A16 EZ RE THE WASHINGTON POST.MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14 , 2020
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR[email protected]LOCAL OPINIONSJoin the debate at washingtonpost.com/local-opinionsM
ONTHS OF protests following the brutal
killings of several Black Americans at the
hands of police officers have pushed Vir-
ginia’s legislature to prioritize police re-
form during a special session that began in late
August. Four weeks in, lawmakers have passed im-
portant reform measures and are on track to enact
several more.
Key aspects of recent tragic events feature promi-
nently in reform efforts. Breonna Taylor was killed in
her own home by officers executing a no-knock
warrant, and George Floyd died with an officer’s knee
on his neck while nearby officers looked on. Bills on
track to pass both chambers in Richmond would ban
no-knock warrants (which allow police to enter a
home without announcing themselves) and neck
restraints. They would also require police to inter-
vene when another officer uses excessive force.
These are appropriate, if narrow, responses. Fortu-
nately, lawmakers are also making progress on larger
criminal justice reforms. We applaud efforts from
both chambers to eliminate searches on the basis ofthe odor of marijuana alone and to prevent police
from using minor traffic violations as a pretext for
stops — a practice that often targets motorists of
color. We encourage the House of Delegates to
embrace a measure, likely to pass the Senate, that
would reduce jail time for some incarcerated Vir-
ginians who are elderly, permanently disabled or
terminally ill.
Overall, this is a good start for a special session,
particularly one held under pandemic conditions that
have posed myriad technical challenges. The General
Assembly has also produced sensible voting reform
measures to make the November election safer and
smoother. But lawmakers still have work to do.
One contentious topic ahead is qualified immuni-
ty, a legal doctrine that acts as a liability shield when
officers violate people’s civil rights. Advocates have
pushed state lawmakers to eliminate the protection
and thus open up state courts to police misconduct
lawsuits. Some warn about the unintended conse-
quences of a hasty end to qualified immunity:
frivolous lawsuits, damage to local government fi-nances and a potential decline in new police recruits.
These concerns justify caution, but not inaction.
The Virginia House voted to strip police of quali-
fied immunity last week. The Senate killed the House
bill, concerned that the language was overly broad.
Senators were correct to note that there are other
ways to hold police officers accountable in court: by
codifying use-of-force standards (which the cham-
ber’s omnibus bill does) or by specifically creating a
right to sue in state court for use-of-force violations.
Come the regular session in January, lawmakers
should prioritize crafting effective language that
gives civilians the recourse they deserve when their
rights are violated by law enforcement. Perhaps they
can draw inspiration from Colorado, where lawmak-
ers rolled back qualified immunity but included
measures to limit the personal financial liability of
officers found guilty of serious misconduct so as not to
deter would-be police from joining. A blanket repeal
of qualified immunity need not be a heuristic for
meaningful reform. Fortunately, in Virginia, the
General Assembly is well on its way.Virginia tackles police reform
The legislature makes a good start on curbing abuses.
H
ERE IS one of the least surprising revela-
tions ever leaked from the federal govern-
ment: According to an internal Census
Bureau document, major, uncorrectable
errors may result from forcing the bureau’s enumer-
ators and number-crunchers to rush through the
decennial count. House Oversight and Reform Com-
mittee Chair Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) revealed
the document this month, claiming it was a presen-
tation for Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who
oversees the bureau. It shows that the decision of
Senate Republicans and the Trump administration
to give the bureau no more time to finish a count that
started late and has encountered pandemic-related
problems threatens to corrupt for a decade the
process of distributing congressional seats and
doling out some $1.5 trillion in annual federal aid.
“A compressed review period creates risk for
serious errors not being discovered in the data —
thereby significantly decreasing data quality,” the
document warns.
To be clear, this would not be the fault of the
bureau’s professionals, whom Republicans have put
in an impossible position. They are facing a statu-
tory deadline requiring that they deliver their count
by Dec. 31. The bureau had previously asked for
more time. House Democrats authorized a deadline
extension. Senate Republicans failed to do so, and
the Trump administration ordered last month that
door-knocking conclude by Sept. 30, weeks earlier
than the experts had hoped.
The newly revealed document shows that, at the
time the short timetable was announced, the bureau
knew that “abbreviated processes or eliminated
activities... will reduce accuracy.” Not only would
door-knocking end weeks sooner, but also the
number-crunching needed after the door-knockers
finished their work would be compressed into
92 days. Since 1990, the number-crunching has
consumed between 140 and 185 days, according to
Ms. Maloney. “Serious errors discovered in the datamay not be fixed — due to lack of time to research
and understand the root cause or to re-run and
re-review one or multiple state files,” the document
warns. “A compressed review period creates risk for
errors being present in the data.”
The only perspective from which this is not a
potential disaster is that of Republicans seeking
maximum partisan advantage. The Trump adminis-
tration already tried once to skew the count by
adding a citizenship question to the census form,
which would have deterred immigrants, even legal
ones, from responding. The Supreme Court haltedthat move. Yet rushing the census might help
Republicans because poor and minority communi-
ties tend to be the ones undercounted, which would
make many Democratic-leaning states appear to be
less populous than they are — and therefore due less
money and political representation.
The Senate should have passed a covid-19 relief
bill months ago, with a census deadline extension in
it. With the bureau up against a wall, senators
should not wait to agree on the rest of a relief
package to give the counters more time. The census
needs clarity, now.On the verge
of disaster
Census workers need more time
to conduct a fair and accurate count.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
KRISSAH THOMPSON
Managing 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 SolutionsThe Washington Post
1301 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071 (202) 334-Today’s Post prints the last regular column by
Robert J. Samuelson. I have known “Sam” since 1962,
when he was a college freshman. I cannot tell you
how much I admire him. He has been an invaluable
person to read, but a difficult person to categorize.
Bob Samuelson is characterized by integrity. I
have never seen him on television; I suspect that’s
because he feels he wouldn’t have time in a TV
format to think about what he should say, let alone
research it. The only equally TV-averse journalist I
knew was Meg Greenfield — pretty good company. I
love that Sam’s opinions are his own. When the worst
columnists put on a blue shirt or a red shirt and write
not to inform the reader but to help the cause, Sam
always wore his own shirt. To write his weekly
column, he tried to learn things. And he wrote to
inform the readers. I didn’t agree with everything he
wrote. (I am pleased that he retires without succeed-
ing in abolishing Amtrak.) He was repelled by
President Trump (my words, not his), but equally
offended by Democrats who weren’t logical thinkers.
His favorite teacher in college was a cranky individu-
alist who insisted on thinking through opinions,
even if they were opinions all good people were
supposed to share. (It was the 1960s.)
That teacher would be infinitely proud of what
Sam has become. And he would be right. If someone
asked me to point to a journalist whose career was
characterized by honesty and integrity, Sam
wouldn’t be the only one, but I’d have no hesitation
pointing to him. I’ve been lucky to read him and
luckier to know him.
Donald Graham, Washington
The writer is chairman of Graham Holdings and
former publisher of The Washington Post.Grateful for Mr. Samuelson
In his Sept 8 op-ed, “Casting doubt on a pre-
e lection vaccine is shameful,” Marc A. Thiessen
quoted the head of Operation Warp Speed, Moncef
Slaoui, as saying the creation of a viable vaccine “has
nothing to do with the election.” That may be
Mr. Slaoui’s position, but I guarantee that in Presi-
dent Trump’s mind, it has everything to do with the
election. Given Mr. Trump’s track record of lies and
deceits during his tenure in office, to think otherwise
is foolish. Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.), the
Democratic nominee for vice president, is right to be
cautious. Polls show that the majority of people in
this country agree with her.
Kim Hemphill, South RidingMarc A. Thiessen wrote that Sen. Kamala
D. Harris was pathetic for expressing doubt about
taking President Trump’s word that a rushed vaccine
trotted out before the election would be safe and
effective. She outlined her reasons for doubting the
president’s word. When pressed, she admitted she
would accept the word of Anthony S. Fauci, a doctor
and scientist of renowned integrity, when it comes to
protecting the public health to the best of his current
knowledge. This is the public health official whom
Mr. Trump has discarded for failing to conform to
politically expedient exhortations.
The current “expert” Mr. Trump trots out is a
radiologist, not an epidemiologist. Why would the
public trust what Mr. Trump touts? He doesn’t listen
to the best advisers. He wants only what serves his
political ends.
Ms. Harris rightly shifted focus on whom we trust
when it’s safe to take our vaccine.
Sunny Alsup, WashingtonDoubt is a good thing
The Sept. 9 front-page article “DOJ acts to assist
Trump in lawsuit” stated that the Justice Depart-
ment seeks to be swapped out as the defendant in a
lawsuit between President Trump and E. Jean
Carroll. Ms. Carroll asserts that Mr. Trump raped her
more than two decades ago, and she has filed a
defamation suit against him in New York state court.
Mr. Trump denied her assertion while in of-
fice. Thus, he can supposedly be represented by the
Justice Department. Mr. Trump can be defended as a
federal government “employee” but is not subject to
the Hatch Act, which applies to federal government
employees. Am I the only one scratching my head
over these events?
Though I read Mr. Trump’s 2019 denial of
Ms. Carroll’s allegation with incredulity, because
nothing surprises me about Mr. Trump, this is
perhaps the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen
the Barr DOJ do (among many things).
As a lawyer, I find this repugnant and absurd.
Attorney General William P. Barr is not the presi-
dent’s personal attorney. Yet he acts as if he is.
Perhaps Mr. Barr should go back to private practice
so that the Justice Department can return to its
proper role of providing legal services for the federal
government and the American people.
Beverly Petersen Jennison, Silver SpringRegarding the Sept. 10 news article “Barr
claims precedent in Justice intervention”:
Waiting to make a “scope of employment” claim
on behalf of President Trump under the Federal Tort
Claims Act seems corrupt. When I was an Army
attorney and a soldier or civilian employee was sued
in state court for an incident that occurred in the
scope of employment, I did not wait 10 months to
ensure that the court was informed that the
government intended to substitute itself as a defen-
dant on behalf of the individual. Filings in state
court demanded immediate action to ensure substi-
tution as quickly as possible to protect the individu-
al and ensure the efficient administration of justice.
Attorney General William P. Barr’s Justice De-
partment appears to have deliberately waited not
for the efficient administration of justice but as a
stalling technique to prevent production of evidence
and embarrassing revelations before the election.
Such a stalling action also suggests to me that
Justice has doubts about the merits of its assertion.
Delay may be more important than the likelihood of
prevailing on the merits.
E. Jean Carroll maintains that a DNA swab would
corroborate her claim that Mr. Trump lied and
defamed her. If or when Justice and Mr. Trump lose
on the merits of the coverage of the Federal Tort
Claims Act, discovery will have been delayed past
the election. This assertion of scope and its timing
were purely political.
Gregory Hand, Leola, Pa.A repugnant intervention
F
ORMER VICE PRESIDENT Joe Biden has
been pretty clear about where taxes on
upper-income Americans and corporations
are headed if he’s elected: up. Highlights of
his plan include an increase in the top marginal rate,
and a limit on deductions for those earning more
than $400,000 per year; an end to the favorable
“step-up” treatment of inherited financial assets; an
increase in the top corporate tax rate from 21 to
28 percent, with a minimum of 15 percent for large
companies; and imposing Social Security taxes on
wage income above $400,000.
Taken together, Mr. Biden’s plans would raise
about $3.8 trillion over 10 years, with 72 percent of
that coming from the top 1 percent of earners,
according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation.
Contrary to much Republican rhetoric, Mr. Biden’s
proposals represent not confiscatory socialism but
an effort to undo the least defensible giveaways in
the 2017 tax cuts passed by a GOP Congress and
signed by President Trump, while preserving parts
of that law that broadened the tax base.Last Wednesday, Mr. Biden added additional
teeth — and complexity — to his corporate tax plans,
targeting the perennial issue of “offshoring” of
U.S. jobs by multinationals. During a campaign stop
in Michigan, he specified that his proposed mini-
mum tax on the foreign profits of U.S.-based compa-
nies would eliminate an automatic exclusion worth
10 percent of assets, and apply on a country-by-
c ountry basis, in effect making firms pay more to the
United States on what they earn in low-tax countries
such as Ireland. In addition, he would apply a top
corporate rate of 30.8 percent on earnings from
products U.S. companies make abroad and sell in the
United States — coupled with a 10 percent tax credit
for investments that reopen closed plants or “re-
shore” jobs from abroad.
The political benefits for Mr. Biden of this mes-
sage, delivered in the Midwest, are clear enough. The
benefits for the economy are more mixed, as is often
the case with policies that seek to direct capital from
one potential investment to another. It makes sense
to reduce artificial tax advantages in the 2017 tax billfor operating, or parking intellectual property, in tax
havens abroad. Mr. Biden’s proposed surtax on
foreign manufacturing, however, seems to deny the
reality of global supply chains. Americans certainly
wouldn’t like it if, say, Germany penalized BMW for
exporting cars from South Carolina. The surtax
applies to U.S.-owned call centers or services over-
seas “where jobs could have been located in the
United States.” Meeting that amorphous standard
will surely create jobs for lawyers and accountants.
So will qualifying for the job-retention tax credit; to
the extent companies succeed, the proposal narrows
the corporate tax base Mr. Biden elsewhere seeks to
broaden.
Mr. Biden is right to present alternatives to
Mr. Trump’s economic bromides. He is also right to
advocate maximum job creation in the United
States. The best way to achieve the latter goal,
though, is to ensure the United States is a desirable
place to invest — generally. Higher business taxes
can be compatible with that goal, as long as the rules
are clear and consistent.Mr. Biden’s tax plan
The Democrat undoes indefensible giveaways. But it also adds unhelpful complexity.
ABCDE
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
EDITORIALSTOM TOLESThe Sept. 3 front-page article “D.C. monuments
report has some questioning Bowser’s timing” posed
a warning to those who wish to designate buildings
and monuments named after individuals for removal
or “contextual interpretation.” It is historically dubi-
ous and unfair to make such decisions without con-
sidering the entire life and career of a person for
whom a monument, building or institution is named.
The housing complex named after Arthur Capper
provides a case in point. Capper was a Republican
senator from Kansas from 1919 until his retirement in- As a longtime member (and chairman from
1925 to 1933) of the Committee on the District of
Columbia, he advocated D.C. voting rights in Con-
gress. He introduced resolutions to amend the Con-
stitution to provide D.C. residents with voting repre-
sentation in the House and Senate and participated in
related hearings. During World War II, Capper spoke
on the floor of the Senate about the injustice endured
by the thousands of D.C. residents who were sent to
fight by a Congress in which they had no representa-
tion. H is record entitles him to be remembered as an
early champion of D.C. voting representation in
Congress.
Nelson F. Rimensnyder, WashingtonAn early champion of D.C. voting rights
Capper spoke on the floor of the
Senate about the injustice endured by
the thousands of D.C. residents.
L etters and Local Opinions: [email protected]
Op-eds: [email protected]