SULLIVAN'S SALVOS
May 28, 2024
Sullivan’s Salvos 5/30/24
In this edition:
*Vote for Sullivan!
*Endorsements Part 1!
*Endorsements Part 2!
*Endorsements Part 3!
*Police
*Did You Know?
*Vote for Sullivan!
Like most people growing up in rural Iowa in the 60s and 70s, I was raised to be humble. “Don’t toot your own horn,” was the phrase. But as an adult, I chose a profession that requires you to “toot your own horn” every four years if you want to keep your job. So if you will please indulge me, I want to use a few words to explain why I believe I deserve your support in the upcoming Supervisor Primary.
The following comes straight from my website: https://www.rodsullivanforsupervisor.com.
Rod Sullivan's accomplishments put Johnson County's people and their wellbeing at the center of his work. During his time in office, Rod has facilitated discussions, advocated and led changes that have improved the lives of tens of thousands of Johnson County residents. Those efforts include:
· Raising the minimum wage
· Increasing funding for affordable housing
· Creating the GuideLink Center
· Passing the Conservation Bond Initiative
· Passing the Human Rights Ordinance
· Creating the Free Tax Help Project
· Instituting the Buy Here Initiative
· Adding rural warning sirens
· Creating the Livable Community for Successful Aging Policy Board
· Creating the Local Foods Policy Council
· Adopting the Community ID
· Leading the transition to regional mental health care
From the very beginning, Rod has put the people and their community at the forefront.
· He provided steady leadership during the 2008 floods and over a decade later did the same during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
· He saved the Sutliff Bridge, preserved the Historic Poor Farm, and initiated the renaming of Johnson County after Lulu Merle Johnson.
· Rod started the 1105 Project with the gift of the old Public Health Building.
But it isn't just the people of Johnson County he fights for; it is also the land they live on. In his time, he advocated and passed the Sensitive Area Ordinance, Stormwater Ordinance, Wind and Solar Ordinance, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan.
I’m proud of the work I have done. Moving forward, I plan to continue to focus on mental health, affordable housing, climate change, and more. I think we can accomplish more great things. That is why I would ask for your vote during the 2024 Democratic Primary.
*Endorsements Part 1!
I am incredibly honored to receive the endorsements of the Iowa City Federation of Labor, Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Building Trades, and Laborer's Local 43!
Nothing makes me prouder than the fact that the working people of our county know I have their backs! Thank you, organized labor!
*Endorsements Part 2!
I am also proud to announce that I have been endorsed by Moms Demand Action as a Gun Sense candidate! I really appreciate this endorsement, as I believe Moms Demand Action has done great work both nationally and locally.
*Endorsements Part 3!
It is not a widely known fact, but it is something of which I am very proud: I was the first elected official in the country to formally endorse Bernie Sanders for President in 2016.
So I am also proud to have received the endorsement of Our Revolution, the organization that sprung up from the remaining Sanders supporters.
*Police
It seems that one of the big debates in and around Iowa City is whether we should reduce spending on law enforcement in favor of more funding for health and human services initiatives. It reminds me of a trip I took.
Melissa and I spent some eye-opening time in Haiti. At the time, it was the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, and 5th poorest country on planet Earth. If I had to guess, I’d wager they are worse off now than when we visited.
We spent a tiny bit of time in Port-Au-Prince, whose approximately 2.6 million people is comparable to Pittsburgh, Las Vegas, or Sacramento. We spent most of our time in a city of about 80,000, which is pretty similar to Iowa City. We also visited villages close in size to Solon and Lone Tree. In all these places, I only saw police twice – entering and leaving the country at the airport.
Has an almost complete lack of police led to a better society? No, in fact, it is much the opposite. In the absence of police, the bigger, stronger person always wins. Women and children are the big losers. Physical prowess and/or money, rather than laws, settle most disputes.
I know, I know… Haiti fails to invest in everything, not just police. Better public health, education, etc. would also improve lives. So let’s compare the countries across the world with the highest and lowest rates of police.
Of 146 reporting counties, the US ranks number 44 at 243 officers per 100,000 people. Among the countries with the lowest policing rates are Mali, Haiti, and Somalia. Not great company. Finland comes in at #16, but is followed immediately by bad actors like China and Myanmar. Right after that? Canada, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden.
The point is, even the most progressive social democracies have police. Yes, the rate is lower. But we are talking 185-195 police per 100,000 people in the social democracies, compared to 243 in the US. The number is lower, but not substantially lower.
What does this tell us? Even with birth to death free healthcare, great schools, free childcare, guaranteed pensions, and the like, societies need police. We will NEVER – and I mean NEVER – approach the level of social investments made by these European countries. We’ll never get close. Regardless of how much we invest upstream, downstream, you are still going to need some police.
As human beings became farmers rather than hunter/gatherers, they began living in larger and larger groups. Every single society since then has maintained some system of settling disputes. In some societies, this is done with armies. In more democratic societies, this is done with police. It has never worked any other way. There must be some way to maintain social order. Using police seems to be the best method anyone has ever come up with.
So what are we to do here? Again, we are asked whether we should reduce spending on law enforcement in favor of more funding for health and human services initiatives. I think it is obvious that this is a false choice.
Again, we will NEVER – and I mean NEVER – approach the level of social investments made by these European countries. We’ll never get close. Especially when we are only talking local dollars. Those social democracies have billions to spend; by comparison, we have a pittance. Regardless of how much we invest upstream, downstream, you are still going to need some police.
So why pit funding for police versus funding for social services? We should acknowledge that both are important. Both deserve to be heartily funded. And both should be subject to the same budgetary scrutiny as every other program or service governments provide.
I think some of the anti-police attitude comes from high profile cases. We all saw what happened to George Floyd. We know what police did to Brionna Taylor. I could name another hundred examples of bad police doing bad things to African Americans.
In addition, many of us locally saw bad behavior by past cops in Iowa City. Everyone had a story of two. Add in greater distrust of institutions in general, and it is easy to see why some folks might think more police is a bad deal. I just don’t happen to agree.
I have had a close look at local law enforcement for over 20 years now. And I can tell you that local police did a better job in 2003 than 1993, did better in 2013 than 2003, and do better in 2023 than in 2013. The improvement is significant. There is better training. They have adopted most national best practices. DEI is not optional. Cops who did not buy in have retired; new cops are hired into a very different culture. We (voters) deserve credit, because we have demanded higher standards, and our police have stepped up.
This does not mean things are perfect. We can always improve. We need to remain diligent as citizens. We need to demand the very best policing available.
And yes, we are not immune from a disastrous event. Police are people; it could happen. We need to do everything we can to make certain it doesn’t happen, but there are no guarantees.
I think there are several things to consider here:
1. I do not want to “defund” the police, but I expect police to be accountable.
2. I do not want to “defund” the police, but I expect police to always strive to be better.
3. I do not want to “defund” the police, but I expect police to always use best practices.
4. No one is more upset by a bad cop than all the good cops.
5. Contrary to what is often stated, minorities strongly oppose “defunding” the police.
A 2021 report from the Vera Institute of Justice noted that for the first time, arrest rates in the suburbs were higher than in major cities. And while arrest rates for African Americans in urban areas have been going down, they are increasing in suburbs. Over the past 20 years, the United States has seen a 20% decrease in the overall arrest rate, lower rates of racial disparities in arrests, and lower youth arrest rates. Despite very high-profile examples to the contrary, police just may be doing better nationwide.
There are racists incidents on busses. We don’t call for the abolition of bus drivers. There are racist incidents in schools. We don’t call for the abolition of teachers. There are racist incidents in hospitals. We don’t call for the abolition of doctors. I don’t see this as much different.
I am all for police accountability. But “defunding”? No thank you! If I need a cop, I want to call 911 and get a cop!
*DID YOU KNOW? Polls close at 8 pm on Tuesday, June 4. You can find your polling place here: https://gis.johnsoncountyiowa.gov/pollingplaces/
Anyone interested in learning more about County government should take a look at the County website-
"Sullivan’s Salvos" is sent once per week to any interested party. It will give a brief update on issues of interest to Johnson County residents.
These messages come solely from Rod Sullivan, and neither represents the viewpoints of the whole Board of Supervisors nor those of groups or individuals otherwise mentioned.
If you do NOT want the weekly E-mail, simply reply to this message, and type "unsubscribe" in the subject line.
If you know anyone else who might be interested, just forward this message. They can E-mail me at rodsullivan29@gmail.com with "subscribe" in the subject line.
As always, feel free to contact me at 354-7199 or rodsullivan29@gmail.com. I look forward to serving you!
---Rod
posted by Rod Sullivan @ 9:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home