If we want people to stand up and show authentic courage in protecting democracy amid the current onslaught—we need to demand it, and give kudos when it happens.
In that vein, every week I’m going to sing the praises of someone who lifted us all through taking a courageous and strong stand for America and democracy. Each Friday, I will name a Patriot of the Week.
Here’s my first one:
Andy Kim
This week, a number of people did stand up. Protests across the country and in Washington; speeches and rallies in DC; an overnight Senate session to slow the nomination of Vought; media appearances. Some smart and proactive lawsuits which look to be bearing fruit (see below).
But from my vantage point, it was a single isolated act that initially stuck out, and got much of the rest started. One of the first steps, authentic enough to cut through the clutter, and break the initial silence in a way that snowballed into something bigger.
One person, standing up.
Even if, at first, alone.
In only his first month as a US Senator, as frustrated Americans were asking what was being done to fight back and seeing too few doing so (the House was not in session), New Jersey Senator Andy Kim did something different: on Monday morning, he actually showed up at U.S. AID headquarters by himself, walked through the doors he had walked through as a U.S. AID intern twenty years before, and tried to get answers.
As NOTUS reported: “One senator went there directly: On Monday morning, Sen. Andy Kim tried to get inside the agency to meet with its acting administrator, Jason Gray….After less than 10 minutes in the lobby and in the presence of four security officials, Kim was told he could not meet with Gray or any member of his staff.
“It wasn’t what I was hoping for, but frankly, it was what I expected,” Kim said while walking out of the building.”
Senator Kim then stood in front of the building and explained to gathered media why he was there, what he had tried to do, and why it was important.
Here was that moment:
After Kim went to the building itself, then made these comments standing outside it, larger crowds began to show up in front of buildings — U.S. AID, the Department of the Treasury, the State Department, and others.
And after that, the silence about what was happening ended.
Not only that, but Senator Kim proceeded to explain in numerous media outlets what U.S. AID does, and its importance as a tool in American diplomacy and aid:
Here he is (in Slate) describing why U.S. AID’S work is important: “What I want to just express to the American people is that USAID and the work that they’re doing, it’s not charity. This isn’t American altruism. This is something that is so vital to our national security. I am a deep believer in this idea that national security is built off the three D’s: defense, diplomacy, and development. And it’s not just me—this is something that Ronald Reagan started….This is the most chaotic and dangerous global environment I’ve ever seen during my lifetime. We have a real credible challenge to our global leadership with rising China, but also the sabotage work of Russia, Iran, and elsewhere. This is not the time to consider taking tools off the table.”
Senator Kim also very clearly and succinctly explained why the DOGE attack on U.S. AID is so legally problematic, and so dangerous: “Congress has codified USAID as an entity within the executive branch, and as a result, it is not something that is the purview of an individual president to decide. If there’s going to be major reorganization or dismantling of USAID, it needs to go through Congress….This effort is illegal. It is not being done in a way that is bringing Congress into the fold. What they’re trying to do, in terms of bringing USAID under the State Department and gutting major parts of the agency, is undermining the capabilities and functions of USAID as laid out in federal statute.”
Thank you, Senator Kim, for your leadership.
You too can send words of appreciation by contacting him HERE.
BREAKING: late yesterday, two news items broke regarding the assault on U.S. AID. One, the administration announced that the staff of U.S. AID was being decimated down to just a few dozen. But hours after that, a suit was filed to stop the decimation of U.S. AID, which the Complaint explained was “generat[ing] a global humanitarian crisis.”
Day 67 — February 6, 2024
A series of court decisions slowed Trump actions on multiple fronts:
A district court judge (and Reagan appointee) issued a national injunction against Trump’s executive order trying to eliminate birthright citizenship. The judge did not mince words: “Citizenship by birth is an unequivocal Constitutional right. It is one the precious principles that makes the Untied States the great nation that it is. The President cannot change, limit or qualify this Constitutional right via executive order."
And pending review of cases challenging the “deferred resignation” offer to federal workers, as well as the raids of data in both the Treasury and Labor Departments, actions in all three cases were temporarily stopped.
So far, Trump has not won a single decision in court surrounding his series of illegal and problematic actions and executive orders.
Unfortunately, the next DOGE target looks to be the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which includes the National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center. DOGE apparently informed senior staff to plan to reduce its staff by 50% and funding by 30%.
Long-time subscribers of mine know this comes right out of Project 2025—and is motivated by anger that NOAA responsibly tracks and studies climate change and its impact on severe weather.
REMINDER of Project 2025 and NOAA:
As I wrote about in the fall, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration “predicts changes in climate, weather, oceans, and coastlines and provides data that informs lifesaving forecasts such as tracking hurricanes tracking and…intense weather, such as hurricanes.” It includes the National Weather Service, National Ocean Service, The Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, and other agencies.
According to Project 2025, the NOAA "has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity.” (p. 675). Its focus, Project 2025 alleges, “seems designed around the fatal conceit of planning for the unplannable.”
That’s right, Project 2025 declared its opposition to trying to plan for future weather events, and now DOGE is acting on that..
As a result, NOAA “should be broken up and downsized.”
Project 2025 proposed:
“fully commercializ[ing] [the National Weather Service’s] forecasting operations” (p. 675)
reviewing the data of the National Hurricane Center and National Environmental Satellite Service to ensure it is “presented neutrally, without adjustments intended to support any one side in the climate debate” (p. 676)
“disband[ing] the preponderance of the climate-change research” of the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, because “it is the source of much of NOAA’s climate alarmism” (p. 676)
ensuring politicized appointments to lead the NOAA — “Ensure Appointees Agree with Administration Aims. Scientific agencies like NOAA are vulnerable to obstructionism of an Administration’s aims if political appointees are not wholly in sync with Administration policy. Particular attention must be paid to appointments in this area.” (p. 677)
These steps greatly risk the nation’s ability to track and predict major weather events. As the LA Times summed up: Project 2025 “urges the demolition of some of the nation’s most dependable resources for tracking weather, combating climate change and protecting the public from environmental hazards.”
As a USA Today analysis stated: “NOAA’s satellites, aircraft, weather stations and meteorologists constantly collect weather data and expertly offer detailed weather forecasts and predictions to residents, researchers and nearly every third-party weather program, forecasting service or app. NWS weather alerts notify us of hurricanes, tornados and flooding. The NWS forecasts fire weather and issues watches, warnings and advisories for high winds, life-threatening rip currents and other hazards.”
More broadly, the proposals “block and make less available information about climate change in order to serve an agenda of climate change denial.”
In our podcast “Trump’s Project 2025,” Mark Ruffalo and I worked together to describe the real-world challenges that will play out if these steps take place. You can listen to it HERE.
Share this post