”

As most would understand, who have lived in Washington, for any length of time this candor is rare, indeed, some would say non-existent.” Even when faced with the decision on what to do when Trump called him to seal the deal, he felt compelled to protect his team, as he noted, “Our primary concern was, we can't infect the investigative team. We don't want the agents and analysts working on this to know the president of the United States has asked, and when it comes from the president, I took it as a direction, to get rid of this investigation because we're not going to follow that request. So we decided, we have to keep it away from our troops.”

Reaction from the White House has been a mixed bag: no tweets from POTUS, an unusual occurrence,(some are saying Ivanka had a hand in this) and Sarah Sanders, a spokesperson, said, defensively, “The President is not a liar.”

Meanwhile the president's attorney, Marc Kasowitz has stated, in a written statement, saying in part, “In attacking Comey's testimony — as Trump surrogates did throughout the day — the ex-director "admitted that he unilaterally and surreptitiously made unauthorized disclosures to the press of privileged communications with the president."

The right-leaning USA Today reported that the president said, “we are under siege,” but “We will come out larger, and better and stronger than ever.”

If there is any damage to the White House, from implosion, then the Comey statements tell us, once again, that we need to fear, as a nation, the things from within rather than without.

Unwelcome homecoming for Trump with low polls

When President Donald Trump returns home to America, he may well wish that he had stayed abroad as even these “goodwill” trips, that other presidents have taken, have not resulted in favorable ratings. In, fact a recent Gallup Poll revealed that he has a job approval rating of only 39 percent, not far from his average in the previous two weeks. Only 56 percent of those polled approve of his presidency.

While the tanked ratings have much to do with his agenda, one driven by campaign promises, except cutting Medicaid, which he said that he would not do, his legislative agenda, mostly in a budget proposal has been focused on wealth transfer from the low-income to the the working poor to the very wealthy. He has included himself as he purposes to drop a longheld tax plan that would allow him to pay even less taxes; which he bragged about during the campaign.

Add to that pile, a House vote that would approve of taking health care benefits from at least 24 million Americans, has not done his reputation much good, and as the trend grows to include such draconian cuts to traditional programs such as SNAP, previously known as food stamps, and children’s health programs, the sky above the White House grows darker.

Trump’s travel ban is also once again, stuck in appeals, despite modifications to it that deleted references that seemed to give preferential treatment to Christians, over Muslims, and those who held valid visas and green cards.

The Chicago Sun-Times reported that “The Richmond, Virginia-based 4th Circuit is the first appeals court to rule on the revised travel ban unveiled in March. Trump’s administration had hoped it would avoid the legal problems that the first version from January encountered. A second appeals court, the 9th U.S. Circuit based in San Francisco, is also weighing the revised travel ban after a federal judge in Hawaii blocked it.”

As usual, the president’s late night tweets, and his unbridled tongue, have held his agenda hostage to the checks and balances provided by the Constitution. And while the Supreme Court would likely hear the case if asked, (as they most always do when a lower court strikes down a federal law or presidential directive), “a central question in the case before the 4th Circuit was whether courts should consider Trump’s public statements about wanting to bar Muslims from entering the country as evidence that the policy was primarily motivated by the religion.”

  

Hovering in the background is the investigation into the alleged communications both before his inauguration, and afterwards with the Russians, the most notorious being a closed door meeting with them, that was barred to the American press. Also, in that meeting Trump revealed classified information, according to a Washington Post blog, that was denied by the White House.

Then he revealed classified information from the British government in the aftermath of the Manchester bombing, resulting in a tart admonishment from their prime minister, Theresa May.

With accusations that the president obstructed justice by asking former FBI head, James Comey, to abandon the investigation of former National Security head Mike Flynn, in a meeting where he asked both Vice-President Pence, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, to leave, have prompted serious discussions about impeachment. But, most observers feel that with the GOP in power after a nearly decade long absence, that their consent is nil.

Presidential families have always held some oddities, from a perennially unemployed brother in law, to old school chums, like LeMoyne Billings, of JFK’s, and perpetual house guest, so that Mrs. Kennedy complained to the White House chief usher, “Oh, Mr. West, he’s been a house guest of mine ever since I’ve been married!”

But perhaps no president has had a son-in-law that has been subject to an FBI investigation, which has Jared Kushner, under investigation, for proposing to the Russians, before the election, last December, to use their secure line of communications, to the Russian Ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, who, himself, was itchy about granting access, and risking the line’s security, to an American, reported The Washington Post.

The risk would have also been great for Kushner, and Trump, if discovered by our intelligence; but, Kushner, ever the neophyte, seems to not have known, or perhaps not even cared.

These pitfalls, some say landmines, that the Trump campaign team, and administration officials have stepped on, is precedent shattering, and the admixture of power and ignorance, from within, have exposed the country to greater hazards, than from without.

Chicagoans brace for more violence with warm weather

In his recent visit to Chicago, former president Barack Obama held a meeting at the South Shore Cultural Center, along with his wife Michelle, to discuss plans for his presidential library, and his vision for that space. Included in his remarks, were some unexpected, and even unbridled comments about problems facing the city.  Leading them, was the increasing violence that has pockmarked the city’s reputation. As Obama remarked, “if you ask a lot of people outside of Chicago about Chicago, what’s the first thing they talk about? They talk about the violence.”

So far the city has exceeded the 762 homicides from last year, with over 1,000 people shot, and it seems well on its way to pass its two decade record. With the approach of summer, Chicago is poised for further increases with increasingly warmer temperatures. The link between hot weather, and crime, supported by scientific evidence, already has some residents fearful.

This past weekend, the city saw 18 people shot as the mercury rose, and fall.

Severe heat increases crime, according to psychologist Lance Workman at the University of Glamorgan (UK) who has established a link between hot weather and the levels of serotonin – a brain chemical – that is released, with a side-effect that can heighten aggression.

“‘Violent crime and riots increase as temperatures rise,’ he emphasized, and ‘“The majority of riots in the USA occur when the temperature increases to between 27C and 32 C (81 to 90 Fahrenheit). When the temperature goes over 32C, however, riots level off and begin to fall because people become so hot they can't be bothered."

While police have effectively kept crime away from the downtown areas, the tourists, and the predominantly white North side, the near daily media coverage of blacks shooting other blacks (albeit low-income blacks) is a near daily occurrence, especially in some neighborhoods, such as Englewood. The increased violence has also exacerbated racial tensions in a city with a long history of racial segregation. And, it has  fueled suspicion towards blacks from white visitors, even middle class blacks, as they make their daily commute to work, or school.

That commute has also become fraught with tension, as Chicago’s public transportation system, especially the Red Line subway, has become rife with robberies, some even in broad daylight, and others, in early evenings, with roaming gangs stealing, often under gun point, wallets, purses, and cell phones. Chicago Transit Authority officials, say that video surveillance cameras can help apprehend perpetrators, but most get away.

A local community newspaper features a police blotter detailing the crimes, and most offenders are not apprehended. Activists, such as Eric Russell, have suggested the use of Guardian Angels style monitors, as well as dedicated text numbers for riders to report crimes, and audio announcements that the trains are being monitored. Yet, to appear (as in London) are plainclothes police, riding the trains.

Seemingly, most of the attention is given, by CTA, and Chicago police, to the homeless who sleep on the trains, often lacking the money to pay another, required, fare at each end of the Red line.

Last year there was a focus on cheaters who jumped the turnstile, as CTA officials felt that there was linkage between those that did so, and system violence. This year that seems to not be a tactic.

Adding to the racially charged atmosphere are the divisions from the 2016 elections, and the much publicized capture, and torture, of a young white male by four black teenagers, who yelled, “Fuck Trump,” and “Fuck white people, as they slashed his clothes, and other indignities. As a consequence the city is on edge, as headlines blare the latest violent sprees.

Sup. Eddie Johnson

Gangs and guns are prevalent in equal measure, and ways to prevent both have been on the forefront of police concern. There have been intervention methods, by police, used to track social media bragging, and provocation, to proposed legislation to thwart, or at least contain their violence, which can spill into the streets, killing innocent bystanders. Often the headlines are full of stories where toddlers, or school age children, become drive by casualties.

A recent case had two police officers shot as they ran a covert operation, but instead were shot by a gang member who may or may not have thought they were rival gang members. According to the Chicago Tribune, it was “unclear what the shooter knew that the unmarked, covert van carried officers or if he thought that they were rival gang members.”

The suspects were reputed to be members of the La Raza street gang, one of four Hispanic gangs believed to he responsible for about three dozen shootings tied to semi-automatic rifles,” in a West side neighborhood, according to reports.

Adding to the threats to quality of life in that Back of the Yards neighborhoods is an increasing use of rifles, “styled after AR-15s and AK-47s . . . a menacing new development in the gang fights,” and they also noted, “a menacing new development in the gang fights.”

As The Chicago Sun-Times reported: “Further antagonizing police challenges are carjackings, near downtown areas, and in some neighborhoods. Whether it’s a Bears wide receiver’s Maserati or the 2006 BMW heisted in an incident that led to a man being shot early Tuesday, carjackings are making headlines around downtown Chicago and on the West and North sides.

City crime statistics show their numbers have been on the rise: Vehicular hijackings in Chicago nearly doubled between 2015 and 2016 and are occurring with the same frequency this year.

Chicago Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said the uptick “appears to be a pattern between Area Central and Area North involving juveniles and targeting higher-end vehicles.”

Efforts in March, of this year, by CPD superintendent, Eddie Johnson, to push a bill through the state legislature to curb guns was caught in the ongoing donnybrook between state Democrats and Republicans, who led by Gov. Bruce Rauner, opposed the bill, saying that it was too soft on crime.

Regional differences between city and suburb, but also downstate, in more rural areas, (where hunting is prevalent), have differing opinions regarding gun control, made the bill, which emerged from committee by one vote, dead on arrival in the Illinois Senate.

Drug usage has vastly increased in the surrounding suburbs with heroin, leading as the drug of choice, even among affluent families, and many lawmakers demurred, so as not to be soft on the offenders, or the dealers.

Mayor Emanuel

 “The proposal would increase the sentencing guidelines for judges deciding punishment for repeat gun felons. Instead of a range of three to 14 years, judges would hand out sentences in the range of seven to 14 years. If judges wanted to depart from that guideline, they would have to explain why,” reported the Chicago Tribune.

Race of course entered the picture, and while attempts to limit low level criminals from the jails, rehabilitations is still sought by many, including Sen. Patricia Van Pelt, who claimed, that “more arrests is just going to cost us more money.”

Sen. Don Harmon noted that,  “Almost 900 black and brown men were killed with guns last year. If there were 900 heroin overdoses in DuPage County, we'd be moving heaven and earth to deal with it, and we sit on our hands while kids are getting shot.”

Running along like an old-school television crawl, under the banner of crime prevention, is the tension between CPD and that of the black community, which earned national headlines with the shooting of an unarmed black teenager, named Laquan McDonald, created the tipping point between effective, and lawful, policing and what others have called deadly racial profiling.

The delayed release of police video, from the incident, ensnared Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and the State’s Attorney Office, whose previous head Anita Alvarez, seemed to be in a political blockage as Emanuel, allegedly had the tape held from public scrutiny, as he faced an unexpected challenge from former Cook County Board member, Jesus “Chuy” Garcia.

After that, and repeated revelations of police brutality, going back to the days of Cmdr. John Burge, who was convicted of torturing black prisoners, guilty, or innocent, the issue of police brutality reached a fever pitch.

With charges of racism, many called for Emanuel to resign, which he did not do, but did manage to win, albeit shaken, after a runoff election,a historic first for Chicago. Since then there has been a Department of Justice investigation, under the Obama administration, in its outgoing days, that had, then Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, issuing a scathing report, that included among other charges, pervasive racism.

Reaction form CPD and the Fraternal Order of Police, was wholly negative, and was labelled as a political untruth, or even “crap, and that police could not do their jobs, with increased regulations and policy changes, mandated reports, and videos.In fact, many police and their supporters trashing the findings.

Increased satisfaction led the Fraternal Order of Police to vote out Dean Angelo, as head, and put Kevin Graham, in his place. Graham, outspoken in his opposition to reform, and the DOJ report, had the Tribune reporting, “Graham has slammed the media for allegedly lying about police misconduct claims and applauded [Jeff] Sessions' move to review the federal government's reform agreements with local police agencies. He also said he disagreed with Emanuel and Supt. Eddie Johnson's pledges to continue pursuing reform.”

“Sessions recognizes that the police are generally doing a good job and must be allowed to continue to do so. We think this decision is a step in the right direction to restoring law and order and diminishing violent crime in the city,” he continued.

Jeff Sessions, the new US Attorney General has vowed that he will not use a consent decree to enforce the findings and police have gone into retrenchment mode against all suggestions, otherwise, for improvement.

Nearly five years ago, for my now defunct Examiner column, I spoke with Dr. Dennis Rosenbaum, professor of criminology, law and justice at the University of Illinois at Chicago, who has done research on anti-gang and anti-violence strategies in Chicago, and more than a dozen cities across the nation. He emphasized what he thinks is a key role for prevention: putting police in the community so that they get a feel for the community, and most importantly to know the residents, identify the repeat offenders, and “the people [that are supportive] of police efforts.”

This idea was compromised by a shortage of police, under the Richard M. Daley administration, with a “cost savings” formula for greater overtime, one that proved to be self-defeating. There has been increased recruiting, by Emanuel, but observers feel that it will take years before any positive effect can be seen by the new officers, due to lack of experience.

In a recent North Side meeting with the newly created Community Policing Advisory Panel, residents asked for “ a change in the “police culture”, and “greater accessibility.” Also, asked for were police from “every ethnic group,” with preference to working in their own neighborhoods.

Heard then, and previously, were “more foot patrols, bike patrols, and more personal contact. We want friendly police community interaction.”

Present at that meeting was Johnson, but who said little beyond, “the rest of the country is looking at Chicago right now.” One of those, looking, is President Trump who has frequently used the city as an example of what’s gone wrong with America’s largest cities.

Many academics and lawmakers have stated that the root causes of the violence in the black neighborhoods are economic disinvestment and opportunities for employment. Illinois has the highest black unemployment of the nation at 12.7 percent compared to 6.7 for Latinos and 5 percent for whites..

Add to that, an often fragmented family structure, without two parents. To counter that, Emanuel has established a mentoring program, that the city’s website calls “a bold and aggressive effort to invest $36 million in public and private funds over three years to expand mentoring programs to serve at risk youth across the city.”

Designed as a volunteer based program, he “has set aside the cash to bankroll an immediate expansion of Becoming A Man, the program with the best track record for results. Also known as BAM, Becoming A Man served 2,700 students in the last school year and has seen crimes fall and graduation rates soar among its participants.

Now, the program will add room for nearly 1,400 more students — a total of 4,080. That will help deliver on the mayor’s promise to provide a mentor to every one of the 7,200 eighth-, ninth- and tenth-grade boys in Chicago’s 20 most violent neighborhoods,” reported the Chicago-Sun Times.

A local columnist for the Chicago Tribune, said, “As long as we live isolated in our demographic, geographic bubbles, largely ignorant of each other, the city's troubles won't be fixed. Mentoring programs are one way to open the borders.”

Many of these efforts, be they economic efforts, or mentoring programs, will take time; a lot of time, and some effects may not be seen for more than a generation. Meanwhile, it may be a long hot summer.

Americans question Trump's sanity after closed meeting

Mr. Trump with Russian Minister Sergey Lavrov at White House

The latest saga of President Trump has tongues wagging even more, this time on more than a late night tweet, or failed legislation, or inaugural crowd size. This leak of classified material, to the Russians in a meeting with Russian Prime Minister Sergey Lavrov, revealed in a Washington Post blog has many in Washington, and beyond, wondering about the sanity of the 45th president of the United States, as he blithely reveals classified information, from our ally, Israel, that could be used by the Russians to jeopardize both countries, and their operatives.

That meeting alone was controversial,since it was closed to the American press, and photographers, in favor, of only the Russians, something that the doyenne of Washington, Andrea Mitchell, was so shocked by, she tweeted that the administration's actions were wholly unprecedented.

Even more amazing is further news, that American intelligence officers had warned their Israeli counterparts, not to tell Trump too much, for fear that he would leak it. To be fair, an American president has the latitude to reveal classified information, but with the counsel of his senior advisors. This was not done, as Thomas Bossert, the assistant for Homeland Security had to call both the CIA and the NSA for damage control.

At this juncture, it’s hard to defend Trump’s carelessness, as a “spur of the moment” thing as White House officials have declared the leak to be, especially since the Russians have sophisticated intelligence both on the ground, and electronically to patch together even the barest of information to pinpoint U.S. and allied intelligence.

Even more troublesome is the fact that it has been revealed that James Comey was asked by Trump to drop the investigation of ousted NSA leader, Michael Flynn, who has also been accused of collusion with the Russians, both before and after the election.

Serious breaches of trust and, even common sense, are causing many both inside and outside the beltway, to doubt the ability of Trump to lead, and impeachment is getting mainstream play outside of the more radical circles, proliferating on the internet.

If this is the beginning of the end, then the White House is on a downward spiral as many in the media have noted, as this nascent presidency is tilted like a sinking ship. And, righting it will take more than the usual Washington spin.

Fingering the “deep state” or now, leftist plots, are no longer holding water as it appears that Emperor Trump has no clothes. Even if the inconsistencies coming from the press room were themselves consistent, it would help. But, the backing and filling makes all of this behavior on the part of White House officials suspect.

Most troubling are the contacts with Russia that have dangerous consequences for the weakened but still embattled Russian president, Vladimir Putin, whose alleged meddling in the 2016 election have given credence to lingering Cold War suspicions. For a man that does not like to lose, and enjoys the spectacle of the United States government in disarray, and whose cooperation we need in coming to terms with Syria, and other world conflicts, the stakes are high.

When the defense comes from such people as General H.R. McMaster who was tasked, not once, but twice, by Trump, to come to his defense in appearances before the press, in the White House Rose Garden, labelling Trumps leak as “wholly appropriate” it’s far beyond an Ian Fleming novel, or as one wag has put it, “the bullets in this cold war are real.”  

McMaster said in turn, to reporters: “At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed, and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly.”

The Russians, on the other hand, quite satisfyingly, have said that nothing of value was released, and Maria Zakharova, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, dismissed all of this. In her response to queries from presumably close associates, since they used her patronymic, said, "Guys, have you been reading American newspapers again?" she wrote on her Facebook page. "You shouldn't read them. You can put them to various uses, but you shouldn't read them. Lately it's become not only harmful, but dangerous too."

With someone at the head of the United States, who is behaving, as if sanity is being held at bay, then, most in the media, even diehard Republicans, are quitting Trumps sanity and its effect not only on the party, but the government, and not just from the so-called coastal elite.

There may be no love for Vice-President Pence by many liberals, but the question of insanity, partisanship aside, is not questioned, although his record on helping those on the lower income levels is dismal. Then again, Speaker Paul Ryan, has become so associated with wealth transfer, few would like to see him in the Oval office.

The good news, if any, is that former FBI chief Robert Mueller  has been selected by Deputy Attorney General, Rod. J. Rosenstein, as special counsel for the Russian investigation, and who, in the past, has won the respect of those on both sides of the aisle, will now be special counsel investigating, what the Chicago Tribune calls “potential coordination between Russia and the Trump team during the 2016 presidential election.”

As The New York Times reported Mueller can decide “whether to consult with or inform the Justice Department about his investigation. He is authorized to investigate “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump,” according to Mr. Rosenstein’s order naming him to the post, as well as other matters that “may arise directly from the investigation.” He is empowered to press criminal charges, and he can request additional resources subject to the review of an assistant attorney general.”

Running parallel to the erratic behavior of the president is this ongoing back channelled love affair between Trump and Putin, one that may have had the potential of influencing the recent election. And, also through avenues unknown, since our press was not allowed into the meeting, thus giving more weight to the suspicion of what exactly is happening between the two governments, and raises the question: has Trump become become the stooge in this international drama, while the Kremlin looks on with bemusement?