a18 eZ re the washington post.saturday, february 22 , 2020
letters to the editor[email protected]local opinionsM
ANY OF the Trump administration’s
moves to shrink legal and illegal immigra-
tion have been bold, sometimes brazen
policy shifts, trumpeted in the media and
brandished for all to see. Draconian cuts in annual
refugee admissions. Disqualification of asylum seek-
ers by changing eligibility rules. Arm-twisting Mexi-
co into blocking U.S.-bound migrants at its southern
border. Canceling the Obama-era moratorium on
deporting migrants brought to the United States as
children. Tr ying to evict hundreds of thousands of
Haitians, Salvadorans, Hondurans and others who
have lived and worked legally in this country for
years.
Other moves, just as or more effective, are bureau-
cratic booby traps laid in arcane procedural byways.
A migrant takes an errant step, in compliance with
previous rules, and suddenly finds deportation
agents knocking at the door.
Ta ke foreign-born victims of human trafficking,
many of t hem coerced into sex work or what amountsto labor slavery. For 20 years, they’ve been eligible f or
special visas allowing them to remain and work in
this country, often in return for agreeing to testify
against their traffickers. Then, in 2018, the Trump
administration changed the rules. Now unsuccessful
applicants are subject to deportation hearings. Ap-
plications for the special visas have nose-dived.
Similarly, tweaks of the technical fine print have
been deployed against other crime victims, who
previously may have qualified for visas as an incen-
tive for helping law enforcement. Now, as The Post’s
Catherine Rampell reported in a recent column, if
their application forms contain any blank spaces,
visas that once would have been granted are auto-
matically denied. Thus, an applicant who lives in a
house might leave blank the field for an apartment
number; an applicant with no middle name might
leave that field blank. Reasonable? To tally. But also,
now, grounds for expulsion.
Or, take the case of unaccompanied migrant mi-
nors in the care of the Department of Health andHuman Services. For years, they have been provided
with services, including counseling by therapists
who adhered to their p rofession’s c ustomary practice
of confidentiality. Now, as detailed by The Post’s
Hannah Dreier, those assurances of confidentiality
are a quaint formality, swapped out for a new regime
under which notes taken in therapy are routinely
passed along to immigration officials who use them
against minors i n deportation h earings. Thus has the
Trump administration weaponized counseling,
transforming therapists into government informers.
The rules changes may seem surreal and night-
marish, the stuff of dystopian fiction. The lives they
affect, and potentially ruin, are very real. Govern-
ment forms have become minefields, intentionally
designed to entrap the unsuspecting. Adults who
present themselves as a means of emotional support
for migrant children are really lying i n ambush. And a
system designed to extend a h elping hand t o those in
peril has been turned into a latticework of sinister
snares.A latticework of sinister snares
Mr. Trump’s immigration policies are straight out of dystopian fiction.
Why such vehemence? I s there something in his
history Mr. Sanders wants to conceal from voters?
The same question must be asked of
Mr. Bloomberg regarding his treatment of women
who worked for him. Allegations have surfaced that
Mr. Bloomberg’s company, Bloomberg LP, fostered a
climate of sexism a nd that Mr. Bloomberg helped set
that tone with dismissive and belittling comments
about women. Mr. Bloomberg has pushed back
against the claims but refused to release former
employees from nondisclosure agreements they
signed as part of settlements in harassment lawsuits.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) rightly pressed
Mr. Bloomberg for transparency during the Wednes-
day Democratic candidates debate. “Mr. Mayor, are
you willing to release all of those women from those
nondisclosure agreements? So we can hear their sideof the story?” she asked.
Mr. Bloomberg’s bumbling response — about
“agreements between two parties that wanted to
keep it quiet... and we’ll live with it” — was
nonsensical and insulting. Indeed, apparently even
Mr. Bloomberg came to realize how inadequate —
and politically damaging — his answer was because
late Friday afternoon he released a statement saying
that women covered by three nondisclosure agree-
ments who had made complaints against him can be
released from the pacts if they contact his company.
That’s a good start but why these three? How were
they selected? What is the universe of complaints?
Transparency must be complete. So it is galling
that two leading Democratic candidates cannot
distance themselves further from the Trump-style
concealment and obfuscation.I
N URGING Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to live up
to his promise to release his medical records, we
recently posed the question of whether
Mr. Sanders, a leading contender for the Demo-
cratic presidential nomination, really prefers to
follow the poor example set by President Trump.
Apparently the answer is an unabashed yes.
Mr. Sanders not only has doubled down on the
secrecy surrounding his health, but his campaign
also has taken a page from the president’s playbook
by lashing out and belittling those who dare to
question his decision.
Mr. Sanders wasn’t t he only candidate who during
this week’s presidental debate showed contempt for
transparency. Former New York mayor Mike
Bloomberg scoffed at the notion of releasing women
who have accused him of sexist and misogynistc
behavior from confidentiality agreements. Fortu-
nately, by week’s end he was edging toward more
openness.
Mr. Sanders and Mr. Bloomberg are polar oppo-
sites on many issues, but t hey both seem to think
they can get away with thumbing their nose at
legitimate questions that have been raised about
their fitness for office. At issue for Mr. Sanders are
the promises he made — both before and after he
suffered a heart attack in October — to release his
full medical records. “The American people have the
right to know w hether the person they’re going to be
voting for president is healthy,” Mr. Sanders, 78, said
in September.
The promise is unmet, and Mr. Sanders is quite
brazen about breaking his word. “I don’t think we
will, no,” he said dismissively about releasing the
promised records, as opposed to (emulating
Mr. Trump) letters from his doctors. Making matters
worse, his press secretary launched an attack on
journalists who pressed the issue, making an absurd
analogy to the type of “smear” campaign used by
birthers against former president Barack Obama.Contempt
f or transparency
Mr. Sanders and Mr. Bloomberg
are avoiding legitimate questions
about their fitness for office.ABCDE
FredericK J. rYan Jr., Publisher and chief executive officer
news pages: editorial and opinion pages:
Martin Baron Fred hiatt
executive editor editorial Page editor
caMeron Barr JacKson diehL
Managing editor deputy editorial Page editor
eMiLio Garcia-rUiZ rUth MarcUs
Managing editor deputy editorial Page editor
tracY Grant Jo-ann arMao
Managing editor associate editorial Page editor
scott Vance
deputy Managing editor
BarBara VoBeJda
deputy Managing editor
Vice presidents:
JaMes W. coLeY Jr......................................................................................Production
L. WaYne conneLL..........................................................................human resources
Kate M. daVeY..................................................................................revenue strategy
eLiZaBeth h. diaZ.................................................audience development & insights
GreGG J. Fernandes........................................................customer care & Logistics
stePhen P. GiBson...................................................................Finance & operations
scot GiLLesPie.........................................................................................................arc
Kristine coratti KeLLY...................................................communications & events
John B. KennedY.................................................................General counsel & Labor
MiKi toLiVer KinG........................................................................................Marketing
Kat doWns MULder........................................................................Product & design
shaiLesh PraKash...............................digital Product development & engineering
JoY roBins...........................................................................................client solutions
the Washington post
1301 K st. nW, Washington, d.c. 20071 (202) 334-John Locher/associated Press
From left, presidential candidates Mike Bloomberg, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders at the
Democratic presidential primary debate on Wednesday in Las Vegas.In his Feb. 16 Sunday Opinion essay, “President
Trump and I disagreed. Liberty survives.,” Arthur
C. Brooks clarified the disagreement between his
remarks and those of President Trump at the recent
National Prayer Breakfast. Mr. Brooks agreed with
Jesus’ moral teachings to “love your enemies and pray
for those who persecute you, that you may be children
of your Father in heaven” v s. Mr. Trump’s p erception of
his victimhood in that “my family, our great country
and your president have been put through a terrible
ordeal by some very dishonest and corrupt people.”
Mr. Brooks ended his essay on a positive note by
stating that in our country, he can disagree with a
powerful president without fear of repercussion. Al-
though I agree with Mr. Brooks as a matter of principle,
I believe the issue is more nuanced considering that
his freedom e xists because of the actions and deaths of
millions of Americans over decades of history. Wheth-
er it be GIs fighting to end the German Reich and the
Holocaust, Civil War soldiers fighting to end slavery
and preserve the Union, or GIs fighting in Afghani-
stan, it is hard to believe they loved their enemies.
Unfortunately, I am one citizen who is unable to rise
above his dislike of the present administration to love
my e nemy.
Charles G. Sarau, RivaArthur C. Brooks should count himself fortunate
that “nothing of consequence” happened as a result of
his squabble with President Trump during the Nation-
al Prayer Breakfast. As a p rofessor a nd fellow at a n elite
university, Mr. B rooks enjoys a high level of job securi-
ty that allows him to express his views free of reprisal.
Mr. Brooks was silent, though, regarding Mr. Trump’s
use of executive power to fire government workers
who raise moral objections to his policies. What does
Mr. Brooks have to say about the president’s v indictive
dismissals of Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and
his brother from their White House roles after Mr. Vin-
dman testified about the Trump administration’s
Ukraine policies?
Mr. Brooks’s well-intentioned attempt to change the
minds of the president and his allies is ultimately naive
and ineffective. The Rev. M artin Luther King Jr. under-
stood the limits of moral suasion, writing in his 1967
book, “Where Do We G o From Here: Chaos or Commu-
nity?,” t hat “fallacious is the notion that ethical appeals
and persuasion alone will bring about justice.” In-
stead, King declared that “evil must be attacked by a
counteracting persistence, by the day-to-day assault of
the battering rams of justice.”
Jason Zeledon, S ilver SpringDisagreeing with the president
Regarding Colbert I. King’s Feb. 15 op-ed, “Should
we pray for Trump?”:
In addition to the bounteous prayers of Episcopal
Bishop Michael B. Curry, the president receives the
prayers from millions of Americans across a multi-
tude of religious faiths. Every Saturday, during the
Sabbath service, many Jews read “A Prayer for Our
Country.” There are numerous versions of this
prayer, but one reads, “May our judges, elected
leaders, and all who hold public office exercise their
responsibilities with wisdom, fairness, and justice
for all. Fill them with love and kindness, and bless
them that they may walk with integrity on the paths
of peace and righteousness.”
In addition, within the Jewish faith there is the
concept, developed by Rabbi Abraham Joshua
Heschel, of “praying with our feet.” That is, we pray
for the president by taking action for change, with
protests, lobbying and voting. And so, each week, I
pray for the president from my prayer book, and I
then continue daily on the journey, along with so
many others, praying with my feet.
Nechama Liss-Levinson, WashingtonMillions of us pray for Mr. Trump
In his Feb. 14 op-ed, “The rise of the moder-
ate Democrat,” David Ignatius claimed the Demo-
cratic Party’s “moderate wing” was revived with the
victory of Democratic presidential candidate Pete
Buttigieg in the Iowa caucuses.
But by any objective or historical measure,
Mr. Buttigieg is not a moderate. Mr. Buttigieg’s
proposed tax increases dwarf those of past Demo-
cratic presidential nominees. He has proposed a
massive $7 trillion in tax increases over the next
decade. That’s five times the size of the tax increases
proposed by 2016 Democratic presidential nominee
Hillary Clinton and more than double the size of the
tax increases proposed by former vice president Joe
Biden in his current campaign for president.
Mr. Buttigieg’s health-care plan is also quite
radical. As the Feb. 9 editorial “There are no ‘cen-
trists’ ” noted, Mr. Buttigieg’s h ealth-care plan would
“eventually drive private insurance companies out of
business,” e liminating private health plans.
Hans Bader, ArlingtonMr. Buttigieg isn’t a moderate
Regarding the Feb. 13 PowerPost article “On first
anniversary, a fete for Ivanka Trump’s program to
empower women”:
As President Trump’s associates celebrated Ivanka
Trump for her Women’s Global Development and
Prosperity Initiative, people around the world suffer
because of the Trump administration’s egregious
reproductive health policies.
How does Ms. Trump expect people to become
economically empowered when her father’s a dminis-
tration has worked to ensure that they can’t have
control over their reproductive lives? It is impossible
to “empower millions of women to lift their families
out of poverty,” as Ms. Trump claims, without provid-
ing access to comprehensive reproductive health
care, including contraception, p re- and postnatal care
and s afe abortion.
In imposing the global gag rule and blocking
funding to the United Nations Population Fund, the
Trump administration has harmed the reproductive
health of people around the world.
Ms. Trump’s complicity as her father’s administra-
tion has effectively gutted global health assistance
reveals everything you need to know about her
supposed commitment to women’s empowerment. If
Ms. Trump cared about empowering women around
the world, she would stand up and speak out against
the h orrendous policies o f the Trump administration.
Instead, she has aided and abetted one of the worst
assaults on reproductive health and rights in recent
memory.
Rebecca Harrington, Washington
The writer is senior director of advocacy and
outreach at Population C onnection Action Fund.The wrong way to empower women
F
IVE MONTHS ago, President Trump abruptly
aborted plans to conclude a deal with the
Afghan Ta liban, citing an a ttack that had killed
a U.S. soldier. Now the accord is back, with one
addition: a seven-day period beginning Saturday in
which both the Ta liban and U. S. forces are to refrain
from major offensive actions. If the partial truce
holds, S ecretary of State Mike P ompeo said Friday, the
deal will be signed Feb. 29, and intra-Afghan negotia-
tions will begin soon after on “a comprehensive and
permanent ceasefire and the future p olitical r oadmap
for Afghanistan.” Meanwhile, a drawdown of
U.S. troops will begin.
Present and certain former U. S. officials are de-
scribing this as the best chance for peace in many
years. We hope that’s the case, but the deal is difficult
to judge because many of its terms remain undis-
closed. U.S. officials deny reports of multiple secret
annexes. But they ought to make all of its provisions
public, ideally before the signing.
What we know from news reports and sources close
to the negotiations is that the United States has
committed to reducing the U.S. troop level to 8,600,from the current level of about 13,000, in the first
135 days of the agreement. During that time, the
Ta liban is to renounce al-Qaeda and other terrorist
groups and open negotiations with an Afghan com-
mittee, i ncluding g overnment officials as well as other
leaders. If the United States concludes those pledges
have been met, the withdrawal will continue; the
administration reportedly committed t o a full pullout
over time.
Officials acknowledge the risk that the peace pro-
cess won’t get off the ground. It remains to be seen
whether the Ta liban leadership can actually control
the thousands of militants fighting under its banner.
The Afghan government has its o wn problems follow-
ing a bitterly disputed presidential election whose
announced result — the reelection of President Ashraf
Ghani — has been rejected by his leading opponent.
If these hurdles can be overcome, the talks could
focus on the permanent cease-fire, a potentially land-
mark achievement in a nation that has been at w ar for
40 years. For that, the Taliban may demand the
formation of a transitional government, which would
oversee revisions to the constitution. The gaps be-tween the sides are wide: While some Taliban leaders
say they now accept the r ight o f women to be educated
and work outside t he home, t hey show n o willingness
to preserve the democratic political system.
That brings us to the agreement’s biggest weak-
ness: a lack of linkage between an Afghan political
settlement and the f inal w ithdrawal of U.S. troops. An
annex r eportedly describes t he pullout, Ta liban coun-
terterrorism commitments, peace talks and a perma-
nent cease-fire as “interdependent.” But a full
U.S. withdrawal before any settlement would likely
lead to a new civil war and, possibly, a renewed
Ta liban dictatorship.
T he Trump administration is right to test the
Ta liban’s willingness to stop fighting, break with
al-Qaeda and negotiate in good faith with the Afghan
government. M ilitary c ommanders say they c an man-
age with the lower troop level after the initial with-
drawal. But Mr. Trump must b e prepared to call a halt
to the drawdown if the insurgents do not deliver. A
rush for an Afghan exit in this election year may yield
short-term political benefits, b ut it will invite a strate-
gic disaster.The drawbacks of leaving Afghanistan
A rush for an exit may yield short-term political benefits, but it will invite a strategic disaster.
ABCDE
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
editorialsMargie Bell’s Feb. 16 letter, “The downsides of
added density,” mentioned preserving g reen space in
response to Judith Collins and Chitra Kumar’s
Feb. 11 letter, “A path to more affordable housing
options,” which supported permitting duplexes and
other multifamily housing in Arlington single-family
neighborhoods. B ut there is another reason t o object
to zoning changes: a long-standing promise by
Arlington County to preserve Arlington’s single-
f amily neighborhoods in exchange for concentrating
dense development around the Metro corridors, as
well as the less well-known intent to preserve green
space to offset such intensified development. In fact,
the Arlington County Board has just identified
multiple green parks to the Arlington Public Schools
for potential use as school sites.
“Upzoning” to multifamily housing would de-
stroy even more neighborhood green space on thecompletely unsubstantiated assertion that some-
how that would preserve other “offsetting” green
space beyond the exurbs that is, for many Arlington
residents, practically inaccessible. It is far more
likely the proposed conversion of single-family
housing to duplexes, etc., would drive up the prices
of remaining homes, compelling young Arlington
families to leave our community to find more
affordable single-family homes in those very rural
areas that some advocates of increased density in
our single-family neighborhoods claim will some-
how be preserved.
Rick Epstein, ArlingtonNo ‘upzoning’ in Arlington
Converting single-family housing toduplexes, etc., would drive up prices.