Sunday, August 17, 2025

‘What A Wonderful World’


Moving The Window

 


Moving The Window

Tonight’s piece runs longer than I like to, especially on a Saturday night, but the issues are serious, and incumbent upon us all to stay caught up. Thanks for being here and for reading Civil Discourse. If it helps you understand these issues better, I hope you’ll share it with friends and consider subscribing if you don’t already.

The Overton Window is a model that describes the range of policies considered acceptable at a given time by the public and policymakers. It’s the spectrum of ideas that are legitimate, feasible choices, and anything that falls outside of the window is considered too extreme for serious consideration. For instance, the idea of deploying the National Guard, or even the military, on American streets to control the local population is something we would have considered far outside of the Window for decades.

Think of what Donald Trump is doing in the District of Columbia in these terms. He’s made up a crisis—a wave of crime that doesn’t exist. The law in the District is different from how it is elsewhere because of limited home rule and a law that was drafted, at least arguably, to give the president alone the ability to declare an emergency that would permit control of local law enforcement. Trump tried it in Los Angeles, but ran into issues, like the Governor’s objection and the Posse Comitatus Act, which prevents direct law enforcement by the Guard and the military. But in the District of Columbia, Trump has asserted the ability to seize control of the Metropolitan Police for at least thirty days and longstanding DOJ interpretation of the law says Posse Comitatus doesn’t apply in D.C.

Trump is using the quasi-federal status of the District to socialize the idea that he can:

  • make up an emergency and no one can challenge his thinking

  • seize control of local law enforcement

  • use the National Guard for direct law enforcement purpose

For the casual observer of American politics, he’s creating a new normal and shifting the Overton Window to include a presidential takeover of American cities.

Next stop, Los Angeles, Baltimore, Oakland, New York and Chicago, all cities Trump said were "bad, very bad," without explanation. All cities where the law is less friendly to a Trump takeover than it is in the nation’s capital. But Trump has been more than willing to brazen it out in court and live to fight in the Supreme Court, where he hopes for, and has frequently been rewarded with, a decision that hands over more power to the unitary executive. To be able to last out the appeal, Trump needs to make sure that the public isn’t so outraged that he has to pull back. Hence, the need to move the Overton Window.

A potential pitfall for Trump is that outside D.C., he’ll need to convince courts, where his moves will certainly be challenged, that his determination of an emergency or other condition necessary to allow him to interfere with state and local control is not reviewable. Since his first day in office, when he declared an emergency at the border, Trump has been relying on that notion, that contrary to the checks and balances the Founding Fathers set up, any decision he makes that there is a national emergency can’t be challenged in the courts. Then, he declared an emergency that permitted him to make the (false) claim that the Venezuelan drug cartel Tren de Aragua was invading the United States, which set up his inhumane deportations of people to CECOT prison in El Salvador without due process. Most recently, it has been tariffs, predicated on the claim that “foreign trade and economic practices” have led to a “national emergency.” In each instance, Trump has faked an emergency, while pushing the courts to say that they cannot review his decisions. So far, the lower federal courts seem to be skeptical. At some point, that issue will make its way to the Supreme Court. If SCOTUS lets him get away with that, our position becomes that much more precarious.

Understood this way, what’s happening this weekend in the District of Columbia is a matter that should concern all of us. We cannot afford to let the Overton Window move. Our conversations with the people around us matter and it’s a moment where we need to make real the spectre of armed and masked troops marching through our streets—not just those in other people’s neighborhoods.

Last week, we discussed how small of a force the D.C. National Guard is. There are reports that early this week, National Guard troops from other states, Trump-friendly red states like West Virginia, Ohio, and South Carolina, will arrive to assist in whatever it is that Trump thinks he’s doing—surely not fighting crime, since these troops aren’t trained to do that. If Trump wanted to help reduce crime, he’d be funding data-driven best practices that are shown to work and that have, in fact, been bringing down crime in the District, as then-interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin announced Trump had done during his first 100 days in office. Make sure you point out the incredible hypocrisy by Trump when he justifies his actions by claiming crime is out of control.

The most important news is that Americans are not giving way to Trump. As the pictures sent to me by protestors show, people were out in the District of Columbia today, refusing to be intimidated by a president who wants to convince us that sending out masked law enforcement agents and armed troops on the streets of the nation’s capital, and any other city for that matter, is within his power. It is not. We will not tolerate his creeping totalitarianism. We are not obligated to accept his power play or make any of this easy for him, as he takes a well-worn page from every authoritarian’s playbook. We are not that country and he is not a king—nor a dictator.

On Friday, Judge Ana Cecilia Reyes, born in Uruguay and appointed to the district court in D.C. by Joe Biden in 2023, wasted no time in scheduling a hearing after the District filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s attempt to exceed the power granted by the home rule law in his attempt to take over the Metropolitan Police. The previous night, Attorney General Pam Bondi tried to replace the D.C. Chief with the head of the DEA.

You have to like a judge who has this picture of herself with her pup on Wikipedia and reportedly brings her dog to work. Such a breath of fresh air during an administration where the president has no pets and the Secretary of DHS admitted that she shot hers.

Judge Reyes began the hearing by clarifying that she was not holding an evidentiary hearing and would not get into issues that would require development of the facts, like whether there was actually an emergency or a legitimate federal purpose behind Trump’s takeover. For purposes of the hearing, she assumed that Trump was correct on those points, saying she would go into them this coming week if necessary, before delving into the legal issues surrounding Trump’s order.

In the end, Attorney General Pam Bondi backed down, agreeing to let Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith continue to run the Department’s day-to-day operations under Mayor Muriel Bowser’s orders. She wrenched a concession from the district, directing Bowser to order the police department to assist in federal immigration enforcement. There is likely another legal confrontation coming where that process may conflict with laws passed by the District, which is a sanctuary city.

And as for Trump’s claim that he was worried about crime? Chief Smith wrote in an affidavit accompanying the District’s lawsuit that, “If effectuated, the Bondi Order would upend the command structure of MPD, endangering the safety of the public and law enforcement officers alike.” Imagine your local police department being run by the attorney general or his designee instead of the people who know your city and its needs the best. We’ve come full circle to where we started: Trump is making up the need for any of this. It’s about moving the Overton Window to give him the opportunity to seize more power, in more places, in a distinctly un-American fashion.

We shouldn’t forget about what was on the front pages before Trump started all of this and his embarrassing knee-bending exercise with Putin in Alaska on Friday. Trump has something to hide. And, apparently, he’s willing to take some hits to try and knock it off the public’s radar screen. Let’s not let anyone forget about it: Trump could release the Epstein files tomorrow.

You’ve just read today’s breakdown without a paywall because paid subscribers make that possible. If you want to help me keep this work available to everyone—and get extra benefits along the way—please join us.

We’re in this together,

Joyce


The Fair Share Amendment is delivering

 


ADVERTISEMENT

We can help you fight the heat without losing control of your energy bill. Learn more. Eversource.

sponsored by The Boston Foundation

The Best of CommonWealth Beacon  OPINION

The Fair Share Amendment is delivering 

August 17, 2025

By JIM ROOSEVELT AND ANDREA SILBERT

Since 2022, when Massachusetts voters approved the Fair Share Amendment tax on incomes over $1 million, debate has swirled over the impact of the new levy on the state’s business climate. 


There’s universal agreement that investments in transportation and public education, which the new tax funds, are crucial to building a dynamic and prosperous economy. But some speculated that multi-millionaires would flee Massachusetts rather than pay the new tax. Last week’s news that the millionaires tax generated $3 billion over the past year should put those fears to rest. 


Prior to its passage, opponents of the Fair Share ballot question predicted it would backfire — failing to generate meaningful revenue to address the state’s transportation and public education needs, and hurting our economic competitiveness along the way. 


But nearly three years later, it’s becoming clearer and clearer — the Massachusetts millionaires tax has been a total success, and an incredible benefit for our state’s businesses. 


Despite predictions of substantial millionaire flight, the number of millionaires and ultra-wealthy individuals in Massachusetts grew significantly over the first two years the Fair Share Amendment was in place.  


The state has experienced revenue gains — $2.46 billion in the first year and nearly $3 billion in the second — that are more than double the state’s initial expectations, and more than even the proponents of the new tax predicted. That’s strong evidence that that multi-millionaires are staying in Massachusetts and paying more in taxes, not fleeing for other states. 


ADVERTISEMENT

Inclusion. It's worth it. Global View Communications.

And that revenue is making a real difference. Over the past two and a half years, the state Legislature has approved more than $6 billion in Fair Share investments that are helping to deliver two of the most important resources for Massachusetts businesses: a well-educated workforce and a reliable transportation system.  


From the cradle to career, investments from the millionaires tax are key to growing and supporting the workforce our businesses depend on. 


Thanks to Fair Share funding to expand the number of public pre-K classrooms in cities and towns across the state, thousands of parents can now afford to stay in the workforce after their children are born. 


Kids can’t learn if they’re hungry. So Fair Share is funding in-school breakfast and lunch for every child in the state, helping them succeed in school and start off on a path to long-term success. The millionaires tax is supporting school building improvements across the state, enabling more vocational programs to train the next generation of workers in high-demand careers. And it’s delivered significant funding to every school district in the state, ensuring that schools have more of the resources they need to educate our future workforce. 


Once students graduate, Fair Share is funding free community college and expanded financial aid for low- and middle-income students at UMass and our other state universities. As a result, public college enrollment has increased for the first time in a decade. That means thousands of additional students who are preparing for good jobs with local employers. 


And when our graduates enter the workforce, Fair Share funding is delivering a transportation system they can count on to get to and from work. It’s the key funding mechanism in Gov. Healey’s plan to repair the MBTA after decades of disinvestment, which has resulted in the elimination of subway slow zones, trains that are moving faster, and the hiring of more bus drivers to expand service. 


In other parts of the state, the state’s regional transit authorities are using Fair Share funding to expand their service hours, add weekend service, create new bus routes, and make buses free. And hundreds of millions of dollars have gone into repairing roads and bridges across the state, ensuring that drivers can get to work on time. 


Now, it’s true that Massachusetts faces a migration problem. But it’s not multi-millionaires who are hiring U-Hauls and leaving the state; it’s low- and middle-income workers who can’t afford the high cost of living in Massachusetts.  


ADVERTISEMENT

National Grid. We're here with solutions to help manage your summer energy bills. Lean more.

 

By putting more money directly in the pockets of working families with programs like free school meals, college financial aid, and free buses, the Fair Share Amendment is making Massachusetts more affordable for the workers our businesses depend on. 


And these investments are having an impact. Between July 2023 and July 2024, Massachusetts saw its largest population increase in 60 years, and the rate of domestic outmigration has significantly slowed. And this year, Massachusetts was ranked the strongest state economy in the US. 


Now, Massachusetts faces a new threat: billions of dollars in federal budget cuts that are being made to partially offset the cost of a $4.5 trillion federal tax cut that will overwhelmingly benefit the very rich and large corporations.  


As businesses begin to grapple with the effect of these changes on the Massachusetts economy, we’re left with one thought: Thank goodness Massachusetts had the foresight to pass the Fair Share Amendment when we did. 



ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Jim Roosevelt is the former CEO of Tufts Health Plan. Andrea Silbert is chair of the Alliance for Business Leadership. 



The Boston Foundation is deeply committed to civic leadership, and essential to our work is the exchange of informed opinions. We are proud to partner on a platform that engages such a broad range of demographic and ideological viewpoints.

Submit an Opinion Piece

We welcome informed commentary about local, state and national public policy. Please include the author's contact information when submitting.

SUBMIT

Submit a Tip

Do you have a scoop you want to share with the CommonWealth Beacon team?  We offer several ways to get in touch with and provide materials to our journalists.

SEND A TIP

We're hiring!


Want to work for CommonWealth Beacon?

We're seeking an experienced Senior Reporter to join the team.

LEARN MORE

More Commentary from CommonWealth Voices

Legacy admissions must go    

by Lydia Edwards and Raul Fernandez


Don’t let public access TV go dark 

by Caleb Tobin



In Lynn, new ‘Calm Team’ offers alternative to police response

by Jared Nicholson



In the face of federal cuts, Mass. must spend transportation dollars right

by Reggie Ramos



DONATE

Top News | 'He’s Not Going to Run Unopposed': Sanders Rejects Schumer for Majority Leader

                                                               LOTS OF POSTS IGNORED BY BLOGGER..... OR REMOVED ON THEIR WHIM! ALL POSTS ARE...