JOHN SEEWER, Associated Press

2 months ago

FILE – Joe Wurzelbacher, also known as “Joe the Plumber,” laughs while talking outside of his home in Holland, Ohio, Oct. 16, 2008. Wurzelbacher, who was thrust into the political spotlight as “Joe the Plumber” after questioning Barack Obama about his economic policies during the 2008 presidential campaign, has died, his son said Monday, Aug. 28, 2023. He was 49. His oldest son, Joey Wurzelbacher, said his father died Sunday, Aug. 27, in Wisconsin after a long illness. (AP Photo/Madalyn Ruggiero, File)

TOLEDO, Ohio (AP) — Samuel “Joe” Wurzelbacher, who was thrust into the political spotlight as “Joe the Plumber” after questioning Barack Obama about his economic proposals during the 2008 presidential campaign, and who later forayed into politics himself, has died, his son said Monday. He was 49.

His oldest son, Joey Wurzelbacher, said his father died Sunday in Wisconsin after a long illness. His family announced this year on an online fundraising site that he had pancreatic cancer.

“The only thing I have to say is that he was a true patriot,” Joey Wurzelbacher — whose father had the middle name Joseph and went by Joe — said in a telephone interview. “His big thing is that everyone comes to God. That’s what he taught me, and that’s a message I hope is heard by a lot of people.”

He went from toiling as a plumber in suburban Toledo, Ohio, to life as a media sensation when he asked Obama about his tax plan during a campaign stop.

Their exchange and Obama’s response that he wanted to “spread the wealth around” aired often on cable news. Days later, Obama’s Republican opponent, U.S. Sen. John McCain, repeatedly cited “Joe the Plumber” in a presidential debate.

Wurzelbacher soon faced intense media scrutiny and acknowledged that he didn’t have a plumber’s license, saying at the time he didn’t need one because he worked for small plumbing company owned by someone else.

Wurzelbacher went on to campaign with McCain and his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. But he later criticized McCain in his book and said he did not want him as the GOP presidential nominee.

His sudden fame turned him into a sought-after voice for many anti-establishment conservatives, and he traveled the country speaking at tea party rallies and conservative gatherings.

He also wrote a book and worked with a veterans organization that provided outdoor programs for wounded soldiers.

In 2012, he made a bid for a U.S. House seat in Ohio. But he lost in a landslide to Democrat Marcy Kaptur in a district heavily tilted toward Democrats.

Republicans had recruited him to run and thought his fame would help bring in enough money to mount a serious challenge. But he drew criticism during the campaign for suggesting that the United States should build a fence at the Mexico border and “start shooting” at immigrants suspected of entering the country illegally.

Wurzelbacher returned to working as a plumber after he gave up on politics, his family said.

Funeral arrangements were pending. Survivors include his wife, Katie, and four children.

___

Associated Press writer Mark Scolforo in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, contributed to this report.

The post Joe the Plumber, who questioned Obama’s tax proposals in the course of the 2008 marketing campaign, has died at 49 appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco’s board of directors has signaled that it stands ready to right past racial injustices — at least in spirit.

In a unanimous vote Tuesday, the 11 members accepted a draft plan with more than 100 redress recommendations for the city’s eligible black residents. Those proposals include a whopping $5 million one-time payment to each adult and a full payoff of personal debt — including credit cards, taxes, and student loans. Black residents could also earn at least $97,000 annually for 250 years and buy homes within the city limits for $1.

The board’s move was largely procedural – an intermediate step in a much longer process. It does not bind the city to any of the ideas put forward in the 60-page proposal by the San Francisco African American Reparations Advisory Committee, which was tasked in 2020 to “address the institutional, city-sanctioned harm inflicted on African American communities.” became .”

“We are not here today to say which recommendations we will support or advance. There is still work to be done,” said bill sponsor Shamann Walton before voting during the 7 1/2 hour meeting.

A final report with feedback from the Supervisory Board is due in June. The board is scheduled to meet again on this topic in September.

Nonetheless, the vote was met with fanfare from residents and the large cash payout made national headlines. But some longtime civil rights and reparations activists have criticized the board and the committee’s financial restitution figures, calling it political theater aimed at delaying significant change.

Some activists have criticized the plan as unrealistic

“This black community doesn’t need to be built on tricks and failures. Your hopes shouldn’t just be raised by words, words, words,” Rev. Amos Brown told NPR a day after the meeting.

Brown is not only senior pastor of Third Baptist San Francisco, the city’s oldest black church, but also president of the San Francisco NAACP. He said he has been “in the civil rights struggle for 68 years” and was taught by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Frustrated and angry, Brown noted that he had asked the board to reject the $5 million payment proposal before the meeting.

To be clear, Brown said he expects the cash refund to be part of any reparations package by the city, state and federal government. But first, he said, officials need to focus on the future and the best way forward toward equality and justice. For Brown, that means investing in housing, education, health care, economic empowerment, and cultural centers for San Francisco’s dwindling black community.

At its peak in the 1970s, African Americans made up about 13.5% of the city’s population. As of 2022, the number dropped to 5.7%. This makes it one of the largest cities in the country with one of the lowest percentages of black residents.

“Deliberate action should be taken to stop the bleeding of this black population if we’re going to have any blacks left to make amends with,” Brown said.

Brown also noted the city’s budget deficit. “You know there’s no money to pay for it,” Brown said. “So they just paid lip service. It is not fair. It’s not honest.”

By voting to accept the proposal without any indication of how they would fund it, politicians have both options, according to Brown.

“They offer low-hanging fruit that seems like a win, but you know you’re only going to win [lead to] more studies. And that’s a different game. Another delaying tactic. This frustrates people until things unravel and then self-destruct. We have to stop this. It’s time America paid up and acted with substance, with integrity and accountability,” Brown said.

During Tuesday’s meeting, one of the plan’s authors stated that “the committee has not been mandated to conduct a feasibility study. The task was to record the damage and determine the value.”

Others believe the proposals are an important first step towards justice

Andre Perry, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who studies racial and structural inequality, has written about the government’s obligation to pay reparations. He contradicts the notion that San Francisco’s big ticket items are a red herring.

“This argument about whether or not this is a distraction doesn’t necessarily hold me because in so many cases I hear people say that very serious ideas about reparations are fantastic or foolhardy. So I don’t necessarily jump when I hear a big number more because people often make the same arguments about a very rigorous analysis,” Perry told NPR.

“The mere idea of ​​reparations is impossible for many.”

Perry has yet to read the details of San Francisco’s draft proposal. But he said more often than not, the experts who draft plans that involve large sums of money “recognize the scale of the discrimination and the collective economic impact that many different discriminatory policies have not only over the course of their lives, but also over the life of their family.” person can have. ”

Even if it seems all but impossible for a community to pay out that sum, having a record of that assessment is imperative, he added.

He acknowledges that Brown’s concerns stem from lessons learned from the failure of other federal and local efforts.

“In a place like San Francisco, you mostly have what is, and I’ll put that in quotes, a progressive city in an unquoted ‘progressive state.’ And so much of what can be presented can just soothe the fantasies of a progressive left as theater,” Perry said. “And that doesn’t do anyone any service.”

But black communities seeking justice cannot operate from a place of fear, he said.

Other groups of people have succeeded in creating compensation systems for egregious injustices. In the US, Native Americans have been given land and billions of dollars because they were forcibly evicted from their land. Japanese Americans imprisoned during World War II eventually received $1.5 billion in compensation. And the American government played a crucial role in ensuring that Jews received reparations for the Holocaust.

If San Francisco’s proposal goes ahead, it will take a first step, along with other cities, toward some form of local, state and federal redress, Perry said.

“Exclusive, discriminatory politics didn’t start in Washington. It started in the municipalities,” he explained. “Things like redlining started in Baltimore and eventually became codified by the federal government. But they started locally. Therefore, it is important that local governments also begin to develop their reparations policies, which are spreading all the way to Washington, DC.”

Copyright 2023 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.

The post San Francisco will talk about reparation proposals — however even supporters are break up appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors, which meets at City Hall, adopted a draft plan with more than 100 recommendations for compensation to eligible black residents. But the move was largely procedural and does not bind the city to any of the proposals. David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images Hide caption

toggle caption

David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors, which meets at City Hall, adopted a draft plan with more than 100 recommendations for compensation to eligible black residents. But the move was largely procedural and does not bind the city to any of the proposals.

David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

San Francisco’s board of directors has signaled that it stands ready to right past racial injustices — at least in spirit.

In a unanimous vote Tuesday, the 11 members accepted a draft plan with more than 100 redress recommendations for the city’s eligible black residents. Those proposals include a whopping $5 million one-time payment to each adult and a full payoff of personal debt — including credit cards, taxes, and student loans. Black residents could also earn at least $97,000 annually for 250 years and buy homes within the city limits for $1.

The board’s move was largely procedural – an intermediate step in a much longer process. It does not bind the city to any of the ideas put forward in the 60-page proposal by the San Francisco African American Reparations Advisory Committee, which was tasked in 2020 to “address the institutional, city-sanctioned harm inflicted on African American communities.” became .”

“We are not here today to say which recommendations we will support or advance. There is still work to be done,” said bill sponsor Shamann Walton before voting during the 7 1/2 hour meeting.

A final report with feedback from the Supervisory Board is due in June. The board is scheduled to meet again on this topic in September.

Nonetheless, the vote was met with fanfare from residents and the large cash payout made national headlines. But some longtime civil rights and reparations activists have criticized the board and the committee’s financial restitution figures, calling it political theater aimed at delaying significant change.

Some activists have criticized the plan as unrealistic

“This black community doesn’t need to be built on tricks and failures. Your hopes shouldn’t just be raised by words, words, words,” Rev. Amos Brown told NPR a day after the meeting.

Brown is not only senior pastor of Third Baptist San Francisco, the city’s oldest black church, but also president of the San Francisco NAACP. He said he has been “in the civil rights struggle for 68 years” and was taught by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Frustrated and angry, Brown noted that he had asked the board to reject the $5 million payment proposal before the meeting.

To be clear, Brown said he expects the cash refund to be part of any reparations package by the city, state and federal government. But first, he said, officials need to focus on the future and the best way forward toward equality and justice. For Brown, that means investing in housing, education, health care, economic empowerment, and cultural centers for San Francisco’s dwindling black community.

At its peak in the 1970s, African Americans made up about 13.5% of the city’s population. As of 2022, the number dropped to 5.7%. This makes it one of the largest cities in the country with one of the lowest percentages of black residents.

“Deliberate action should be taken to stop the bleeding of this black population if we’re going to have any blacks left to make amends with,” Brown said.

Brown also noted the city’s budget deficit. “You know there’s no money to pay for it,” Brown said. “So they just paid lip service. It is not fair. It’s not honest.”

By voting to accept the proposal without any indication of how they would fund it, politicians have both options, according to Brown.

“They offer low-hanging fruit that seems like a win, but you know you’re only going to win [lead to] more studies. And that’s a different game. Another delaying tactic. This frustrates people until things unravel and then self-destruct. We have to stop this. It’s time America paid up and acted with substance, with integrity and accountability,” Brown said.

During Tuesday’s meeting, one of the plan’s authors stated that “the committee has not been mandated to conduct a feasibility study. The task was to record the damage and determine the value.”

Others believe the proposals are an important first step towards justice

Andre Perry, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who studies racial and structural inequality, has written about the government’s obligation to pay reparations. He contradicts the notion that San Francisco’s big ticket items are a red herring.

“This argument about whether or not this is a distraction doesn’t necessarily hold me because in so many cases I hear people say that very serious ideas about reparations are fantastic or foolhardy. So I don’t necessarily jump when I hear a big number more because people often make the same arguments about a very rigorous analysis,” Perry told NPR.

“The mere idea of ​​reparations is impossible for many.”

Perry has yet to read the details of San Francisco’s draft proposal. But he said more often than not, the experts who draft plans that involve large sums of money “recognize the scale of the discrimination and the collective economic impact that many different discriminatory policies have not only over the course of their lives, but also over the life of their family.” person can have. “

Even if it seems all but impossible for a community to pay out that sum, having a record of that assessment is imperative, he added.

He acknowledges that Brown’s concerns stem from lessons learned from the failure of other federal and local efforts.

“In a place like San Francisco, you mostly have what is, and I’ll put that in quotes, a progressive city in an unquoted ‘progressive state.’ And so much of what can be presented can just soothe the fantasies of a progressive left as theater,” Perry said. “And that doesn’t do anyone any service.”

But black communities seeking justice cannot operate from a place of fear, he said.

Other groups of people have succeeded in creating compensation systems for egregious injustices. In the US, Native Americans have been given land and billions of dollars because they were forcibly evicted from their land. Japanese Americans imprisoned during World War II eventually received $1.5 billion in compensation. And the American government played a crucial role in ensuring that Jews received reparations for the Holocaust.

If San Francisco’s proposal goes ahead, it will take a first step, along with other cities, toward some form of local, state and federal redress, Perry said.

“Exclusive, discriminatory politics didn’t start in Washington. It started in the municipalities,” he explained. “Things like redlining started in Baltimore and eventually became codified by the federal government. But they started locally. Therefore, it is important that local governments also begin to develop their reparations policies, which are spreading all the way to Washington, DC.”

The post San Francisco is discussing reparations proposals, however they are a great distance off : NPR appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.

San Francisco Board of Supervisors Raphael Mandelman and Dean Preston have proposed two different solutions to the housing and homelessness crisis that may force The City to get more involved in its thorniest policy question.

Preston is working to put an initiative on the November ballot that would penalize property owners who keep residential units vacant for six months or more. The goal of the proposed bill would be to disincentivize real estate speculation, push landlords to rent vacant units and, through penalties on unrented vacant units, raise money for homeless services. Naturally, Preston’s proposal is supported by many on The City’s progressive left.

Mandelman’s proposal focuses on a different aspect of the housing problem by requiring The City to provide shelter to homeless people — a policy known as “right to shelter.” New York City and Washington, DC already have similar policies that in some cases are stronger than what Mandelman has proposed. Right to shelter may seem like a radical idea, as it would force The City to commit to housing the homeless. But the law would only require San Francisco to provide shelter, not housing. Shelter includes residential hotels, homeless shelters, organized tent cities and tiny homes, but does not require The City to build more permanent housing.

Neither of these solutions are perfect and both have been criticized. Preston’s vacancy tax would not cover single family homes or duplexes, even though these types of buildings constitute a significant proportion of the vacant units in San Francisco. A broader vacancy tax would have a greater impact on the housing market, but would also run into opposition from smaller landlords and homeowners.

Mandelman’s policy of forcing The City to provide shelter to homeless people would also empower San Francisco to make it unlawful to sleep on the streets – and could be construed as criminalizing homelessness. If Mandelman’s proposal passes, it is likely there would be more incidents of police arresting or otherwise targeting homeless people. Some San Franciscans would probably see this as necessary, even good, while others would see it as a violation of the rights of homeless people and a form of harassment.

Yet based on what we have seen in other cities, obliging San Francisco to provide shelter could also further empower homeless people and their advocates, because they would be able to sue The City if sufficient shelter is not provided. During the pandemic, New York City was south because of inadequate WiFi in homeless shelters. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, supporting some homeless young people to continue their studies and expanding the notion of shelter.

Mandelman and Preston are coming at the same problem from different angles, but together they may make The City rethink its big picture approach to housing and homelessness.

Both of these proposals sample the relationship between housing and capital in San Francisco. Preston’s idea makes it tougher for wealthy investors to use residential buildings speculatively. Taxing vacant units does not make it illegal for landlords to profit off their investments, but forces them to lease empty units rather than waiting for property values ​​and rents to go up.

Housing in San Francisco is hardly unregulated. Rent control, limits on what can be built and other policies influence the housing market. But these policies keep the private sector at the center of housing. Both Preston and Mandelman’s proposals call for both regulating the market and bringing The City into housing policy in a bigger way.

An unquestioned assumption about housing — not just in San Francisco but throughout the US — is that creating and providing housing, except for the very poor, is the work of the private sector. This is not the case in most countries and perhaps San Francisco is now beginning to question this as well.

The problem with linking housing almost exclusively to the private sector is that market factors define the housing market — and in different ways, Preston and Mandelman are trying to address that.

Mandelman’s solution asks nothing of property owners, but forces The City to do more to find shelter for approximately 8,000 homeless people. His proposal implicitly recognizes the failure of the market to create housing for homeless and compels The City to provide some support for those living on the streets.

A peculiar pathology in American policy making is that we continue to be bedeviled by problems most of the world has solved. Gun violence and health care fall into this category, and so does housing. US policy does not dictate that housing is a right, or even a direct government issue, but rather the domain of markets and profits with some regulations and incentives.

Given the extent of homelessness in San Francisco and many American cities it is not a bad idea to start questioning that approach.

Lincoln Mitchell has written numerous books and articles on The City and the Giants. Visit lincolnmitchell.com or follow him on Twitter @LincolnMitchell

The post Two proposals could radically shift San Francisco’s method to housing appeared first on DAILY SAN FRANCISCO BAY NEWS.