Op-Ed

OP-ED: Neglect, Disrespect Of Puerto Rico By Trump Administration Continues

THE SEATTLE MEDIUM — President Donald Trump reignited the antipathy he has towards Puerto Rico when, in a recent meeting with Congressional Republicans, he reiterated his desire to deny any but the most basic funds to Puerto Rico.

Published

7 years ago

April 20, 2019

Oakland Post

By Barrington M. Salmon

President Donald Trump reignited the antipathy he has towards Puerto Rico when, in a recent meeting with Congressional Republicans, he reiterated his desire to deny any but the most basic funds to Puerto Rico.

He told senators in a closed-door meeting on March 26 he thinks Puerto Rico got too much funding compared to mainland states like Florida, Georgia and Texas. In a CNN exclusive by Jim Acosta and Kevin Liptak, Trump said he is willing to supplement a shortfall in the island’s food stamp program to the tune of $600 million but refuses to do more.

This posture infuriated Gov. Ricardo Rosselló who reacted angrily to Trump’s comments, calling him a bully and accusing him of ignoring the island’s dire post-hurricane needs. Rosselló told CNN that he would not sit back and allow his officials to be bullied by the White House.

“If the bully gets close, I’ll punch the bully in the mouth,” he said. “It would be a mistake to confuse courtesy with courage.”

In various media reports, Rosselló described the president’s remarks as “irresponsible, regrettable and, above all, unjustified,” and “below the dignity of a sitting president.”

“I invite the president to stop listening to ignorant and completely wrong advice,” Rosselló added in a statement last week. “Instead he should come to Puerto Rico to hear firsthand from the people on the ground. I invite him to put all of the resources at his disposal to help Americans in Puerto Rico, like he did for Texas and Alabama. No more, no less … What I am aiming to do is make sure that reason prevails, that empathy prevails, that equality prevails and that we can have a discussion.”

Trump has complained repeatedly that Puerto Rican government officials are wasting the money it has already received, a statement that Rosselló strenuously pushed back against.

“He treats us as second-class citizens, that’s for sure,” he said. “And my consideration is I just want the opportunity to explain to him why the data and information he’s getting is wrong. I don’t think getting into a kicking and screaming match with the President does any good. I don’t think anyone can beat the President in a kicking and screaming match. What I am aiming to do is make sure reason prevails, that empathy prevails, that equality prevails, and that we can have a discussion.”

Both Rosselló and San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz, have sought meetings with Trump for months but he has refused. Rosselló met with White House officials and was also on Capitol Hill last week discussing the prospects of Puerto Rican statehood with lawmakers.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said Trump supports the federal government offering $600 million to Puerto Rico to bridge a food stamp shortfall caused by commonwealth officials slashing benefits, but the president is resistant to the US government sending disaster aid dollars and money to rebuild antiquated water systems and make them more resilient to future storms.

Overall, more than 580,000 people in Puerto Rico rely on the food stamp program and more than 40 percent of them live below the poverty line, Rossello said.

According to the Associated Press, the Government Accountability Office estimates that Puerto Rico will need about $132 billion to rebuild from Maria. And so far, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has obligated almost $4 billion in public assistance grant funding to the island and Congress has released $11 billion.

The Democratic House pulled together an almost $14 billion aid package that sat in the Senate for weeks, then Trump’s stubborn refusal to approve additional funding led them to block a $13.5 billion Republican disaster aid bill on April 2. The Dems argued that without more adequate aid for Puerto Rico they wouldn’t support the bill.

Trump criticized Democrats via Twitter for “fighting” the disaster relief bill and he continues to argue that Puerto Rican officials are using federal funds to pay off its debts, an assertion the officials strenuously deny.

“I want to be very clear: Not a single federal dollar has been used to make debt payments,” Rosselló said. “Mr. President: Enough with the insults and demeaning mischaracterizations. We are not your political adversaries; we are your citizens,”

According media reports, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said Trump was blaming Puerto Rico for failing to spend money that his own administration was refusing to turn over to the island.

“This administration cannot simultaneously hold up recovery dollars for Puerto Rico, and then point to Puerto Rico’s failure to spend it as an excuse not to provide additional assistance,” Leahy said during debate on the Senate floor.

““I’ve given them more money than they’ve ever got,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “Puerto Rico has been taken care of better by Donald Trump than by any living human being. I think the people of Puerto Rico understand it.

Since the storms, Trump has congratulated himself, claiming that the recovery efforts were ‘incredibly successful’ and he praised FEMA and law enforcement as well.

In a recent article in The Independent, a British publication, acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney is quoted as saying he believes Puerto Rico will need to find its own way out of the debt crisis. Those knowledgeable about what happens in the White House also say they believe he is encouraging Trump’s negative view of the island.

On April 1, Trump tweeted: ”The people of Puerto Rico are GREAT but politicians are incompetent or corrupt. Puerto Rico got far more money than Florida and Texas combined, yet their government can’t do anything right, the place is a mess, nothing works.”

San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz, who has been trading insults with Trump since shortly after the storms, issued a statement last week saying Trump’s comments are a reminder that he “cannot lead.”

“When faced with a devastating human crisis, Trump augmented it because he made it about himself, not about saving our lives,” she said. “When expected to show empathy, he showed disdain and lack of respect; it seems to be too hard for Trump to know the facts, so he continues to lie about the aid sent to Puerto Rico and about the federal inadequacy towards Puerto Rico.”

As the politicians squabble, the 3.2 million residents of the island commonwealth are still struggling to cope with the crippling and devastating effects of massive back-to-back Category 4 and 5 storms in September 2017. Hurricane Maria destroyed the island’s electrical grid and cellphone towers. In addition, about 80 percent of transmission lines are down and 100 percent of the wires connecting homes and businesses were demolished.

Damage to the island’s infrastructure, especially in the interior and remote villages and communities, left many roads impassable and residents left to fend for themselves. Most affected were the elderly, people needing dialysis or operations for other illnesses, those suffering from asthma and other respiratory diseases, the poor, residents living in poverty, people living in mountain regions, near rivers and in the heart of the commonwealth’s rugged interior and those who live in the southeastern part of the island.

It is now acknowledged that more than 4,000 people died during and after the storms.

The entire ordeal is exacerbated by the fact that Puerto Rico has been in an economic tailspin for the past 12 years. A federally appointed Financial Oversight and Management Board reported last year that the Commonwealth had $74 billionin bond debt and $49 billion in unfunded pension liabilities as of May 2017. The Control Board has implemented draconian austerity measures which has led to demonstrations and unrest since the hurricanes.

Although Puerto Ricans are American citizens, they do not have a voting member of Congress and cannot vote for president. Puerto Ricans have chafed under America’s colonial yolk and that issue is again in plain view with a president who is unapologetic in his support of white nationalists and their agenda, and quite comfortable expressing his disdain for Puerto Rico, as he has towards other majority Black and brown nations.

Critics, pundits and academics say it’s impossible to ignore the role race plays in Trump’s treatment of Puerto Ricans.

In an interview on Tuesday, Rosselló reminded people that Puerto Rico’s population is almost entirely Latino and said that historically, there have been “ethnic undertones” to the treatment of Puerto Ricans by Washington.

“We don’t want special treatment. We just want equal treatment,” he said.

Dr. Lauren Lluveras said Trump has racialized the federal response and wonders in an article titled, ‘Is Racial Bias Driving Trump’s Neglect of Puerto Rico?’if racial bias fuels his behavior.

“The island is so crippled in part thanks to the federal government’s underwhelming early hurricane response,” said Dr. Lluveras, Postdoctoral Fellow at the Institute for Urban Policy Research and Analysis, University of Texas in Austin. “The historic storm played its role, of course, destroying homes, triggering mudslides and rendering roadways impassible.”

“But the Trump administration delayed dispatching military personnel and material relief until after the hurricane made landfall, and let the Jones Act waiver lapse, reducing the number of ships that can bring aid to the island. These actions have slowed recovery considerably.”

Political Economist Pedro Cabán, an expert in Puerto Rican political and economic change, agreed, saying in a 2017 Jacobin Magazine article titled, ‘Catastrophe and Colonialism’ that Hurricane Maria brutally exposed the crisis of Puerto Rico’s colonial status.

“The Donald Trump administration’s response to the crisis reveals that Puerto Ricans are racialized as subordinate, despite their US citizenship, said Dr. Cabán, Professor of Latin American, Caribbean and US Latino Studies at University at the State University of New York in Albany. “Trump’s racially charged statements resurrected long dormant, degrading characterizations of Puerto Ricans as lacking the capacity and will to fend for themselves.”

FIU’s Dr. Danielle Pilar Clealand said the worst hurricane to hit Puerto Rico in more than 80 years has racialized Puerto Ricans.

“Puerto Rico occupied an elite position in the Caribbean and was considered one of the whiter Caribbean islands, but they’re being racialized,” said Dr. Clealand, assistant professor in the Department of Politics & International Relations at Florida International University’s Cuban Research Institute. “They’ve been racialized as non-whites in ways they haven’t before. This is causing them to change their perspective as it relates to who they are. That component is something to watch as people re-envision where they stand in the world.”

This article originally appeared in The Seattle Medium.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Civil Rights Icon John Lewis Lauds The Links, Incorporated and Issues Voting Rights Call to Action

Don't Miss

Black Millennial Political Convention Scheduled in Washington

Oakland Post

Click to comment

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Jim Crow 2.0 at the Pentagon

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

Published

3 weeks ago

August 3, 2026

bpusa-syndication

Pete Hegseth insists that he is restoring “merit” to the United States military. But after months of dismissals, blocked promotions, and ideological purges, the evidence tells a different story. His campaign against so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has become something far more dangerous: an assault on equal opportunity that falls with particular force on African Americans, while also targeting women, Latinos, gay Americans, and transgender service members.

The latest example is both troubling and infuriating.

Once again, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reportedly blocked the promotion of an exceptionally qualified woman—Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt. Bauernschmidt is no ordinary officer. She became the Navy’s first woman to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the most demanding leadership assignments in the world. Her career reflects decades of exemplary performance, operational excellence, and leadership under extraordinary pressure.

Yet once again, a distinguished military career appears to have been subordinated to an ideological agenda masquerading as “merit.”

I call BS!

The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

The pattern has become impossible to ignore.

General Charles Q. Brown Jr., only the second African American to serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed despite a career that placed him among the most accomplished military leaders of his generation.

Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first woman ever to serve as Chief of Naval Operations, was removed despite decades of distinguished command experience.

Reports have documented interventions that blocked or delayed the promotions of Black officers and women selected through the military’s rigorous promotion system.

Now Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt joins the growing list of highly accomplished officers whose careers have been derailed for reasons that have never been persuasively explained.

Where is Congress?

Its silence has become deafening.

Congress has an independent constitutional responsibility to oversee the armed forces. Instead, too many lawmakers have watched silently while one of the nation’s most respected institutions is subjected to ideological litmus tests and political interference.

This is not military reform. It is testosterone-fueled performative masculinity disguised as a philosophy of military excellence.

The irony is impossible to miss. Hegseth repeatedly invokes “merit,” yet his rhetoric begins with the assumption that Black officers, women, and other historically excluded Americans must somehow justify their achievements in ways that white male officers are rarely required to do.

That is not meritocracy. It is prejudice wrapped in patriotic language.

No one is asking that anyone be promoted because of race or gender. Americans simply expect that promotions be based on demonstrated competence, leadership, integrity, and service. The officers being targeted have already proven themselves repeatedly under one of the world’s most demanding evaluation systems.

Their records speak for themselves.

The attack on African American military leadership has been especially pernicious.

For generations, Black Americans fought in segregated units, earned decorations while denied equal treatment, and repeatedly demonstrated loyalty to a nation that often failed to extend them full citizenship. They broke barriers not because standards were lowered but because excellence finally overcame institutional discrimination.

Today’s campaign against “diversity” threatens to revive old assumptions under new slogans.

The implication that Black generals and admirals somehow owe their success to affirmative action rather than extraordinary performance echoes some of the ugliest stereotypes of the Jim Crow era. Yesterday’s segregationists claimed Black Americans were inherently less qualified. Today’s culture warriors simply employ more politically acceptable language while inviting the same suspicion about Black achievement.

That is why Hegseth’s campaign increasingly resembles Jim Crow 2.0.

The targets may now wear stars on their shoulders instead of military patches on segregated uniforms, but the underlying message is hauntingly familiar: Black excellence is presumed suspect, while white excellence is presumed earned.

America’s military became the finest fighting force in history because it opened its doors to talent wherever it could be found. It grew stronger after President Truman desegregated the armed forces. It became stronger when women assumed greater command responsibilities. It became stronger when every qualified American was given the opportunity to serve to the fullest extent of their abilities.

Diversity is not a concession. It is a strategic advantage.

The nation’s adversaries do not fear an American military because it is racially homogeneous. They fear it because it draws upon the talents of more than 340 million Americans whose diverse experiences, perspectives, and abilities make our armed forces unmatched anywhere in the world.

Every politically motivated dismissal of a distinguished officer sends a chilling message throughout the ranks: excellence alone may no longer be enough if you belong to the wrong demographic group.

That weakens morale. It weakens recruitment. It weakens retention.

And ultimately, it weakens national security.

Pete Hegseth has every right to pursue military readiness. He has no right to redefine merit in ways that repeatedly cast suspicion upon the accomplishments of Black officers, women, and others who have devoted their lives to defending this nation.

America deserves better. The men and women who wear the uniform deserve better. The Constitution deserves better.

And unless Congress finds the courage to exercise meaningful oversight, history may well remember this period not as a restoration of military excellence, but as the moment political ideology attempted to resurrect, in modern form, the old poison of exclusion.

Jim Crow did not strengthen America. Jim Crow 2.0 will not strengthen America’s military. It will only diminish it

Wade Henderson
Strategic Advisor
Civil and Human Rights
wade@wadejhenderson.com

bpusa-syndication

Posts by bpusa-syndication

Activism

Alameda County Makes History: Board of Supervisors Unanimously Adopts Reparations Action Plan

The Final Action Plan addresses disparities in housing, economic opportunity, education, health, environmental justice, public safety, arts and culture, land use, and other areas where historical government policies have contributed to inequitable outcomes for Black residents.

Published

2 months ago

July 5, 2026

Oakland Post

The Reparations Commission members and Alameda County Board of Supervisors celebrated the approval of its report on June 30. Present were (first row, l. to r.) Dee Johnson, Supervisor Elisa Marquez, Supervisor Lena Tam, Debra Gore, Artavia Berry, Supervisor Nikki Fortunato Bas, Jennifer Gayden, and Supervisor David Haubert; Second row (l. to r.) Supervisor Nate Miley, Larry McClendon, Brandon T. Sass, Phil Gardiner, Shadrick A. Small, and James Knowles. Photo by Ashley Sturgis, Supervisor’s Assistant from the Office of Supervisor Lena Tam.

Landmark 5–0 Vote Advances One of the Nation’s Most Comprehensive County-Led Reparative Justice Efforts

Special to The Post

The Alameda County Board of Supervisors unanimously voted 5–0 on Tuesday to adopt the Final Action Plan of the Alameda County Reparations Commission, marking a historic milestone in the County’s commitment to advancing reparative justice for Black residents.

The vote follows nearly three years of work by the Alameda County Reparations Commission, which was seated in July 2023. Through extensive historical research, analysis of County data, public listening sessions, expert testimony, and community engagement, the Commission developed a comprehensive roadmap for addressing documented harms and expanding opportunity for future generations.

“This vote represents more than the adoption of a report,” said Debra Gore, Chair of the Alameda County Reparations Commission. “It is a commitment to truth, accountability, and action. Reparations are not about guilt or charity. They are about government’s responsibility to address documented harms created by its own policies and to build a more just future.”

During the Board meeting, Gore delivered a keynote address entitled “Redress as Constitutional First Principle,” presenting reparations as a constitutional principle rooted in the First Amendment’s guarantee of the right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Her remarks connected the nation’s founding ideals with Alameda County’s own data documenting continuing racial disparities.

At the conclusion of her address, Gore received a standing ovation from all five members of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, recognizing both the Commission’s work and the significance of the Board’s action.

Grounded in County data and community testimony, the Commission’s recommendations reflect nearly three years of research and engagement with residents, historians, policy experts, advocates, and County staff. Together, they offer a roadmap for repairing documented harms while strengthening opportunity, accountability, and equity for future generations.

The Board’s action also includes a commitment to establish a standing committee to oversee implementation of the Action Plan, signaling that reparative justice will remain an ongoing County priority.

“History will remember this moment not because Alameda County acknowledged injustice,” Gore said. “History will remember that our County chose action. This vote demonstrates that government can confront difficult truths, listen to its residents, and take meaningful steps toward repair.”

Reached in an interview on July 1, Gore said she felt a sense of “joyfulness and reverence” for the ancestors and survivors of the harms of slavery through Jim Crow. “We might be the first in the country to pass an action plan with the commitment to ‘operationalize’ reparations.”

Gore is grateful to former Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson, who asked her to serve on the commission, and current Supervisor Nate Miley, who asked her to be the chairperson.

Among the many who helped create and inspire the report, Gore pointed to former Oakland City Councilmember Leo Bazile, who has been calling for reparations since the 1960s, and the late Reparations Committee member Jesse Clyde Burleson, who provided insight on incarceration as an ongoing harm to the Black community. The report was dedicated to the memory of Burleson, who passed away on March 6 and who had been imprisoned from 1987-2018.

Gore also pointed to their avenue of approach on reparations, which was as much about the impact of slavery as it was about constitutional rights that had been systematically denied to Black people.

Members of the committee were: Cathy Adams, president and CEO of the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce (OAAOCC) issued a statement supporting the reparations milestone.
OAACC “is grateful to former Supervisor Keith Carson, Supervisor Nate Miley, and the entire Alameda County Reparations Commission for their tireless efforts to develop a comprehensive action plan to address and repair the documented harms experienced by our local Black community,” Adams said.

“As an organization deeply committed to advancing workforce development, expanding access to capital, and creating opportunities for Black-owned businesses in Oakland and throughout Alameda County, we look forward to working alongside the steering committee to help deliver meaningful economic justice to those impacted by generations of systemic inequities.”

The Alameda County Reparations Commission extends its gratitude to the hundreds of residents who shared their experiences, the Commissioners who dedicated nearly three years of service, County staff, researchers, historians, and community partners whose work made this milestone possible.

With adoption of the Final Action Plan, Alameda County now begins the next phase of implementation in partnership with County leadership, community organizations, and residents. The commission will be dissolved, Gore says, and she looks forward to the next steps, one of which is the appointment of committee members.

Besides, Burleson, Gore and Bazile, members of the commission included: Natasha Triplett, Shenita Hurskin, Brandon T. Sass, Artavia Berry, Tiega N. Varlack, James Knowles, Vickie Stephens, Dr. Philip S. Gardiner, Dee Johnson, Larry McClendon (vice chair) , Carolyn (CJ) Johnson, Alan E. Dones, Jennifer A. Gayden, Lori Cox (vice chair), and Shadrick A. Small.

About the Alameda County Reparations Commission

Established by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in July 2023, the Alameda County Reparations Commission was charged with examining the historical and ongoing harms experienced by Black residents resulting from government policies and practices and developing recommendations for repair. The Commission’s Final Action Plan provides a comprehensive framework for advancing equity, accountability, and opportunity throughout Alameda County.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Activism

OPINION: Unfair Media Attacks on OUSD Leadership for Not Closing Schools

Dr. Denise Saddler is a respected educator who leads with integrity, honesty, and decades of experience in service to OUSD. Since stepping into the role of interim superintendent, she has worked tirelessly alongside the Senior Leadership Team and fiscal consultants to address one of the most difficult financial situations our district has faced.

Published

2 months ago

July 5, 2026

Oakland Post

The school district has achieved ‘significant milestones that reflect disciplined leadership and a renewed commitment to fiscal responsibility,’ said Board President Jennifer Brouhard

By Jennifer Brouhard, Special to The Post

I am not going to directly respond to or amplify the personal attacks on the Oakland Unified School District’s dedicated leaders who are working every day on behalf of Oakland’s students.

In December, the Board gave clear direction: bring forward a budget proposal that did not include a state loan and did not include school closures. Saddler and her team did exactly what the Board asked them to do.

There were differing opinions about how to address the district’s fiscal challenges. The two former employees referenced in a news article supported a different approach that included pursuing a state loan and exploring school closures. Those proposals were presented to the Board alongside Saddler’s proposal.

The Board adopted Saddler’s recommendation because it reflected the direction we had established. Since I joined the Board in 2023, the majority of the Board has consistently opposed school closures and has worked to preserve local control by avoiding a state loan whenever possible.

The public records cited in the article demonstrate the countless hours Saddler, the Senior Leadership Team, and our consultants devoted to developing a responsible financial plan. Difficult decisions were made, ideas were debated, and ultimately the Board selected the proposal that best aligned with our priorities.

As a result of that collaborative work, OUSD has adopted its first balanced budget in 22 years, achieved a qualified Second Interim Certification, and submitted a positive Third Interim Report.

These are significant milestones that reflect disciplined leadership and a renewed commitment to fiscal responsibility.

While there is still important work ahead, I believe the relationship between the Board, Dr. Saddler, and the Senior Leadership Team has become stronger and more collaborative throughout this process. We are moving in the right direction—with honesty, integrity, and a focus on the needs of OUSD’s 34,000 students.

Jennifer Brouhard, a retired OUSD teacher was elected in 2023 to represent District 2 and has been Board president since 2025.