content
stringlengths 186
41.5k
| id
stringlengths 17
19
|
|---|---|
Fox News announced long-time anchor Shepard Smith will be leaving the network . Smith was most recently the chief news anchor and managing editor of the network β s breaking news unit and anchor of `` Shepard Smith Reporting . ''\nFriday 's episode `` Shepard Smith Reporting '' is his final show . Fox News said there will be rotating anchors hosting the 3 p.m . ET time slot until a new dayside news program is announced .\nβ Shep is one of the premier newscasters of his generation and his extraordinary body of work is among the finest journalism in the industry . His integrity and outstanding reporting from the field helped put FOX News on the map and there is simply no better breaking news anchor who has the ability to transport a viewer to a place of conflict , tragedy , despair or elation through his masterful delivery , '' Jay Wallace , President & Executive Editor of FOX News Media , said in a statement .\nβ Recently , I asked the company to allow me to leave Fox News and begin a new chapter , '' Smith explained in the press release . `` After requesting that I stay , they graciously obliged . The opportunities afforded this guy from small town Mississippi have been many . It β s been an honor and a privilege to report the news each day to our loyal audience in context and with perspective , without fear or favor . I β ve worked with the most talented , dedicated and focused professionals I know and I β m proud to have anchored their work each day β I will deeply miss them . β\nSmith has been known to make rebuttals to President Trump on his show , especially when it came to Trump 's criticisms against the press . As a result , Trump has sent out tweets targeting Smith . Trump sent a tweet about Smith as recently as Thursday .\n... Court Justice & I turned him down ( he β s been terrible ever since ) , Shep Smith , @ donnabrazile ( who gave Crooked Hillary the debate questions & got fired from @ CNN ) , & others , @ FoxNews doesn β t deliver for US anymore . It is so different than it used to be . Oh well , I β m President ! β Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) October 10 , 2019\nThis is a breaking news story and will be updated .
|
allsides-corpus-200
|
This is a rush transcript . Copy may not be in its final form .\nAMY GOODMAN : In one of his final acts in office , President Obama shortened the sentences of 209 prisoners , pardoned 64 individuals on Tuesday . The list included Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning , longtime imprisoned Puerto Rican independence activist Oscar LΓ³pez Rivera and retired U.S. Marine Corps General James Cartwright . But missing from the list is 71-year-old Native American activist Leonard Peltier .\nLater in the program , we β ll look at the cases of Peltier and Oscar LΓ³pez Rivera , but first to Chelsea Manning , who β s now set to be free May 17th , after Obama shortened her sentence from 35 years to seven . According to her attorneys , she is already the longest-held whistleblower in U.S. history . She β s been in military custody since May 2010 . Manning leaked more than 700,000 classified files and videos to WikiLeaks about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and U.S. foreign policy . She β s been subjected to long stretches of solitary confinement and denied medical treatment related to her gender identity . Chelsea Manning attempted to commit suicide twice last year .\nJoining us now are two of her attorneys . Nancy Hollander is Manning β s appellate attorney . Chase Strangio of the ACLU represents Manning in a lawsuit against the Pentagon for denial of medical care related to her gender dysphoria . Also with us is The Intercept β s Jeremy Scahill , author of the recent piece , β The True Scandal of 2016 was the Torture of Chelsea Manning . β\nWe welcome you all to βββ ! Chase Strangio , your response to what President Obama did yesterday ?\nCHASE STRANGIO : Well , I justβI first want to thank you and everyone who supported Chelsea over the years . The reality is that this was a mass mobilization effort , keeping her story alive , led by Chelsea herself and all of the people who made sure that nobody forgot the justice that she fought for and the incredible symbol of democratic principles and advocacy that she really embodies . Yesterday was an incredible day for us who care about her . As I β ve said time and time again , President Obama really had her life in his hands . And it β s such a relief that he acted on the side of mercy and justice here .\nCHASE STRANGIO : Unfortunately , we haven β t spoken to Chelsea , which is a bit concerning , but we β re remaining hopeful that we will be able to speak with her today and actually be able to share this news . It β s quite unusual for the individual to not be informed of their commutation with their attorneys . But we know that , you know , she was on standby , waiting for this . I spoke with her yesterday around 2:00 p.m. , and she was just her sort of hopeful , pragmatic self , waiting for news . And we were all hoping and praying with her . So , hopefully , today we β ll connect with her and get to share in this incredible moment that really did save her life .\nCHASE STRANGIO : Yeah , absolutely . She has served seven years already . The 35-year sentence was egregious at the time . It β s particularly egregious in retrospect . And she has served seven years . It is absolutely preposterous to hear people saying that there are no consequences for her actions . She has been tortured and imprisoned , denied basic medical care . She has suffered so much , and it is time for her to be free .\nAMY GOODMAN : Nancy Hollander , the response on the networksβI was watching CNN last night . The overwhelming response of the guests that they β ve had onβlet me go to some of the comments . Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan released a statement protesting the commutation , saying , quote , β This is just outrageous . Chelsea Manning β s treachery put American lives at risk and exposed some of our nation β s most sensitive secrets . President Obama now leaves in place a dangerous precedent that those who compromise our national security won β t be held accountable for their crimes. β Meanwhile , Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona called the commutation a β grave mistake β that may , quote , β encourage further acts of espionage and undermine military discipline. β He added , quote , β Thousands of Americans have given their lives in Afghanistan and Iraq upholding their oaths and defending this nation . Chelsea Manning broke her oath and made it more likely that others would join the ranks of her fallen comrades . Her prison sentence may end in a few months β [ time ] , but her dishonor will last forever , β McCain said . Nancy Hollander , your response ?\nNANCY HOLLANDER : They β re totallyβit β s just false . The secretary of defense at the time , Gates , said that the worst that happened was some embarrassment for the United States . There was not a single individual ever identified who was harmed by what Chelsea did . What Chelsea did actually helped the United States . It helped Americans . It helped people around the world understand about human rights violations , understandβbring war home to people . She wanted people to see what happens to somebody who gets killed , what happens to people in Iraq and Afghanistan . She wanted to make this real , so that we would stop doing these kinds of things to people . And so , what they β re saying is exactly the opposite of what Chelsea did . There has never been a single bit of evidence that anybody was harmed or that national security was harmed .
|
allsides-corpus-201
|
Steve Stephens , the so-called β Facebook killer β who sparked a multi-state manhunt after he brazenly gunned down a Cleveland man at random , killed himself Tuesday morning in Pennsylvania as cops closed in , authorities said .\nStephens was spotted in a McDonald 's parking lot in Erie County just after 11 a.m. by a member of the public who quickly contacted Pennsylvania State Police . After a 2-mile chase , `` troopers attempted a PIT maneuver to disable Stephens β vehicle ... As the vehicle was spinning out of control from the PIT maneuver , Stephens pulled a pistol and shot himself in the head , '' a state police Facebook statement said .\nβ We have closure in regards to the search for Steve Stephens , β Mayor Frank Jackson said during a Tuesday afternoon news conference in Cleveland .\nStephens was driving a white Ford Fusion , a picture of which had been circulated by police , when he was discovered .\nCleveland Police Chief Calvin Williams said officials knew of no ties Stephens had to the Erie County area , but they were continuing to investigate .\nIt was not believed that Stephens killed anyone else during his nearly 48 hours on the run , FBI Special Agent in Charge Steve Anthony said .\nPennsylvania police said they kept a close watch on an Erie casino in recent days because Stephens had a history of gambling .\nPennsylvania State Police Major William Teper Jr. said he was only aware through social media that Stephens ' cellphone had been located Sunday afternoon in Erie just hours after killing 74-year-old Robert Godwin Sr. on a Cleveland street . Teper said investigators are trying to determine Stephens ' movements in the area .\nStephens ' mom , Maggie Green , told Fox News on Tuesday she heard the news of her son 's death on the radio . She said she believed he would commit suicide because he visited her house before the murder to say goodbye .\n`` 'Momma this will be the last time you see me ... I just wanted to see you for the last time , ' '' Green said that Stephens told her .\n`` Steve was a good Christian person ... he just snapped ... he had a gambling problem , '' she said .\nAt a press conference earlier this morning , Cleveland police said they did not know where Stephens was .\nStephens , 37 , shot and killed Robert Godwin seemingly at random on Sunday , recording the encounter on his phone and uploading the horrific video to Facebook . Godwin 's family said he had no connection to Stephens or a woman Stephens mentioned during the incident .\nCleveland police on Monday advised residents of Pennsylvania , Michigan , Indiana and New York that Stephens could be in those states , and the manhunt for Stephens soon expanded nationwide .\nErie County , Pa. , is about 100 miles northeast of Cleveland .
|
allsides-corpus-202
|
His standing with veterans damaged by scandal , President Barack Obama on Tuesday defended his administration 's response to Veterans Affairs lapses that delayed health care for thousands of former service members , but conceded more needed to be done to regain their trust .\nHis appearance also had deep political overtones in a state where the Democratic senator , Kay Hagan , is facing a difficult re-election and has sought to distance herself from Obama 's policies , declaring as recently as Friday that his administration had not `` done enough to earn the lasting trust of our veterans . ''\nBut Hagan and the state 's Republican Senator , Richard Burr , were at the North Carolina Air National Guard Base to greet Obama . She welcomed him warmly and he gave her a peck on the cheek .\nObama and Hagan were both addressing the American Legion 's National convention , with the president 's address to the legionnaires the latest administration response to the health care uproar that led to the resignation of Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki in May .\nObama declared that the nation owes veterans for their service and that the lengthy wait times and attempts to hide scheduling flaws were `` outrageous and inexcusable . ''\n`` We are very clear-eyed about the problems that are still there , '' Obama said . `` And those problems require us to regain the trust of our veterans and live up to our vision of a VA that is more effective and more efficient and that truly puts veterans first . And I will not be satisfied until that happens . ''\nObama promised `` a new culture of accountability '' under new Secretary Bob McDonald . `` Bob does n't play , '' Obama said .\nHe announced steps to strengthen access to mental health care by members of the military , to improve the transition for those leaving the military from care administered by the Defense Department to that run by Veterans Affairs , and to foster suicide prevention and better treatments for post-traumatic stress syndrome .\nEarlier this month , Obama signed a $ 16.3 billion law aimed at easing the long waits that tens of thousands of military veterans had endured to get medical care .\nThe law , a product of rare bipartisanship in the House and Senate , followed reports of veterans dying while awaiting appointments to see VA doctors and of a widespread practice of employees covering up months-long wait times for appointments . In some cases , employees received bonuses based on falsified records .\nThe VA says investigators have found no proof that delays in care caused any deaths at a VA hospital in Phoenix .\nMoving beyond the steps included in the law , Obama planned to take executive actions that :\nβ Automatically enroll military personnel who are receiving care for mental health conditions and are leaving the service in a program that transfers them to a new care team in the VA .\nβ Undertake a study designed to detect whether people show signs of being vulnerable to suicide or post-traumatic stress syndrome .\nβ Spends $ 34.4 million in a VA suicide prevention study and about $ 80 million on a program to treat diseases , including post-traumatic stress syndrome .\nObama also announced a partnership with lenders such as Wells Fargo Bank , CitiMortgage , Bank of America , Ocwen Loan Servicing and Quicken Loans to make it easier for active-duty service members to obtain mortgage interest rate reductions .
|
allsides-corpus-203
|
In attacking Donald Trump , President Obama has managed to anger one of the nation β s largest and oldest veterans β groups .\nThe Veterans of Foreign Wars took offense at Mr. Obama β s assertion that its members are confused by right-wing media pundits .\nβ I don β t know how many VFW posts the president has ever visited , β VFW National Commander John A. Biedrzycki Jr. said Thursday , β but our near 1.7 million members are a direct reflection of America , which means we represent every generation , race , religion , gender and political and ideological viewpoint . β\nHe added , β We don β t have confused politics , we don β t need left- or right-wing media filters telling us how to think or vote , and we don β t need any president of the United States lecturing us about how we are individually effected by the economy . β\nDuring a speech Wednesday in Elkhart , Indiana Mr. Obama said , β I β m concerned when I watch the direction of our politics . I mean , we have been hearing this story for decades β tales about welfare queens , talking about takers , talking about the 47 percent . It β s the story that β s broadcast every day on some cable news stations , on right-wing radio . It β s pumped into cars and bars and VFW halls all across America , and right here in Elkhart . β\nThe president went on , β If you β re hearing that story all the time , you start believing it . It β s no wonder people think big government is the problem . No wonder public support for unions is so low . No wonder that people think the deficit has gone up under my presidency when it β s actually gone down . β\nβ Our nation was created and continues to exist solely because of the men and women who wear the uniform , β he said . β Let β s not denigrate their service , their sacrifice or their intelligence . β
|
allsides-corpus-204
|
Story highlights Obama 's plan was for a `` smarter and better '' government with demonstrable benefits\nGloria Borger says President is instead staring down rabbit hole of government incompetence\nShe says the VA scandal , after the health care website woes , highlights the problem\nBorger : Obama can be effective in managing but needs to grab control of bureaucracy\nWhen Barack Obama was a newbie president , there was no shortage of ambition or lack of confidence in the government he was about to lead . Government should be seen as a force for good , not evil . Sure , he told us , it needed to be `` smarter and better , '' but that couldβand wouldβhappen under his watch .\nNever mind that Bill Clinton spent years `` reinventing government '' with mixed success . Or that only 2 % of the American public believes that government can be trusted to do the right thing all the time . President Obama was convinced he could change all that with programs that would deliver for Americaβsuch as health care reformβand the public would be grateful .\nInstead , the President is living his own version of `` Alice Through the Looking Glass '' : staring down a rabbit hole of government bureaucracy and inefficiency . The government he has studiously tried to grow , manage and change has become his own personal nemesis . All of which makes you wonder : Does the President himself trust government anymore ?\nThe scandal at the Department of Veterans Affairs is just the latest in a slew of bureaucratic messes that strike at the core power point of the Obama presidency : Making government work . Consider the disastrous health care website rollout . The IRS controversy . Even the question of NSA surveillance raises questions about the role of government : Did the civil libertarian Obama allow spies to run amok ?\nThe President is clearly having a running debate with himself over all this . About a year ago , after the NSA program was revealed and Democrats and libertarians started squawking , Obama seemed more than a tad defensive on government spying . `` If people ca n't trust not only the executive branch but also do n't trust Congress ... to make sure that we 're abiding by the Constitution ... '' he said , `` then we 're going to have some problems here . ''\nThese are not trivial matters . Health care is the signature legislative achievement of the administration , and a botched rollout made it smell bad at the start . Fixing the VAβand aiding veteransβis a cornerstone of the Obama presidency . And yet , it all looks as if somehow the bureaucracy has beaten the boss .\nJUST WATCHED House Committee grills VA witnesses Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH House Committee grills VA witnesses 00:45\nJUST WATCHED McCain : Time for Shinseki to move on Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH McCain : Time for Shinseki to move on 04:32\nJUST WATCHED VA staffers fudged numbers to meet goal Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH VA staffers fudged numbers to meet goal 02:55\nJUST WATCHED Some in VA may face criminal charges Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Some in VA may face criminal charges 06:00\nIt 's a management issue . So far as I can tell , the governing style of this administration has two extremes : issues singled out for micromanagement ( as in , foreign policy , from the West Wing ) and issues completely delegated ( as in , VA management ) . What seems to be missing is the in-between : the continual monitoring and early warning system that avoids presidential blindsiding . That 's the area in which most of the business of government actually gets done .\nAnd it can get done . The apparatus to do the nation 's business in a competent way is there . Use it , and manage it . That 's what chief executives are hired to do .\nGovernment is unwieldy and difficult and hard to tame , sure . But if your presidency is based , in large part , on telling Americans that government can work for them -- which it can -- you need to make it work .\nIt 's not that the President is a hopeless manager . He does very well when he leads a hierarchical organization with a single goal , like a presidential bid . He 's top dog , he 's not negotiating with anybody , and he 's not trying to get people to do things they do n't want to do . In a campaign , for instance , they all want to elect the same person : him .\nBut when you have to negotiateβor leadβpeople not related to you , or not indebted to you or who do n't agree with you , it 's a different story . Managing or negotiating with people with mixed motives ( Congress , anyone ? ) is not an Obama strong point .\nBy nature , bureaucracies are hard to trust and even harder to tame . And if a chief executive is n't careful , it 's an energy-sapping ( and legacy endangering ) vortex that sucks you right in . Just ask Obama , who was government 's best friend .\nDoes he still feel that way today ? Hard to know . But my guess is he 's a bit like Alice in Wonderland . `` I ca n't go back to yesterday , '' she said , `` because I was a different person then . ''
|
allsides-corpus-205
|
One of Donald Trump β s major themes on the 2016 campaign trail was the need to improve the health care offerings afforded to America β s veterans . We β re going to β take care of our veterans like they have never been taken care of before β was a fairly typical stump speech line , though he sometimes shortened it to simply a brief promise to β take care of our vets . β\nThis was typically laced with references to the spring 2014 VA scandal and devoid of references to the bipartisan reform legislation that passed in the wake of the scandal . Trump didn β t particularly have a policy critique of the Obama administration and never so much as mentioned any of Hillary Clinton β s policy ideas on the issue β the pitch he was making was , broadly , that Democrats didn β t respect or care about veterans as much as he did .\nWednesday he held meetings at his Florida estate with private sector health care leaders to discuss ways to improve things , and then , as described by the New York Times β s Michael Shear , briefed the press on his thinking :\nMr. Trump met with several executives of private hospital systems at his Mar-a-Lago estate on Wednesday . After the meeting , Mr. Trump called out to reporters , saying he wanted to describe his ideas for changes to the Department of Veterans Affairs , but then quickly directed one of his senior aides to describe the proposals under consideration . The official , speaking on the condition of anonymity , provided no details about how the plans would work , how much they would cost , or the possibility of unintended consequences from privatizing part of the V.A. β s sprawling medical system .\nLooking back to the campaign trail , it β s not hard to see what Trump was doing . Whether it was taking care of vets or respecting cops or reopening coal mines or getting Americans jobs in steel mills , wherever there was a stereotypically male occupational category , Trump was there to rhetorically elevate its social status .\nHe did not actually have a specific criticism of the veterans β health care status quo or a specific plan to improve it , and I think Americans in the relevant parts of the country will soon find that he doesn β t have a plan to bring back coal mining or labor-intensive forms of domestic steel production either . In many cases , that reality probably won β t cost Trump votes . Voting for the guy who praises steel and coal and cops and veterans rather than the woman talking about reducing student debt is at least as much a matter of identity politics as it is a matter of policy . After all , anyone interested enough in the details of veterans β health policy or energy policy could have figured out pretty quickly that there was no substance to Trump β s plans .\nBut there probably are some people out there who voted for Trump on the assumption that he had some notion of how to accomplish the things he β s promised . If so , they β re set to be sorely disappointed .
|
allsides-corpus-206
|
The VA 's Broken Promise To Thousands Of Vets Exposed To Mustard Gas\nIn secret chemical weapons experiments conducted during World War II , the U.S. military exposed thousands of American troops to mustard gas .\nWhen those experiments were formally declassified in the 1990s , the Department of Veterans Affairs made two promises : to locate about 4,000 men who were used in the most extreme tests , and to compensate those who had permanent injuries .\nBut the VA did n't uphold those promises , an NPR investigation has found .\nNPR interviewed more than 40 living test subjects and family members , and they describe an unending cycle of appeals and denials as they struggled to get government benefits for mustard gas exposure . Some gave up out of frustration .\nIn more than 20 years , the VA attempted to reach just 610 of the men , with a single letter sent in the mail . Brad Flohr , a VA senior adviser for benefits , says the agency could n't find the rest , because military records of the experiments were incomplete .\n`` There was no identifying information , '' he says . `` No Social Security numbers , no addresses , no ... way of identifying them . Although , we tried . ''\nYet in just two months , an NPR research librarian located more than 1,200 of them , using the VA 's own list of test subjects and public records .\nThe mustard gas experiments were conducted at a time when American intelligence showed that enemy gas attacks were imminent . The tests evaluated protective equipment like gas masks and suits . They also compared the relative sensitivity of soldiers , including tests designed to look for racial difference .\nThe test subjects who are still alive are now in their 80s and 90s . Each year more of their stories die with them .\n`` We were n't told what it was , '' says Charlie Cavell , who was 19 when he volunteered for the program in exchange for two weeks ' vacation . `` Until we actually got into the process of being in that room and realized , wait a minute , we ca n't get out of here . ''\nCavell and 11 other volunteers were locked inside a gas chamber with mustard gas piping inside . Blocks of ice sat on shelves overhead with fans blowing across them to increase the humidity in the room , which intensified mustard gas 's effects on the body . After an hour , the officer released six of the men back to their barracks . Cavell and five others were told to stay put .\nInside the chamber , Cavell 's skin started to turn red and burn in the places where he sweat the most : between his legs , behind his neck and under his arms . Blisters that eventually increased to the size of half dollar coins started to grow in the same places . At the end of the second hour , the officer ordered Cavell back to his barracks and to continue wearing his gas-saturated uniform .\nAbout This Investigation This is Part 2 of a two-part investigation on mustard gas testing conducted by the U.S. military during World War II . The first story in this report focused on race-based experiments done as part of the military 's chemical warfare program : NPR News Investigations Secret World War II Chemical Experiments Tested Troops By Race\nCavell , now 88 years old , says the officer threatened him and the other test subjects : If they told anyone about their knowledge or participation in the experiments , they would receive a dishonorable discharge and be sent to military prison at Fort Leavenworth , Kan .\n`` They put the fear of God in just a bunch of young kids , '' he says .\nThese experiments with mustard gas were conducted by the Army and Navy at more than a dozen locations . Some test subjects had only partial exposure , such as having the chemical agents applied directly onto their skin . Others were locked in gas chambers , like Cavell . A third type of test exposed troops to gas outdoors in simulated combat settings .\nIn all , roughly 60,000 World War II veterans were used as test subjects , and they kept the experiments secret for half a century . A group of them , led by Nat Schnurman , went public with their stories in 1990 .\nSchnurman , who died in 2013 when he was 87 , had suffered debilitating injuries after being tested at the U.S . Naval Training Center in Bainbridge , Md . He filed a federal lawsuit for compensation in 1979 , but was unsuccessful because of a legal doctrine that protects the military from being sued for service-related injuries . Schnurman and his wife , Joy , spent the next two decades compiling evidence of the testing in order to put pressure on the military .\nWhen the story broke , VA Deputy Secretary Anthony Principi appeared on 60 Minutes , in 1991 , to explain how the agency would respond to men who were injured in the tests : `` They should be praised for what they did , '' Principi said on the CBS News program . `` And as far as the secretary and I are concerned , we 're about to do right by them . ''\nMore than 20 years later , the VA has attempted to contact fewer than a quarter of the thousands it said it would .\nOne of the men who never heard from the VA was John Berzellini . His wife , Irene , remembers how the experiments affected his health for the rest of his life .\n`` I remember him laying up in the bedroom up there , '' she says .\nBerzellini says every winter her husband spent weeks in bed with chronic bronchitis β an illness government studies have linked to mustard gas exposure . She says they did n't know that he was eligible for disability benefits when he died of a heart attack in 1995 .\nIn the early 1990s , VA officials also announced the agency would lower its burden of proof to make getting benefits easier in these cases . The process typically relies on evidence , but most of the men in these experiments have none because the tests were done in secret .\n`` This is not an easy , not a simple thing , '' Flohr says . `` But we have done everything that we could do , I definitely believe that . ''\nThe VA created a list of illnesses that are linked to mustard gas exposure β such as skin cancer , leukemia and chronic breathing problems . According to the agency , if a veteran has an illness on the list and can prove he was exposed , he receives benefits .\nBut NPR interviewed veterans who met both of those requirements and have still been denied for years β sometimes decades β as the VA continues to request more information and proof .\nCavell says that even today , when he comes to a locked door he 's reminded of the inside of a gas chamber .\n`` There was no handle on the door . You could n't get out , '' he says . `` And that 's what I have problems with today . If I go to a locked door , I panic sometimes to try to get out . ''\nIn 1988 , Cavell requested copies of his records from the experiments he was in at the Naval Research Laboratory . Researchers there had recorded his full name in neat handwriting on lined paper . They had detailed the length of time he spent inside a gas chamber and the level of mustard gas in the air .\nCavell then submitted the documents to the VA as proof of his exposure . He filed claims for several illnesses on the VA 's list of those linked to mustard gas , including skin cancer and chronic breathing problems . But until NPR inquired about his case , all of those claims had been denied .\nAfter NPR 's inquiry , the VA told NPR there was enough evidence to grant his claims . They based that conclusion on the same information that had been sitting in his VA file for decades . Officials say they ca n't explain why the benefits were n't granted sooner . Cavell is currently being re-evaluated before the benefits can be disbursed .\nFormer CIA Director Porter Goss says the VA has mishandled these claims . Goss was a Florida congressman when he was contacted by a group of constituents who were used as test subjects and spoke out on their behalf . `` This should have been ancient history by now , '' he told NPR . `` And these people should have long been appropriately provided for . ''\nGoss says he thinks the VA never delivered on its promises because this issue has been disappearing on its own for years . About 500 World War II veterans die each day , according to data maintained by the VA. `` I do think there is a little bit of that attitude of : 'This is today 's problem , it will be gone by tomorrow , ' `` Goss says . `` But this is a bargain we made . And this goes to the essence of 'Can you trust your government ? ' And in this case I 'm afraid the answer is not yet . ''\nFlohr tells NPR his agency has followed federal statutes in its handling of claims for mustard gas exposure . But Goss says that excuse is at the core of all that is dysfunctional in Washington bureaucracies . `` I do n't think there 's an explanation for why this program was n't more successful , '' Goss says . `` If I were back in Congress , I 'd be asking that question . ''\nCongress has intervened in similar situations . It passed the Agent Orange Act in 1991 , which requires the VA to assume that all veterans who served in and around Vietnam were exposed to the chemical . And in 2010 , the VA announced it would review 90,000 previously denied Agent Orange claims . To date , these policies have not been applied to World War II vets who were exposed to mustard gas .\nOfficials at the Pentagon tell NPR it 's likely that some of the records about military mustard gas experiments were never recovered . And yet Flohr insists the VA still needs proof in order to grant claims .\n`` I 'm sorry , '' Flohr says . `` But the only thing we can do is follow our statutes and regulations . ''\nThose regulations have kept veterans like Harry Bollinger , 88 , from receiving benefits . Bollinger still has chronic breathing problems and breaks out in eczema in places where he was burned as a young Navy recruit :\n`` Around my privates and under my arms and face and everywhere else , '' he says .\nBollinger gave up appealing VA rejections in 1994 , after four years of traveling back and forth 30 miles to a VA office office in Pittsburgh . Then , in 1996 , Bollinger received a military commendation in the mail . The document acknowledges his participation in mustard gas experiments . But Bollinger says he would n't go back to the agency after the way he was treated there .\nA tattered ball cap that says World War II veteran hangs by the front door in his house . He says he is proud of his service , and he wears the cap everywhere he goes . But Bollinger says that time in his life is tainted : by the pain he felt as a human test subject in military experiments , and by the VA that told him it was n't real .\n`` That 's going to be on my tombstone , '' Bollinger says . `` U.S. Navy , Guinea Pig . That wo n't be too long now probably . ''\nNPR Investigations Research Librarian Barbara Van Woerkom contributed reporting and research to this investigation . NPR Photo Editor Ariel Zambelich and reporters Christopher Groskopf , Jani Actman and Lydia Emmanouilidou also contributed to this story .
|
allsides-corpus-207
|
Patient Michael Swan rests his hand on his walker as he inhales a drag while taking a cigarette break in the smoking shack outside the West Roxbury campus of the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Boston , Monday , Sept. 30 , 2019 . The VA is set to ban smoking at all its grounds nationwide starting Oct. 1 , a welcome move by health-conscious veterans but not by others who enjoy a smoke between appointments . ( AP Photo/Charles Krupa )\nPatient Michael Swan rests his hand on his walker as he inhales a drag while taking a cigarette break in the smoking shack outside the West Roxbury campus of the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Boston , Monday , Sept. 30 , 2019 . The VA is set to ban smoking at all its grounds nationwide starting Oct. 1 , a welcome move by health-conscious veterans but not by others who enjoy a smoke between appointments . ( AP Photo/Charles Krupa )\nCONCORD , N.H. ( AP ) β Serving up drinks at the American Legion post in Concord , Jeff Holland gets a little testy when the talk turns to smoking .\nA Marine veteran who enjoys lighting up , the 44-year-old Holland fought unsuccessfully against a ban at the post that went into effect this month . And starting Tuesday , he will be prohibited from smoking when he visits the nearby Manchester VA Medical Center in New Hampshire .\nIt is part of a nationwide smoking ban outside all VA medical facilities that applies to visitors , patients and employees .\nβ I get the aspect that it β s a hospital and for all practical purposes you shouldn β t be smoking inside the VA , β Holland said . β But as far outside , I think they should still have a smoking area . I mean you got guys from World War I , World War II where this is all they have known for 40 or 50 years . To kind of take that right away , it β s kind of a shame . β\nSmoking was already prohibited inside VA medical buildings , but now patients , employees and visitors will not be able to puff away anywhere on the grounds . Previously , smoking was allowed in designated shelters dotting the grounds of VA medical facilities . Posters and banners promoting the ban have been put up in facilities and the VA is alerting veterans through social media and letters . They have also held forums on the ban .\nβ This is a really good thing for our veterans and our staff , β said Kevin Forrest , associate director of the Manchester VA , which serves 27,000 veterans . β It β s a safer environment . It reduces fire risk . There is certainly evidence that smoking and second-hand exposure is a medical risk for our veterans . β\nThe smoking ban was first announced this summer . It brings the facilities in line with bans already in place at 4,000 medical facilities and four national health care systems that have made their grounds smoke free .\nBut the move isn β t without controversy . A third of veterans smoke , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , and many were introduced to the habit while serving . Tobacco has long been tied to military : Cigarette ads featured troops , and the culture of the service historically promoted smoking on the battlefield or as a welcome respite from the stress of combat .\nβ We recognize this is a difficult change for many folks , β John D β Adamo , who is co-chairing the smoke-free implementation working group for VA Boston . It is gradually implementing the ban for the 62,000 veterans it serves over the coming months , including providing resources that could help veterans kick the habit . Violators will initially be warned of the policy and eventually VA police will enforce it .\nβ This is a major cultural change , β he continued . β It β s really been something often utilized for comradery , essentially a sense of community . β\nBut even a gradual rollout is seen as too stringent for some smokers β and even some veterans who don β t smoke . They argue that there should be some place for smoking at VA facilities and fear that some veterans may choose cigarettes or cigars over visiting their VA doctors .\nβ It β s going a little too far , β Gregory d β Arbonne , president of the New Hampshire chapter of the Association of the United States Army . β I β m against smoking , but there are people who smoke . When they do , they go outside and have this little smoking area . Now , what are they going to do ? β\nJorg Dreusicke , a 72-year-old former smoker from New Hampshire who recruits members for the Veterans of Foreign Wars nationwide , called the move government overreach . He started smoking at the age of 10 and quit three years ago .\nβ It β s big brother telling people how to live , β he said . β Some people don β t mind because it doesn β t affect them . But for those it effects , they are pissed . β\nHe predicted that after a β period of revolt β and much complaining , veterans would eventually return to medical centers .\nOthers are welcoming the ban , saying it is long overdue .\nTony Botticello , a 76-year-old Coast Guard veteran whose lung cancer is in remission , said he would often pass by smokers in parking lot on the way to his treatment at the Manchester VA . He smoked for over 50 years but quit smoking five years ago .\nβ It β s personal for me , β he said . β Maybe this will make somebody think about the ramifications of smoking and how some people find smoking offensive . β
|
allsides-corpus-208
|
Rescuers in Thailand on Monday freed four more members of the boys soccer team stranded in a flooded cave complex , as part of the second phase of a desperate rescue operation that aims to save four more kids and the team 's coach before heavy rains imperil the effort .\nFour ambulances with flashing lights were spotted leaving the area as Thai navy SEALs said on Facebook that four boys were brought out of the cave on Monday , bringing the total to eight rescued so far before rescue operations were suspended for the day .\nChiang Rai acting Gov . Narongsak Osatanakorn said at a news conference the rescue mission on Monday took only 9 hours compared to the 11 hours the previous day , adding that rescue crews are more familiar with the mission and additional help was present . A Thai army deputy commander added that the operation went `` smoothly '' but warned the next phase `` will depend on all conditions , '' according to Sky News .\nNarongsak said that rescuers , which included 18 divers and 100 personnel , may need to adjust their operation if they choose to bring out the remaining five people on Tuesday , and that it may take multiple steps .\nThai officials stressed they are hoping the rescue operation will be wrapped up by Tuesday , and that the four who were first pulled out of the cave on Sunday are eating solid food now and in `` good condition . ''\nThe newest set of rescues came about six hours after Chiang Rai acting Gov . Narongsak Osatanakorn said the second phase was underway . One helicopter carried the sixth and seventh boys to be rescued to a hospital , while the eighth boy was being transported on another helicopter for medical treatment .\n`` All conditions are still as good as they were yesterday , '' Narongsak told a news conference . `` The boys ' strength , the plan β today we are ready like before . And we will do it faster because we are afraid of the rain . ''\nOn Sunday , Thai navy SEALs successfully retrieved the first four members of the youth soccer team from the cave where they had been trapped for more than two weeks in the first rescue operation .\nInterior Minister Anupong Paojinda said early Monday the same group of expert divers who took part in Sunday 's rescue returned to extricate the others because they know the cave conditions and what to do . He said fresh air tanks needed to be laid along the underwater route , as officials continue to pump water out of the cave .\n'DO N'T BLAME YOURSELF , ' PARENT OF TRAPPED THAI YOUTH WRITES TO BOYS ' COACH\nReuters , citing an unnamed source at a nearby hospital , reported the boys β conditions were β not bad β but will continue to be monitored .\n`` This morning they said they were hungry and wanted to eat khao pad grapao , '' Narongsak said , according to the Associated Press , referring to a Thai dish of meat fried with chili and basil and served over rice .\nIt was not immediately clear Monday how the overnight rains had impacted water levels inside the flooded cave . Officials have said storms forecast for Chiang Rai province in Thailand 's far north had factored into their decision to go ahead with a complicated and dangerous plan to have the boys and their coach dive out of the cave . If everything goes to according to plan , the operation should be completed on Tuesday , officials previously told The Wall Street Journal .\nDR. MARC SIEGEL : BOYS RESCUED FROM THAI CAVE NOW FACE POSSIBLE MEDICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES\nNarongsak previously said experts told him flooding from new rain could shrink the unflooded space where the boys are sheltering to just 108 square feet .\n`` I confirm that we are at war with water and time from the first day up to today , '' he said . `` Finding the boys does n't mean we 've finished our mission . It is only a small battle we 've won , but the war has not ended . The war ends when we win all three battles β the battles to search , rescue and send them home . ''\nThe death Friday of a former Thai navy SEAL underscored the risks . The diver , the first fatality of the rescue effort , was working in a volunteer capacity and died on a mission to place air canisters along the passage to where the boys are , a necessary task in order for divers to safely travel the five- to six-hour route .\n4 BOYS FROM THAI SOCCER TEAM RESCUED FROM FLOODED CAVE\nAuthorities spent hours replenishing air tanks along the cave 's treacherous exit route .\nTrips from the entrance to where the team is trapped and back to the entrance take about 11 hours and include walking , wading , climbing and diving , the BBC reported . There is reportedly a guide rope in place . Two divers will accompany each boy as they are gradually extracted .\nAn international team of expert diversβ90 in all , 40 from Thailand and 50 from overseasβhave been working in the area .\nAbout 40 U.S. Air Force special operations personnel -- including an 18-person personnel recovery team -- were on the ground in Thailand at two locations , a U.S. defense official told Fox News .\nThe stranded boys , members of the Wild Boars soccer team , have been invited to the World Cup Final in Moscow if they make it out in time and can physically handle the trip .\nFox News ' Jeff Paul and Melissa Chrise in Chiang Rai , Thailand , Fox News ' Lucas Tomlinson , and The Associated Press contributed to this report
|
allsides-corpus-209
|
Activists in Hong Kong , angered by what they perceive as little progress in talks on democratic reforms with the government , marched to the home of the territory 's chief executive to demand his ouster .\nReuters says : `` Others continued to occupy main streets in the Chinese-controlled city , where they have camped for nearly a month in protest against a central government plan that would give Hong Kong people the chance to vote for their own leader in 2017 but tightly restrict the candidates to Beijing loyalists . ''\nAbout 200 protesters held signs at Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying 's home . The BBC reports that many were also angered by Leung 's recent remarks arguing that `` universal suffrage '' in the former British colony would lead to the poorer segments of society gaining control .\nAs we reported on Tuesday , the government held a televised meeting with student activists in an effort to defuse the crisis , but the results were inconclusive .\nAccording to the South China Morning Post , police had to intervene on Wednesday in Mong Kok , one of three main protest sites , to prevent taxi drivers from tearing down barriers .\n`` Rubbish bins , fences , wooden pallets and bamboo poles were ripped up by members of the Taxi Drivers and Operators Association and loaded onto the back of a truck with a crane , as angry protesters rushed to stop the destruction at the Dundas Street end of Nathan Road . ''\nThe cabbies are angry at the blocked streets that have resulted from the weeks of protests .\nThe SCMP also reports that Hong Kong 's Commerce Secretary Greg So Kam-leung has told the territory 's lawmakers that more than 70 government websites have been hacked .\nThe commerce secretary said hackers identifying themselves as from the group Anonymous `` issued a warning to the government and police force on October 2 after tear gas was fired at pro-democracy demonstrators in the city , '' SCMP says .
|
allsides-corpus-210
|
Click to expand Image Indians protesting against the new citizenship law and verification policies at Shaheen Bagh , a Muslim-majority neighborhood in Delhi that became the iconic image of these protests , January 31 , 2020 . ( Photo by Amarjeet Kumar Singh / SOPA Images/Sipa USA ) Β© Sipa via AP Images\n( New York ) β Indian authorities should immediately drop politically-motivated charges against those peacefully protesting against citizenship policies that discriminate against Muslims and release them from custody , βββ said today .\nPolice have used draconian anti-terrorism , sedition , and other laws against students , activists , and other government critics , but have not acted against violence by supporters of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP ) . In some cases , the police filed new charges after activists were granted bail to ensure that they remained in custody , placing them at further risk during the Covid-19 outbreak in overcrowded prisons with inadequate sanitation , hygiene , and access to medical care .\nβ The Indian authorities have used the nationwide Covid-19 lockdown to arrest activists , silence dissent , and deter future protests against discriminatory policies , β said Meenakshi Ganguly , South Asia director at βββ . β Instead of addressing past police abuse , the authorities seem to be trying their best to add to the list . β\nIn December 2019 , the BJP-led government adopted the Citizenship Amendment Act , which for the first time in India makes religion a basis for citizenship . In response , protests broke out throughout the country following fears that the act , together with a planned nationwide verification process to identify β illegal migrants , β could threaten the citizenship rights of millions of Indian Muslims .\nViolence around the protests broke out in Delhi on February 24 , 2020 , leaving at least 53 people dead and hundreds injured , most of them Muslim . The police failed to respond adequately and were at times complicit in these attacks . The authorities have failed to conduct impartial and transparent investigations into the violence .\nWhile peaceful protests were dispersed after the government announced a lockdown in March 2020 to contain the spread of Covid-19 , the authorities have since started arresting protesters , including students and activists , and filing charges of sedition , murder , and terrorism under the Unlawful Activities ( Prevention ) Act ( UAPA ) , accusing them of a β conspiracy β to β defame the country in the international arena . β\nThose arrested include Meeran Haider , Safoora Zargar , Asif Iqbal Tanha , and Gulfisha Fatima , student activists ; Shifa-Ur-Rehman and Khalid Saifi , activists ; Devangana Kalita and Natasha Narwal , student activists from the feminist collective Pinjra Tod ; Tahir Hussain , a local political leader from Aam Aadmi Party ; and Ishrat Jahan , local leader from the opposition Congress party .\nZargar , arrested on April 10 for rioting , was granted bail three days later . But that day the police booked her under the UAPA and for murder and sedition . She was denied bail on those charges despite her being in the second trimester of pregnancy and having an underlying medical condition , two factors that could place her at heightened risk of complications if she were to contract Covid-19 .\nKalita and Narwal were granted bail after being arrested for rioting . In Kalita β s case , the magistrate noted that the police could not produce any concrete evidence to prove her role in the violence . However , the Delhi police immediately booked them on other charges , including sedition , murder , and under the UAPA , and they remain in jail .\nViolence broke out in Delhi on February 24 , soon after a local BJP politician , Kapil Mishra , demanded that the police clear the roads of protesters . Tensions had been building for weeks , with BJP leaders openly advocating violence against the protesters , portraying anyone who spoke out against the government as working against the country β s interests .\nClashes between BJP supporters and citizenship law protesters soon transformed into Hindu mobs rampaging through northeast Delhi , killing Muslims and damaging their homes , shops , mosques , and property . While several Hindus were also killed , including a policeman and a government official , Muslims overwhelmingly bore the brunt of the violence .\nActivists fear the police have overwhelmingly arrested Muslim residents from northeast Delhi neighborhoods where the violence took place in February , some of them victims of attacks , while failing to act against those responsible for the mob violence . The Delhi police have denied these allegations , saying the number of people arrested from the two communities are β almost identical to each other , β but have failed to disclose arrest details . The authorities have even provided contradictory information . In March , Home Minister Amit Shah told parliament that the violence was a β well-planned conspiracy β and that the police had filed over 700 cases , and detained 2,647 people . In a media briefing a day later , the Delhi police said that 200 people had been arrested . A month later , in reply to a Right to Information request , the Delhi police claimed that 48 people had been arrested . In May , a police spokesperson said that more than 1,300 people had been arrested in over 750 cases .\nIn several cases , βββ found that the police did not follow procedures established under the criminal code such as producing an arrest warrant , informing the person β s family of the arrest , and providing them a copy of the First Information Report , the official police case , or ensuring that those arrested have access to legal counsel , including during interrogation .\nA lawyer reported that his 45-year-old client was accused of looting and burning a shop as part of a mob . On April 2 , when the man and his wife were not at home , several policemen barged into their house , searched it , and took their younger son to the police station . His son was released only when the man presented himself to the police , who detained him without telling him or his wife of his charges . His wife was given a copy of the First Information Report after 10 days . He was not able to meet or speak to his lawyer until he received bail over two months later .\nA 35-year-old man who was shot and injured during the violence in Delhi in February was detained without a warrant on April 7 , his lawyer said . His family went to three police stations to inquire about his whereabouts but were given no information . They were eventually informed that he had been arrested but were not given a copy of the First Information Report . His lawyer had to apply for his records through the courts and found out that he was charged with murder . He remains in jail .\nDue to the Covid-19 lockdown , those arrested have limited to no access to legal counsel or to family members . A 21-year-old man was arrested on April 7 on charges of rioting and arson . His lawyer told βββ that she is yet to meet her client : β At the beginning of the lockdown , access to court records was a huge challenge . Generally , people being arrested were being sent into judicial remand without a lawyer present . I have had no contact with my client . Under normal circumstances , he would have been produced in court every 14 days and I would check on his health , have a conversation with him , move an application if he needs anything , but I can not do any of that now . β\nActivists and students across the country , especially in BJP-ruled states , continue to be targeted for participating in anti-citizenship law protests . In Uttar Pradesh state , Farhan Zuberi , a student at Aligarh Muslim University , was arrested on charges of sedition , rioting , and attempted murder . Dr. Kafeel Khan was initially arrested for promoting enmity between groups for a speech during the protests , but after he received bail on February 11 , he was charged under the draconian National Security Act and kept in custody .\nIn Assam state , the police arrested several activists , charging some of them with sedition and under the UAPA . In January , Delhi police charged a university student , Sharjeel Imam , with sedition and he remains in jail . In February , Amulya Leona Noronha was arrested for sedition in Karnataka for raising the slogans for Pakistan and India unity at a protest but released on bail after over three months in detention because the authorities failed to file charges within the 90-day mandated time period .\nβββ previously documented that the authorities responded to the largely peaceful protests in a partisan manner . In many cases , when BJP-affiliated groups attacked protesters , the police did not intervene .\nNor have the authorities taken any action against BJP leaders who incited violence against the protesters , calling to β shoot β them . The Delhi High Court , while hearing petitions about the violence in February , questioned the police decision to not file cases against BJP leaders advocating violence , saying it sent the wrong message and perpetuated impunity . The government β s attorney said that the situation was not β conducive β for registering complaints against BJP leaders .\nIndian authorities should uphold the rights to freedom of expression , association , and peaceful assembly , βββ said . The government should act to repeal or substantially revise the UAPA as well as repeal the colonial-era sedition law to end the abuses committed under these laws .\nβ Instead of locking up people who dare to speak out against discriminatory government policies , the authorities should listen to their legitimate fears and grievances , β Ganguly said . β The government has repeatedly said that minorities in India have nothing to fear , and the authorities should put actions to those words . β
|
allsides-corpus-211
|
Nepali Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli has said that Hindu deity Ram was born in the Himalayan nation and not India , as he accused New Delhi of `` encroaching on cultural facts '' amid frayed diplomatic relations between the two South Asian neighbours .\n`` We have been oppressed a bit culturally . Facts have been encroached , '' Oli said at a function at his residence in the capital , Kathmandu , on Monday , according to Nepali news website setopati.com .\nAccording to Hindu mythology , Lord Ram was born in Ayodhya town located in the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh and married to Sita from Janakpur located in present-day Nepal .\nBut the 68-year-old leader claimed Ayodhya is a village to the west of the Nepali border town of Birgunj . He added that Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh , about 135km from state capital Lucknow , is a more recent creation of India 's .\nA demonstrator shouts slogans after being arrested in Kathmandu during a protest against India 's newly inaugurated link road [ Prakash Mathema/AFP ]\n`` We still believe that we gave Sita to Indian Prince Ram . But we gave to the prince from Ayodhya , not India . Ayodhya is a village a little west to Birgunj , not the Ayodhya created now , '' he was quoted as saying by setopati.com .\nIndia 's Hindu far-right believe Ram was born at the site of a medieval-era mosque . The Babri mosque was demolished by a Hindu mob in 1992 . Last year India 's Supreme Court gave the disputed land to Hindus to build a Ram Temple , asking Muslims to build a mosque far from the site .\nOn Tuesday , Nepal 's foreign ministry sought to clarify Oli 's comments .\n`` As there have been several myths and references about Shri Ram and the places associated with him , the prime minister was simply highlighting the importance of further studies and research of the vast cultural geography the Ramayana represents to obtain facts about Shri Ram , Ramayana and the various places linked to this rich civilization , '' the ministry said in a statement .\n`` The remarks were not meant to debasing the significance of Ayodhya and the cultural value it bears . ''\nThe Nepali prime minister has attacked India several times since a diplomatic row erupted on May 8 when New Delhi inaugurated a Himalayan road link passing through the disputed territory of Kalapani . Nepal opposes a controversial Indian map published last November that showed Kalapani in India .\nLast month , Nepal 's parliament approved a new political map , showing Kalapani , Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura within its borders , drawing strong reactions from India .\nOli has in the past accused New Delhi of conspiring to topple his government , and last week banned private Indian channels for `` character assassination '' and airing `` false propaganda '' .\nAnalysts say Oli 's tirade against India likely aims to divert attention from domestic political troubles . Senior leaders from his ruling National Communist Party ( NCP ) have been seeking his resignation over his leadership style and governance failure . He has also faced the ire of the people for his handling of the coronavirus crisis .\nThe Nepali prime minister has also accused India of spreading the coronavirus pandemic into his country .\nSenior NCP leaders have also criticised Oli 's anti-India remarks that were deemed `` neither politically correct nor diplomatically appropriate '' .\nA spokesman from India 's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP ) has criticised Oli and accused the left parties of `` playing with peoples ' faith '' .\n`` Lord Ram is a matter of faith for us , and people will not allow anybody , be it prime minister of Nepal or anyone , to play with this , '' Bizay Sonkar Shastri told the Times of India newspaper .
|
allsides-corpus-212
|
Thursday was a traditional Chinese holiday that follows a lunar calendar , and it coincidentally came right after the National Day holiday this year . As a result , many people had expected the rallies to remain just as large on Thursday as on Wednesday .\nDemonstrators were making a bigger effort by midmorning Thursday to minimize their disruption to commerce . Ken Lee , a 17-year-old hotel worker , sat on a gray plastic stool next to a row of safety cones β commandeered earlier from the police β that partly blocked the entrance to Queens Road , an important commercial street in Hong Kong . He explained that he was supposed to remove the cones not just for emergency vehicles that might come along , but also for delivery vehicles . Moments later , a newspaper deliveryman on a bicycle and a large bakery truck appeared . Mr. Lee politely moved the cones . The city β s leadership has concluded that it would be pointless for Mr. Leung to sit down with protest leaders , although a few informal contacts have been made with democracy advocates and a few of Mr. Leung β s friends have recommended negotiations . Beijing has given the Hong Kong government only a little room to negotiate the details of how the next chief executive will be elected in 2017 β the fundamental issue for the demonstrators .\nβ The government can tolerate the blockade of three or four or five areas and see how the demonstrations go , so the only way the demonstrators can go is to escalate it β spread it to more places , and then they can not sustain it β or they will become violent , β said a person who is involved in the Hong Kong government β s decision-making .\nAn adviser to the government said the officials believed that Mr. Leung should bide his time . β The consensus is to wait and patiently deal with the crisis β it is not easy , but we shall do our best to resolve it peacefully , β the adviser said .\nThe strategy carries risks for the local and national governments because it in effect cedes momentum to the protesters and allows them to drive events . For China , continuing protests could inspire more dissent on the mainland , despite its censors β attempts to block discussion of the events . Chinese Human Rights Defenders , an advocacy group , said Wednesday that China had already detained or intimidated dozens of people for perceived transgressions like expressing support for the protesters on social media .\nFor the Hong Kong government , the risk is that the city β s image as a stable financial center will be harmed and that the government β s intransigence , rather than the protesters β actions , will be blamed for the disruption .
|
allsides-corpus-213
|
India has seen a sudden increase in attacks on Christians as more people are circulating since the COVID-19 lockdown was lifted .\nAccording to International Christian Concern ( ICC ) , eight separate attacks have taken place in two weeks involving radical Hindu nationalist groups that are physically assaulting Christians and damaging their property .\nThe most recent incident occurred on June 21 where a pastor was praying for a sick person in Kolonguda village .\nA mob of 150 people broke into Pastor Suresh Rao 's house , then dragged him out and severely beat him .\n`` They kicked me like they would kick a football , '' Pastor Rao said . `` They dragged me into the street and pushed me to the ground . There , they started to trample on me . They tore my clothes , kicked me all over my body , and punched my left eye . I have sustained a serious eye injury as a result of a blood clot . ''\nThe pastor was accused of trying to convert Hindus to Christianity .\n`` They said that India is a Hindu nation , and there is no place for Christians , '' Rao explained .\n`` I am prepared for this kind of eventuality , '' Pastor Rao explained . `` I know the cost of serving Jesus in these remote villages , and I will continue to serve the people of this region . ''\nAnother incident took place in India 's Tamil Nadu state where a church was reduced to ashes , leaving 100 Christians with no house of worship .\n`` I was so distressed and pained in my heart , '' Pastor Ramesh , head pastor of Real Peace Church said . `` It was hard labor for 10 years to build the church . All the hard work and sacrificial donations from the poor congregants were brought down to the ground . All that is left is ash . ''\n`` In the last ten years , I have been told numerous times by radicals to close the church . By God 's grace , I was able to endure all these hardships and abuses , but this time it is total devastation , '' the pastor added .\nAnd on June 13 , radicals threatened members of Laymen Evangelical Fellowship Church while they were setting up the church to reopen after being on lockdown .\nPastor Augustine said radicals were telling Christians that praying or gathering at church was forbidden and that Christians had caused the virus to spread .\n`` We do n't know what future holds , '' Pastor Augustine said . `` However , we are concerned that the radicals will not allow us to have a church service . ''\nIndian Christians fear the persecution will continue as more people begin to emerge from the COVID-19 lockdown .\nSTAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FREE βββ NEWS APP !\nClick Here Get the App with Special Alerts on Breaking News and Live Events !\nWe encourage readers who wish to comment on our material to do so through our Facebook , Twitter , YouTube , and Instagram accounts . God bless you and keep you in His truth .
|
allsides-corpus-214
|
WASHINGTON β The new head of the Environmental Protection Agency suggested to a gathering of conservative Republicans on Saturday that the agency could begin as early as next week the process of rolling back some of the federal regulations put in place by the Obama administration .\n`` The future ain β t what it used to be '' at the EPA , Scott Pruitt said during an address at the Conservative Political Action Conference , or CPAC .\nPruitt , who started at the agency Tuesday , did not specifically indicate what rules President Trump 's administration will target immediately . But he cited a controversial clean water rule as an example of a regulation that went too far .\nThe regulation β known as the Waters of the United States Rule and adopted by the Obama administration β expands the definition of waters subject to the jurisdiction of the EPA under the Clean Water Act .\nCritics charge the rule so broadly expands the federal government β s authority that it would be able to regulate ditches and small bodies of water . The EPA finalized the rule in May 2015 but it has been blocked by a federal appeals court pending further legal challenges .\nCongress voted last year to overturn the rule by invoking a rarely used law known as the Congressional Review Act . But President Obama vetoed that resolution .\nNew EPA head tells employees to 'avoid abuses ' in regulating process\nTrump 's new EPA head is in the middle of an email controversy\nSenate confirms Scott Pruitt for EPA chief amid last-minute drama\nIn his CPAC address , Pruitt , who as Oklahoma attorney general sued the EPA 14 times , said people who want to eliminate the agency are `` justified '' for such attitudes because of the regulatory overreach by the Obama administration .\n`` People across this country look at the EPA like they look at the IRS , '' he said . `` I hope to be able to change that . ''\nUnder his leadership , Pruitt said , the EPA would pay close attention to the rule-making process to ensure any new rules do not go beyond what is allowed under federal law .\nβ Executive agencies only have the power that Congress has given them , β he said . β They can β t make it up as they go . They can β t fill in the blank . β\nOne of his top priorities , he said , will be providing businesses with β regulatory certainty . β\nβ We β re going to provide certainty by living within the framework that Congress has passed , β he said . Obama-era regulations that don β t fit within that framework will be rolled back , Pruitt added .\nPruitt also promised to work with the states as β partners , not adversaries β on issues such as clean air and water .
|
allsides-corpus-215
|
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE ( βββ ) - U.S. President Donald Trump is pleased with Scott Pruitt β s performance as head of the Environmental Protection Agency but allegations of ethical missteps β have raised some concerns , β a White House spokesman said on Thursday .\nThe White House is hopeful Pruitt will be able to answer those concerns , spokesman Raj Shah told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Elkhart , Indiana .\nPruitt has been under fire for potential ethics lapses , including flying first class , excessive spending on security , and the rental of a room in a Washington condominium owned by the wife of an energy lobbyist .\nβ The president is pleased with the job that he β s doing as the administrator . However , the issues that have been raised that I think you guys are all familiar with - they have raised some concerns , β Shah said .\nβ We β re hopeful and expecting that Administrator Pruitt will be able to answer those , β he said .\nThe EPA has defended Pruitt β s spending on travel and security , saying it has been crucial to protecting him from public threats and ensuring he can conduct confidential work , and have also pointed out that Pruitt β s lease for the room in Washington , of about $ 50 a night he was there , was around market rate .\nPruitt has drawn praise from conservatives during his EPA tenure for rolling back Democratic former President Barack Obama β s policy to curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other environmental regulations opposed by industry .\nAlthough Trump has expressed support for Pruitt for his work on scaling back environmental regulations , White House sources have told βββ officials are worried about the flow of charges against him .\nThere are nearly a dozen pending investigations into Pruitt with the EPA inspector general , the Government Accountability Office and the White House Office of Management and Budget , as well as the U.S. House of Representatives oversight committee .
|
allsides-corpus-216
|
The carbon emissions rule would be one of Obama β s largest legacy achievements . How Obama 's team sold the EPA rule\nOnce again facing a big decision , President Barack Obama chose a familiar path : a walk around the South Lawn of the White House with chief of staff Denis McDonough .\nPodesta β s a runner , and he couldn β t look more like one . But he β s not used to meetings on the moveβeven if this one was to discuss the progress on climate change , the issue he β s been trying to get more attention to for years and came back to the White House in January to lead .\nThe EPA β s proposed carbon emissions standards rule released Monday is one of the most significant actions the federal government β s ever taken on climate change . If finalized next year and put in place , it would be one of Obama β s largest legacy achievements .\nMaking sure that it didn β t seem like a big deal or all about Obama was all part of Podesta β s plan .\nInterviews with Podesta and other senior White House aides on Monday portrayed a White House that had been closely involved along every step of the way , from drafting the rule to the roll-out and messaging effort surrounding it .\nLap after lap that evening in mid-May , Podesta and McDonough talked the president through the proposed rule . He wanted to know how it squared with promises he had made in Copenhagen in 2009 , would hold up against the inevitable court challenges and how they β d attempted to balance the concerns of business , labor , Democrats and green groups so that everyone walked away not too disappointed and excited enough .\nLast week in the Oval Office , Obama signed off on the outreach and messaging strategy Podesta and climate adviser Dan Utech briefed him on . The president wanted all the groups they needed bought in . He wanted the White House to be ready with whatever rebuttals they β d need . And most of all , he wanted to minimize the prospects of this becoming yet another flashpoint .\nβ He wanted to know , β Podesta said Monday evening , relaxed after a successfully calm roll-out day , β β Okay , how are we prepared for battle here ? β β\nObama had all day Monday for an event at the White House , or maybe in front of a power plant , running footage for the evening news of him announcing his plan to save the planet . Just last week , he β d talked to the graduating cadets at West Point about the likelihood that they β d have food riot duty in their futures . Instead , they had EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy make the announcement , keeping Obama to a conference call run by the American Lung Association .\nβ The idea was to modulate his involvement , β said an administration official .\nFor seven minutes , Obama held forth on children β s asthma , which White House data showed was the most compelling angle they had β pointing out the disparate rates in the African-American and Latino community β with only a passing reference to taking care of β this beautiful blue ball in the middle of space , β just before he put down the phone .\nFor months , Podesta ran a strategy to seed support for the rule , planning a sequence of events to get people thinking about the administration β s efforts on climate change β a visit to the California wildfire damage in February , a solar summit at the White House in April , the National Climate Assessment in May ( complete with an afternoon of interviews by weathermen in the Rose Garden ) .\nThe effort , Podesta said , was β try to tell a story to the American people so these individual actions didn β t come in a way that they didn β t understand what the overall strategy was . β\nBy the time Hurricane Sandy hit in October 2012 , the Obama campaign was certain he was going to win . But looking out at the damage to the Jersey Shore from his helicopter , he talked , aides said , about how the area would need to rebuild in a totally different way β with climate change in mind .\nThe change that really mattered , though , was the amount of coverage the storm was getting β hitting the media capital helped β and the way the White House felt it resonating with people around the country . They don β t like to use the word opportunity to describe where they found themselves after Sandy , but that β s what this was .\nβ It was something he always knew he was going to come back to , β said White House communications director Jennifer Palmieri . β But Sandy also put the connection between climate and weather and the impact it could have on the radar for Americans in a level to which prior to that it had not broken . β\nClimate change hadn β t gone well for the White House in the first term β the House barely passed a cap-and-trade bill in 2009 that died in the Senate β but became yet another campaign issue that helped Republicans take the House and pick up Senate seats in the 2010 midterms .
|
allsides-corpus-217
|
Agencies use loopholes to avoid transparency , the author writes . | John Shinkle/βββ How the EPA skirts transparency\nIt appeared to be the dawn of a new day when , in January 2009 , President Barack Obama proclaimed that his administration would be β committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government . We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency , public participation and collaboration . β\nBut more than four years later Americans continue to wait for the president to make good on those promises .\nInstead of more sunshine on how federal bureaucracies operate , agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency have increasingly utilized regulatory loopholes to avoid transparency and pander to special interests .\nOne such Clinton-era tactic , known as β sue and settle , β is perhaps the most devious way in which agencies make sweeping policy changes , while keeping Congress and the American people in the dark .\nUnder this process , environmental groups and a federal agency agree to enter into a lawsuit that alleges that the agency has failed to meet a regulatory deadline or requirement . The two parties then settle with a preconceived consent decree that circumvents the traditional rule-making process and β forces β the agency to quickly implement mutually agreed-upon rules .\nIn a recently released report , the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that EPA chose not to defend itself in lawsuits brought by special interest advocacy groups at least 60 times between 2009 and 2012 . As the Chamber notes , β these settlements directly resulted in EPA agreeing to publish more than 100 new regulations , many of which impose compliance costs in the tens of millions and even billions of dollars . β\nNot surprisingly , in each case , EPA settled on terms dictated by environmentalists β 34 times with the Sierra Club alone β without input or review from Congress , stakeholders or even the Office of Management and Budget . In fact , EPA does not disclose that it is even being sued until the two parties have already struck a deal and that agreement is filed in court .\nWorse yet for taxpayers , the environmental groups β lawyers are paid directly out of federal coffers .\nThose fees also lack appropriate transparency . In 2012 , the Government Accountability Office reported that of the 75 agencies GAO contacted , a staggering 65 did not maintain records of why or what taxpayers were forking over for frivolous lawsuits .
|
allsides-corpus-218
|
Over the past few days , the Environmental Protection Agency has been slapped with new media guidelines , expected to be hit with $ 800 million in budget cuts , and will have its current data on the agency β s website subject to political review . President Trump is reining in the agency , which was accused of overreach during the Obama presidency , specifically with its regulations on carbon emissions , power plants , and coal . The EPA is undergoing a facelift and some are not happy about it . ProPublica reported that EPA employees are coming into work in tears :\nSo far , Trump β s remodeling efforts have been both dramatic ( nominating Oklahoma attorney general and fossil-fuel ally Scott Pruitt to head the agency ) and quietly tactical ( freezing all EPA contracts and grants ) . [ β¦ ] At EPA headquarters , the mood remains dark . A longtime career communications employee said in a phone interview Tuesday that more than a few friends were β coming to work in tears β each morning as they grappled with balancing the practical need to keep their jobs with their concerns for the issues they work on . To be sure , the EPA is an agency where information has been tightly controlled for many years , including under the Obama administration , which was harshly criticized by the Society of Environmental Journalists in 2013 for having β taken secrecy to a new level. β The EPA β s sheer size , with 10 regions and more than 14,000 employees , guarantees some level of confusion , as well . From headquarters through the regional offices , employees said they still hadn β t confirmed if a freeze on work under hundreds of existing contracts , described in a headquarters memo acquired on Monday by ProPublica , applied to vital actions like responding to spills .\nSo , while the details of the order regarding contracts are being clarified , let β s not forget that Middle America has been crying for the past eight years , as Obama β s war on coal has led to coal miners being laid off , which led to the destruction of local economies . So , spare me the sob stories from government bureaucrats .
|
allsides-corpus-219
|
House Republicans approved deep spending cuts for the Environmental Protection Agency along with provisions to block the agency β s upcoming rule-making on Wednesday .\nThe House Interior and Environment appropriations bill would cut EPA funding by 9 percent next year and block several new rules the agency aims to put out this summer , including rule-making on water oversight and greenhouse gas emissions at power plants , The Hill epa-funding β target= β _blank β > reported Wednesday .\nThe $ 20.2 billion funding bill for the Interior Department , EPA and other agencies will move to the full House Appropriations Committee for consideration .\nOverall , the bill cuts spending by $ 246 million from current levels and $ 3 billion below President Obama β s request .\nFunding for the EPA has decreased by 20 percent since Republicans took control of the House in 2011 .\nDemocrats on the House Appropriations subcommittee said they wouldn β t support the bill β s harsh cuts to the EPA .\nβ We are going backwards and the consequences will be felt in communities all across the country , β Rep. Betty McCollum , a Minnesota Democrat and the ranking member of the subcommittee , said at a Wednesday hearing , The Hill reported .\nBut Republicans on the committee argue that the agency β s rule-makings have gone to far and the cuts are needed to rein in an out-of-control environmental agenda .\nβ There is a great deal of concern over the number of regulatory actions being pursued by the EPA in the absence of legislation and without clear congressional action , β said subcommittee chairman Rep. Ken Calvert , California Republican , The Hill reported .\nThe bill will now go to the full House Appropriations Committee for approval .\nCommittee chairman Rep. Hal Rogers , Kentucky Republican , whose state would be hurt by the EPA β s coal regulations , said that β Congress must exercise its prerogative to prevent this kind of bureaucratic overreach , β The Hill reported .
|
allsides-corpus-220
|
Some suggest that Congress β remove Trump from office , so that he can not abuse incumbency to subvert the electoral process , but let the American people make the judgment on whether or not he gets a second termβ¦ Removing Trump from office for the remainder of his term would disable him from abusing presidential power again and protect the integrity of the electoral process from inappropriate interference . At the same time , letting him run for a second term would permit the American electorate to decide whether Trump , despite his attempt to subvert the system , should have another chanceβ¦ Decoupling removal from disqualification lowers the stakes and changes the constitutional calculus . As long as Trump can run again , Republicans can not hide behind a claim that they are [ the ] ones protecting voter choice by opposing impeachment. β Edward B. Foley , Politico\nβ The long-run structure of the American welfare state , which is heavily focused on providing health care and retirement security to the elderly , requires a growing population and economy . Immigrants contribute to both goals β¦ Going forward , demographers forecast that immigration β both the people it provides directly and the children that immigrants bear and raise β is the only reason America β s working-age population isn β t declining . This is doubly true when you consider that immigrants β work in the household and child care sectors likely serves to increase native-born Americans β childbearing as wellβ¦ That hundreds of millions of people around the world would like to move to our shores β and that America has a long tradition of assimilating foreigners and a political mythos and civil culture that is conducive to doing so β is an enormous source of national strength . It β s time we started to see it that way. β Matthew Yglesias , Vox\nβ By signaling that the huddled masses are no longer welcome while others in the administration ( particularly Jared Kushner ) continue to advocate for the types of visas favored in Silicon Valley , Team Trump spins this as advocating not for β zero immigration , β but for the β right kind of immigration β β¦ [ But ] β the president has made it more difficultβand expensiveβto hire high-skilled tech workers from other countries . The administration has throttled a program that encouraged entrepreneurs to come to the U.S. It β s also ending work permits for spouses of H-1B holders , who are often highly skilled professionals themselves. β As a result of the administration β s efforts , there was a 10 percent decline in H-1Bs issued last yearβ¦ It isn β t just about dissuading the tired and poor from coming , it β s about telling everyone to stay away . β Alex Shephard , New Republic\nβ [ The rule ] won β t attract greater numbers of better-heeled , success-bound applicants . But it will radically slash the total number of immigrants gaining legal admission . And it will deprive the U.S. economy of badly needed workers of the sort who have a long track record of upward mobilityβ¦ The fact remains that less-well-heeled immigrants fill jobs for which there are insufficient native-born applicants ; they perform well in those jobs and move up the income bracket . The administration β s new rules , while complex β they exempt pregnant women , asylum seekers , refugees , military service personnel and others β would drastically expand the pool of those who could be denied legal permanent residency based on poor predictors of future success. β Editorial Board , Washington Post\nβ The Labor Department reports that seven million jobs are going unfilled even as the economy is slowingβ¦ Foreign-born workers include surgeons , computer engineers and financiers , and also those working in restaurant kitchens and driving cabs , doing the less desirable jobs at the lowest wages . But they contribute to the growth of the nation , and if some of them need help at some point with housing or food stamps , it β s a bargain in the long term . The economic return makes immigration a great investment for the nation . Which is why Mr. Trump β s public charge rule is bad for all Americans , not just those who strive to become one. β Bill Saporito , New York Times\nβ Aside from the strong moral arguments against letting poor people go hungry and sick , no rational government would want immigrant communities to , for example , forgo vaccinating their children in order to avoid a punitive reaction from immigration authorities ; that has all the makings of a public health catastrophe . No rational government of a country with millions of immigrants would want millions of immigrant children to show up at school hungry each morning because their parents are afraid to apply for food stamps . No rational government would want hundreds of thousands of immigrant families to risk homelessness because of a temporary dip in their financial situation . Simply out of self-interest , a country such as the United States can not afford to drive millions of legal immigrants entirely outside the social safety net. β Sasha Abramsky , The Nation\nβ Never mind that immigrants are , for one thing , less likely to rely on welfare benefits than native-born Americansβ¦ consider for a moment how many Americans -- our parents , grandparents , or great-grandparents -- would n't be here today if regulations that used the straitened circumstances of new immigrants to measure their future earning potential had been in place. β Jill Filipovic , CNN\nβ The first comprehensive immigration law at the federal level was the 1882 Immigration Act , which , among other things , excluded anyone who was β unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge. β That principle β the β public-charge doctrine , β as it β s called β has been included in all subsequent immigration legislation , including the 1996 immigration and welfare-reform lawsβ¦\nβ The Clinton administration issued guidance that barred consideration of anything other than cash benefits for purposes of determining self-sufficiency . In other words , an immigrant using food stamps , Medicaid , free school lunch , and public housing β but not cash benefits such as TANF or SSI β was to be considered self-supportingβ¦ Immigrants shouldn β t just use welfare less than the native-born β ideally , they shouldn β t use it at all . β\nβ This approach is rooted in the common sense notion that immigrants should support themselves , not burden taxpayers . If they can β t support themselves , they should leaveβ¦ However , the rule isn β t draconian . It applies to β an alien who receives one or more designated public benefits for more than 12 months in the aggregate within any 36-month period. β Receipt of two benefits in one month counts as two months . Thus , immigrants in dire straits can seek assistance of the types addressed in the new rule . Their status will be in jeopardy only if they remain on it for a year or more , total , during a three-year period . And even if they do , they won β t automatically be denied green cards . Other factors will be considered in assessing the likelihood that an immigrant who has used welfare extensively will be granted status . β\nSome , however , argue β there β s little evidence that immigrants are free-riding , and the DHS rule cedes too much discretion to bureaucrats over immigration decisionsβ¦ most immigrants don β t qualify for most public benefits until they have lived in the country for at least five years . Thus DHS is directing immigration officers in the 837-page rule to project the likelihood that immigrants might someday become a β public charge β based on arbitrary levels of income , employment , education and English proficiencyβ¦\nβ While supposedly trying to flesh out a vague statute , DHS is essentially rewriting immigration law on its own . And wouldn β t you know , the rule bears a striking resemblance to the β merit-based β system that restrictionists in the White House have proposed but can β t get Congress to pass . If this sounds like Barack Obama β s legislate-by-rule strategy on climate change , that β s because it is . β\nβ Congress passed a law decades ago establishing that potential immigrants likely to become a β public charge β should not be permitted to enter the country . That makes some sense : A new resident should be able to add to , not detract from , the existing community β s economic resources . The problem is that Congress did not do its job and clearly establish when an aspiring immigrant meets or fails that testβ¦\nβ The rule announced on Monday is 837 pages long . It needed to address all the thorny issues Congress avoided and makes a roomful of contentious value judgments along the wayβ¦ This is a problem inherent in what conservative lawyers call β the administrative state. β Congress passes laws that amount to mere statements of intent , avoiding the difficult choices that invite scrutiny and make enemies . It passes the buck to executive agencies , which then must make the value judgments and trade-offs via processes largely behind closed doorsβ¦ Judicial oversight is no substitute for congressional abdication . Judges are not equipped to make the moral or technical judgments such laws in all but name require . β\nβ This isn β t about raceβ¦ the story of immigration to the United States has always been about people of every race , color and creed who come here to work and take advantage of American freedoms and opportunity β not a desire to take advantage of the welfare stateβ¦ Even if you don β t share administration hard-liners β desire to cut back legal immigration , Βemphasizing merit is a common-sense concern that is supported by most Americans . Our culture is rooted in self-sufficiency and individual initiative . Our immigration system should reflect our national creed . β\nβ If a dozen drones or missiles can do the kind of damage to the world economy as did those fired on Saturdayβshutting down about 6 percent of world oil productionβimagine what a U.S.-Iran-Saudi war would do to the world economy . In recent decades , the U.S. has sold the Saudis hundreds of billions of dollars of military equipment . Did our weapons sales carry a guarantee that we will also come and fight alongside the kingdom if it gets into a war with its neighbors ? β¦ the nation does not want another war . How we avoid it , however , is becoming difficult to see . John Bolton may be gone from the West Wing , but his soul is marching on . β\nOthers note , β I β d hate to be a Democratic member of Congress trying to convince Joe Sixpack that this is a whole new ballgame . The transcript shows Trump being Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky trying to ingratiate himself with the big dog by , for instance , mentioning that he stays at Trump hotels . Trump β s conversation is typically scattershot , wandering all over the field , leaving a reasonable listener puzzled about what the takeaways are supposed to beβ¦ β β I think Joe Sixpack β s response is going to be a hearty shrug . After all that has emerged about Trump so far , his approval rating is closely tracking Obama β s approval at the same point in his presidency . To get Mr. Sixpack β s attention you are going to have to do better than this . β
|
allsides-corpus-221
|
On Tuesday , Maine Gov . Paul LePage ( R ) released data on purchases made with state welfare benefits that he claimed exposed abuse , but they only add up to less than a percent of all benefit transactions .\nThe data show that there were more than 3,000 transactions at bars , sports bars , and strip clubs made with EBT ( electronic benefit transfer ) cards loaded with TANF ( Temporary Assistance for Needy Families , or welfare ) and food stamp benefits between January 1 , 2011 and November 15 , 2013 . The state doesn β t track what was actually purchased , and some transactions can be withdrawals from ATMs at those locations . Given that there are about 50,000 of these transactions every month , or nearly 1.8 million in that time frame , as the state β s Department of Health and Human Services ( DHHS ) spokesman told the Bangor Daily News , they only make up β about two-tenths of 1 percent of total purchases and ATM withdrawals , β the paper calculates .\nLePage still expressed outrage at this tiny fraction of purchases . β This information is eye-opening and indicates a larger problem than initially thought , β he wrote when the data was released . β These benefits are supposed to help families , children and our most vulnerable Mainers . Instead , we have discovered welfare benefits are paying for alcohol , cigarettes and other things that hardworking taxpayers should not be footing the bill for. β When the Bangor Daily News asked his spokeswoman about the small number of transactions , she responded , β Any amount of abuse in the system that takes away from the truly needy needs to be dealt with , β adding , β We β re not uncovering anything new . There are always going to be bad actors out there . We β re simply saying , β We β ve got an eye on you . β β\nHis spokeswoman also said that he will sponsor a bill to address issues with welfare benefits during this year β s session , including the fact that the state doesn β t track what recipients buy .\nIf LePage is seeking to paint welfare recipients as wasteful spenders who blow their money on alcohol and cigarettes , the data are not on his side . Nationally , those who receive public benefits such as welfare cash assistance , food stamps , housing assistance , Medicaid , and others spend a bigger portion of their budgets on basics like food , housing , and transportation than those who aren β t enrolled in these programs . They also spend less on eating out and entertainment . Overall , families who rely on government programs spend less than half of what families who don β t rely on them spend .\nLePage has made other controversial statements and decisions when it comes to the poor or less fortunate residents of his state . He claimed that 47 percent of Mainers don β t work , despite the fact that 65 percent are working or actively seeking a job while the remaining percentage is mostly made up of retirees , the disabled , students , and homemakers . He exhorted all able-bodied residents to β get off the couch and get yourself a job β in 2012 despite high unemployment rates and few job openings . After he pushed for a five-year cap on welfare benefits , more than 1,500 families with an estimated 2,700 children lost the assistance . Even his plan to simply relocate the state β s DHHS office was controversial , as he wants to move it from downtown Portland to a location in South Portland that is difficult to reach and could restrict the poor β s access to social services .
|
allsides-corpus-222
|
The federal government is about to put $ 100 million behind a simple idea : doubling the value of SNAP benefits β what used to be called food stamps β when people use them to buy local fruits and vegetables .\nThis idea did not start on Capitol Hill . It began as a local innovation at a few farmers ' markets . But it proved remarkably popular and spread across the country .\n`` It 's so simple , but it has such profound effects both for SNAP recipients and for local farmers , '' says Mike Appell , a vegetable farmer who sells his produce at a market in Tulsa , Okla .\nThe idea first surfaced in 2005 among workers at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene . They were starting a campaign to get people to eat more fresh produce .\n`` I think we were trying to confront the idea that healthy foods , [ like ] fresh fruits and vegetables , are not affordable , '' says Candace Young , who was director of the department 's nutrition programming at the time . ( Young now works for The Food Trust in Philadelphia . )\nYoung recalls that one of their workers pointed out that some SNAP recipients live near farmers markets `` and we thought , how about we incentivize them to use their SNAP benefits at these farmers markets ? ''\nThe city made a few thousand dollars available for the program . So at a few markets in the South Bronx and Harlem , when someone spent $ 10 of SNAP benefits , he then received an additional $ 4 in the form of coupons called HealthBucks , which could be used to buy more local produce .\nThis desire to make farmers markets more food-stamp friendly seems to have been floating in the air at that time . A farmers market in Lynn , Mass. , used a $ 500 donation to do something similar the very next year .\nThen , in 2007 , the idea mutated into a form that really caught on .\nIt happened with the birth of the Crossroads Farmers Market , on the boundary that divides the towns of Langley Park and Takoma Park , Md . The area , just outside Washington , D.C. , is home to many immigrants .\n`` A lot of Latinos come to this market , '' says Michelle Dudley , the market manager . `` I would say that 70 percent of our customers are Spanish-speaking , but we also see people from the Caribbean . Folks from West Africa . ''\nBack in 2007 , a man named John Hyde organized the Crossroads market with this immigrant community in mind `` and then realized β these people did not have a lot of money , '' says Gus Schumacher , Hyde 's friend and collaborator at the time . ( Hyde ca n't tell the story himself , unfortunately . He died in 2009 . )\nSchumacher says he and Hyde got to talking about this money problem and had a brainstorm : If they could raise some money , they could use it to double the value of food stamps , as well as vouchers from the WIC ( Women , Infants , and Children ) program and food benefits for seniors .\nSchumacher , a former top official at the U.S. Department of Agriculture , used his connections to raise the money . `` I asked the National Watermelon Association if they would provide a small stipend , and they were very generous . They provided $ 5,000 , '' he says .\nThey set up a system that has remained almost unchanged ever since . On a recent visit , I see SNAP recipients lining up to speak with a market volunteer named Rosie Sanchez . They tell her how much money they want to spend from their SNAP benefits . Sanchez swipes their SNAP card and gives them wooden tokens that they can spend at the market . But she actually gives them tokens worth twice the amount that she took from their SNAP benefits ; up to $ 15 more .\nSanchez is a SNAP recipient herself . This program `` is very important , '' she says . `` You know why ? Because I get up to $ 15 for free . So I have $ 30 every week . With my $ 30 , I 'm able to buy fresh , local β it 's not expensive . It 's the best ! ''\nGus Schumacher loved it , too . The same year this market started , he co-founded , together with chef Michel Nischan , an organization called Wholesome Wave , which has brought this idea of doubling SNAP benefits to farmers markets from Connecticut to California .\nPrivate foundations were happy to contribute , because they realized that their dollars could do several things at once : ease poverty , promote better health and boost the local farm economy .\nIn Michigan , food activist Oran Hesterman set up the Fair Food Network , which called this idea Double Up Food Bucks and got it working in more than 100 places across the state .\n`` We wanted to take it from the seed of an idea to a demonstration that this is something that you could do at scale , '' Hesterman says .\nHesterman was thinking big . He wanted to sell this idea to the government .\nHe invited one of Michigan 's senators β Democrat Debbie Stabenow β to see Double Up Food Bucks for herself . And last year , Stabenow , who is chairwoman of the Senate 's Agriculture Committee , proposed including it in the so-called farm bill .\nOn the other side of Capitol Hill , the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee , Republican Frank Lucas , from Oklahoma , was hearing about this idea , too .\nFarmer Appell had brought Double Up Food Bucks to the Cherry Street Farmers Market in Tulsa and talked about it to a member of Lucas ' staff .\n`` It did n't seem like it required much of a sell , '' Appell recalls . `` They seemed to be on board with it . '' If the program was supporting farmers , the congressman wanted to support it .\nEarlier this year , the farm bill passed , and it included $ 100 million , over the next five years , to boost SNAP dollars when they 're spent on fresh fruits and vegetables . Those taxpayer dollars have to be matched by private funding , so the program could add up to $ 200 million in total .\nThat 's a huge increase . According to some estimates , it may be 10 times what these programs spend right now .\nAs a result , small programs like the Cherry Street Farmers Market and the Crossroads market are now applying for funding to expand . And Michigan 's Fair Food Network , one of the biggest programs , is even moving beyond farmers markets . It 's now working with supermarket chains to see whether SNAP recipients shopping there can double their dollars for fresh produce every day and all year round .
|
allsides-corpus-223
|
There may be a glimmer of hope for the Millennial Generationβmy generationβ when it comes to attitudes about government and the welfare state . In 2008 , young Americans got drunk on Barack Obama . I mean , insanely drunk over Mr. Hope and Change , who bamboozled them not once , but twice . So , it should come as no surprise that after Obamacare β s disastrous rollout and the president β s ineffectiveness as a leader that a majority of young Americans would support recalling him from office .\nOuch ! But , so what if they agree to this ? They 're still hopelessly liberal on everything , right ? Emily Ekins at Reason says not so much , especially once millennials become employed and , you know , start making money :\nMillennials also become more fiscally conservative as they age , make more money , and learn they will become responsible for paying for things . In fact majorities begin to oppose income redistribution and increased spending on financial assistance to the poor , and support for government guarantees drops once millennials start making between $ 40K-60K a year . Moreover , as they roll off their parents ' health insurance policies and begin paying for their own , they no longer are willing to pay more for insurance even `` if it helped provide health insurance coverage for the uninsured , '' flipping from 57 percent in support to 59 percent opposed .\nWhen it comes to Social Security , 71 percent of millennials support creating private accounts :\nSimilarly , Pew found 67 percent of all Americans also favor allowing younger workers invest in private accounts . However , if allowing younger workers to opt out of Social Security meant reduced benefits to seniors , only 38 percent of all Americans would favor while 55 would oppose , according to Reason-Rupe . Millennials β willingness to cut entitlements simply doesn β t comport with strong economic liberalism .\nAs for health care , 54 percent of millennials believe that government should ensure access , but Ekins noted β GenX was also more supportive when they were in their 20s and have since changed . β\nYou can read the rest of Reason β s report on millennials here .\nAlthough , while millennials might go the way of the generations before them , they β re largely β unclaimed. β While Republicans β espousing of social conservatism might turn them off , the GOP β s advocacy for free markets and economic independence might be a magnet . Yet , they β re unsure if such a system is the best for social mobility , according to the report . That β s an area conservatives can surely win , but only if we make the argument . Demography isn β t destinyβand it seems the notion of young Americans being lost to liberalism is a bit premature .\nAfter all , the majority of 18-year-olds voted for Mitt Romney in the 2012 presidential election .\nI double-checked this and found a Washington Post article from March 10 that touched upon this , saying Democrats have a young people problem as well :\nAmong self-reported voters who were 18 years old in 2012 , Mitt Romney , not Obama , won the majority : 57 percent . Romney also won 59 percent among 19-year-olds , and 54 percent among 20-year-olds . These youngest voters of 2012 had entered the electorate in 2010-2012 , when Obama β s popularity was much lower than the high point of his inauguration .\nIn other words , they saw the Obama agenda in action .\nRepublicans have an inroad ; let 's see if they take advantage of it .
|
allsides-corpus-224
|
UPDATE : United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli outlined the details of the new rule from the White House briefing room Monday morning , citing his own immigrant family from Italy .\nThe new rule does not affect asylum seekers , refugees , pregnant women , mortgage loans or students loans . Food stamps , cash assistance and other welfare will count as a negative on applications to become legal permanent residents . Likelihood of welfare use , current use or past use will only serve as one negative factor as applications are considered . A totality of other factors , like age and employment , will also be considered before a green card is issued .\nThe rule will go into affect on October 15 , 2019 and applications for green cards will not consider the new requirements while evaluating eligibility until that date . Applications submitted before October 15 will not be subject to the additional scrutiny .\n`` This is an implementation of a law passed by Congress in 1996 ... on a bipartisan basis , '' Cuccinelli said . `` Our rule generally prevents aliens who are likely to become a public charge from coming to the United States or remaining here and getting a green card . ''\n`` Through the public charge rule , President Trump 's administration is re-enforcing the ideals of self-sufficiency and personal responsibility ensuring immigrants are able to support themselves and become successful here in America , '' he continued .\nUnited States Citizenship and Immigration Services Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli will announce from the White House Monday morning new enforcement measures that will make it more difficult for immigrants to obtain green cards if they are likely to sign up for welfare benefits .\n`` Public charge has been a part of our immigration law since the 1880s . Self-sufficiency has been a core tenet of the American dream . Self-reliance , industriousness , and perseverance laid the foundation of our nation and have defined generations of hardworking immigrants seeking opportunity in the United States ever since , '' a USCIS official released Monday morning . `` President Trump is fulfilling his promise to the American people to fix our immigration system and is defining this important law that will protect American taxpayers and prevent abuse of government benefits . ''\nCuccinelli will argue the Trump administration is simply enforcing long standing and existing laws .\n`` Generations of Americans and hardworking legal immigrants have worked hard to meet their needs β they didn β t rely on the government , '' a background document says . `` For more than a century , our process of admissibility into the country has emphasized the need for self-sufficiency . ''\nThe move is being made to cut down on fraud , abuse and to protect resources provided by the American taxpayer .\nDHS is revising its interpretation of β public charge β to incorporate consideration of such benefits , and to better ensure that aliens subject to the public charge inadmissibility ground are self-sufficient , i.e. , do not depend on public resources to meet their needs , butrather rely on their own capabilities , as well as the resources of family members , sponsors , and private organizations.10This rule redefines the term β public charge β to mean an alien who receives one or more designated public benefits for more than 12 months in the aggregate within any 36-month period ( such that , for instance , receipt of two benefits in one month counts as two months ) . This rule defines theterm β public benefit β toinclude cash benefits for income maintenance , SNAP , most forms of Medicaid , Section 8 Housing Assistance under the Housing Choice Voucher ( HCV ) Program , Section 8 Project-Based Rental Assistance , and certain other forms of subsidized housing . DHS has tailored the rule to limit its effects in certain ways , such as for active duty military members and their families , and children in certain contexts .\nCheck back for more information after Cuccinelli 's press conference , which will take place at 10 am ET .
|
allsides-corpus-225
|
USDA rule would cut food stamp benefits for 3.1 million About 3.1 million people would lose food stamp benefits under the Trump administration 's proposal to tighten automatic eligibility requirements for the food stamp program .\nAbout 3.1 million people would lose food stamp benefits under the Trump administration 's proposal to tighten automatic eligibility requirements for the food stamp program .\nThe Agriculture Department said Tuesday that the rule would close `` a loophole '' that enables people receiving only minimal benefits from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to be eligible automatically for food stamps without undergoing further checks on their income or assets .\n`` For too long , this loophole has been used to effectively bypass important eligibility guidelines . Too often , states have misused this flexibility without restraint , '' Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said in a statement .\nThe proposed rule is the latest in the Trump administration 's efforts to cut back on the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program or SNAP , the official name of the food stamp program . It also has proposed to tighten work requirements for those who receive federal food assistance .\nUSDA estimates that 1.7 million households β 3.1 million people β `` will not otherwise meet SNAP 's income and asset eligibility prerequisites under the proposed rule . '' That would result in a net savings of about $ 9.4 billion over five years .\nAn unpublished version of the proposed rule acknowledges the impact , saying it `` may also negatively impact food security and reduce the savings rates among those individuals who do not meet the income and resource eligibility requirements for SNAP or the substantial and ongoing requirements for expanded categorical eligibility . ''\nHouse Speaker Nancy Pelsoi said it was `` the administration 's latest act of staggering callousness '' while Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said he would `` fight to make sure these cuts never become a reality . ''\nSen. Debbie Stabenow , D-Mich. , said the administration was trying anew to circumvent Congress and that the effect would be to `` take food away from families , prevent children from getting school meals , and make it harder for states to administer food assistance . ''\nCongress has rejected previous , similar attempts to change the expanded automatic eligibility provisions , most recently during the farm bill debate in 2018 .\nRobert Greenstein , president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities , said the proposal could discourage working families with incomes close to the maximum for SNAP participation from seeking more work out of fear that the added wages could make them ineligible for the program .\n`` The proposed rule would weaken SNAP 's role in supporting work while making it harder for families that struggle to get by on low wages to meet their basic needs , '' he said .\nAbout 36 million people participated in SNAP in April 2019 , down from more than 38 million a year earlier .\nUnder current law , states may automatically make people eligible for food stamps , if they meet income and other requirements for TANF . USDA says 43 states have expanded that to include households that it says `` barely participate '' in TANF . The provision is called `` expanded categorical eligibility . ''\nUSDA said the policy has resulted in people receiving food stamps who do n't need it and would n't qualify under regular program rules .\nEllen Vollinger , legal director of the Food Research & Action Center , said the proposal was troubling and that the government should `` put attention on how to help more people , not undercut supports for them and make their struggle against hunger even harder . ''\nShe said the department did n't seem to address a resulting loss of school meals , which she said the Congressional Budget Office included in its analyses of previous , similar proposals . `` It 's another hit on hunger , '' she said .\nUnder the proposal , to qualify for automatic eligibility , people would have to get at least $ 50 a month in benefits from TANF for a minimum of six months .\nPerdue said the change is necessary for `` preventing abuse of a critical safety net system so those who need food assistance the most are the only ones who receive it . ''\nThe rule , expected to be published in the Federal Register on Wednesday , is open for public comment for 60 days .
|
allsides-corpus-226
|
A disturbed man with an AR-15-style rifle walked through a popular historic site in 1996 , shooting up the cafe and gift shop . He left 35 people dead and 19 seriously injured .\nThe country β s conservative leader pushed through immediate , sweeping changes to gun laws . Chief among them was a ban and mandatory buyback of more than 600,000 semiautomatic rifles and other long guns , which were then melted down . In all , one researcher estimates , the government ultimately destroyed about a million weapons β roughly one-third of its total gun stock .\nThat was in Australia , a country that has not had another large-casualty mass shooting since . Officials repeatedly ask : why can β t America do the same ?\nβ We know that other countries , in response to one mass shooting , have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings . Friends of ours , allies of ours β Great Britain , Australia , β Barack Obama said last year after a mass shooting at a college in Oregon .\nβ Certainly the Australia example is worth looking at , β Hillary Clinton said that same month .\nIn an attack on America β s political inaction last week , comedian Samantha Bee asked why one city after another had to have its β turn β witnessing a mass shooting . In Australia , she said : β Parliament passed strict gun laws and they haven β t had a mass shooting since then . β\nOne reason America can β t emulate Australia is purely political : American gun rights advocates say this kind of confiscation would prompt β a civil war β .\nβ It β s confiscation of private property and the threat of jail , and that β s not the American way , β said Philip Alpers , a gun violence researcher at the University of Sydney .\nBut there are other reasons that Australia is not a good model for how the US can address gun violence . As part of a Guardian examination of what it might take to break the cycle of the American gun control debate , we looked first at how parents of children killed at Sandy Hook elementary school are trying to move the conversation forward β in part , by fighting for laws that would not have saved their children . Today , we β re looking more deeply at the reality behind America β s gun casualty numbers β and why allowing mass shootings to define the debate may get in the way of saving lives .\nCan the US break its cycle of gun control failure ? Read more\nAmerica β s gun problem is dramatically larger in scale than Australia β s was\nIn the US , more than 10,000 Americans will likely be killed in gun murders this year . Another 20,000 will likely be lost to gun suicide . The total number of gun deaths and violent injuries will be close to 100,000 .\nEven before the β big melt β , as one Australian gun researcher put it , Australia β s per capita rate of gun homicide was much lower than America β s . Handguns were already strictly regulated .\nIn 1995 , before it implemented sweeping gun buybacks , Australia saw 67 gun murders , fewer than last year β s total murders in Oklahoma City . After Australia β s buyback of nearly a million guns , at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars , the nation β s gun murders dropped by nearly half , from 67 to about 30 gun murders per year . Researchers are still debating how much of that drop was attributable to the new gun control policies , since gun murders were already trending down .\nThe US also has a dramatically larger number of guns . For the US to collect and destroy the same proportion of firearms that Australia did it would require a buyback of 90m firearms , according to a leading Australian researcher , at a cost that might be in the billions if the US paid fair market value for the weapons .\nThe US doesn β t just have a mass shooting problem β it has an enormous , multifaceted gun violence problem\nMass shootings are a growing and alarming phenomenon in the US . By a purely numerical count , the United States has seen more than 1,000 mass shootings in 1,260 days . By a stricter definition , the number is smaller but still sobering : 19 public mass shootings since the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in December 2012 .\nBut by any definition , they make up only a tiny percentage of the overall toll of gun deaths .\nThe US could end all mass shootings today and its rates of gun violence would still be many times higher than other rich countries .\nMuch of America β s day-to-day gun violence is concentrated in America β s poorest , most racially segregated neighborhoods β places with high rates of unemployment , struggling school systems , and high levels of mistrust between police officers and community members .\nAfrican Americans , who represent 13 % of the total population , make up more than half of overall gun murder victims . Roughly 15 of the 30 Americans murdered with guns each day are black men .\nGun violence in America , as criminologist Frank Zimring put it , is another regressive tax on the poor . Some black neighborhoods have experienced so much violence that their residents report symptoms of post-traumatic stress at rates comparable to veterans of war .\nBecause everyday gun violence is concentrated in racially segregated neighborhoods , it β s easy for millions of Americans to think they won β t be affected .\nβ As soon as it β s anybody β s kindergartener that can be at risk , we β re a hell of a lot more terrified , because there is no social class or geographic address that makes one exempt , β Zimring said .\nAmerica β s gun control debate continues to revolve around the exact circumstances of the shooting that is currently on the news . Is a new gun law worth it , or not ? That depends on whether it might have prevented this particular shooting . While this is an understandable , human response , it is a terrible way to go about saving lives .\nThe shock and horror that follows mass shootings has led to an obsessive focus on the dangers of military-style rifles β even though rifles of any kind were used in less than 3 % of gun murders in 2014 , according to FBI data .\nA tunnel focus on mass shootings has also fueled the public perception that mental illness is driving gun violence . But experts caution that even miraculously curing all schizophrenia , bipolar disorder , and major depression in American might only lead to a 4 % reduction in overall violence .\nA debate conducted in the aftermath of mass shootings has also prompted a huge public investment in guarding and fortifying public schools against shootings , even though the typical school can expect to see a student homicide only once every 6,000 years , according to safety expert Dewey Cornell .\nSince the 1999 school shooting at Columbine high school in Colorado , the justice department has invested nearly $ 1bn to help put police officers in schools , though Cornell notes there is still little evidence that school security measures reduce crime .\nThe political focus on mass shootings sometimes even undermines policies that are aimed at addressing the big picture of violence . Opponents of universal background checks have sought to undermine Democrats β push for the reform by pointing out that mass shooters β murder weapons are often purchased legally . But that β s not the point . Expanding background checks on private sales of guns is a strategy designed to help crack down on the illicit market in guns used in everyday gun violence .\nA gun debate driven by focus on the most high-profile killings also plays into the hand of the National Rifle Association , whose leaders argued this weekend that tough gun control laws in Europe did not prevent the terrorists in Paris from getting guns .\nThat may be true . But the United States β overall gun homicide rate is roughly 16 times higher than in France , according to statistics from the FBI and Gunpolicy.org .\nTo save the greatest number of lives , it β s the everyday violence β not just the mass shootings β that we need to prevent .
|
allsides-corpus-227
|
Today , conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh was interviewed by Fox News ' Chris Wallace regarding the horrific massacre that occurred last week at the hands of gunman Nikolas Cruz . That shooting which occurred at a High School in Parkland , FL left 17 dead and many more injured . In the wake of the tragedy , thousands have called for more gun control and and mental health measures to prevent the next shooting . But , Limbaugh argued that none of the proposed ideas will actually stop the next shooting and America must protect its students by arming our teachers in preparation for the next tragedy .\n`` What I found very interesting about the students , and they β re very articulate and you have to feel for them . It β s wrecked their lives , they are a combination of scared and angry . But , Chris , I have to ask if anybody is really serious about solving this ? , '' Limbaugh told the host of Fox News Sunday .\n`` Cause of none of this , and by the way I couldn β t care less about the angle of this , because none of this , is going to solve it . Prayers and condolences don β t solve it . And marches don β t solve it , '' he claimed .\nThen , Limbaugh warned the audience of the very real threat the next mass shooter is out there amongst t the public , gun in hand , saying , `` Chris , the next shooter is out there . The next shooter probably has the gun that he is going to use . The next shooter is known by many people in his community who are concerned that this guy may do what everybody is afraid he is going to do . Now how is anything that we are talking about going to stop that ? ''\n`` We have got to realize this is what our country has become.We can wish that it weren β t it this way and we can wish that Congress can legislate it away , but they ca n't . It 's not the fault of the NRA , it β s not the fault of the NRA . It 's the fault of the people doing this , our inability of dealing with that , and stopping them . We have armed security at virtually every public entity except schools . For some reason the are a gun free zone and everybody who wants to shoot up a school knows they are going to be armed , '' he added .\nThe ultimate solution , he says , is arming teachers to protect students in schools . β The solution is we need concealed carry in these schools . If we are really serious about protecting the kids , we need a mechanism to be defensive when this kind of thing β if we β re not going to take action , we better have mechanisms in these schools to stop it when it breaks out . β\nLimbaugh also blamed the media for politicizing these events rather than working to find actual solutions .
|
allsides-corpus-228
|
The idea that gun-control advocates do n't want to confiscate your weapons is , of course , laughable . They ca n't confiscate your weapons , so they support whatever feasible incremental steps inch further toward that goal . Some folks are more considerate and get right to the point .\n`` I have never understood the conservative fetish for the Second Amendment , '' writes The New York Times ' new-ish conservative columnist Bret Stephens . Referring as a fetish to an inalienable right that has a longer and deeper history among English-speaking people than the right to free speech or the right to freedom of religion is an excellent indicator that someone probably has n't given the issue serious thought .\nI mean , Stephens is n't contending Americans should n't own five AR-15s . He 's arguing that the state should be able to come to your house and take away your revolver or your shotgun or even your matchlock musket .\n`` From a law-and-order standpoint , more guns means more murder , '' writes Stephens , before pulling a narrowly catered statistic that ignores the vast evidence that the number of guns does not correlate with the murder or the crime rates . What studies often do is conflate gun homicides and suicides . If Stephens wants to argue that confiscation would lead to fewer suicides , he 's free to do so . But he 's also going to have to explain why countries with the highest suicide rates often have the strictest gun control laws . The fact is that despite a recent uptick in crime , since 1990 , the murder rate has precipitously droppedβincluding in most big urban centersβwhile there was a big spike in gun ownership .\nThen Stephens compares justifiable gun homicidesβshooting a felon while protecting one 's home , etc.βwith unintentional homicides with a gun . After some back-of-the-napkin calculation , Stephens concludes that guns are useless as a means of personal protection . Anyone who 's spent 10 minutes thinking about gun control understands there is no way to quantify how many criminals are deterred by the presence of guns , or how many , for that matter , are turned away in the midst of crime . Has anyone calculated how many non-gun-owning families are safer because their neighbors own firearms ?\nWithout getting into the practicality of confiscating more than 300 million guns , it seems odd that someone would let murderers and madmen decide what inalienable rights we should embrace . It is almost humorous to hear someone advising you not to worry about domestic tyranny as he explains why the state should eradicate a constitutional right and confiscate your means of self-defense . But Stephens comes to the likely true conclusion that you ca n't stop random men from killing .\nTo his credit , Stephens refrains from comparing random madmen with those who kill in the name of a worldwide ideological movement that relies on terrorism as a political weapon . Though we can often do something to detect the latter , the FBI would not have stopped `` Mohammad Paddock , '' in the same way they did n't stop Syed Rizwan Farook or Tashfeen Malik or Nidal Hasan or Omar Mateen .\nBut my favorite part of Stephens ' column is when he asks : `` I wonder what Madison would have to say about that today , when more than twice as many Americans perished last year at the hands of their fellows as died in battle during the entire Revolutionary War . ''\nSetting aside the population scale , Stephens might not know that one of the reasons the Federalists , including Madison , opposed the Second Amendment was that they believed concerns over protections from the federal government were overblown because there were so many guns in private hands that it was unimaginable any tyrannical army could ever be more powerful than the general public . Others , like Noah Webster , reasoned , `` The supreme power in America can not enforce unjust laws by the sword ; because the whole body of the people are armed , and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be , on any pretense , raised in the United States . ''\n`` Repealing the Amendment may seem like political Mission Impossible today , '' writes Stephens , `` but in the era of same-sex marriage it 's worth recalling that most great causes begin as improbable ones . ''\nTo troglodytes like myself , the writing of the Constitution and Bill of Rights was perhaps the greatest cause of the nation . Moreover , same-sex marriage was instituted by the courts . Repealing the Second Amendment is going to take a lot more heavy lifting . There are probably too many fetishists around to make it happen .\nI 'm one , too . As an American and a Jew descended from people who came here escaping both Nazism and communism , I 'm OK with fetishizing the Second Amendment . As a person who can read history and contrast the 19th- and 20th-century history of America and Europeβand about anywhere elseβI `` get '' the fetish . And when I read columns like the one Stephens wrote , I definitely get it .
|
allsides-corpus-229
|
Story highlights President Obama says gun law foes `` willfully lied ''\nMajor components of Obama 's gun proposals fail to win Senate approval\nSupporters of new gun laws blame the defeats on NRA influence in Congress\nIn a major defeat for supporters of tougher gun laws , the U.S. Senate on Wednesday defeated a compromise plan to expand background checks on firearms sales as well as a proposal to ban some semi-automatic weapons modeled after military assault weapons .\nThe votes were on a series of amendments to a broad package of gun laws pushed by President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre in December .\nHowever , fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association led a backlash by conservative Republicans and a few Democrats from pro-gun states that doomed key proposals in the gun package , even after they had been watered down to try to satisfy opponents .\nAfter the votes , Obama angrily criticized the NRA and senators who voted against the expanded background checks for rejecting a compromise he said was supported by a strong majority of Americans .\n`` Instead of supporting this compromise , the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill , '' Obama told White House reporters .\nJUST WATCHED Obama angry about gun bill failure Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Obama angry about gun bill failure 01:43\nJUST WATCHED The risky politics of gun control Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH The risky politics of gun control 01:24\nJUST WATCHED Soto : Disappointed in our Senate Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Soto : Disappointed in our Senate 02:22\nNoting polls that showed 90 % support for such a measure , Obama called it a `` pretty shameful day for Washington '' and wondered of Congress : `` Who are we here to represent ? ''\nHe was flanked by relatives of gun violence victims as well as former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords , a gun owner who was disabled in a shooting attack and supported Obama 's proposals .\nA statement by Giffords and her husband , former astronaut Mark Kelly , said the Senate had `` ignored the will of the American people , '' adding that those senators who voted against the expanded background checks chose to `` obey the leaders of the powerful corporate gun lobby , instead of their constituents . ''\nTo Erica Lafferty , the daughter of the principal of the Newtown , Connecticut , school who was killed along with 20 first-graders and five other educators in the December attack , the vote amounted to inaction in the face of a national tragedy .\n`` The next time there 's a mass shooting and they 're asked what they did to prevent it , they 're going to have to say nothing , '' she said .\nOn the other side , the NRA 's Chris Cox called the expanded background check proposal `` misguided , '' saying it would not reduce violent crime `` or keep our kids safe in their schools . ''\nThe broader gun package still under consideration by the Senate includes tougher laws on gun trafficking and straw purchases , and steps to devise ways to improve safety in schools .\nAs originally proposed , with a provision to expand background checks , it would have been the most significant gun legislation before Congress in almost two decades .\nDue to early opposition to the background check provision , Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Republican Sen. Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania worked out a compromise that was less comprehensive than what Obama wanted but still gained the president 's support .\nThe Manchin-Toomey plan would have expanded background checks to include private sales at gun shows and all Internet sales , while continuing to exempt most sales between family members and friends .\nDue to procedural steps agreed to by both sides , all the amendments considered Wednesday required 60 votes to pass in the 100-member chamber , meaning Democrats and their independent allies who hold 55 seats needed support from some GOP senators to push through the Manchin-Toomey proposal .\nThe final vote was 54 in favor to 46 opposed with four Republicans joining most Democrats in supporting the compromise . With the outcome obvious , Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid , D-Nevada , cast a `` no '' vote to secure the ability to bring the measure up again .\nMeanwhile , four Democrats from pro-gun states voted with most Republicans in opposition .\nWhen the result was announced by Vice President Joe Biden , who presided over the chamber for the vote , two women in the gallery of spectators shouted `` shame on you '' at the senators .\n`` They are an embarrassment to this country that they do n't have any compassion or care for people who have been taken brutally from their families , '' said one of them , Patricia Maisch , who grabbed the gun magazine from the attacker who shot Giffords and several other people in Tucson in January 2011 .\nOn the proposal by Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California to update a 1994 ban on semi-automatic weapons that expired in 2004 , the vote was 40-60 , showing opposition by several Democrats as well as the chamber 's Republican minority .\nObama had pushed for Congress to include both the expanded background checks provision and the weapons ban in any gun package . In recent weeks , he and the White House focused their efforts on winning support for the Manchin-Toomey compromise .\nHowever , the NRA promised political retribution against supporters of tougher gun laws , and it called the expanded background checks a first step toward a national gun registry and government confiscation of firearms .\nObama called that claim misinformation , noting the Manchin-Toomey proposal prohibited such a registry . He said the tactics of the NRA galvanized a vocal minority of gun owners against the legislation , which caused some senators to flinch .\n`` They worried that the gun lobby would spend a lot of money and paint them as anti-Second Amendment , '' Obama said . `` And obviously a lot of Republicans had that fear , but Democrats had that fear , too . And so they caved to the pressure . And they started looking for an excuse , any excuse to vote 'no . ' ''\nReid earlier warned Republicans that the strong majority of Americans who support expanded background checks wo n't forget votes against the Manchin-Toomey compromise .\n`` The American people ... have a long , long memory , '' he said .\nMeanwhile , an alternative package of gun proposal that reflected the NRA position also was defeated .\nOfferd by conservative Republicans , the alternative plan introduced Wednesday after weeks of hearings and debate on Democratic proposals lacked any expansion of background checks but called for more funding to better enforce the existing system .\nA sponsor of the Republican alternative , Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas , said it would target the gun violence problem in a way that the Democratic proposal before the Senate would not .\nIn response , Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Pat Leahy , D-Vermont , called the GOP 's last-minute proposal a `` weak and counterproductive alternative . ''\nOther proposed amendments defeated Wednesday included a plan by Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas to make state concealed weapons permits acceptable throughout the country. , as well as a proposal by Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey to limit the number of rounds in ammunition magazines .\nAny legislation passed by the Senate would then go to the Republican-led House . So far , House Speaker John Boehner has stopped short of promising a vote on whatever the Senate sends over .
|
allsides-corpus-230
|
As the post-Sandy Hook gun-control debate continues , states such as Georgia , South Dakota , Colorado , and New York have emerged as bellwethers on how the nation is beginning to stand up to gun violence .\nA day after the Georgia legislature ended bans on guns in bars , churches , and college classrooms , South Dakota passed the first law in the United States aimed expressly at allowing school districts to arm teachers .\nGuns are not outlawed in schools in 18 states and some school districts do have some armed teachers , but the vast majority of districts have not supported teacher-carry to this point .\nThe extent to which South Dakota teachers take advantage of what will become a tough new licensing program is unclear . And the issue is electrified by politics , as over a thousand gun laws , divided between expansion and contraction of gun laws , have emerged in state houses across the country since the massacre of 20 children and six staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown , Conn. , on Dec. 14 .\nIndeed , as a federal gun-control package has been whittled down in the Senate , the real impact of Newtown is likely to be felt state to state , especially given some of the sweeping reforms that have already passed . The big question is what these legislative moves suggest about public support for more antiviolence gun controls , which have in the past spiked and then petered out after past mass shootings .\n`` We know that attention to these issues moves on relatively quickly , '' says Brendan Nyhan , a political scientist at Dartmouth College in Hanover , N.H .\nRecognizing that need for urgency , New York Gov . Andrew Cuomo signed a tough new gun-control law into effect in New York . Colorado legislators are set to vote Monday on arguably the most meaningful bellwether gun-control package , one that would crimp the ability of Coloradoans to own certain types of ammunition magazines and institute universal background checks , closing the so-called gun show loophole .\nColorado 's stature as a traditional pioneer state with a progressive bent has made the outcome of that legislation especially interesting to national observers , as it may augur how similar proposals fare in other western states . Colorado has also been uniquely affected by gun violence at Columbine High School in 1999 and last year 's massacre in an Aurora movie theater .\nBut so far , many local governments have taken the opposite lesson from the Sandy Hook massacre . Instead of limiting the right to own weapons , their thinking goes , it 's instead a call to arms .\nTo many Americans , `` gun rights has become a civil rights movement , so it 's not just purely strategic politics , '' says Jennifer Carlson , a gun culture expert at the University of Toronto .\nCommunities in Idaho , Maine , and Georgia are all pondering whether to make gun ownership mandatory for residents , primarily to make up for emergency call time delays from distant police or sheriff departments .\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nSouth Dakota 's armed teacher law is directly tied to what happened at Sandy Hook , as well as concerns about shootings in distant , rural communities . According to the law , school boards are under no obligation to adopt the training regimen , but have to address the issue if 5 percent of registered voters sign a petition urging them to take up the topic .\nLawmakers in Georgia , meanwhile , had been working since before Sandy Hook to end gun-carry bans in bars , churches , and college campuses . The measure passed the House and is expected to prevail in the Senate as well . It 's not clear whether Gov . Nathan Deal would sign the law or let it become law without his signature .
|
allsides-corpus-231
|
Young survivors of Wednesday 's school shooting in Florida have announced a national march on Washington to demand political action on gun control .\nStudent organisers told US media that they were determined to make Wednesday 's shooting a turning point in the national gun debate .\nThe attack , which left 17 students and staff members dead , was the deadliest US school shooting since 2012 .\nYesterday protestors chanted `` shame on you '' to US lawmakers and the president .\nMr Trump said last year he would `` never '' infringe on the right to keep arms - a long-running and contested debate within the US .\nIn his first public comments on the gun control issue since the attack , Mr Trump blamed the Democrats for not passing legislation when they controlled Congress during the early years of Barack Obama 's administration .\nHe also rebuked the FBI for missing signals before Wednesday 's school shooting , after the organisation admitted it had failed to act on a tip-off about the suspected shooter Nikolas Cruz .\nSpeaking on US television networks on Sunday morning , student survivors from Marjory Stoneman Douglas announced their March for Our Lives campaign .\nThey are planning to march on Washington on 24 March to demand that children and their families `` become a priority '' to US lawmakers . They want other protests to happen simultaneously in other cities on the same day .\n`` We are losing our lives while the adults are playing around , '' Cameron Kasky , a survivor from the school said .\nIt is one of many student-led protests amassing support on social media in the wake of Wednesday 's attack .\nOn Saturday students and their parents - as well as politicians - took part in an emotionally-charged rally in Fort Lauderdale , close to Parkland .\nArguably the most memorable moment came when high school student Emma Gonzalez took to the podium and attacked the US president and other politicians for accepting political donations from the National Rifle Association ( NRA ) , a powerful gun rights lobby group .\n`` If the president wants to come up to me and tell me to my face that it was a terrible tragedy and ... how nothing is going to be done about it , I 'm going to happily ask him how much money he received from the National Rifle Association , '' said Ms Gonzalez .\n`` It does n't matter because I already know . Thirty million dollars , '' the 18-year-old said , referring to donations during Mr Trump 's presidential campaign .\n`` To every politician who is taking donations from the NRA - shame on you ! '' said Ms Gonzalez , who took cover on the floor of her secondary school 's auditorium during the attack .\nAccording to the Center for Responsive Politics , the NRA spent $ 11.4m ( Β£8.1m ) supporting Mr Trump in the 2016 campaign , and $ 19.7m opposing Hillary Clinton .\nThe president 's views on gun control have shifted over time . In recent years , he has pledged to fiercely defend the Second Amendment to the US Constitution , which protects people 's right to keep and bear arms .\nLast year , he told an NRA convention he would `` never , ever infringe '' on that right .\nIn a tweet late on Saturday , the Republican president accused the Democrats of not acting on gun legislation `` when they had both the House & Senate during the Obama Administration .\n`` Because they did n't want to , and now they just talk ! '' he wrote , referring to criticism from Democrats following Wednesday 's shooting .\nMr Trump - who on Friday met survivors of the attack - has also blamed the shooter 's mental health and the FBI 's failings .\nThe US news network CNN has invited Florida lawmakers and the president to attend a town hall event with survivors of the attack on Wednesday .\nSaturday 's rally coincided with a gun show in Florida . Hundreds of people attended the event at the Dade County fairgrounds , despite calls to cancel it .\nMr Cruz , 19 , is a former student at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School .\nHe was reportedly investigated by local police and the Department of Children and Family Services in 2016 after posting evidence of self-harm on the Snapchat app , according to the latest US media reports .\nChild services said he had planned to buy a gun , but authorities determined he was already receiving adequate support , the reports say .\nThe reports come after the Federal Bureau of Investigation ( FBI ) admitted it did not properly follow up on a tip-off about Mr Cruz last month .\nThe 5 January tip was not the only information the FBI received . In September , a Mississippi man reported to the law enforcement agency a disturbing comment left on a YouTube video under Mr Cruz 's name .\nFlorida Governor Rick Scott called for FBI director Christopher Wray to resign over the failures to act .\nIn a late tweet on Saturday , the President rebuked the organisation for their handling of tip-offs .\n`` Very sad that the FBI missed all of the many signals sent out by the Florida school shooter . This is not acceptable . They are spending too much time trying to prove Russian collusion with the Trump campaign . ''
|
allsides-corpus-232
|
( CNN ) β New Jersey Gov . Chris Christie painted a bleak picture of America 's standing in the world on Sunday , blaming the Obama administration for making the country appear weak by not defending the nation 's values in other parts of the globe .\n`` No one understands any longer who America stands with or against , '' he argued . `` No one really understands exactly what we 'll stand for - and what we are willing to sacrifice to stand up for it . ''\nChristie said it 's time for the country 's leaders to `` stop singing a happy tune '' about the country 's condition . `` It is time for us to tell the truth about that condition and then to begin taking the hard and firm actions that are necessary to fix it , '' he continued .\nThe Republican governor made his remarks at a gala hosted by Rabbi Shmuley Boteach 's `` This World : Values Network '' in New York . Major Jewish figures , including Israel 's ambassador to the United States , as well as mega GOP donor Sheldon Adelson , attended the dinner .\nIf there was any doubt that Christie did n't line up with the more hawkish wing of the Republican Party , he firmly quashed those doubts Sunday night . Christie , who 's seriously considering a run for president , argued U.S. leaders needs to re-establish America 's reputation as a strong enforcer of freedom and promoter of prosperity , even if that requires `` sacrifice . ''\n`` We need to stand once again loudly for these values , and sometimes that is going to mean standing in some very messy , difficult places and standing strong and hard for those things that we believe in , '' he said . `` And it will mean sacrifice from the people of our country . ''\nChristie cited both domestic and foreign policy concerns as reasons for what he described as the country 's deteriorating status . At home , he blasted Washington for partisan gridlock on fiscal issues .\n`` We are and have become a dysfunctional government that even our own people snicker , laugh at , ignore and are disgusted by , '' he said , adding there was a time when developing democracies wanted to emulate America 's government , but that is no longer the case .\nOn international affairs , the governor referenced issues in Syria , Russia and Iran as three foreign policy areas in which the Obama administration has failed to show strength and credibility .\nHe said America `` is no longer sending clear signals to the world - consistent signals . ''\n`` Signals like the ones Ronald Reagan sent when he was president as to who our friends are and that we will stand with them without doubt , and to who our enemies are , who we will oppose regardless of the cost , '' he continued .\nChristie 's remarks solidify his stance on national security issues as the Republican Party is knee-deep in an ideological fight over foreign policy . That debate has perhaps played out most visibly between Christie and another potential 2016 contender , Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky , who 's trying to woo the broader Republican base with his libertarian-leaning , non-interventionist views .\nChristie 's speech was widely anticipated in the Jewish community because the last time Christie appeared before a Jewish audience , he made a major blunder by referring to the `` occupied territories , '' a term Israel and its allies do n't use .\nMany Israelis do n't consider the territories to be occupied , but rather say Israel has a legitimate claim to the land . Palestinians , along with the United Nations , consider the West Bank to be Palestinian but under military occupation by Israel .\nIn a private meeting later with Adelson , the GOP donor , Christie said he `` misspoke '' and that he did n't believe the West Bank is `` occupied '' by Israel . While Christie did n't mention Israel in his speech Sunday , he made it clear that the United States should more overtly align with its allies , and he singled out Iran as a `` terrorist state '' with nuclear capability .
|
allsides-corpus-233
|
President Trump unveiled his plan for Afghanistan after seven months of deliberation Monday evening , announcing tweaks around the edges of the current strategy instead of a different approach .\nHe announced five β core pillars β to the approach : getting rid of any timelines for how long U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan ; using all elements of power , including diplomatic and economic ; getting tougher on Pakistan ; getting India to help more with economic development ; and expanding authorities for U.S. forces to fight terrorists .\nWhat the president did not announce was how many more U.S. troops would head to Afghanistan , which he decided earlier this year to leave up to Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to determine .\nHe did , however , say the U.S. would no longer talk about troop levels or drawdown dates , making it unclear whether troop increases would be announced . There are currently about 8,400 U.S. forces in Afghanistan , and the president has reportedly approved of a plan to send about 4,000 more .\nβ We will not announce our plans for further military activities . Conditions on the ground , not arbitrary timetables , will guide our strategy from now on . America β s enemies must never know our plans or believe they can wait us out . I will not say when we are going to attack , but attack we will , β he said .\nHe floated the idea of a β political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban and Afghanistan , but added , β nobody knows if or when that will ever happen . β\nHe said it was up to the people of Afghanistan to β take ownership of their future β and to β achieve an everlasting peace , β but did not say how that would happen .\nβ We are not nation-building again , we are killing terrorists , β he asserted .\nTrump did not talk about how much more the new strategy would cost , but said the U.S. would ask its NATO and other allies to do more . The U.S. spends about $ 45 billion per year in Afghanistan . While he did not announce a withdrawal date , he said β our support is not a blank check β¦ The American people expect to see real reforms , real progress , and real results . Our patience is not unlimited . β\nThe speech was a disappointment to many who had supported his calls during the campaign to end expensive foreign intervention and nation-building . He acknowledged the frustration that Americans felt after 16 years of war without an end in sight .\nβ The American people are weary of war without victory . Nowhere is this more evident than Afghanistan the longest war in American history , 17 years . I share the American people β s frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time , energy , money and most importantly , lives , β he said .\nHowever , he said despite his β original instinct β to pull out , β decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office , in other words when you are president of the United States . β\nAfter studying the Afghanistan in β great detail and from every conceivable angle , β he said he did not want to repeat the mistake of the previous administration in Iraq and pull out too early , leaving a vacuum for terrorists to fill .\nβ We can not repeat in Afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in Iraq , β he said . β We must address reality . β\nThe president said that today , 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan , and cited last week β s terrorist attack in Spain as evidence terrorists must be defeated .\nβ We will defeat them and defeat them handily , β he said . β In Afghanistan and Pakistan , America β s interests are clear . We must stop the resurgence of safe havens that allow terrorists to threaten America . β\nTrump announced the new strategy at Army Post Fort Meyer in Arlington , Virginia , surrounded by soldiers , and spoke of the unity among forces trying to achieve one mission and called for the same unity among Americans .\nβ All service members are brothers and sisters , they β re all part of the same family . It β s called the American family , β he said . β Let us find the courage to heal our divisions within . β
|
allsides-corpus-234
|
In this photo taken from the Turkish side of the border between Turkey and Syria , in Akcakale , Sanliurfa province , southeastern Turkey , smoke billows from a fire inside Syria during bombardment by Turkish forces Wednesday , Oct. 9 , 2019 . Turkey launched a military operation Wednesday against Kurdish fighters in northeastern Syria after U.S. forces pulled back from the area , with a series of airstrikes hitting a town on Syria 's northern border . ( AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis )\nIn this photo taken from the Turkish side of the border between Turkey and Syria , in Akcakale , Sanliurfa province , southeastern Turkey , smoke billows from a fire inside Syria during bombardment by Turkish forces Wednesday , Oct. 9 , 2019 . Turkey launched a military operation Wednesday against Kurdish fighters in northeastern Syria after U.S. forces pulled back from the area , with a series of airstrikes hitting a town on Syria 's northern border . ( AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis )\nAKCAKALE , Turkey ( AP ) β Turkey launched airstrikes , fired artillery and began a ground offensive against Kurdish fighters in northern Syria on Wednesday after U.S. troops pulled back from the area , paving the way for an assault on forces that have long been allied with the United States .\nTurkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced the start of the campaign , which followed the abrupt decision Sunday by U.S. President Donald Trump to essentially abandon the Syrian Kurdish fighters , leaving them vulnerable to a Turkish offensive that was widely condemned around the world .\nThe decision was a major shift in U.S. policy and drew opposition from all sides at home . It also marked a stark change in rhetoric by Trump , who during a press conference in New York last year vowed to stand by the Kurds , who have been America β s only allies in Syria fighting the Islamic State group . Trump said at the time that the Kurds β fought with us β and β died with us , β and insisted that America would never forget .\nAfter Erdogan announced the offensive , Trump called the operation β a bad idea. β Later Wednesday , he said he didn β t want to be involved in β endless , senseless wars . β\nIn northern Syria , residents of the border areas were in a panic and got out on foot , in cars and with rickshaws piled with mattresses and a few belongings . It was a wrenchingly familiar scenario for the many who , only a few years ago , had fled the advances on their towns and villages by the Islamic State group .\nPlumes of smoke could be seen rising near the town of Qamishli and clashes continued late Wednesday amid intense shelling as Turkey struck at least six different border towns along a 290-mile ( 300-kilometer ) stretch . At least seven civilians and three members of the Kurdish-led force known as the Syrian Democratic Forces were killed in the Turkish bombardment , Kurdish activists and a Syria war monitor said .\nTurkey β s campaign β in which a NATO member rained down bombs on an area where hundreds of U.S. troops had been stationed β drew immediate criticism and calls for restraint from Europe . In his statement , Trump emphasized that there are no American soldiers in the immediate area under attack .\nβ Our mission is to prevent the creation of a terror corridor across our southern border , and to bring peace to the area , β Erdogan said in a tweet announcing what he called β Operation Peace Spring . β\nHe said that Turkish forces , with Ankara-backed Syrian fighters known as the Syrian National Army , had begun to eradicate what he called β the threat of terror β against Turkey .\nMustafa Bali , a spokesman for the U.S.-backed SDF , said Turkish warplanes were targeting β civilian areas β in northern Syria and that shells also had fallen near a prison guarded by Kurds and holding some of the most dangerous IS militants . The AP could not verify the report independently .\nIn Washington , officials said two British militants believed to be part of an Islamic State group that beheaded hostages and was known as β The Beatles β had been moved out of a detention center in Syria and were in U.S. custody .\nBefore Turkey β s attack , Syrian Kurdish forces who control nearly 30 percent of Syria β s territory warned of a β humanitarian catastrophe. β More than 2 million people live in the area impacted by the attacks , according to aid groups .\nThe Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said those killed in the Turkish bombardments included two Christian Assyrians in Qamishli , a married couple and their child , a man in a village outside the town of Tal Abyad , and a child in a village west of Qamishli .\nThe Turkish operation meant to create a β safe zone β carries potential gains and risk for Turkey by getting its forces even more deeply involved in the Syria war . It also ignites new fighting in Syria β s 8-year-old war , potentially displacing hundreds of thousands .\nA resident of Tal Abyad said one of the bombs hit an SDF post , and he fled with his wife and mother by car to Raqqa , nearly 100 kilometers ( 60 miles ) to the south , to flee the bombing . The resident , who gave his name as Maher , said the road to Raqqa was packed with vehicles and families , some fleeing on foot β to get away from the bombing . β\nβ People fled and left everything behind , β he said in a text message after he reached safety .\nTurkey has long threatened to attack the Kurdish fighters that Ankara considers terrorists allied with a Kurdish insurgency in Turkey . Expectations of an invasion increased after Trump β s announcement Sunday , although he also threatened to β totally destroy and obliterate β Turkey β s economy if the Turkish push went too far .\nU.S. critics said he was sacrificing an ally , the Syrian Kurdish forces , and undermining Washington β s credibility . Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham , a Trump ally , told β Fox & Friends β that if Trump β follows through with this , it would be the biggest mistake of his presidency . β\nTrump later said the U.S. β does not endorse this attack and has made it clear to Turkey that this operation is a bad idea . β\nTrump said he made clear from the start of his political career that β I did not want to fight these endless , senseless wars β especially those that don β t benefit the United States . Turkey has committed to protecting civilians , protecting religious minorities , including Christians , and ensuring no humanitarian crisis takes place β and we will hold them to this commitment . β\nNATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg , while noting that Turkey β has legitimate security concerns β after suffering β horrendous terrorist attacks β and hosting thousands of refugees , said the country should not β further destabilize the region β with its military action in Syria .\nGerman Foreign Minister Heiko Maas condemned the offensive , saying it will β further destabilize the region and strengthen IS. β The operation also was criticized by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker .\nThe EU is paying Turkey 6 billion euros ( $ 6.6 billion ) to help the country cope with almost 4 million Syrian refugees on its territory in exchange for stopping migrants leaving for Europe .\nThe Turkish presidency β s communications director urged the international community to rally behind Ankara . In a Washington Post column published Wednesday , Fahrettin Altun said Turkey aimed to β neutralize β Syrian Kurdish militants in northeastern Syria and to β liberate the local population from the yoke of the armed thugs . β\nErdogan discussed the incursion by phone with Russian President Vladimir Putin . Erdogan β s office said he told Putin the military action β will contribute to the peace and stability β and allow for a political process in Syria .\nIn its call for a general mobilization , the local civilian Kurdish authority known as the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria asked the global community to fulfill its responsibilities and for the U.S.-led coalition to set up a no-fly zone in northeastern Syria to protect the civilian population from Turkish airstrikes .\nThe Syrian Kurdish group urged Moscow to broker talks with the Syrian government in Damascus in light of the Turkish operation . The Syrian Kurdish-led administration said it viewed positively calls from Moscow encouraging the Kurds and the Syrian government to settle their difference through talks .\nSyria β s Foreign Ministry condemned Turkey β s military strike , calling it a β blatant violation β of international law and vowing to repel the incursion .\nRussian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused Washington of playing β very dangerous games β with the Syrian Kurds , saying the U.S. first propped up the Kurdish β quasi state β in Syria and now is withdrawing support .\nβ Such reckless attitude to this highly sensitive subject can set fire to the entire region , and we have to avoid it at any cost , β he said in Kazakhstan .\nEarlier Wednesday , three IS militants targeted the SDF in Raqqa , once the de facto IS capital at the height of the militants β power . An activist collective in Raqqa reported an exchange of fire and an explosion ; the Observatory said two IS fighters engaged in a shootout before blowing themselves up .\nIS claimed responsibility , saying one of its members killed or wounded 13 SDF members .\nThe SDF , which holds thousands of IS fighters in detention facilities in northeastern Syria , has warned that a Turkish incursion might lead to the resurgence of the extremists . The U.S.-allied Kurdish-led force captured the last IS area controlled by the militants in eastern Syria in March .\nEl Deeb reported from Beirut . βββ writers Suzan Fraser in Ankara , Turkey ; Mehmet Guzel in Akcakale , Turkey ; Nasser Karimi in Tehran , Iran ; Nataliya Vasilyeva in Moscow ; and Bassem Mroue in Beirut contributed .
|
allsides-corpus-235
|
The administration Kabuki dance we β re witnessing featuring U.S. refusal to provide nonlethal support equipment for Ukraine is President Obama displaying the new β flexibility β he promised Vladimir Putin he would have after his re-election . In short , it is capitulation .\nThe administration is trying to make the case that by showing restraint , Mr. Obma will encourage Mr. Putin , the Russian president , to be more willing to negotiate . The mind boggles . What β s taking place in Ukraine has far-reaching implications for the United States and our allies in both Europe and the Far East .\nThe apparent lack of support from NATO β s political leadership to help Ukraine maintain its sovereignty is clearly tied to its dependence on Russia for more than 30 percent of their energy requirements . This compromised position was accepted based on the assumption that European security after the Cold War could be guaranteed ( with reduced defense budgets ) by engaging Russia , not confronting it .\nThis now appears to be a costly error , since it has been known for some time that NATO β s engagement policies have not required Russia β s reciprocity . However , one positive outcome of the current crisis should be an unmistakable wake-up call for NATO , as its credibility is clearly being challenged .\nThe administration β s rationale for not providing nonlethal equipment , such as night-vision devices , body armor , medical kits , uniforms , boots and military socks to the β victim β is that it could be perceived by Russia as β destabilizing β and as a β force-multiplier , β and , therefore , too provocative . This is nonsense . Russia has deployed 40,000 fully equipped , modernized troops backed up by tanks , aircraft and helicopters , plus paid KGB goon squads that are creating havoc in Eastern Ukraine .\nMr. Obama responds by debating whether to provide what amounts to humanitarian aid because he doesn β t want to encourage Ukraine β s leadership to take more aggressive action to protect its sovereignty . With this type of convoluted thinking , we β d better hope that this administration and its national security team never gets us into a war that requires real leadership .\nWhat is behind such thinking ? Is Mr. Obama concerned that Mr. Putin will somehow scuttle his precious P5+1 ( the five permanent members of the United Nations β the U.S. , Russia , China , Great Britain and France β plus Germany ) negotiations with Iran over its nuclear-weapons program ? We can only hope that Mr. Putin would take such an action , as those negotiations are nothing but a sham . According to Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper , Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in about two weeks , once the order is given .\nSymptomatic of the Ukraine crisis , no matter where you look , the United States is seen as being in retreat . The stability that America brought to the global strategic equation is being systematically dismantled by the Obama administration , principally by the unilateral disarmament of our military forces .\nThe Ukraine situation is far from being resolved . China is flexing its military muscle in the Far East . The Middle East remains in chaos . Iran β s nuclear-weapons capability is almost a certainty . With the unpredictability of North Korea , why would the Obama administration at this time make the shocking announcement of deep cuts to the U.S. nuclear forces , four years ahead of the 2010 New START treaty schedule ?\nOur most secure deterrent , our strategic ballistic-missile submarines , will be reduced by 28 percent by having the capability of 56 launch strikes disabled . Thirty B-52 strategic bombers will be converted to conventional use , which represents a 38 percent reduction in capability , and 50 missiles will be removed from our underground silos , which is the most vulnerable leg of the triad .\nWith every nuclear power in the world modernizing its strategic forces , particularly Russia and China , plus the known fact that Russia has been cheating on existing treaties , making such a dramatic force-reduction announcement now is more than troubling .\nThe Obama administration is taking the United States down a course that will put us in an absolute nuclear inferiority position with regard to Russia and perhaps China . It is jeopardizing our national security .\nWith the United States β strategic policy adrift , Mr. Putin is controlling events in the Ukraine . With basically no opposition , he will certainly seek more opportunities . In the Far East , we can anticipate that China , seeing our basic inability to respond to the Ukraine crisis , will seize the opportunity to absorb some low-hanging fruit in the South China Sea , most likely contested Philippine islands .\nWhat will it take to make Congress exercise its constitutional responsibilities and maintain its legitimacy by acting in the best interest of the United States ? We are being challenged , and we can not afford to continue to embrace a fantasy foreign policy .\nJames A. Lyons , U.S. Navy retired admiral , was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations .
|
allsides-corpus-236
|
The Obama administration has yet to articulate a clear course of action to dismantle ISIL . Obama 's blurry foreign policy vision\nThe extremist Islamic group that beheaded journalist James Foley has been described as β wicked β and an β imminent threat , β and President Barack Obama has vowed to be β relentless β in pursuing it .\nYet for all the vivid rhetoric in recent days , the Obama administration has yet to articulate a clear course of action to dismantle the radical group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and is struggling to lay out a precise vision to respond to the new threats in chaotic areas of Iraq and Syria where ISIL has thrived in recent months .\nThe lack of clarity in the U.S. approach to the region has underscored claims by critics β including voices generally friendly to the White House β questioning whether Obama β s foreign policy message is coherent enough to win support across the globe .\nAnd the disconnect between dramatic condemnations and decisive action against ISIL threatens to leave the president looking ineffective or even impotent , just as his call for Syrian President Bashar Assad to resign remains unheeded three years later .\nAt the daily briefing for reporters Monday , White House press secretary Josh Earnest faced a barrage of questions about whether Obama is prepared to expand the campaign against ISIL and whether Obama β s policies on the subject are muddled .\nβ The president has been very clear about what he believes our priorities are in Iraq , why he believes it β s important for the United States to pursue a comprehensive approach to countering the threat that β s posed by ISIL , not just to Iraq , but also to Americans and American interests , β Earnest said . β That strategy includes some of the military strikes that the president has ordered . β\nProminent foreign policy figures , including Democrats such as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Rep. Jane Harman , as well as a broad range of Republicans , have argued recently that the message the U.S. is projecting abroad is murky .\nβ Great nations need organizing principles , and β Don β t do stupid stuff β is not an organizing principle , β Clinton told The Atlantic β s Jeffrey Goldberg in an interview earlier this month , adding , β One issue is that we don β t even tell our own story very well these days . β\nClinton β s remarks caused a stir mainly because they were taken as criticism of Obama , but less attention was paid to the substance of her critique , which seemed to track very closely statements made earlier in the summer by Harman , who now heads the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars .\nβ I β m not saying it is U.S. foreign policy , but the perception of our foreign policy in much of the Middle East is : β Don β t do stupid stuff β plus use drones , β β Harman told an audience at the Aspen Security Forum in July . β I don β t think that β s winning any heart or mind or any mind or heart . β\nβ The perception has to be that we stand for things and not only stand for them , but live those values , β Harman added . β We β re just not making the sale right now for lots of reasons . β¦ Our narrative needs a lot of work . β\nWhile Obama did authorize a β limited β U.S. military campaign to bomb ISIL positions in Iraq earlier this month , he has yet to expand that military effort to try to eradicate the group there or across the border in Syria . Despite Obama β s talk of a β relentless β effort against ISIL , the limits he has articulated β such as β no boots on the ground β β have been clearer than the indications of how far the U.S. is willing to go to fight the militant group .\nWhile some observers expected Obama might lay out his ISIL policy in greater detail during a speech Tuesday to an American Legion convention in North Carolina , the White House said Monday the address would focus mainly on issues like problems at Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals .\nBut the president will need to move quickly ; the issue is increasingly urgent in Europe , which has had thousands of Muslim citizens join the fighting in Syria β a substantial number of those with ISIL . The strategy debate is likely to be a significant theme in Obama β s diplomatic talks over the next month . The president is scheduled to attend a NATO summit in Wales next week and in mid-September is expected to host a United Nations Security Council meeting in New York focused specifically on the dangers posed by foreign fighters in Syria who might return to Europe or the U.S. to carry out terrorist attacks .\nWhen pressed Monday about Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel β s comments declaring ISIL to be an β imminent threat β to American interests worldwide , Earnest straddled , preferring to call the group β a significant threat β and hedging about the dangers it poses to Americans outside Iraq and Syria .\nβ This is a complicated situation , but there is no question that there is a significant threat that β s posed by ISIL , in part because of their demonstrated military capacity ; in part also because they have demonstrated access to significant financial resources , β Earnest said .\nEarnest also insisted that when Obama told The New Yorker magazine earlier this year that some radicals were β JV β or junior varsity players pretending to be more threatening than they were , he was not referring specifically to ISIL .\nβ The president was not singling out ISIL , Earnest said . β He was talking about the very different threat that is posed by a range of extremists around the globe . Many of them do not have designs on attacking the West or on attacking the United States , and that is what puts them in stark contrast to the goals and capability of the previously existing Al Qaeda core network that was led by Osama bin Laden . β\nAnalysts said the White House β s tone toward ISIL has changed markedly in recent weeks and that the policy also appears to be shifting .\nβ The rhetoric has changed from the β JV β comment , β the Middle East Institute β s Paul Salem said . β Although some in the intelligence community and government agencies were apparently sounding the alarm , it seems that as it went up in the echelons of government that alarm was not sounded in a major way two months ago to the president . β
|
allsides-corpus-237
|
LONDON β Britain 's Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt warned Iran of `` serious consequences '' if it does not release a British-flagged oil tanker it seized in the strategic Strait of Hormuz waterway on Friday , although he ruled out `` military options . ''\nHunt announced later in a tweet that he had spoken with Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and `` expressed extreme disappointment '' that Iran had `` behaved in the opposite way '' of trying to deescalate the situation .\nThe seizing of the `` Stena Impero '' potentially marks the most significant escalation in tensions between Iran and the West since they began rising in May , about a year after the United States pulled out of an international accord aimed at Iran 's nuclear program .\nThe Pentagon announced it authorized the movement of troops to Saudi Arabia as an `` additional deterrent , '' adding to the 1,000 troops deployed to the Middle East in June .\nThe showdown has caused concerns around the globe , with each maneuver bringing fear that any misunderstanding or misstep by either side could lead to war .\n`` It is essential that freedom of navigation is maintained and that all ships can move safely and freely in the region , '' Hunt said late Friday , ahead of an emergency government meeting . He subsequently told British media that `` we β re looking at a diplomatic way to resolve the situation , but we are very clear that it must be resolved . ''\nAbout a fifth of the world 's crude oil exports passes through the Strait of Hormuz .\nIran β s Revolutionary Guard Corps ( IRGC ) said Friday that the `` Stena Impero '' was taken to an Iranian port because it was not complying with `` international maritime laws and regulations . '' On Saturday , Iran 's state-run IRNA news agency reported that the `` Stena Impero '' collided with an Iranian fishing boat , causing it damage , and then failed to respond to calls from the smaller craft . The fishing boat informed Iran β s Ports and Maritime Organization , which notified the IRGC . The IRGC launched an investigation .\nFARS , Iran 's semi-official news agency , later released video showing the IRGC seizing the ship .\nIran 's Revolutionary Guard also released a new , high-quality video of the incident , showing commandos in black ski masks rappelling from a helicopter onto the vessel .\nA statement from Stena Bulk , which owns the seized tanker , said the ship had 23 crew members aboard when it was seized . They are from India , Russia , Latvia and the Philippines . There were no reports suggesting of any of them were injured .\nAnother British ship was briefly detained Friday before allowed to go . The owner of the Liberian-flagged , but British-owned , tanker said it was boarded by armed guards . The `` Mesdar '' vessel has left Iran β s territorial waters , Iran state media said .\n`` This only goes to show what I β m saying about Iran : trouble , '' President Donald Trump told reporters at the White House . `` Nothing but trouble . ''\nTrump declined to say whether the moves by Iran crossed a `` red line '' or how the U.S. might respond . He noted the U.S. has a maritime security agreement with Britain .\nThe latest incident follows a threat by Iran to seize a British oil tanker in the Persian Gulf after British Royal Marines earlier this month helped capture an Iranian tanker off Gibraltar , in the Mediterranean Sea , suspected of carrying oil to Syria in breach of European Union sanctions . Iran denied the ship was on its way to Syria .\nSuggesting the tanker seizure could have been a retaliatory act , FARS reported a spokesperson for Iran 's Guardian Council , Abbas Ali Kadkhodayee , as saying , `` The rule of reciprocal action is well-known in international law which is used against the foul measures of a government , '' adding that the seizure of the ship was a `` correct measure ... based on international rights . ''\nU.S. patrol aircraft are in the vicinity monitoring the situation in the Strait of Hormuz , and Naval Forces Central Command has been in contact with American ships in the area to ensure their safety , a Department of Defense official said . Britain has sent additional warships to the area and been escorting oil tankers in the region .\nU.S. Central Command said it in the process of developing a `` multinational maritime effort , '' called `` Operation Sentinel , '' to increase security of key Middle East waterways .\nLast month , Trump abruptly canceled a planned retaliatory attack on Iran after the country downed an unmanned U.S. drone , but his administration has kept up a policy of trying to squeeze Iran 's leaders with stiff economic sanctions . Days after he pulled back the strikes on Iran , Trump threatened to use `` overwhelming force '' against Iran if it attacked any U.S. assets or personnel . Trump announced that the U.S. `` destroyed '' an Iranian drone on Thursday . Iran said there is no evidence for that .\n`` If ( Stena Impero ) has been taken to Bandar Abbas then that β s an important Iranian military port and I think any military options will therefore be extremely unwise , '' Tom Tugendhat , chairman of Britain 's parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee , told the BBC .\nContributing : Doug Stanglin , Nicholas Wu , David Jackson , Donovan Slack and John Fritze , from Washington , D.C. ; Associated Press
|
allsides-corpus-238
|
The sheer size and frequency of the recent credit card data breaches at Target , Neiman Marcus and other companies are prompting lawmakers to consider legislative options to keep sophisticated cyberthefts from happening .\n`` If anything , we 've learned from this major , major breach that we can no longer do nothing , '' said Sen. Amy Klobuchar , D-Minn. `` We have to take action . ''\nThe bad guys who stole data from as many as 110 million Target customers are so good at what they do that even the most modern security programs could n't detect them . If security software ca n't keep up , hopes for regulation to stop fraud are slim .\n`` This is kind of an ongoing war , and the types of threats are changing all the time , '' said Fran Rosch , a vice president at the security software company Symantec . He appeared Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary panel , which explored legislative options in data security .\n`` Information 's everywhere , '' Rosch said . `` It 's in our data centers , it 's in the cloud . It 's in software that sits in the cloud and on our mobile devices . So the threats are exploding , but so are the attack surfaces . ''\nLawmakers are considering a few policy changes to better protect consumers , such as pushing for more secure credit and debit cards . American credit cards have already failed to keep up with European and Asian card technology , which feature encrypted chips . The chips prevent cyberthieves from reusing any data after they steal it .\n`` What 's stopping our country when they 're doing this in Europe ? '' Klobuchar asked .\nPart of the problem is the complexity of the American financial system , which has so many competing card issuers , banks , retailers and business owners . Adopting systemic change to the way purchases are made would cost retailers and banks hundreds of millions of dollars .\nBut the recent breaches were so costly that both banks and retailers are backing a changeover to chip technology together .\n`` All of us have to move together simultaneously ; it 's a shared responsibility , '' said Target Chief Financial Officer John Mulligan . `` The financial industry , obviously they 're , in general , the issuers of the cards . So again , in partnership with them , we need to move together collectively so the whole system is employing chip and PIN technology . ''\nVisa and Mastercard are aiming to have chips in the majority of U.S. cards by October 2015 , but it could be even longer before retail outlets change their card readers . Lawmakers are asking what they could do to speed up the change .\nAnother plan would be to tighten data theft disclosure and security standards , an option pushed by Sen. Al Franken , D-Minn .\n`` Right now there 's no federal law setting out clear security standards that merchants and data brokers need to meet , and there 's no federal law requiring companies to tell their customers when their data has been stolen , '' Franken said .\nFranken and Sen. Patrick Leahy , D-Vt. , are co-sponsoring the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act , which includes those disclosure and security standards . Both retailers and security companies who appeared before senators Tuesday signaled support .\nBut the fast-changing tech terrain makes some lawmakers wary of any attempt at national standards .\n`` I 'm always a little bit concerned about creating a new federal regulatory authority , '' said Sen. Mike Lee , R-Utah , `` in part because sometimes when you establish something like that it can quickly become ineffective , especially if it 's in an area like this one . ''\nOutside a Washington , D.C. , Target store Tuesday , Joshua Sands said he 's still a loyal Target shopper β but he 's taking personal responsibility for his security .\n`` It 's like being on the Internet , when they tell you you should always have an anti-virus on your computer , '' he said . `` You always assume somebody 's trying to get in . You have to be vigilant for yourself . You ca n't leave it up to someone else to handle your security . ''\nUntil more systemic changes are put in place , security experts say the attacks on our payment systems are expected to continue .
|
allsides-corpus-239
|
Chrissy Houlahan has done a lot with her industrial engineering degree over the last 30 years including serving in the Air Force , working in the aircraft manufacturing industry , being the COO of a sports apparel company and even teaching high school chemistry .\nHoulahan says her science , technology , engineering and mathematics β or STEM β background has allowed her to be fluid in her career by helping her tackle everyday problems through a unique lens .\n`` Somebody with a technical background might think in a little bit different than the way , for instance , that a lawyer would think , '' Houlahan says . This was one of her biggest motivators for running for office in Pennsylvania 's 6th Congressional District , she says .\n`` I think a person with a technical background could be really useful in Washington , '' says Houlahan , noting that Congress is called to pass laws on issues the Founding Fathers would have never thought imaginable .\n`` Anything from cybersecurity , biosecurity , information technology and privacy issues are all things the government now has the responsibility to be worried about , '' she says . `` Those are all things that scientific and technical backgrounds can be used for . ''\nHoulahan won her congressional House race this month , defeating a Republican opponent who is a tax lawyer and businessman . She is one of the nine STEM-related professionals β one senator and eight members of the House of Representatives β voted into office during the 2018 midterms . All are Democrats except for one Republican and the cohort includes an ocean scientist , an aerospace engineer , a software engineer and a biochemist .\nAccording to the latest congressional profile , released before Election Day , only about seven percent of the 115th Congress reported they have some kind of STEM background . Occupations that are typically associated with people running for office β lawyers , career politicians , business men and women β were the most frequently listed .\nThere 's a reason there are not a lot of STEM professionals in Congress , says Shaughnessy Naughton , founder of 314 Action , an advocacy group that helps candidates with such a background move beyond advocacy and into action .\nNaughton started the group β named after the most widely known mathematical ratio β in 2016 in response to concern about the Trump administration 's attacks on science , especially the president 's stance on climate change . And 314 Action helped eight of the new STEM professionals get elected to Congress in the recent elections .\nNaughton says while there are procedural hurdles for anyone trying to break into politics , scientists also face cultural barriers .\n`` Scientists and physicians and STEM professionals often think of science as above politics , or their profession is above politics and therefore they should n't be involved in politics , '' says Naughton , who staged an unsuccessful campaign for Congress herself in 2014 and then again in 2016 . `` And I think we see the results of that attitude by just a real dearth of people with scientific backgrounds and the often misplaced priorities that are put forward [ by Congress ] . ''\n314 Action spent more than $ 2 million endorsing 13 candidates in the midterm elections . Eight of them won their races , while the five candidates who did not still made tremendous gains in promoting STEM backgrounds as a way to talk about local issues , says Naughton .\n`` I think it 's important because we would have a policy more based in facts and evidence , '' Naughton tells NPR . `` But I also think we would have a more collaborative approach to governing if more scientists were at the table . ''\nThrough trainings and financial support , 314 Action helps STEM professionals-turned-candidates promote their experience and skill set in their run for office .\nCongresswoman-elect Dr. Kim Schrier says the group helped her use her experience both as a pediatrician and a Type 1 Diabetes patient to connect with voters . Last week she become the first Democrat to ever represent the 8th Congressional District of Washington state .\n`` It gave me the ability to speak to the issues that other candidates just do n't have and an expertise that I can really bring to Congress to help fix our broken medical system , '' say Schrier , who decided to run because Republicans in Congress kept trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act .\n`` And that directly affected patients like me with pre-existing conditions , '' she says .\nSchrier hopes to bring a unique voice when topics such as health care , the pharmaceutical industry and prescription drugs arise in the next Congress .\nCongresswoman-elect Elaine Luria says her being a nuclear engineer connected with voters on issues that deeply affect in the 2nd Congressional District of Virginia such as global warming , tourism , aquaculture and offshore drilling . Her district includes Virginia Beach , the Norfolk Naval Station and other parts of that city β which is starting to grapple with increased flooding as sea levels rise .\n`` When we talk about those issues they are environmental issues and they have a scientific basis but because of the nature of our region they 're also people 's livelihood-type issues , '' she says . `` All of these things impact the economy here . ''
|
allsides-corpus-240
|
Three GOP congressmen introduced a resolution Friday calling for special counsel Robert Mueller to resign from the Russia collusion probe , citing his ties to the FBI and its role in controversies involving Russia .\nRep. Matt Gaetz , R-Fla. , a member of the House Judiciary Committee , along with co-sponsors , Rep. Andy Biggs , R-Ariz. , and Louie Gohmert , R-Texas , introduced the resolution on Friday .\nβ Evidence has emerged that the FBI withheld information from Congress and from the American people about Russian corruption of American uranium companies , β Gaetz said in a statement Friday . β A confidential U.S. witness , working in the Russian nuclear industry , revealed that Russia had deeply compromised an American uranium trucking firm through bribery and financial kickbacks . β\nGaetz was referring to Mueller β s supervision of a bribery probe involving a subsidiary of Russia β s Rosatom , which eventually got approval from the U.S. to buy a Canadian mining company , Uranium One , that controlled a swath of American uranium reserves . At the time of the probe , Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein , who appointed Mueller as special counsel , was a U.S. attorney and Mueller was FBI director . Republicans want to know how that deal was approved despite the evidence gathered in the bribery probe .\nMUELLER FACING NEW REPUBLICAN PRESSURE TO RESIGN IN RUSSIA PROBE\nGaetz also pointed to the FBI informant , whose gag order was lifted by the Justice Department last week , and is now able to provide information to Congress , free of the FBI β s nondisclosure agreement he signed when Mueller served as director .\nβ Although federal agents possessed this information in 2010 , the Department of Justice continued investigating this β matter β for over four years . The FBI , led at the time by Robert Mueller , required the confidential witness to sign a non-disclosure agreement . When the witness attempted to contact Congress and federal courts about the bribery and corruption he saw , he was threatened with legal action , β Gaetz said in a statement . β By silencing him , Obama β s Justice Department and Mueller β s FBI knowingly kept Congress in the dark about Russia β s significant and illegal involvement with American uranium companies . β\nGaetz said that due to these β deeply troubling β events , Mueller β s β impartiality is hopelessly compromised . β\nRep. Trent Franks , R-Ariz. , has also called for Mueller β s resignation .\nSenate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley , R-Iowa , has called for an independent special counsel to investigate the Obama-era Uranium One deal .\nThere are currently two pieces of legislation in the Senate , with bipartisan sponsorship , that would ensure a judicial check on the executive branch β s ability to remove a special counsel . Republican Sens . Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , and Thom Tillis , R-N.C. , are behind the bills , along with Democratic senators .\nThe proposed resolution comes just days after Mueller β s team announced the first charges in their investigation into Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign officials in the 2016 presidential election .\nFormer Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates were indicted on 12 counts by a federal grand jury as part of the probe . Both pleaded not guilty . And Former Trump foreign policy campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos entered a guilty plea on Monday after admittedly making false statements to the FBI .
|
allsides-corpus-241
|
They have spent their lives in research facilities , been injected with miserable diseases , and used by National Institutes of Health scientists to research new medicines , but now , after being designated by the NIH as `` permanently ineligible for biomedical research , '' 60 chimpanzees , slated for retirement , are unable to be moved to a special sanctuary because of congressional inaction .\nAt issue is an obscure piece of legislation , The Chimp Act , which puts a cap on the amount of money the NIH can spend , from its appropriated budget , on the care of NIH owned or supported chimpanzees housed in sanctuaries .\nCurrently , there are 60 chimpanzees slated to move from the New Iberia Research Center , in Lafayette , La. , to Chimp Haven in Keithville , La. , this spring . In addition , this law also means trouble for the 100 chimpanzees currently housed in Chimp Haven , designated as retired .\n`` We have hit this wall , and we need this fixed , or else come mid- to end-November , we will not be able to pay Chimp Haven to take care of these animals , '' said Dr. Kathy Hudson , NIH Deputy Director for Science , Outreach and Policy . `` Scientifically , ethically and economically that is a bad idea . ''\nThat wall Hudson is talking about is a $ 30 million spending limit , enacted under a law in 2000 that legally obligates the NIH to only spend that much of its appropriated funds on the sanctuary care for these chimpanzees .\nThese 60 chimps that have been designated to head into retirement are not alone . There are many more waiting behind them , since the Institute of Medicine advised the NIH to retire all of its biomedical research chimps , in favor of better , less expensive models for medical research . However , 50 chimpanzees will be placed on retainer in case they are needed for crucial medical studies that could be performed no other way .\nThere is wide bipartisan support for amending the law , but somehow , the permission slip got lost during the mess that was the government shutdown .\nWednesday , Senator Tom Harkin , D , Iowa , Chairman of the Senate HELP Committee and Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor , Health and Human Services , Education , and Related Agencies , will get the ball rolling in his committee , by introducing The CHIMP Act Amendments of 2013 ( S. 1561 ) , a bipartisan bill that the Committee will consider at an executive session .\n`` The National Institutes of Health has made a worthy and important decision to scale back the use of chimpanzees in medical research . Current law limits NIH 's ability to use its existing funds to provide care to its chimpanzees already housed in sanctuaries , in addition to carrying out the important goal of moving the chimps current living in research labs . We have an obligation to provide care for animals that have directly contributed to our medical knowledge , and it is absolutely urgent that Congress act to remove this funding limitation now and for the future , '' the senator said in a statement to βββ .\nHudson has faith that this issue will be resolved quickly by Congress .\n`` This is really an issue where there is no divide , it would be impossible to find someone who did n't support the NIH in taking care of these animals that have contributed greatly to biomedical research , '' Hudson said . `` We are very grateful to the members and staff that have contributed to this bill and think it will move quickly through house and senate . ''\nHarkin also expressed his hope for a quick bipartisan movement to ensure the chimps enjoy the sunset of their lives . `` Moving these chimps to sanctuary care is not only the right thing to do , but doing so would also be more cost-efficient for NIH and for taxpayers . I hope that Democrats and Republicans can work together to ensure that NIH can use resources it already has on hand to ensure these chimps ' well-being now and in the future , '' he said in a statement to βββ .\nHudson agreed and explained that it is more cost effective to care for the chimps that are not being used in research in the sanctuary . `` We 're not breeding these animals , and they are an aging population . It will be more economical to have these animals there ; overtime these costs will go down . ''
|
allsides-corpus-242
|
( CNN ) In the struggle between Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Democratic-controlled House , the immovable object may finally have met an irresistible force .\nMcConnell has been the immovable object : He 's frustrated House Democrats by systematically blocking Senate votes so far on the lengthening list of bills they have passed , from gun control to additional protections for patients with preexisting health problems .\nBut McConnell 's blockade faces a new challenge as the House turns to a series of bills meant to fight foreign interference in the 2020 election . Those measures , aimed at defending fundamental American institutions from foreign subversion , may be tougher for the Kentucky Republican to portray as partisan overreach than the bills the House has passed so far . And that could make them an irresistible force that strains his overall strategy of preventing action on any House legislation .\n`` It could be the thing that has the public home in on where the problem is , where the obstruction is , '' says Democratic Rep. John Sarbanes of Maryland , a leading author of the House election security agenda . `` The public , and I understand that , they paint everything with a broad brush and they say Washington is dysfunctional . Here 's a case study that they are going to be very interested in , that shows ... the problem is not with Washington , the problem is not broadly with Congress , the problem is with Mitch McConnell , who will not bring any of these things to the Senate floor . ''\nMcConnell 's decision to methodically bar consideration of any of the House priorities already looms as a defining gamble in the GOP 's effort to maintain its Senate majority in next year 's election . He has leaned into his role as obstacle , portraying a Republican-controlled Senate as the last line of defense against a Democratic `` socialist agenda '' and calling himself the `` Grim Reaper '' for their legislative plans .\n`` I am indeed the 'Grim Reaper ' when it comes to the socialist agenda that they have been ginning up over the House with overwhelming Democratic support , and sending it over to America , '' he declared in an interview on Fox News Channel last week . `` Things that would turn us into a country we have never been . '' McConnell 's campaign is even providing contributors with T-shirts featuring a tombstone for `` socialism '' on the front and a similar quote underscoring his determination to block the House agenda on the back .\nThe electoral impact of McConnell 's strategy will likely be determined by which side successfully defines the agenda he is obstructing .\n`` He talks about that almost every opportunity he can , '' says Josh Holmes , McConnell 's former chief of staff . `` Being in opposition to health care plans that end private health insurance or environmental deals that basically shut down your electricity provider is something that he 's pretty comfortable with . ''\nBut neither single-payer health care nor the Green New Deal , which Republicans are confident they can paint as unprecedented government intrusion into the economy , is likely to reach a vote on the House floor , much less pass the chamber , before 2020 .\nInstead , the legislation the House has passed this year -- and that McConnell is blocking -- has focused more on expressions of social values and bread-and-butter economic concerns , like buttressing the Affordable Care Act and confronting high prescription drug costs . Many of these measures enjoy preponderant support from the public in polls .\nnearly three-fourths of Americans said they supported legal status for those young people . The House , for instance , in early June passed legislation that provides legal status for potentially millions of `` Dreamers , '' young people brought to the country illegally as children . In a Fox News poll released Sunday , nearly three-fourths of Americans said they supported legal status for those young people .\ndilute the Affordable Care Act 's protections for patients with preexisting medical problems . In April Also in May , the House passed legislation to block regulatory actions by the Trump administration that woulddilute the Affordable Care Act 's protections for patients with preexisting medical problems . In April polling by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation , about two-thirds of Americans said it was important that health insurers be required to sell coverage to consumers with preexisting health conditions and be prevented from charging them more .\nOther House-passed measures this year include the Violence Against Women Act , legislation promoting greater gender equity in pay and comprehensive legislation to expand voting rights and impose new ethics guidelines on Washington . Senior Democratic House aides are confident that by the 2020 election , they will also pass legislation creating a nationwide $ 15 minimum wage , expanding the subsidies for families to purchase health insurance through the ACA 's exchanges , updating the Voting Rights Act and combating the rising costs of prescription drugs .\nThe strong public support for most of these ideas has Democrats cautiously optimistic that their challengers next year can portray incumbent Republican senators as part of a `` do-nothing Senate '' blocking action on important concerns .\n`` When your occupation is to vote every day down the line against things that matter to voters ... sure , we are going to make those a significant issue , '' says J.B. Poersch , president of Senate Majority PAC , a leading Democratic super PAC .\nDemocrats have been frustrated so far by their inability to create more pressure on McConnell to take up any of the House-passed bills ; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a news conference last week where she brandished a chart showing `` McConnell 's graveyard '' of bills that he had blocked , complete with miniature tombstones .\nHolmes , now president of a Washington communications firm , says House Democrats today face the same unforgiving equation Republicans did in 2013-14 . During that congressional session , the GOP-controlled House passed a series of conservative priorities , only to see them systematically blocked by the Democratic majority led by then-Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada . Despite loud complaints , House Republicans could never generate enough pressure on Reid to force him to allow votes on the GOP plans .\nMcConnell feels politically secure bottling up the House priorities , Holmes says , `` for the same reason Harry Reid did n't feel particularly moved by the fact that ( then-Speaker ) John Boehner had moved every conservative bill dealing with the economy or social issues possible . The priorities of Nancy Pelosi are not the priorities of Mitch McConnell , period . And he 's very comfortable with that . ''\nElection security , though , could be an issue that causes at least some GOP senators to question McConnell 's blockade . Sarbanes , who chaired the House Democrats ' Democracy Reform Task Force , says the party plans to pass by August `` a suite '' of bills to safeguard the 2020 election against foreign interference .\nThose bills will include some measures already included in the House 's omnibus political overhaul legislation , HR 1 , that would provide states with more money to harden voting systems against possible foreign intrusion and mandate that the Department of Homeland Security develop a strategy for resisting such attacks .\nThe House also plans to pass new measures requiring campaigns to notify federal law enforcement officials if they are approached by foreign operatives with damaging information on their opponents , as well as provisions barring campaigns from sharing internal information with foreign officials , mandating more disclosure of foreign ad purchases on digital platforms and clarifying that it is illegal to work with foreigners to influence an American election .\n`` We may not get every single piece of this package onto the floor and passed and directed to the Senate before August but we want to get a good critical mass of these important measures in place , '' Sarbanes says .\nPolls have shown broad public support for further action to resist interference by Russia or other foreign actors in the 2020 election . A Monmouth University poll last month found that 60 % of Americans believe the government is not doing enough to guard against such interference ; a survey by Democratic pollster Geoff Garin for the bipartisan advocacy group Law Works Action found that more than 4 in 5 Americans support a requirement that political campaigns notify law enforcement officials of foreign offers of assistance .\nMcConnell , as noted above , has felt comfortable blocking debate on other House-passed legislation with comparably lopsided levels of public support . But House Democrats are hopeful that more Senate Republicans will demand that he allow action on these issues because the public is likely to see them as less partisan .\n`` I think it 's going to be a very difficult place for him to be , opposing these things that are supposed to protect the fundamental principles of our democracy , '' Sarbanes says . `` This is about ... protecting ourselves from foreign interference , having confidence that our elections are being carried out in a free and fair and uninfluenced way . It 's baseline stuff ; it 's Founding Fathers kind of principles here . If you stand in the way of measures that are designed to safeguard these principles , I think you are standing in the way of American democracy or at least not respecting it . ''\nMcConnell has n't yet definitively closed the door on election security legislation . He 's committed to a full Senate briefing later this month from intelligence officials on the possible risks .\n`` I would suspect that has a huge amount of influence about what ultimately the Senate does in this space , '' says Holmes .\nBut all signals from McConnell suggest he 's unlikely to accept almost any new federal initiatives on election security . Last week , Senate Republicans blocked an effort by Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia to force a vote on a `` duty to report '' bill , which many Republicans consider an effort to embarrass President Donald Trump . McConnell shrugged off Trump 's comments , which drew widespread condemnation in both parties , that `` you might want to listen '' to a foreign government offering dirt on a 2020 opponent . And Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri , a member of the GOP leadership , has publicly declared that McConnell is unlikely to allow any election security bill to reach the floor , whatever the House does next .\nThat opposition reflects both McConnell 's long-standing resistance to federal influence over any aspect of election activity ( he 's long been the leading opponent of campaign finance regulation ) and his reluctance to take actions that provoke Trump . But it risks allowing Democrats to make election security a powerful symbol for the wider wall McConnell has constructed against the legislation passing the House .\nIn a sign of what may be ahead , the Texas Democratic Party on Monday , for instance , chastised Republican Sen. John Cornyn , who 's up for reelection next year , for joining the Republican opposition to Warner 's legislation on disclosing foreign contacts . `` If Cornyn is unwilling to legislate , what exactly is he in Washington for ? '' Abhi Rahman , the party 's communications director , said in a statement .\nThe ordinarily taciturn McConnell has enthusiastically accepted the persona of the `` Grim Reaper '' for House priorities . The question is whether the Senate leader is embracing that identity to a point that helps Democrats entomb the GOP Senate majority in 2020 .
|
allsides-corpus-243
|
The chairman of a House committee that recommended a contempt citation against Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in its Fast and Furious investigation said on Tuesday President Obama β s assertion of executive privilege in the matter means the White House is covering up its involvement in the botched operation or is obstructing a congressional probe .\nβ To date , the White House has steadfastly maintained that it has not had any role in advising the [ Justice ] Department with respect to the congressional investigation , β Rep. Darrell Issa , California Republican , said in a tersely-worded seven page letter to Mr. Obama .\nβ The surprising assertion of executive privilege raised the question of whether that is still the case , β he said .\nMr. Issa , chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee , also challenged the validity of the privilege claim , saying courts have β consistently held β that executive privilege applies only to documents and communications that involve the president β s decision-making process .\nAccordingly , he said , the assertion could only mean that Mr. Obama β or your most senior advisers β were involved in managing the Fast and Furious operation β and the fallout from it , β or the president was asserting a privilege he knew to be β unjustified solely for the purpose of further obstruction a congressional investigation . β\nThe committee voted 23-17 last week along strict party lines to recommend to the full House that Mr. Holder be held in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over hundreds of pages of Fast and Furious documents sought by the panel under a subpoena . The executive privilege assertion came only shortly before the committee was scheduled to vote on the recommendation .\nThe House is expected to vote on the recommendation later this week .\nMr. Obama previously has denied any knowledge of the Fast and Furious operation , and has stood solidly behind Mr. Holder despite an increasing chorus of calls by Republicans for his resignation .\nFast and Furious was a gunrunning operation by the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives ( ATF ) aimed at identifying drug smuggling bosses in Mexico who were buying weapons out of Phoenix area gun shops . More than 2,000 weapons , including AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifles and .50-caliber Barrett sniper rifles , were sold and β walked β into Mexico , but the ATF lost track of them .\nThe operation , which began in September 2009 , was shut down only after U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry was shot and killed during a December 2010 gunfight with Mexican bandits at an isolated location near the Mexican border , south of Tucson . Two weapons found at the site of the Terry killing later were traced to the Fast and Furious operation .\nβ The Terry family appeared before the committee on June 15 , 2011 , to ask for answers about the program that put guns in the hands of the men who killed their son and brother , β Mr. Issa said . β Having been stonewalled for months by the attorney general and his senior staff , the committee issued a subpoena for the documents that would provide the Terry family with the answers they seek . β\nThat subpoena was issued on Oct. 12 , 2011 , and while the Justice Department has said it has handed over 7,600 records involving Fast and Furious , Mr. Issa said the department has identified β 140,000 pages of documents and communications responsive to the committee β s subpoena . β\nWhite House Spokesman Eric Schultz dismissed the letter , saying Mr. Issa β s analysis of executive privilege has β as much merit as his absurd contention that Operation Fast and Furious was created in order to promote gun control. β He said Mr. Obama β s privilege claim was consistent with executive branch legal precedent set over the past three decades .
|
allsides-corpus-244
|
Nearly a half century ago , young Donald Trumpβa Wharton graduate , and an avid player of squash , football , and tennisβscored a 1-Y medical deferment . Hundreds of thousands of young men were being deployed to Vietnam . Trump had some bone spurs . He then limped happily into his father β s real-estate business without delay .\nWhen Trump was interviewed by the Times about his deferment during the 2016 campaign , he admitted that the foot condition was β temporary β and β minor β βusually orthotics or stretching eased the painβand yet , β I had a doctor that gave me a letterβa very strong letter on the heels. β He promised the paper that he would look for the letter . Amazingly , it never turned up . Later , however , his unforgettable physician , Dr. Harold N. Bornstein , assured the nation that Trump , if elected , β will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency . β\nOn Wednesday morning , the Commander-in-Chief declared by tweet-fiat that , β after consultation with my Generals and military experts , β he had decided to reverse an Obama Administration decision and bar transgender individuals from serving in the military β in any capacity. β Trump tweeted further , β Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming . . . victory and can not be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail . β\nLet β s begin with the retrograde cruelty . There are thousands of transgender people already serving among the 1.3 million active-duty members of the military . These are people who have volunteered their service and have potentially put their lives on the line , and yet their President , who managed to come up with a flimsy doctor β s note back in the day , denies them their dignity , their equality . He will not β accept or allow β them in the military . Imagine the scale of this insult .\nHowever , today β s outrageβthey seem to come at least once dailyβis not merely one that reflects on Trump β s low character . It also reveals yet another layer of his political cynicism , and his willingness to use any tactical means available to try to emerge whole from his current predicament .\nThe President is in the midst of a colossal scandal , and the country , to an increasing measure , knows it . It β s not merely a matter of poor popularity polls . A sizable portion of the country wants to be rid of him and suspects he is unworthy of his office . Six months into his Presidency , according to a USA Today/Media Ethics poll , the country is split on whether or not he should be impeached , with forty-two per cent on either side of the question . The scandal is broad-based , but it surely includes ( but is not limited to ) contacts with Russian officials during the campaign and potential collusion to undermine the Clinton campaign ; the constant lying about same ; the firing of James Comey ; the threats to fire Jeff Sessions and Robert Mueller ; the appalling vulgarity of his public performances ( cf . the β Playboy After Dark β speech before the Boy Scouts of America ) ; the accumulating evidence of a history of sleazy business practices and partners ; and the level of sheer incompetence in the West Wing .\nIt is implausible that Trump paid much attention to his highest-ranking generals , or to experts , generally ; Secretary of Defense James Mattis has supported transgender individuals joining the military . And the hardly radical Rand Corporation has published an in-depth study refuting the idea that transgender soldiers are somehow expensive , or that they undermine the morale and cohesion of the military over all . Trump β s decision to bar transgender people from the military is pure politics , cheap and cruel politics , a naked attempt to divert attention from his woes , to hold on to support from his baseβa base that he believes will cheer his latest attempt to do battle with the secular-humanist coastal Γ©lites who are so obsessed with identity politics . ( One Administration official told Axios β s Jonathan Swan that the move was intended to force Democrats from Rust Belt states to take β complete ownership of this issue. β ) In other words , it is a decision straight out of the Steve Bannon playbook . Cue the organs of the alt-right press .\nTrump likes to declare what a β disaster β the military is , how deeply it has fallen into disrepair , and how he will be its salvation . When you begin to consider the meanness of what Trump has done , it is worth remembering him saying that he was β smarter β than the generals on military matters , and that he mocked John McCain β s service in Vietnam because β I like people who weren β t captured. β When you begin to think about the scale of this offense , it is worth remembering Khizr Khan , the Gold Star father who lost a son in Iraq , addressing Trump directly from the lectern of the Democratic National Convention : β You have sacrificed nothing and no one . β
|
allsides-corpus-245
|
A Pentagon official signaled Wednesday that the U.S. is pressing the Turkish government to intervene in support of Kurdish forces desperately battling to keep the Syrian border town of Kobani from falling into Islamic State hands .\nPentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby told Fox News that U.S. officials are talking with the Turks about `` what they can or will or may do here . ''\nHe added : `` This is a decision the Turkish government has to make . We ca n't make it for them . ''\nAt a press briefing later in the day , Kirby clarified that the United States is not `` making demands of the Turks , '' but hopes they will `` contribute what they can . ''\nThe situation in the town of Kobani has intensified , and with it concerns over whether partners on the ground are doing enough .\nThe New York Times reported earlier that the White House is growing frustrated with Turkish inaction as the situation next door in Kobani gets worse .\nKirby also stressed the `` limits of airpower '' and said the U.S. needs more help on the ground .\n`` There 's just so much you can do from the air , '' he told Fox News . `` You 've got to have willing partners on the ground . You 've got to have ground forces . ''\nThe New York Times quoted a senior administration official who slammed the Ankara government for `` dragging its feet to act to prevent a massacre less than a mile from its border . ''\n`` After all the fulminating about Syria 's humanitarian catastrophe , they 're inventing reasons not to act to avoid another catastrophe , '' the official continued . `` This is n't how a NATO ally acts while hell is unfolding a stone 's throw from their border . ''\nThe Times reported that Secretary of State John Kerry had spoken with his Turkish counterpart Mevlut Cavusoglu and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu multiple times over the prior 72 hours in an effort to resolve tensions between the two sides .\nTurkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the U.S.-led coalition 's air campaign launched last month would not be enough to halt the Islamic State group 's advance . Turkish troops have been massed near the border since the assault on Kobani began , but have so far not taken an offensive posture .\n`` Kobani is about to fall , '' Erdogan told Syrian refugees in the Turkish border town of Gaziantep , according to The Associated Press . The Turkish president called for greater cooperation with the Syrian opposition , which is fighting both the extremists and forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad .\n`` We asked for three things : one , for a no-fly zone to be created ; two , for a secure zone parallel to the region to be declared ; and for the moderate opposition in Syria and Iraq to be trained and equipped . ''\nThe Times reported that President Obama prefers that Erdogan not tether the fight against Islamic State , commonly known as ISIS , to the effort to overthrow Assad . U.S. officials also tell the paper that Erdogan 's demand for a no-fly zone against the Syrian Air Force is meaningless on the grounds that the airstrikes have created a no-fly zone in all but name .\nThe call for a buffer zone inside Syria was , meanwhile , prompting confusion . Top diplomats from the U.S. and Britain said Wednesday they would consider supporting one to help protect Turkey 's borders , but a Pentagon spokesman said that is not an option that is currently on the table . Asked about a buffer zone after an hour-long meeting in Washington , Kerry and visiting British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond both stopped short of embracing one .\nOn Wednesday , Fox News reported that machine gun and small arms fire could be heard and seen near Kobani , indicating street fighting at close quarters . Artillery fire could also be heard at the center of town . The minaret of the town 's mosque was destroyed by ISIS fire .\nU.S. Central Command said Tuesday that five airstrikes on ISIS positions had been carried out near Kobani . A Fox News crew witnessed at least two airstrikes . One strike hit an ISIS tank on a hillside overlooking the town , while another two tanks appeared to be hit to the town 's southwest .\nWhile it is thought that supply lines for ISIS might have been disrupted by the stepped up attacks , enough ISIS fighters have entered the town with heavy arms back-up to wage a serious fight .\nOn Tuesday , the United Nations envoy for Syria issued a call for `` concrete action '' to prevent `` humanitarian tragedies . ''\n`` The world has seen with its own eyes the images of what happens when a city in Syria or in Iraq is overtaken by the terrorist group called ISIS or Da'esh : massacres , humanitarian tragedies , rapes , horrific violence , '' Staffan De Mistura said . `` The international community can not sustain another city falling under ISIS .\n`` The world , all of us , will regret deeply if ISIS is able to take over a city which has defended itself with courage but is close to not being able to do so , '' De Mistura added . `` We need to act now . ''
|
allsides-corpus-246
|
As America β s only prisoner of war in Afghanistan was transferred back to U.S. custody , Republicans challenged the Obama administration β s insistence it did not negotiate with terrorists in securing the soldier β s release and say the move was illegal and could embolden terrorists around the globe .\nAs his parents and residents of his Idaho hometown celebrated the negotiated release of Sgt . Bowe Berdahl over the weekend , the circumstances surrounding the release β and the sudden freeing of five Taliban figures held at the Guantanamo detainee prison β were producing a full-scale controversy in Washington .\nSecretary of Defense Chuck Hagel insisted the U.S. did not negotiate with terrorists in the process of exchanging the transfer of the five terrorism suspects for the release of Sgt . Bergdahl , now 28 , who had been in Taliban hands since June 2009 .\nβ We didn β t negotiate with terrorists , β Mr. Hagel said on NBC β s β Meet the Press. β β And I said and explained before , Sgt . Bergdahl is a prisoner of war . That β s a normal process in getting your prisoners back . β\nSgt . Bergdahl arrived at a U.S. military hospital in Germany Sunday after he was handed over to U.S. special operations forces by the Taliban Saturday , with the government of Qatar serving as a go-between .\nIn an emotional press conference Sunday afternoon in Boise , Idaho , Sgt . Bergdahl β s father , Bob , likened his son β s return to a deep-sea diver resurfacing and urged a gradual re-assimilation process .\nSEE ALSO : GOP lawmakers warn of Taliban incentives in freeing American POW\nβ If he comes up too fast , it could kill him , β said Mr. Bergdahl , thanking supporters and government officials for their help in the process . β The recovery and rehabilitation of Bowe Bergdahl is a work in progress . β\nJani Bergdahl told her son to give himself all the time he needs to recover .\nβ I love you , Bowe β I β m so very proud of you , β she said . β We praise God for your freedom . β\nAdministration officials too said the focus right now should be on the fact that the only U.S. POW from the Afghan conflict is coming back home , even as President Obama is winding down the 13-year war there .\nNational Security Adviser Susan E. Rice told CNN that what officials did was ensure that the United States doesn β t leave a man or woman on the battlefield .\nβ And in order to do this β it β s very important for folks to understand , if we got into a situation where we said , you know , because of who has captured an American soldier on the battlefield , we will leave that person behind , we would be in a whole new era for the safety of our personnel and for the nature of our commitment to our men and women in uniform , β Ms. Rice said . β So [ just ] because the Taliban had him did not mean that we had any less of an obligation to bring him back . β\nBut complicating the administration β s narrative was a rare public statement Sunday from Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar , who said the prisoner swap marked a β great victory β for the Islamist movement that led the military resistance against the U.S. and international forces in Afghanistan for more than a decade .\nβ The sacrifice of our mujahedeen have resulted in the release of our senior leaders from the hand of the enemy , β Mullah Mohammed Omar said .\nMs. Rice and other administration officials insisted that , at the diplomatic level , the U.S. was negotiating with the government of Qatar , not the Taliban or its Afghan allies . But the handover followed secret and indirect negotiations between the U.S. and the Taliban , and Qatar is taking custody of five of the Afghan detainees that had been held at Guantanamo Bay , Cuba .\nThe detainees are believed to be the most senior Afghans still held at the prison : Abdul Haq Wasiq , Mullah Norullah Nori , Khairullah Khairkhwa , Mohammed Nabi and Mohammad Fazl . Mr. Obama β s efforts to close the detainee site have been frustrated by opposition from both parties in Congress .\nRepublican critics Sunday criticized both the abrupt manner in which the Taliban prisoners were traded β with almost no advance warning to lawmakers β and the potential precedent the deal could set in dealing with other terrorist enemies .\nHouse Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. β Buck β McKeon said that the released detainees are β five very dangerous guys that should not leave Guantanamo [ and ] should not have the opportunity to get back into this fight . β\nβ And now we have set a precedent β the president has set a precedent , β the California Republican said Sunday on CNN . β You know , he has violated the law and flouted the Constitution so many times . We have real concerns about this . They β re not following the law . They know they β re not following the law . β\nAdded Sen. Ted Cruz , Texas Republican , speaking on ABC News , β What does this tell terrorists β that if you capture a U.S. soldier you can trade that soldier for five terrorists ? β\nSen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia , the ranking Republican on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence , said the administration assured him just six months ago they would not consider the release of the leaders without consulting Congress .\nβ The security assurances the United States has been given regarding these terrorists is feeble at best , and I fear it is only a matter of time before they resume their terrorist activities , β he said . β These men are not soldiers ; they are dangerous terrorists , and President Obama should be treating them as such . β\nBut Idaho β s all-Republican congressional delegation hailed the move . Rep. Raul R. Labrador told the Boise Weekly he was β thrilled β by the news , while Sen. Mike Crapo said that β our prayers have been answered . β\nMr. Hagel acknowledged that the law now mandates that the defense secretary give at least 30 days β notice for such prison transfers but that officials moved under the timeline they did in order to save Sgt . Bergdahl β s life .\nβ We had information that his health could be deteriorating rapidly , β he said . β There was a question about his safety . We found an opportunity . We took that opportunity . I β ll stand by that decision . I signed off on the decision . The president made the ultimate decision . We did spend time looking at this . β\nMs. Rice said the sergeant β s situation was β acute β and said the administration would have been criticized if it had failed to act when a deal materialized .\nβ We did not have 30 days to wait , β she said . β And had we waited and lost him , I don β t think anybody would have forgiven the United States government . β\nMr. Hagel added that he will not agree to the release of any more detainees from Guantanamo unless the country can be assured β that we can sufficiently mitigate any risk to America β s security . β\nSgt . Bergdahl was captured under murky circumstances in eastern Afghanistan on June 30 , 2009 , about two months after arriving in the country , but neither Mr. Hagel nor Ms. Rice specifically addressed how that happened .\nβ We β ll have the opportunity eventually to learn what has transpired in the past years , but what β s most important now is his health and well-being , that he have the opportunity to recover in peace and security and be reunited with his family , which is why this is such a joyous day , β Ms. Rice said on ABC β s β This Week . β\nAn annual event called β Bring Bowe Back β in his hometown of Hailey , Idaho , scheduled for June 28 was quickly renamed β Bowe Is Back . β\nβ It is going to be Bowe β s official welcome-home party even if he β s not quite home yet , β organizer Stefanie O β Neill said .\nβ’ This article is based in part on wire service reports .
|
allsides-corpus-247
|
US President Donald Trump says transgender people can not serve in `` any capacity '' in the military .\nHe tweeted that he had consulted with military experts and cited `` tremendous medical costs and disruption '' .\nThe Obama administration decided last year to allow transgender people to serve openly in the military .\nBut in June , Defence Secretary James Mattis agreed to a six-month delay in the recruitment of transgender people .\nAs is often the case , the announcement came in a series of tweets .\nMr Trump said : `` After consultation with my Generals and military experts , please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military .\n`` Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and can not be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail . ''\nBut the measure will not go into effect immediately , as spokesperson Sarah Sanders told reporters at a White House press briefing .\nThe implementation policy has to be worked out , she said when asked if troops on battlefields would be immediately sent back to the United States .\nThis was `` a military decision '' said Mrs Sanders , adding that it is `` not meant to be anything more than that '' .\nThe timing of this transgender ban is almost as interesting as the move itself .\nWhy now ? With the Trump administration being buffeted by the Jeff Sessions political death watch , the ongoing multi-prong investigation into the Trump campaign , the healthcare drama in the Senate and the impending Russian sanctions bill , perhaps the administration decided this was a good time to change the subject and rally conservative forces to his side .\nRepublicans have long used cultural issues as a wedge to divide Democrats and energise evangelicals . As one White House insider acknowledged , this is straight out of that playbook . While Mr Trump campaigned as sympathetic to LGBT rights , he needs the traditional religious conservatives to stay loyal to him now , more than ever .\nOr perhaps , as Politico is reporting , the White House sought to resolve an intraparty dispute that threatened passage of a key military spending bill in the House of Representatives . That the president chose to do so suddenly , with little advanced notice , would not be out of the ordinary for this administration .\nThe president 's action will create a furore among liberals and the media commentators whose disdain for the current administration is not a new development . This is a fight the White House will welcome .\nThe independent Rand Corporation estimated in 2016 that about 4,000 US active-duty and reserve service members are transgender , although some campaigners put the figure higher than 10,000 .\nRand also predicted that the inclusion of transgender people in the military would cause a 0.13 % increase in healthcare spending ( approximately $ 8.4m ) .\nA Military Times analysis found that the Department of Defense spends five times that figure just on erectile dysfunction drug Viagara alone .\nThe Obama administration 's move to allow transgender people in the military to serve openly was announced in June 2016 by then Defence Secretary Ash Carter .\nThe policy included a provision for the military to provide medical help for service members wanting to change gender .\nTransgender people would be permitted to join the services , so long as they could demonstrate they had been stable in their new gender for at least 18 months .\nThis was meant to come into effect on 1 July 2017 but the Trump administration delayed it by a further six months . The Pentagon said the five branches of the military needed more time to `` review their accession plans and provide input on the impact to the readiness and lethality of our forces '' .\nWhile Mr Trump 's decision concerns transgender military personnel , the US military 's ban on openly gay and lesbian servicemen and women - known as `` Do n't ask do n't tell '' - was lifted in 2011 .\nLGBTQ campaign group , GLAAD , called Mr Trump 's move `` a direct attack on transgender Americans '' .\nAaron Belkin , director of the Palm Centre , a leading think-tank which studies gender and sexuality in the military , told the BBC that Mr Trump 's decision would force transgender troops to in effect live as gays and lesbians did under `` Do n't ask , do n't tell '' .\nKristin Beck , a retired elite Navy SEAL , issued a challenge to President Trump in an interview with Business Insider : `` Let 's meet face to face and you tell me I 'm not worthy . ''\nShe said that during her decorated military career , she had been `` defending individual liberty '' .\n`` Being transgender does n't affect anyone else , '' she said . `` We are liberty 's light . If you ca n't defend that for everyone that 's an American citizen , that 's not right . ''\nFormer Defence Secretary Carter released a critical statement : `` To choose service members on other grounds than military qualifications is social policy and has no place in our military . There are already transgender individuals who are serving capably and honourably . ''\nChairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee , Republican John McCain , said major policy announcements should not be made via Twitter and continued :\n`` The statement was unclear . The Department of Defense has already decided to allow currently-serving transgender individuals to stay in the military , and many are serving honorably today .\nAny American who meets current medical and readiness standards should be allowed to continue serving . ''\nSeveral British military generals have condemned Mr Trump 's decision , including the commander of the UK Maritime Forces , Rear Admiral Alex Burton .\n`` As an @ RoyalNavy_LGBT champion and senior warfighter I am so glad we are not going this way '' , he wrote on Twitter , later adding : `` We have a justifiably rigorous selection process but it does n't include discrimination and we 're a better fighting force for it . ''\nRepublican opponents of transgender people serving in the military include Vicky Hartzler , a congresswoman from Missouri , who wants transgender service members honourably discharged .\nSome oppose the military having to bear medical costs associated with transgender recruits , such as gender reassignment .\nTony Perkins of the socially conservative Family Research council said : `` Our troops should n't be forced to endure hours of transgender 'sensitivity ' classes and politically correct distractions . ''\nTrump supporter and political commentator Scott Presler is among those who disagree with the military carrying the cost of such interventions .\nWhile disagreeing with the ban , he added that `` generals know more about war than I do .\n`` I am cognisant that they understand what it takes to go to war ... I do n't think this is an attack on the LGBT community .\n`` I 'm mixed , but I have confidence in the guidance that President Trump is receiving , '' he said . `` I do n't think for a second he 's prejudiced . ''
|
allsides-corpus-248
|
WASHINGTON β The U.S. military launched airstrikes to protect a dam in western Iraq , the Pentagon announced Sunday , in another expansion of the air campaign against the Islamic State , the militant group that has seized territory throughout Iraq and Syria .\nU.S. aircraft launched airstrikes against Islamic State targets around the Haditha Dam , a hydroelectric facility on the Euphrates River , Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby , the Pentagon press secretary , said in a statement . The military said the new strikes are in keeping with the Pentagon 's mission to support humanitarian operations and protect U.S. personnel .\n`` We conducted these strikes to prevent terrorists from further threatening the security of the dam , which remains under control of Iraqi security forces , with support from Sunni tribes , '' Kirby said .\nNational Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said the dam is the second-largest hydroelectric contributor to the country 's powers system .\n`` Destruction of the dam or release of water would create a level of flooding that would potentially pose a catastrophic threat to thousands of Iraqis , '' she said in a statement .\nDefense Secretary Chuck Hagel , speaking in Georgia where he 's meeting with government and defense officials , however , rejected the suggestion that the strikes open a new front in the war against the Islamic State or that they represent an escalation of U.S. military operations , according to the Associated Press .\nThe announcement comes after President Obama said Friday the United States was prepared to `` take the fight '' to the militant group , which threatens to destabilize the region and could present a threat to the West .\nA mix of fighters and bombers conducted four airstrikes Saturday to help defend the dam , U.S. Central Command said . The strikes destroyed five Humvees , one armed vehicle , a checkpoint and damaged a bunker , according to the command .\nThe new strikes represent the first shift toward targets in western Iraq , a largely Sunni region that is currently a patchwork of conflicting loyalties .\nSome Sunnis have supported the Islamic State as a bulwark against the Shiite-dominated government . But tribes have taken different stands in the face of the militant offensive . Some tribes are fighting against the militants and others are supporting the Islamic State or are remaining neutral .\nTribes in the Haditha dam region have been fighting against the militants for months . The U.S. military said the dam remains in the hands of tribes working in support of the Iraqi government and Iraqi security forces .\nThe U.S. air campaign began Aug. 8 and has slowly expanded as it has taken on more missions . U.S. planes have pounded targets around the Mosul Dam , allowing a combination of Iraqi counterterrorist forces and Kurdish peshmerga fighters to take the facility back from Islamic State militants .\nU.S. aircraft also targeted militants around Mount Sinjar , where a religious minority had taken refuge after militants had overrun their community . More recently , U.S. aircraft also helped break the siege of Amerli , a Shiite Turkmen town .\nThe U.S. military has conducted 138 airstrikes in Iraq since the air campaign began .
|
allsides-corpus-249
|
Story highlights Ex-Navy SEAL Robert O'Neill says he fired shots that killed Osama bin Laden\nO'Neill says he 's concerned he 'll face prosecution for publicly telling his story\nHe says value of sharing details with families of 9/11 attack victims makes risk worthwhile\nThe Navy SEAL who says he shot and killed Osama bin Laden says he is worried the Pentagon might prosecute him for publicly telling his story of the May 2011 raid on the al Qaeda leader 's compound in Pakistan .\nBut Robert O'Neill said the value of sharing the details of the mission for the families of the September 11 , 2001 , victims and military veterans killed in the ensuing wars makes that risk worthwhile .\n`` I think I did this in a way that does n't violate any tactics or any rules , '' he said in an interview on CNN 's `` The Lead '' with Jake Tapper .\nBeing prosecuted , he said , `` does concern me , and if it comes up , I 'll address it . ''\nJUST WATCHED Ex-SEAL : Treated bin Laden 'as a threat ' Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ex-SEAL : Treated bin Laden 'as a threat ' 04:00\nJUST WATCHED Ex-SEAL describes killing bin Laden Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ex-SEAL describes killing bin Laden 03:13\nJUST WATCHED Ex-SEAL on life after bin Laden raid Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ex-SEAL on life after bin Laden raid 03:54\nIn his most extensive live television interview to date , O'Neill said he realized the power of his story while speaking with a group that included about 20 families of victims of the September 11 attacks . He said it was the first time he 'd really spoken about the mission , and that men and women cried and told him `` it was closure for them . ''\nAt that moment , he said , he realized the importance of sharing what he could -- and that he needed to find a way to do so `` with respect for the tactics , for the safety of our troops and for the Department of Defense . ''\nResponding to criticisms from former administration officials and current servicemembers that he should n't be talking publicly , O'Neill said , `` I think it 's important historically for this to get out there . ''\n`` We were the end of a long , long time of grieving , '' he said . `` We were everybody on that mission . You know , we were the Port Authority , the police department , the NYPD , the FDNY , we were the American people , the 9/11 families , and we were able to go there -- and just that I was able to be a part of that is just the greatest honor that 's ever been asked of me . ''\nO'Neill described many of the details of the mission -- and his preparation beforehand .\nHe said he believed there was `` about a 90 percent chance that we were n't going to come back . '' Among the possible threats : Pakistan 's military , unaware of the mission , could shoot the two helicopters down . Bin Laden 's house could be wired with explosives . Others in the house could be wearing suicide vests .\n`` The house getting blown up , possibly getting shot down , suicide bombers , and then possibly running out of gas was a concern , '' he said . `` The chances of us not coming back were a lot greater than the chances we were coming back . ''\nHe said he called his family members beforehand -- not offering details on what he was doing , but knowing that they 'd soon find out no matter how the mission ended . He also wrote letters to his young children , only to be delivered if he did n't survive at a later date when , for instance , he was n't there for their weddings .\nAfter the mission started , O'Neill described landing outside bin Laden 's compound on the second of two helicopters , after the first one had crash-landed . He said he was the eighth SEAL in line as they moved from the compound 's first floor to its second .\nOn that floor , six ahead of him split off to take out bin Laden 's son , clear other rooms and identify potential threats . He was now second in line headed to the third floor , where they expected to find bin Laden .\nAs the group reached the third floor , he said , the SEAL in front of him dove on top of an `` unknown '' person -- it turned out to be a woman -- to absorb what they feared could be a blast from a suicide vest . He said he thought `` let 's get this over with '' as he entered the room expecting to be blown up by bin Laden .\n`` I shot him twice in the head , he fell on the floor , '' he said . `` I shot him one more time , and I killed him . ''\nJUST WATCHED Navy SEAL : I shot , killed Bin Laden Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Navy SEAL : I shot , killed Bin Laden 07:16\nJUST WATCHED Breaking down the Robert O'Neill interview Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Breaking down the Robert O'Neill interview 07:04\nJUST WATCHED Is Bin Laden shooter now a target ? Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Is Bin Laden shooter now a target ? 03:48\nThe magnitude of what he 'd done did n't register immediately . O'Neill first worried about eliminating other potential threats -- moving a woman and child out of the way , and then clearing the room .\n`` It was n't until the room was cleared and there were more SEALs in the room that it kind of hit me . I had a moment of pause , '' he said .\n`` I said , 'Hey , what do we do now ? ' '' O'Neill said . `` He said , 'Now we go find the computers . ' I said , 'OK , I 'm back . ' ''\nThe 90-minute flight back to the U.S. air base in Afghanistan was stressful , too , as the SEALs counted down the time until they exited Pakistan 's airspace .\nThen , they could exhale . One SEAL laid next to bin Laden 's body to measure his height -- part of confirming his identity . The group had n't brought a tape measure .\nLater , O'Neill sat feet from bin Laden 's body , eating a breakfast sandwich and watching a flat-screen television , while watching President Barack Obama announce to the world that the United States had killed bin Laden .\n`` I think , '' he told CNN , `` I was part of a team full of heroes . ''
|
allsides-corpus-250
|
CHARLOTTESVILLE , Va./WASHINGTON ( βββ ) - U.S. President Donald Trump denounced neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan as criminals and thugs on Monday , bowing to mounting political pressure to condemn such groups explicitly after a white-nationalist rally turned deadly in Virginia .\nTrump had been assailed from across the political spectrum for failing to respond more forcefully to Saturday β s violence in Charlottesville . The head Merck & Co Inc ( MRK.N ) , one of the world β s biggest pharmaceutical companies , quit a presidential business panel as a result , saying he was taking a stand against intolerance and extremism .\nThe chief executives of two other prominent companies - sportswear manufacturer Under Armour ( UAA.N ) and semiconductor chip maker Intel Corp ( INTC.O ) - followed suit hours later .\nCritics denounced Trump for waiting too long to address the bloodshed , and for initially faulting hatred and violence β on many sides , β rather than singling out the white supremacists widely seen as instigating the melee .\nDemocrats said Trump β s reaction belied a reluctance to alienate white nationalists and β alt-right β political activists who occupy a loyal segment of Trump β s political base . Several senators from his own Republican Party had harsh words for him .\nSome 48 hours into the biggest domestic challenge of his young presidency , Trump tried to correct course .\nβ Racism is evil , and those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs , including the KKK , neo-Nazis , white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans , β the president said in a statement to reporters at the White House on Monday .\nβ We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred , bigotry and violence , β he said .\nA 20-year-old man said to have harbored Nazi sympathies was arrested on charges of plowing his car into protesters opposing the white nationalists , killing 32-year-old paralegal Heather Heyer and injuring 19 people . The accused , James Fields , was denied bail at a court hearing on Monday .\nSeveral others were arrested in connection with street brawls during the day that left another 15 people injured . And two airborne state troopers involved in crowd control were killed when their helicopter crashed .\nRelated Coverage Scaramucci says Trump must own his initial failure to condemn neo-Nazis\nSaturday β s disturbances erupted after white nationalists converged in Charlottesville , home of the University of Virginia β s flagship campus , to protest plans for removing a statue of General Robert E. Lee , commander of the pro-slavery Confederate army of the U.S. Civil War .\nTrump β s belated denunciation of white supremacists by name was welcomed by Heyer β s mother , Susan Bro , who thanked the president for what she called β those words of comfort and for denouncing those who promote violence and hatred . β\nβ I wish that he would have said those same words on Saturday , β responded Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia on MSNBC . β I β m disappointed it took him a couple of days . β\nA group of community leaders meeting in Charlottesville likewise said they were unimpressed by Trump β s latest message .\nβ Why did it take criticism from his Republican buddies to move him ... to adjust the moral compass that he does not possess ? β said Don Gathers , who serves as chairman for the city β s commission on monuments and memorials .\nTrump lashed out at his critics late on Monday on Twitter : β Made additional remarks on Charlottesville and realize once again that the # Fake News Media will never be satisfied ... truly bad people ! β\nTrump β s revised statement on Charlottesville , following a day of silence despite a rising chorus of outrage over the violence , came after the chief executive of Merck & Co Inc ( MRK.N ) delivered one of the more noteworthy rebukes of the president .\nMerck CEO Kenneth Frazier , who is black , resigned from Trump β s American Manufacturing Council , saying expressions of hatred and bigotry must be rejected .\nU.S. President Donald Trump delivers a statement on the deadly protests in Charlottesville , at the White House in Washington , U.S. August 14 , 2017 . βββ/Jonathan Ernst\nTrump quickly hit back on Twitter , but made no reference to Frazier β s reasons for quitting the panel , instead revisiting a longstanding gripe about expensive medicines . Frazier would have more time to focus on lowering β ripoff β drug prices , Trump tweeted .\nFrazier β s resignation was followed hours later by two other members of the business panel quitting in protest , Under Armour CEO Kevin Plank and Intel chief Brian Krzanich .\nβ I resigned to call attention to the serious harm our divided political climate is causing to critical issues , including the serious need to address the decline of American manufacturing , β Krzanich wrote in a blog post .\nThe AFL-CIO organized labor federation that represents 12.5 million workers said it , too , was considering pulling its representative from the committee .\nThe jarring images of violence from Charlottesville and the heated public debate over racism resonated around the world , particularly in Europe where leaders are contending with a wave of xenophobia .\nGerman Chancellor Angela Merkel told broadcaster Phoenix on Monday that clear and forceful action must be taken to counter right-wing extremism , and that β we have quite a lot to do at home ourselves . β\nAbout 130 people demonstrated outside the U.S. Embassy in London , some with placards reading β Fascism is not to be debated , it is to be smashed , β and β I am an ashamed American . β\nThe United Nations said there must be no place in today β s societies for the violent racism , anti-Semitism , xenophobia and discrimination on display in Charlottesville .\nAbout 500 protesters assembled in front of the White House for a β Reject White Supremacy β rally , then marched to Trump β s hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue nearby . In Manhattan , thousands of demonstrators stood outside Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue shouting β No Trump , no KKK , no fascist USA . β\nIn Durham , North Carolina , a crowd of demonstrators stormed the site of a Confederate monument outside a court and toppled the bronze statue from its base . Television news footage showed protesters taking turns stomping and kicking the fallen statue as dozens cheered .\nHundreds of miles to the north , a Holocaust memorial in Boston was vandalized , but police said they quickly arrested a 17-year-old boy who was grabbed by onlookers who saw him shatter one of the monument β s glass panels with a rock .\nAsked on Monday whether one side was more responsible for the violence than another in Charlottesville , Police Chief Al Thomas said : β This was an alt-right rally β - using the term that has become a banner for various far-right ideologies that includes neo-Nazis , white supremacists and anti-Semites .\nFields appeared in a Charlottesville court on Monday by video link from the jail where he was being held on a second-degree murder charge , three counts of malicious wounding and a single count of leaving the scene of a fatal accident . His next court date was set for Aug. 25 .\nSeveral students who attended high school with Fields in Kentucky described him as an angry young man who passionately espoused white supremacist ideology .\nThe U.S. Justice Department was pressing its own federal investigation of the incident as a hate crime .
|
allsides-corpus-251
|
As protests against racism and police violence swept across the country , drawing massive crowds into the streets amid a pandemic , public health officials worried about what the overall impact would be .\nCOVID-19 IN COLORADO The latest from the coronavirus outbreak in Colorado : MAP : Known cases in Colorado .\nKnown cases in Colorado . TESTING : Here β s where to find a community testing site . The state is now encouraging anyone with symptoms to get tested .\nHere β s where to find a community testing site . The state is now encouraging anyone with symptoms to get tested . WRITE ON , COLORADO : Tell us your coronavirus stories .\nTell us your coronavirus stories . STORY : How genetic sequencing is helping solve the mystery of coronavirus β spread through Colorado nursing homes > > FULL COVERAGE\nWould these protests β which many health leaders said they support β also turn out to be virus super-spreading events ?\nBut a new study by a nationwide research team that includes a University of Colorado Denver professor has found something surprising : The protests may have slowed the overall spread of the coronavirus in cities with large demonstrations , including Denver .\nβ We think that what β s going on is it β s the people who are not going to protest are staying away , β said Andrew Friedson , the CU-Denver professor who is one of the paper β s co-authors . β The overall effect for the entire city is more social distancing because people are avoiding the protests . β\nFriedson β s specialty is economics β specifically the economics of health care . The field of COVID-19 research now contains a multitude of subspecialties , and it has often been economists leading the way in understanding how people are changing their behaviors in response to the pandemic .\nMORE : Coloradans are moving around at nearly pre-pandemic levels . Will a second coronavirus wave follow ?\nAs the protests built , Friedson said he and his colleagues took note of the rising concerns about virus β spread . He said they also realized they had the ability to answer that question β using official coronavirus case counts and the anonymous , aggregated cell phone data that has become the gold standard for tracking societal shifts in movement .\nThe team worked quickly and published their findings earlier this month as a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper β meaning it has not yet been peer-reviewed .\nβ I β m someone who likes to get the answers out , β Friedson said . β There are a lot of people who say , β Well I think it should happen or I think this should happen , β and it β s nice to have some numbers to inform these decision-making processes . β\nThe paper comes as officials in Colorado and other states are concerned about rising infections , especially among young people .\nNew infections among young people have contributed significantly to Colorado β s uptick in cases in recent days β a rise that reversed a weeks-long trend of falling case numbers and has put Colorado back onto the list of potential coronavirus problem spots . Meanwhile , the number of new infections among older Coloradans has dropped .\nAlready registered ? Log in here to hide these messages . Stay on top of it all . Let us bring Colorado β s best journalism to you . Get our free newsletters .\nWith the July 4 holiday approaching , Gov . Jared Polis and county health officials have pleaded with people to be responsible and avoid large gatherings .\nβ We don β t have the direct causation of this uptick , β Polis told reporters last week , noting that there is evidence that some young people who are part of an outbreak in Boulder had attended protests while other outbreaks are tied to social gatherings . β And we hope this is a trend that is reversed in our state . β\nOn Monday , a spokesman for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment said that , while the state has now seen rising numbers of new cases for two consecutive weeks , β we have not seen any clear association between the protests and an increase in cases . β\nThe spokesman , Ian Dickson , said the uptick in infections β may be partly due to some Coloradans changing their behavior β especially socializing in larger groups , sometimes without proper distancing or mask wearing . β\nFriedson said his paper doesn β t try to figure out whether the protests spread the virus among the people at the protest . Instead , he said the research took the bigger-picture view : What did the protests mean for overall transmission of the virus within the entire community ?\nThe study looked at 315 American cities with populations of more than 100,000 and found that 281 of those cities saw protests . The remaining 34 cities that did not see protests β which , at the time , included Aurora β were used as a control group against which to measure the impact of the protests .\nThe researchers found that protests correlated with a net increase in overall stay-at-home behavior in cities where they occurred β and the increase was larger in cities that saw more sustained protests or reports of violence .\nProtesters in Denver β s Capitol Hill neighborhood on Saturday , June 6 , 2020 . ( Jesse Paul . βββ )\nFriedson said he and his colleagues were a bit surprised at first . The protests in many cities , including Denver , were massive , drawing tens of thousands of people out to march . But they occurred in cities with hundreds of thousands to millions of residents .\nβ We started thinking about it a little more and we thought , β Oh my gosh we β re capturing everybody else , β β he said .\nThe paper also found that , with greater social distancing , COVID case growth slowed in cities with protests from what would be expected β but not by a statistically significant amount . There may be other explanations for the trends , the study β s authors note . Overall , though , they say the data show that any resurgence in coronavirus cases can β t be pinned entirely on the protests .\nβ Public speech and public health did not trade off against each other in this case , β the authors wrote in the paper .\nBut Friedson said there is one last important thing to keep in mind about this study : It β s not a green light for governments to fully reopen bars , concert venues and other places where people gather in large numbers . The key to the researcher β s conclusions is that the protests , while receiving lots of support , were ultimately things most people decided to avoid . That β s not true of many other large gatherings .\nβ An outdoor wedding doesn β t generate avoidance behavior ; we β re measuring avoidance behavior , β Friedson said . β People don β t say , β Oh man , there β s an outdoor wedding next door , we should stay home . β β\nOur articles are free to read , but not free to report Support local journalism around the state .\nBecome a member of βββ today ! $ 5/month $ 20/month $ 100/month One-time Contribution
|
allsides-corpus-252
|
Here β s something everyone knows : Social media is driving American politics into a ditch of partisanship . Political junkies log on and cocoon themselves in a bubble of friendly punditry , appealing fake news , and outrageous acts from the other side . Every retweet and every like is another moment of identity confirmation , another high five to our friends , another reminder that we β re right and they β re wrong .\nThe result is , well , this ugly mess β President Donald Trump , red and blue Americas , polls showing we fear and hate the other party more than ever before , conspiracy theories growing like weeds , a polity where agreement is impossible and everyone is angry . Damn you , Facebook ! Curse you , Twitter ! ( Instagram , you β re cool . )\nBut what if this obvious analysis is wrong ? What if social media isn β t driving rising polarization in American politics ?\nThat β s the conclusion of a new paper by Levi Boxell , Matthew Gentzkow , and Jesse Shapiro . Their study , released recently through the National Bureau of Economic Research , tests the conventional wisdom about polarization on social media nine ways from Sunday and finds that it β s wrong , or at least badly incomplete .\nTheir approach is simple . Using data from the American National Election Survey , they compare the most web-savvy voters ( the young , where 80 percent used social media in 2012 ) and the least web-savvy voters ( the old , where fewer than 20 percent used social media in 2012 ) on nine different tests of political polarization . The measures cover everything from feelings about political parties to ideological consistency to straight-ticket voting , and the data shows how polarization changed among these groups between 1996 and 2012 .\nThe results ? On fully eight of the nine measures , β polarization increases more for the old than the young. β If Facebook is the problem , then how come the problem is worst among those who don β t use Facebook ?\nTo be thorough , Boxell , Gentzkow , and Shapiro also construct panels based on internet access and find much the same thing β polarization is accelerating fastest among those using the internet the least :\nDoes this mean the internet isn β t making us more polarized ? Not necessarily . The young are becoming more polarized , and it β s possible social media is part of the reason . But given that older Americans who don β t use social media are polarizing faster than younger Americans who do , it β s clear that this is about more than whom you follow on Twitter .\nβ Something has to explain the rising polarization of older Americans , β says Gentzkow , an economist at Stanford . β We don β t argue against the view that social media is important . It β s just not the whole picture . β\nI asked Gentzkow what he thinks might be part of the fuller picture . β I have two main hypotheses , β he replied . β One is stuff that has nothing to do with media at all but is structural , like increasing income inequality . The second is non-digital media , and cable TV and talk radio in particular . β\nThe latter piece makes particular sense if you think about the fact that older Americans make up the base of both the cable and talk radio audiences . More than a third of talk radio listeners are over age 65 , and half of Fox News β s audience is over age 68 . As bad as getting your news from Facebook can be , it β s often far better than relying on Fox News or Rush Limbaugh .\nThe authors β data only goes until 2012 , so it can β t tell us much about the 2016 election . But even though Trump β s use of Twitter was remarkable , my guess is the main way it mattered was by setting the agenda for more traditional news outlets , particularly cable news and talk radio . Remember , it was seniors β only 6 percent of whom use Twitter β who pushed Trump to the White House . He won 53 percent of voters ages 65 and over , but only 37 percent of voters ages 29 and younger . Trump is the Twitter-using president , not the president chosen by Twitter β s users .\nSocial media is new , it is transformative , and it is certainly changing American politics . But it β s not the only force at play , nor even the main one . And while it β s hard for news junkies ( myself included ) to remember , most people β s media feeds tilt more toward baby pictures , wedding announcements , and funny videos than political punditry . Those of us who follow lots of politicians and politicized news sources are outliers , and we shouldn β t extrapolate too much from our weird experience .\nWhatever is tearing our politics apart is deeper and more universal than the digital filter bubbles that get so much attention β and it seems to be most powerful among the people least likely to get their news from social media .
|
allsides-corpus-253
|
Unfortunately , there is no Uncle Sam-sponsored miracle cure that can solve a problem at the root of our nation β s government .\nPolitical polarization is harming the effectiveness of the federal government and our ability to solve problems .\nYou could spin a wheel and pick almost any topic under the sun β immigration , Planned Parenthood , religious liberty and the federal deficit to name a few β and find insane comments made about it from the left and right wings of the issue .\nAll of these , and many more , are critical issues that affect almost all of us . Yet there is no approachable middle ground to be found in America today .\nA Pew Research Center survey from 2014 found that we as Americans are more polarized than we have been at any point in the last two decades .\n92 percent of Republicans are more conservative than the average Democrat , which is up from 70 percent in 2004 . And 94 percent of Democrats are more liberal than the average Republican , up from 68 percent of the same year .\nWhile it β s no surprise that Democrats are more liberal than Republicans are , it β s disappointing to see that each party is now more entrenched within its own views than it ever has been before .\nSo far , very few of the candidates running for president can boast that they have successful bipartisan leadership experience to bring to the table .\nWhile Hillary Clinton did work with congressional Republicans during her tenure as first lady and as a senator from New York , too often her messages towards Republicans have been negative and accusatory .\nHowever , the Republicans themselves are definitely not blameless either . Their current front-runner , businessman Donald Trump , has been characterized by many political figures as being a bully for his remarks towards Democrats and other politicians .\nWho can we look to provide positive examples of cooperation ?\nWe need more leaders like Jon Huntsman , Tom Davis and Richard Lugar , who represented our great state for a total of 36 years .\nWhile each of these political figures might lean more towards one side than the other , they are not afraid to reach across divided aisle ways to find common sense solutions to problems .\nEach of these politicians have served under both Democratic and Republican presidents . They have voted for bills that were crafted by the opposing party , and sometimes they even helped create bills with people from the opposite side of Congress .\nThey are also not motivated to see how popular they can get on cable news or social media .\nThey have ideas , they have experience and they have a vision to get things done . And that β s what brings them together .\nI β d like to see the talking heads on any cable network be able to do that .\nLike what you 're reading ? Support independent , award-winning college journalism on this site . Donate here .
|
allsides-corpus-254
|
Diligent opposition has a place in our republic ; hysteria does not .\nDemocrats have been in power for so long that they β ve forgotten how to oppose . Their party has been on a roll since 2005 , when the botched Social Security reform , the slow bleed of the Iraq war , and Hurricane Katrina sent the Bush administration into a tailspin . The Democrats won the Congress the following year and the White House two years after that . And while they lost the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014 , Democrats still had the advantage of retaining the White House , a president seemingly immune from criticism , the courts , the bureaucracy , and large portions of the media . The correlation of forces in Washington has weighed heavily in favor of the Democrats for a decade .\nNo longer . The election of Donald Trump has brought unified Republican government to Washington and overturned our understanding of how politics works . Or at least it should have done so . The Democrats seem not to understand how to deal with Trump and the massive change he is about to bring to the nation β s capital . During the general election they fell for the idea that Trump can be defeated by conventional means , spending hundreds of millions of dollars in negative television advertising and relying on political consultants beholden to whatever line Politico was selling on a given day . This strategy failed Trump β s Republican primary opponents , but Democrats figured that was simply because the GOP was filled with deplorables . It was a rationalization that would cost them .\nRepublicans control the House , the Senate , 34 governor β s mansions , and 4,100 seats in state legislatures . But Democrats act like they run Washington . Nancy Pelosi β s speech to the 115th House of Representatives was a long-winded recitation of the same liberal agenda that has brought her party to its current low . Give her points for consistency I guess . Chuck Schumer is just being delusional .\nSmarting from the failed nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court , the Senate minority leader pledged to oppose Donald Trump β s nominee weeks before inauguration day . β If they don β t appoint somebody good , β he said on MSNBC , β we β re going to oppose them tooth and nail. β That would β absolutely β include keeping the seat held by the late Antonin Scalia empty , he said . β We are not going to make it easy for them to pick a Supreme Court justice . β\nI suppose it β s too much to expect a graduate of Harvard Law School to grasp the difference between majority and minority . Mitch McConnell was able to block Garland β s appointment because the Republicans controlled the Senate . The Democrats do not . And McConnell was able to hold his caucus together because he was on solid historical ground . Lyndon Johnson β s nomination of Abe Fortas as chief justice failed in the election year 1968 , and the so-called β Biden Rule β of 1992 stipulated no Supreme Court replacements during the last year of a presidency . Schumer himself , in a 2007 speech , expanded the waiting period to the final 18 months of a president β s term . Now , despite a record of calling on the Senate to confirm the president β s nominees β as long as the president is a Democrat β Schumer has adopted the strategy of no Supreme Court confirmations at all . How does he think President Trump will respond ? By caving ?\nAn attempt to filibuster the Scalia replacement may force McConnell to change the rules so that Supreme Court vacancies can be approved by a majority vote . And where would Democrats be then ? Not only will they have lost the Scalia seat , they will be completely vulnerable should another vacancy arise in the next two years . And Schumer has a reputation for political savvy .\nI don β t expect the Democrats to roll over for Trump . But I am surprised by their hysterics , and by their race to see who can be the most obnoxious to the new president .\nThe blanket opposition to President-elect Trump extends to his appointments at large . Democrats can thank Harry Reid for allowing executive-branch officials and lower-court judges to be approved by a majority vote . But the Washington Post reports that Schumer wants to prolong the confirmation process so that some Trump cabinet officials are not confirmed until March . The reason : β Democrats have been troubled by a lack of personal disclosure by Cabinet choices that they say mirrors Trump β s refusal to disclose personal tax information during the presidential campaign. β The presidential campaign that , in case the Democrats have forgotten , Trump won .\nReviving the issue of the tax returns makes little sense . It generates headlines but doesn β t move votes . And though it β s entirely possible that one or more of Trump β s nominees won β t be confirmed , I seriously doubt it . In every incoming administration there is a personal revelation or atrocious hearing that dooms a cabinet appointment . But hearings begin next week , whether Chuck Schumer likes it or not , and so far the quality of the opposition research against Trump β s picks has been remarkably blah .\n# related # Yes , the first duty of the opposition is to oppose . And I don β t expect the Democrats to roll over for Trump . But I am surprised by their hysterics , and by their race to see who can be the most obnoxious to the new president . They seem to have been caught off guard , to say the least , by their situation . Take for example their willingness to stand on a podium beside a sign that reads , β Make America Sick Again. β By embracing this message , such as it is , the Democrats associated not Trump but themselves with illness . Who on earth thought that was a good idea ?\nIt takes time to adjust . The Democrats may be counting on inertia and the media to slow the Republicans down and force them into a defensive crouch . Worked in the past . But here β s the thing about Trump : He doesn β t play defense .\nβ Matthew Continetti is the editor-in-chief of the Washington Free Beacon , where this column first appeared . Β© 2017 All rights reserved
|
allsides-corpus-255
|
A top Clinton ally β s political organization gave nearly a half-million dollars to the campaign of the wife of an FBI official who would go on to help oversee the probe into Hillary Clinton β s email practices β a tangled web that is fueling fresh Republican complaints about the investigation .\nβ We β ve never had a thing like this in the history of this country , β Donald Trump said at a Florida rally Monday afternoon , citing the β shocking β new findings .\nThe Wall Street Journal first reported Sunday night on the connections . According to the Journal , finance records show Virginia Gov . Terry McAuliffe β s PAC gave $ 467,500 to Dr. Jill McCabe β s 2015 state Senate campaign . The Virginia Democratic Party spent an additional $ 207,788 on the campaign , the Journal reported .\nMcCabe , who ended up losing to Republican incumbent Dick Black , is married to Andrew McCabe β the FBI β s deputy director .\nAt the time of the campaign and of McAuliffe β s support , McCabe was associate deputy director . He later was promoted to deputy after the campaign ended , assuming an oversight role in the Clinton email investigation .\nMcCabe apparently sought ethics guidance from the FBI and followed it , but his supervision of the email case was not seen as a potential conflict since Jill McCabe β s campaign was over and McAuliffe wasn β t directly involved in the email case .\nThe FBI β s β Ethics and Integrity Program β manual makes clear McCabe would have had to flag the connections to senior management , and the final decision would come in writing .\nIn the section prohibiting employees from participating in criminal investigations in certain cases where there β s a personal or political relationship , the manual says an exception would be if : `` The employee 's participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of interest to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation or prosecution . ''\nThe FBI , in a statement , confirmed that McCabe sought internal guidance β to prevent against any actual or potential conflict-of-interest β and when his wife chose to run , β McCabe and FBI lawyers implemented a system of recusal from all FBI investigative matters involving Virginia politics , a process followed for the remainder of her campaign . During the campaign , he played no role , attended no events , and did not participate in fundraising or support of any kind . β\nA law enforcement official , though , acknowledged an optics issue β given that while McCabe was barred from investigations into Virginia politics , the donation did come from the Virginia governor .\nMcAuliffe and other state figures reportedly recruited Dr. McCabe to run in the first place , but a spokesman pushed back on any suggestion of impropriety .\nMcAuliffe β supported Jill McCabe because he believed she would be a good state senator . This is a customary practice for Virginia governorsβ¦ Any insinuation that his support was tied to anything other than his desire to elect candidates who would help pass his agenda is ridiculous , β the spokesman told the Journal .\nMcCabe continues to be involved in the email investigation aftermath . He was recently asked to brief House oversight committee members on allegations β contained in newly released FBI files β that a State Department official offered a β quid pro quo β with the bureau in a bid to un-classify a particular server email .\nThe revelations in the Wall Street Journal report could dovetail with Donald Trump β s persistent claims that the Justice Department and FBI investigation into Clinton β s email use was compromised . Trump repeatedly has complained about Attorney General Loretta Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton on a Phoenix tarmac days before the FBI announced no charges in its Clinton investigation .\nHe tweeted out the Wall Street Journal story Sunday night .\n'Clinton Ally Aided Campaign of FBI Official β s Wife ' https : //t.co/U0w99gfyKE β Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) October 24 , 2016\nRepublican National Commitee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement the funding looked like a `` down payment '' to influence the FBI probe .\nβ Given all we know about how the corrupt Clinton machine operates , it β s hard not to see this as anything other than a down payment to influence the FBI β s criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton β s private email server , '' Priebus said .\nAccording to the same report , the PAC and Virginia Democratic Party money amounted to more than a third of Dr. McCabe β s campaign funds . She also reportedly was the third-largest recipient of the governor β s Common Good VA funds .
|
allsides-corpus-256
|
Whether you 're a homeowner who bought an energy-saving refrigerator last year or a company hoping to build a wind farm , the tax package Congress just approved may give you a reason to cheer .\n`` It 's got something in there , a Christmas gift if you will , for almost everyone β American homeowners , workers who commute via transit , and manufacturers of efficient equipment like clothes washers , dryers , refrigerators , '' says Kateri Callahan , president of the Alliance to Save Energy .\nHomeowners can save up to $ 500 on taxes for 2012 or 2013 for installing more insulation or an energy-efficient furnace , for example .\nThe tax package is especially meaningful to clean-energy businesses that rely on tax benefits to stay profitable .\nJennifer Case , CEO of New Leaf Biofuel , and her colleagues had been betting on Congress coming through for them , so they are breathing a huge sigh of relief . The San Diego company turns used cooking oil into diesel .\n`` Everybody was thrilled , and now it 's back to work today to sell the fuel that we now can afford to make , '' Case says .\nLast year was a difficult year for New Leaf because Congress let a $ 1-a-gallon tax break for biodiesel expire . Even so , Case 's company decided to triple the capacity of its plant . Case was hoping Congress would reinstate the benefit , and it did .\n`` I think coming to work every day is a gamble , but so far it 's been a good gamble , '' she says .\nDaniel Kunz runs U.S. Geothermal , a company that creates electricity from sources of superhot water that occur naturally underground . When it looked like Congress might not renew tax credits for renewable energy , his company shelved plans to expand one of its plants .\nBut then Congress not only extended the tax credit for renewable energy projects , it also changed the rules . Now , instead of needing to complete a project by the end of 2013 to be eligible , a company has to only start construction by the end of the year .\n`` In fact , this is going to help us make a decision , an economic decision , to go forward on a project that otherwise might not , '' Kunz says .\nThe tax benefits for green energy that Congress extended were originally created over the past decade . At the time , it seemed that energy sources , especially homegrown ones , were scarce . The country also seemed to be on the verge of setting limits on emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide .\n`` There was a sensible reason to want to subsidize a transformation , '' says energy analyst Kevin Book . It 's harder to make a case for renewable energy now , given the booms in natural gas and oil , he says .\n`` All of these things are different now : Demand is declining , supply is increasing , the decarbonization mandate has weakened if not disappeared , and energy security is n't the risk that it used to be , '' he says .\nBook predicts that the New Year 's tax package may be the last big payday for green energy .\nBut Kunz , of U.S. Geothermal , says the United States should keep investing in renewable energy .\n`` It will never be the cure-all energy source , but it is a gift to our children when we build these things to have clean energy sources , '' he says .\nThese projects will produce less pollution , including greenhouse gases . They also can save money over the long haul because , unlike , say , a natural gas power plant , they do n't need to keep buying fuel .
|
allsides-corpus-257
|
Climate change , by nature , is a global problem . Each ton of carbon dioxide affects the climate , whether emitted in Stockholm or Shanghai . At the heart of the Paris Agreement in 2015 is a bargain among nations to nudge one another toward ambitious commitments to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions in an effort to stabilize global temperatures . The bargain also called on rich nations to help developing ones adapt . Now comes a test of the β we β re in this together β spirit . At the COP24 , this year β s United Nations climate summit , a key task is to firm up plans for developed nations to contribute more than $ 100 billion a year by 2020 to help other countries . β [ The developed world ] has to take historical responsibility for this , β says Nigerian climate official Peter Tarfa , noting the outsize emissions of industrialized nations . But the rationale is also pragmatic . More support translates into lower emissions in places with rising populations and aspirations for middle-class lifestyles . β It β s not a question of forcing developed countries to pay , β Dr. Tarfa says . It β s getting them β to see the benefits of such action . β\nIn 2015 , the Paris Agreement on climate change rallied the world β s nations around a sense of collective resolve , a spirit of β We β re all in this together . β\nLeaders embraced the idea that this global-scale problem requires ambitious action from every nation to cut greenhouse-gas emissions . They also agreed that wealthier nations should help finance the efforts of poorer ones .\nSome of that money has already started to flow . But a key moment has arrived . Three years later , it β s the appointed time to firm up plans to hit a $ 100-billion-a-year target for such international transfers by 2020 β and to expand this β climate finance β further from there .\nThe national and global initiatives are intertwined . Without help , developing nations will be less able to pursue ambitious targets for low-carbon economies . Officials from postcolonial and developing nations in the β global south β say industrialized nations should bring more money to the table β for everyone β s sake .\nβ If developed economies put off their climate payments any longer , the Paris Agreement temperature goals will slip out of reach , with tragic consequences for people and planet , '' J. AntΓ΄nio Marcondes , chief negotiator for Brazil , writes in an email to the Monitor . β These finance commitments were not mere ornaments to the Paris Agreement . They were fundamental elements in the balance of the Agreement which must be fully delivered for developed countries to meet their historical responsibilities , and for developing countries to reach an even higher gear . β\nA higher gear may be vital . The outlook appears daunting on several fronts .\nThis week came news that , despite global efforts to date , the world β s greenhouse emissions continue to rise , driven especially by increases in China and India . Meanwhile , the United States under President Trump has backed away from its Paris climate commitments , and recent protests prompted the French government to cancel a gas tax designed to curb reliance on fossil fuels .\nStill , with all the challenges there β s also hope and a tangible sense of determined optimism in Katowice , Poland , at the 24th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , known for short as COP24 . The ethos of β we β re in this together β hasn β t died out .\nβ The expected commitments that we β re hearing from developed countries are all positive , β says Leonardo Martinez-Diaz , director of sustainable finance at the World Resources Institute think tank , speaking by phone from Poland . β We do n't know yet what the numbers are going to be precisely , but we do know that there β s a collective sense that this has to be done . β\nHe notes that , ahead of the summit for climate officials , Germany said it will contribute $ 1.7 billion to the Green Climate Fund for developing nations , nearly twice the support it gave the last time industrialized nations replenished that fund . That would push Germany toward the top tier of contributors , on a per capita basis .\nAnd the World Bank pledged this week to devote $ 200 billion over five years to help poorer nations develop their economies in climate-smart ways .\nTo some degree the Green Climate Fund is still earning the trust of donor and recipient nations alike . Some see room for the fund to make decisions both faster and with enhanced safeguards against misuse of the money .\nStill , there β s fairly wide support for the general concept behind the Green Climate Fund . The reasons voiced by officials and nongovernment organizations are both moral and pragmatic .\nβ The emissions come mostly from developed countries . If you look at the emissions produced by a small island in the Pacific , it 's almost zero , but the country can disappear because of rising sea levels , β says Simon Wilson , head of communications at the Green Climate Fund .\nβ [ The developed world ] has to take historical responsibility for this , β says Peter Tarfa , director of Nigeria β s Department of Climate Change .\nBut Mr. Wilson also notes the business opportunities for private-sector firms . And Dr. Tarfa also frames the the issue more broadly .\nβ It β s not a question of forcing developed countries to pay , it β s a question of getting developed countries to see the benefits of such action and meeting their obligations , β Tarfa says . Reduced emissions bring a benefit to the whole planet . And helping nations adapt to the effects of climate change can mean a reduction in conflict and forced migration .\nAkintunde Akinleye/Reuters/File A power official works on an electric pole along a street in Lagos , Nigeria 's commercial capital . Nigerian officials say that Green Climate Fund support will help the country to diversify energy sources to include more renewables as it moves to expand electricity access .\nNations like Nigeria don β t expect richer nations to pay for all their climate responses . But the needs are significant , and with aid they can do more .\nβ In Nigeria one of the major challenges is access to electricity . We would like to have more investments in clean sources of energy , β Tarfa says . β We also need environmentally friendly and affordable buildings , because the population is increasing dramatically . Other issues are clean transport and smart agriculture to maximize harvest . β\nEach ton of carbon dioxide affects the global climate whether it was emitted in Stockholm or Shanghai . And increasingly the carbon pollution stems from developing economies where growing populations aspire to join the global middle class . Some say these economies , from Asia to Africa and Latin America , are also where each dollar invested can have the biggest effect .\nβ More support translates into more action , and that benefits the whole planet , β says a spokesperson for Brazil β s climate delegation , via email , calling Brazil β s clean-energy aspirations β transformational β and β cost efficient . β\nThe vastness of the global task β slashing greenhouse emissions to stabilize global temperatures while also embracing the rise of a global middle class β brings complexity .\nHow much money is needed , and where ? For what kinds of investments ?\nβ We look at China , we think , β Oh they have all this money. β ... It β s kind of going through the Industrial Revolution on steroids , β says Kate Gordon , an Oakland-based expert with Columbia University β s Center on Global Energy Policy . β Sometimes we forget the scale of the challenge they β re facing to try to grow a middle class and grow a developed-country economy in a sustainable way . β\nShe says β the scale of doing that in China and India and other countries is bigger than the amount of money that they have to deal with it . β\nEven when the general need is acknowledged , part of the challenge is building developed-nation commitment to climate finance .\nIn France , the recent protests by yellow-vested citizens revolved around a fuel tax with revenue going toward deficit reduction , leaving working-class citizens feeling penalized by a new burden on their finances . The uproar doesn β t mean that all action on climate change will be unpopular , but hints at how questions of fairness can be crucial .\nβ France points to the absolute need to think through the local impacts of macroeconomic policy , [ since ] ultimately climate policy is economic policy , β says Ms. Gordon .\nβ There has to be a very careful political strategy to explain to the public why these initiatives and these efforts matter , both domestic and international , β says Dr. Martinez-Diaz of the World Resources Institute . Canada has designed a carbon tax , he notes , so that it recycles revenue back to taxpayers , while giving incentives to move away from fossil fuels .\nClimate policymakers also need to ensure accountability in the process for distributing funds even as they try to scale up the dollar volume . The Green Climate Fund isn β t the only channel for climate finance . But it β s a major one , and has been designed with safeguards to ensure careful review of the projects that get funded .\nSo far its outflows toward climate projects are small β some $ 1.6 billion in commitments β compared with its longer term goals . But it β s active already in 96 nations .\nβ In Egypt ... [ our project is ] building the largest solar park in the world , β says the Fund β s Mr. Wilson .\nβ We think that it is a good model where , at least in principle , decision-making ... ( through the Board ) relies on a system which gives equal voice to developing and developed countries , β says Brice Boehmer of the Berlin-based watchdog group Transparency International , speaking via email . He sees room for the fund to add further safeguards , such as support for whistleblowers and β consultation and participation of civil society . β\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nBut in his view , such objectives β shouldn β t be used as an excuse by developed countries and donors to stop or slow down the disbursements of climate finance . β\nThis story was produced with support from an Energy Foundation grant to cover the environment .
|
allsides-corpus-258
|
President Trump β s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement caused anger and anxiety across the world , with one major exception : China .\nWith the US stepping away from its role as a leader of the global fight against climate change , Beijing is already moving to fill the void , giving it a chance to benefit both diplomatically and economically .\nIt isn β t the first time Trump β who spent the campaign demonizing China β will have wound up giving Beijing a major chance to expand its standing on the world stage .\nAfter Trump withdrew the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership , China inserted itself into trade talks among other nations disappointed by America β s reversal . As Canada and Mexico have felt spurned by Trump during the runup to renegotiating NAFTA , China has emerged as a more reliable trading prospect .\nThis isn β t happening quietly behind the scenes : At China β s first appearance at the World Economic Forum in Davos , Chinese President Xi Jinping chided the West for its flirtation with protectionism , and painted a picture of his country as a paragon of free trade and an inviting place for foreign investment .\nNow , as the US pulls out of the global community β s effort to curb carbon emissions , China β s profile as a forward-looking world leader will only grow . It β s set to become closer to the US β s allies that feel abandoned by Trump β s recent actions , as well as take a more aggressive lead in building a green economy .\nβ While the US is breaking these ties , China β which has traditionally been more reserved in international affairs β is building them at breakneck pace , β Alex Wang , an environmental law professor at the University of California Los Angeles , told me . β As the US loses good will , China is building it . β\nThe reshuffling of the world order in the wake of Trump β s announcement could be seen almost immediately , with top Chinese and European leaders criticizing the US β s withdrawal side by side on Thursday .\nStanding next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel , Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said that β fighting climate change is a global consensus β and pledged that China would remain committed to the Paris agreement .\nMerkel said `` the cooperation of the European Union with China in this area will play a crucial role , especially in regards to new technologies . ''\nIn a statement to the press , Miguel Arias CaΓ±ete , the European Union commissioner on climate action and energy , made the point even more forcefully : `` No one should be left behind , but the EU and China have decided to move forward . Our successful cooperation on issues like emissions trading and clean technologies are bearing fruit . Now is the time to further strengthen these ties to keep the wheels turning for ambitious global climate action . β\nIt won β t be the last time that Beijing and Brussels find themselves seeing eye to eye , or that the two sides look past the US and look to work on joint initiatives that don β t involve Washington . And Europe and China β s enhanced cooperation is quite likely to go beyond coordinating on climate change .\nβ These agreements ... build ties and align interests in ways that reduce the likelihood of conflict and bolster the opportunities for greater growth and development , β Wang says .\nTo make that a little more concrete , let β s take something like China β s jaw-droppingly ambitious One Belt , One Road initiative . It β s a Chinese-funded infrastructure project designed to connect China to 64 countries in Asia , Europe , the Middle East , and Africa that make up around 60 percent of the world β s population .\nAs is often the case with countries that deal with trading with China , Europe has expressed concern about China β s compliance with global trade norms as Beijing goes about pitching its proposals for trains and tunnels . Those are big issues that aren β t easy to surmount , but they become a little bit easier to deal with when you β re able to build goodwill through cooperation on issues like climate change .\nβ As the US loses goodwill , China is building it β βAlex Wang\nIf Europe and China are actually able to grow closer through their coordination on climate change , it could potentially build a better relationship for navigating conflicts over trade .\nIn the meantime , the US and Europe are going through the roughest patch they β ve had since they split over the Iraq War in 2003 . Even before Trump pulled out of the Paris agreement on Thursday , he had already alienated Europe during his trip abroad last week , when he , among other things , refused to reaffirm America β s commitment to NATO and accused Germany of being a trade cheat .\nTrump β s America First agenda has been a huge gift to China\nBut the impact of Trump β s withdrawal from the world stage is bigger than China β s relationship with Europe .\nConsider how , on his first full working day as president , he withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership , an agreement that would β ve boosted trade ties between the US and 11 countries along the Pacific Rim and generated the largest trade bloc the world had ever seen .\nThe accord would have strengthened ties between the US and a number of China β s neighbors and would β ve served as a counterweight to Beijing β s increasing influence in the region ( China was n't part of the deal ) .\nNow , Trump β s move means that Beijing has a major opportunity to step into that vacuum and negotiate a regional trade deal that basically serves as a China-centric version of the TPP . It β s already been making efforts to do exactly that .\nChina has generally been eager to capitalize on Trump β s protectionist tendencies . In his World Economic Forum speech , Chinese President Xi warned against rising nationalism in the West and defended free trade . This is China lecturing the US and Europe about free trade . China β s economy has liberalized significantly in recent decades , but it β s a country that flagrantly disregards all kinds of global trade rules , from denying market access to foreign companies to subsidizing many of its key industries . But when you have the most powerful politician in the world calling for 45 percent tariffs against other countries , Xi doesn β t look so preposterous .\nIf there β s one realm where China is set to best the US in the wake of Paris , it β s in developing a sustainable economy . It β s already investing more than the US in clean energy β in 2016 , it invested more than $ 88 billion to the US β s $ 59 billion β but the gulf between the US and China will grow as the US decides that renewable energy investment isn β t a priority . And it will grow fast . America First is turning out to be anything but .
|
allsides-corpus-259
|
All too many bad ideas get endlessly recycled β the carbon tax is one of them . A carbon tax could be a tax on coal , oil and gas carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants and other sources . Do you know how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere ? It is a little less than 400 parts per million . Do you know what the optimum level of carbon dioxide is ? No one does , even though some have the extreme conceit to think they do .\nThe earth β s atmosphere is 78 percent nitrogen , about 21 percent oxygen , less than 1 percent argon , and only 0.038 percent carbon dioxide β plus a variable amount of water vapor . The gas is necessary for life . Plants can not grow without it . They absorb it and release oxygen in exchange . Animals exhale carbon dioxide and inhale oxygen . There is evidence that as carbon-dioxide levels have risen , plants are growing faster , which means cheaper food .\nThe advocates of a carbon tax claim that the tax will help reduce dangerous emissions . The argument is that carbon dioxide is a β greenhouse β gas and , everything else being equal , more of it in the atmosphere will result in higher atmospheric temperatures . The operative phrase here is β everything else being equal. β When fossil fuels are burned , they produce small amounts of carbon dioxide but large amounts of water vapor . Increases in water vapor show up as more cloud cover . Clouds both trap heat ( which increases warming ) and reflect sunlight ( which reduces warming ) , but there is no consensus about which effect is greater .\nWhat is known with a high degree of certainty is that at times in the past , the Earth has been both warmer and cooler at current levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere . What is also known is the current climate models have a dreadful record of prediction . Twenty years ago , we were told that the Earth β s temperatures would steadily rise from then on , yet there has been no average warming for the past 16 years β oops .\nLet β s assume for the moment that those who think that global warming is largely caused by increases in carbon dioxide , and that man has caused the increase , are correct . Those who think that also have a β mainstream β forecast of 3 degrees Celsius of global warming between now and the end of the century . At most , they also estimate that the U.S. contribution will only be about 0.2 degrees Celsius , or about 7 percent of global warming . Does it make sense for the United States to impose a carbon tax , when emissions from the rest of the world β notably , India and China β would be responsible for 93 percent of the temperature rise ? Even with very high taxes on carbon-dioxide emissions , the amount of warming that would be prevented is too small to measure on a 50-year time scale .\nA carbon tax has real costs to the American economy . Energy prices and food prices would be higher , and virtually everything else that people consume would cost more . The results of higher prices are a lower standard of living , less economic opportunity , lower real wages and fewer jobs . All for what ?\nYou may have noticed that people who have very strong empirical and theoretical evidence for their point of view usually do not feel a need to suppress dissent . Instead they let the strength of their own arguments and evidence persuade . Yet , the global-warming lobby increasingly exhibits the characteristics of an intolerant religious sect , rather than objective scientists . Rather than admitting that their climate models were flawed , many in the global-warming crowd have resorted to name-calling and active repression of those who have argued that solar activity or other phenomena might be more important than carbon dioxide in determining the earth β s temperature .\nAs an economist , I make no pretense to knowing what the optimum temperature of the earth ought to be and what the optimal level of carbon dioxide should be , other than to note , in general , people tend to prefer warmer over colder climates and less expensive and more plentiful food that comes from more warmth , moisture and carbon dioxide . As an economist , though , I am prepared to make judgments as to whether a proposed tax is likely to have more benefits than costs . Even many proponents of carbon taxes , when pressed , admit that they will have virtually no effect on global warming ( even using their very doubtful assumptions ) . However , we do know that these proposed tax increases will have very real negative effects on people β s incomes and job opportunities .\nMankind has adapted to the gradual ups and downs in temperatures and sea levels for thousands of years β without freedom-destroying government mandates and oppressive taxes . The carbon tax idea should be scrapped .\nRichard W. Rahn is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth .
|
allsides-corpus-260
|
While touring areas of California ravaged by a historic drought , President Obama on Friday sounded an ominous warning and said that even if the federal government takes meaningful action to combat climate change , much of the damage already has been done .\nβ Unless and until we do more to combat carbon pollution that causes climate change , this trend is going to get worse , and the hard truth is even if we do take action on climate change , carbon pollution has built up in our atmosphere for decades . The planet is slowly going to keep warming for a long time to come , β Mr. Obama said while touring a farm in Los Banos . β We β re going to have to stop looking at these disasters as something to wait for . We β ve got to start looking at these disasters as something to prepare for , to anticipate . β\nMr. Obama and many Democrats , along with their supporters in the environmental community , have held up extreme weather events such as California β s drought , Hurricane Sandy and others as proof that global warming is wreaking havoc all across the planet .\nBut the issue remains bitterly divisive , and many lawmakers believe Mr. Obama β s dire warnings are grossly overstated .\nThe heated debate over climate change has led to near gridlock on Capitol Hill , with Republicans and some Democrats standing in staunch opposition to major legislative proposals to address the issue . That opposition helped kill the controversial 2010 cap-and-trade bill , which would have put a limit on carbon emissions nationwide .\nIn lieu of congressional action , the Obama administration has taken a number of executive steps . The most notable were the ambitious automobile fuel standards , which call for American cars and trucks to average 54.5 mpg by 2025 , and the Environmental Protection Agency β s strict new rules limiting carbon emissions from power plants .\nThe White House on Friday also announced that in the president β s new budget proposal , due out next month , Mr. Obama will ask Congress to create a new $ 1 billion β climate resilience β fund to spur new research into how communities and infrastructure can be better prepared for the impacts of climate change .\nThe initiative , if approved , also would fund new technologies β that will make us more resilient in the face of changing climate , β the White House said in a statement .\nMoving forward , the president said , such efforts will become more critical β especially in states such as California , which will have to deal with longer , more severe droughts and less water as the climate situation worsens .\nβ Everybody , from farmers to residential areas to the north of California and the south of California and every place in between , as well as the entire Western region , are going to have to start rethinking how we approach water for decades to come , β the president said .\nWhile in California , the president also attended a town hall meeting with the state β s Democratic governor , Jerry Brown , Sens . Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein , both Democrats , and other state and local officials .\nMr. Obama will spend the rest of the weekend in California . Later on Friday , he β ll hold a bilateral meeting with King Abdullah II of Jordan at a private retreat in Rancho Mirage .
|
allsides-corpus-261
|
Unsustainable use of resources is wrecking the planet but recycling is falling , report finds\nThe amount of material consumed by humanity has passed 100bn tonnes every year , a report has revealed , but the proportion being recycled is falling .\nThe climate and wildlife emergencies are driven by the unsustainable extraction of fossil fuels , metals , building materials and trees . The report β s authors warn that treating the world β s resources as limitless is leading towards global disaster .\nThe materials used by the global economy have quadrupled since 1970 , far faster than the population , which has doubled . In the last two years , consumption has jumped by more than 8 % but the reuse of resources has fallen from 9.1 % to 8.6 % .\nThe report , by the Circle Economy thinktank , was launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos . It shows that , on average , every person on Earth uses more than 13 tonnes of materials per year . But the report also found that some nations are making steps towards circular economies in which renewable energy underpins systems where waste and pollution are reduced to zero .\nβ We risk global disaster if we continue to treat the world β s resources as if they are limitless , β said Harald Friedl , the chief executive of Circle Economy . β Governments must urgently adopt circular economy solutions if we want to achieve a high quality of life for close to 10bn people by mid-century without destabilising critical planetary processes . β\nMarc de Wit , the report β s lead author , said : β We are still fuelling our growth in population and affluence by the extraction of virgin materials . We can β t do this indefinitely β our hunger for virgin material needs to be halted . β\nTrump blasts 'prophets of doom ' in attack on climate activism Read more\nThe report found that 100.6bn tonnes of materials were consumed in 2017 , the latest year for which data is available . Half of the total is sand , clay , gravel and cement used for building , along with the other minerals quarried to produce fertiliser . Coal , oil and gas make up 15 % and metal ores 10 % . The final quarter are the plants and trees used for food and fuel .\nThe lion β s share of the materials β 40 % β is turned into housing . Other major categories include food , transport , healthcare , communications , and consumer goods such as clothes and furniture .\nAlmost a third of the annual materials remain in use after a year , such as buildings and vehicles . But 15 % is emitted into the atmosphere as climate-heating gases and nearly a quarter is discarded into the environment , such as plastic in waterways and oceans . A third of the materials is treated as waste , mostly going to landfill and mining spoil heaps . Just 8.6 % is recycled .\nβ This report sparks an alarm for all governments , β said Carolina Schmidt , Chile β s environment minister . β We need to deploy all the policies to really catalyse this transformation [ to a circular economy ] . β\nCristianne Close of the conservation group WWF said : β The circular economy provides a framework for reducing our impacts , protecting ecosystems and living within the means of one planet . β\nThe report said increasing recycling can make economies more competitive , improve living conditions and help to meet emissions targets and avoid deforestation . It reported that 13 European countries have adopted circular economy roadmaps , including France , Germany and Spain , and that Colombia became the first Latin American country to launch a similar policy in 2019 .\nChina β s ban on waste imports aims to encourage domestic recycling , the report said , but has also stimulated the development of circular economy strategies in Australia and other countries which previously exported their waste to China .\nJanez PotoΔnik , a former European environment commissioner and the co-chair of the UN Environment Programme international resource panel , said the world needed to learn to do more with less and replace ownership with sharing , as is increasingly being seen with cars .
|
allsides-corpus-262
|
Employers hired more workers in March even as the number of job openings fell slightly , the Labor Department said Tuesday .\nThe Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey points to a stronger labor market two months ago than another government report suggested Friday .\nLabor said last week that employers added a net 85,000 jobs in March , including hiring and layoffs , as payroll growth sputtered amid frigid weather and a pullback in drilling by oil producers , among other factors . That was the lowest total since June 2012 . Job gains rebounded to 223,000 in April .\nTuesday 's JOLTS report provides a more granular view of employee movements and shows a more encouraging picture . The number of hires , for example , increased by 56,000 to about 5.1 million .\nHiring increased in retail , professional and business services , and leisure and hospitality . It declined in construction , manufacturing and education and health services .\nPart of the reason net job gains were weak is that layoffs and discharges also picked up , rising by 105,000 , or 6.2 % , to 1.8 million . At least some of those job cuts were in the oil industry , which continues to shed workers in response to low crude prices .\nMeanwhile , about 2.8 million Americans quit their jobs β the most since April 2008 β up from 2.7 million in February . A large number of quits is a sign of a dynamic labor market in which workers feel confident enough to leave one job for another .\nOverall , the report `` helps ease concerns that the weak 85,000 ( job gain total ) for March was the start of a new trend , '' says Barclays Capital economist Jesse Hurwitz . `` Confidence remains intact . ''\nLess encouraging is that job openings fell by 150,000 to 5 million after hitting a 14-year high in February . But economist Daniel Silver of JPMorgan Chase notes that openings were still up about 18 % from the year-ago period .\nAnother measure of the labor market 's progress is that there were 1.7 unemployed workers for each job opening in March , down sharply from a high of 6.7 in 2009 .\nThat shows the labor market is continuing to tighten , aiding job seekers , though at a slower pace than last year , Hurwitz says . He expects job gains to pick up to a solid monthly average of 200,000 to 225,000 for the rest of 2015 . That would mark an uptick from the 184,000 monthly pace in the first quarter but a slowdown from last year 's brisk clip of 260,000 .\nLast week , Labor said that employers added 223,000 jobs in April .
|
allsides-corpus-263
|
President Obama β s relationship with blue-collar unions has hit an all-time low , with several powerful labor groups ripping into the administration β and the Democratic Party as a whole β for its rejection of the Keystone XL oil pipeline and its promotion of the highly controversial trade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership .\nMr. Obama β s decision to reject Keystone on environmental grounds , which he announced Friday after a review process that lasted nearly seven years , deeply angered the president β s traditional supporters in the labor movement .\nIn addition to unprecedented verbal criticism of Mr. Obama β including from the Laborers β International Union or North America , which branded the president β cowardly β and his actions β shameful β β other unions hinted that they may rethink their support for Democrats in 2016 .\nβ President Obama has chosen to place politics over substantive policy that only serves to advance the agenda of well-funded radical environmentalists , β Sean McGarvey , president of the North America β s Building Trades Unions , said in a statement Friday . β All of which begs the question : Where does this leave the Democratic Party β s historical core constituency of working Americans ? We won β t know the answer to that question until November 2016 . But , to paraphrase Senator Ted Kennedy , for all those whose jobs have been our concern , the work goes on , the cause endures , and the dream shall never die , and hope springs again in January of 2017 . β\nMr. Obama , who has tried to cultivate close ties with labor leaders throughout his time in the White House , now finds himself in a situation where his relationship with some major unions is tense at best and fatally wounded at worst . In addition to the lambasting the administration has taken over Keystone , it is enduring equal criticism on the Trans-Pacific Partnership ( TPP ) , a major trade deal involving the U.S. and 12 Pacific Rim nations .\nThe full text of the deal , which is opposed by many key figures in the Democratic Party , including 2016 presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton , finally was released last week .\nβ Officials have talked about side deals and special arrangements that they say will improve the agreement , β Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa said in a statement . β But they are unenforceable and won β t help protect the jobs of hardworking Americans . That β s why there is only one right answer for lawmakers when it comes to TPP . Just say no . β\nTeamsters also launched a # TPPWorseThanWeThought campaign on Twitter seeking to rally opposition to the deal within the Democratic Party .\nWhile the administration flat out rejects many criticisms of TPP β including that the deal β s labor standards aren β t strong enough β Mr. Obama took a slightly different tack when explaining why he blocked the Keystone pipeline .\nThe project β which would have crossed the U.S.-Canada boundary , connected with existing pipeline infrastructure and transported more than 800,000 barrels of Canadian oil to refineries on the Gulf Coast β would have created more than 40,000 jobs , according to State Department research . Supporters argue it would have greatly enhanced North American energy security and potentially would have lowered U.S. gas prices .\nBut the president , while also casting doubt on the true job-creation potential of Keystone , made clear that his chief motivation for killing the project is to prove to the world that America will voluntarily lessen its reliance on fossil fuels and lead the world in the fight against climate change .\nβ Today we β re continuing to lead by example , β Mr. Obama said in a White House speech Friday , flanked by Vice President Joseph R. Biden and Secretary of State John F. Kerry . β Because , ultimately , if we β re going to prevent large parts of this earth from becoming not only inhospitable but uninhabitable in our lifetimes , we β re going to have to keep some fossil fuels in the ground rather than burn them and release more dangerous pollution into the sky . β\nFrom the perspective of some unions , the president β s decision proves he β s more interested in securing an environmental legacy than he is in creating jobs and boosting the economy .\nβ After a seven-year circus of cowardly delay , the president β s decision to kill the Keystone XL pipeline is just one more indication of an utter disdain and disregard for salt-of-the-earth , middle-class working Americans , β said Terry O β Sullivan , general president of the Laborers β International Union of North America .\nβ The politics he has played with their lives and livelihoods is far dirtier than oil carried by any pipeline in the world , and the cynical manipulation of the approval process has made a mockery of regulatory institutions and government itself . We are dismayed and disgusted that the president has once again thrown the members of LIUNA and other hard-working , blue-collar workers under the bus of his vaunted β legacy , β while doing little or nothing to make a real difference in global climate change . His actions are shameful . β
|
allsides-corpus-264
|
The recent economic upheaval caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is unmatched by anything in recent memory . Social distancing has resulted in massive layoffs and furloughs in retail , hospitality , and entertainment , and millions of the affected workersβrestaurant servers , cooks , housekeepers , retail clerks , and many othersβwere already at the bottom of the wage spectrum .\nThe economic catastrophe of the previous decade , the Great Recession , hit young adults and those with lower levels of education especially hard . As we approach another nationwide recession , we are about to see history repeat itself .\nMillions of young adult workers were economically vulnerable before COVID-19\nIn a pre-pandemic analysis , we identified 53 million low-wage workers in America who earn median hourly earnings of just $ 10.22 . Of these workers , a disproportionate share are young adults ages 18 to 24 : 13 million , or 24 % of all low-wage workers . These 13 million young adults are especially concentrated in industries that have been shuttered by stay-at-home and social distancing orders , and are likely to experience an outsized share of pandemic-related layoffs .\nFor some young people ( primarily those with a college degree ) , a low-wage job is a temporary waystation , and they are likely to advance to higher-paying work . Given the importance of education in the labor market , those without college credentials are not so well-situated , and future wage growth for them is much less likely . The current economic crisis may exacerbate these differences in outcomes by education levelβjob losses are thus far more concentrated among workers without college degrees .\nOf the 13 million young adults in low-wage jobs , 7.1 million do not have a college degree ( associate or bachelor β s ) and are not making any progress toward one as they work . In our pre-pandemic analysis , we referred to this group as β Cluster 1 , β and will refer to them as such throughout the remainder of this brief .\nThe 7.1 million young adults in Cluster 1 are employed most commonly in occupations such as retail sales , cooks , or servers . The majority are male ( 57 % ) and it is a racially diverse group : 51 % are white , 27 % are Latino or Hispanic , 16 % are Black , and 2 % are Asian American . They have median hourly wages of $ 8.55 and median annual earnings of $ 12,700 .\nNearly half ( 47 % ) of all workers in Cluster 1 work full-time year-round , and they report median annual earnings of about $ 21,000βconsiderably higher than those working fewer hours , but still a low sum to cover living expenses .\nThe majority ( 54 % ) of Cluster 1 report that a high school diploma is their highest level of education , and another third have attended college or training but did not earn a degree . A portion of this β some college β group may have completed a nondegree credential , but the majority likely did not . Without a credential , most are unlikely to see an economic payoff for their time spent in school and are more likely to default on school-related debt than their peers who completed a degree .\nThirty-one percent of workers in Cluster 1 receive safety net assistance ( SSI , public assistance income , SNAP , or Medicaid ) and about half ( 48 % ) live below 200 % of the federal poverty line , a common threshold used to identify the working poor . A little over half ( 54 % ) are still living with a parent , but one in five are the sole wage earner in their family . Only one-third are secondary earners , defined here as living in a family in which at least one member works and earns moderate to high wages .\nNearly half of low-wage young adults without a college degree work in sectors immediately impacted by COVID-19\nA number of industries have rapidly lost jobs due to social distancing measures , travel restrictions , and related government actions in response to COVID-19 . These immediate-risk industries were compiled in previous Brookings analyses and include retail , passenger transportation , arts and entertainment , accommodation , restaurants and bars , and a variety of other personal services . ( Refer to the appendix for a full list of immediate-risk industries . )\nForty-six percent of workers in Cluster 1 are in immediate-risk industries , compared to 23 % of all U.S. workers . Another 20 % of these young workers are in near-term risk industries . Near-term risk industriesβincluding construction , some manufacturing , and real estateβare less immediately impacted than retail and restaurants , but have started to see layoffs in recent weeks .\nTo learn more about the characteristics and risk exposure of Cluster 1 in your metro area , please refer to the data appendix .\nThe next federal relief package should include a massive jobs program\nYoung people typically have unemployment rates much higher than those of prime-age workers . Given that the current unemployment rate is estimated to be at least 20 % , unemployment rates among young people are likely to be staggeringly high . Moreover , at all ages , unemployment is higher among those with lower levels of educationβanother strike against the young adults in Cluster 1 .\nMassive unemployment requires a proportionate response , and any future COVID-19 relief legislation should include a large-scale , federally funded employment initiative . Given the extent of the job losses and the likelihood of an economic depression , we should aim to employ millions of people , and authorize such a program for at least three years .\nLooking only at less-educated young adults , it β s likely that more than 3 million are recently out of work . And that is only a fraction of the newly unemployed , based on the record number of unemployment claimsβ30 millionβfiled in the past six weeks .\nWe don β t know when the private sector will start hiring again , but in the meantime , tens of millions of people have bills to pay and mouths to feed . They can β t wait . The CARES Act β s expansions to unemployment insurance and the $ 1,200 one-time stimulus payment were good initial steps , but they are not enough .\nA federal jobs initiative should encompass various approaches . It should target a wide range of people , including those at the end of the labor market queue : the last-hired/first-fired workers who typically have less experience and lower levels of education . It should also reach those who ordinarily would not have much trouble finding employment , because even the most qualified candidates will not be able to find a job when there is little demand for workers .\nThe jobs initiative should also explicitly target young people , such as those in Cluster 1 , who are often at the back of the line of job candidates . People in their early 20s are at the beginning of their careers , and early unemployment can have lasting negative consequences . Work begets work .\nTo reach young people and provide them with the skills and supports to prepare them for a successful career , we could dramatically expand YouthBuild , service and conservation corps , or AmeriCorps . There are already two active legislative proposals to expand AmeriCorps : the Pandemic Response and Opportunity Through National Service Act and the UNITE Act of 2020 . ( Support for AmeriCorps , however , does not eliminate the need for other programs targeted at young adults , since it is only one model and not necessarily the best fit for all young people . )\nAge-agnostic approaches could include subsidized employment in direct aid to states ( as was done in 2009 β s Recovery Act ) or in any future expansions of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act , as has been suggested by Heather Boushey and the Heartland Alliance . The programs could place subsidized workers at nonprofits and businesses , as well as directly employ people in the public sector ; for example , in emergency response , public works , and infrastructure jobs .\nA federal initiative could also place workers in jobs that aid the COVID-19 relief effort , such as contact tracing , making and distributing personal protective equipment , organizing food drives , and delivering groceries to those who are home-bound . They could pursue projects that focus on other community needs , such as providing computer equipment and digital skills training to address the digital divide so clearly highlighted in the stay-at-home era . Of course , any of these employment opportunities should be safe , allowing for adequate social distancing as well as any necessary personal protective equipment .\nReaching millions of people over several years will require hundreds of billions of dollars . We must not flinch at the price tag . We should calibrate our response to the scale of the problem , and not use the size of existing employment-related funding streams as the benchmark . Providing a chance at employment and preventing economic disaster for workers is just as important asβand could be a complement toβthe relief for businesses in previous legislation . America β s young workers are a worthy investment , and we would reap the benefits for years to come .
|
allsides-corpus-265
|
Series : Desperation Town How Youngstown Gave Itself Away for the Promise of Jobs\nβββ is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power . Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they β re published . This article was produced in partnership with The Business Journal , based in Youngstown , Ohio , which is a member of the βββ Local Reporting Network .\nThe state of Ohio has put General Motors on notice that it may be forced to repay more than $ 60 million in public subsidies as a result of the automaker closing its massive assembly plant last year in Lordstown .\nThe state β s collection effort , initially outlined in a letter to GM in March , has not been previously reported , and the automaker itself has not disclosed the potential liability to shareholders in its corporate filings .\nState officials say the Lordstown shuttering , which made national headlines and drew the ire of President Donald Trump , violated the terms of two state economic development agreements that GM signed more than a decade ago , according to documents obtained by The Business Journal and βββ through public records requests . In return for tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks , the company had pledged to maintain operations at the Lordstown site until at least 2027 .\nβ If the state were to claw back $ 60 million , that would be one of the biggest clawback events in U.S. history , β said Greg LeRoy , executive director of Good Jobs First , a national nonprofit that advocates for accountability in economic development . β This is very significant , very interesting that it would come from a Rust Belt state from a very pro-business administration . β\nThe state Development Services Agency , which oversees economic incentive programs , notified GM in March that it would recommend that the state β s tax authority terminate the company β s tax agreements and collect a full refund . Spokesman Todd Walker said the authority would consider the matter at an upcoming meeting , though he declined to specify a date . The authority β s next session is July 27 , according to its website . Provisions in GM β s tax agreements allow for state regulators to consider market conditions and whether the company continues to maintain β other operations in the state β before issuing a final determination .\nAnd GM is making its case . In a letter in April , the company urged the state to take into account the collapsing market for small cars β the hallmark of the Lordstown plant β and the economic downturn precipitated by the coronavirus pandemic . GM reported net income of $ 294 million for the quarter that ended on March 31 , down from $ 2.1 billion during the same period last year , according to filings .\nβ Cash preservation is critically important to General Motors to support a vigorous emergence from the economic and global health crisis , β Troy D. Kennedy , the company β s U.S. property tax manager , wrote to the Ohio Development Services Agency . β We respectfully request your assistance to help us drive towards a full recovery by choosing not to require repayment of all , or a significant portion of , the tax credits . β\nGM also highlighted its six manufacturing and distribution facilities throughout Ohio , as well as a planned joint venture that would manufacture battery cells for electric vehicles near the Lordstown plant . On Monday , spokesman Dan Flores said in a statement , β We are respectfully asking the state to consider our belief that a repayment of the tax credits would be inconsistent with our significant manufacturing presence in Ohio and the Mahoning Valley . β\nGet Our Top Investigations Subscribe to the Big Story newsletter .\nThe fight over GM β s corporate tax credits has played out quietly over the last few months and underscores the political bind facing leaders in Ohio and elsewhere as they struggle to revive their economies while also balancing their budgets . Last month , Gov . Mike DeWine ordered $ 775 million in budget cuts to plug a yawning hole in this year β s spending plan , and state officials are already estimating a $ 2.4 billion deficit for the fiscal year that begins July 1 .\nTaking on one of the country β s largest automakers would represent a shift for a state and region that has relied heavily on economic incentives to attract new employers and to retain its beleaguered manufacturing base . As The Business Journal and βββ reported last month , local governments like Youngstown have offered businesses free land , tax abatements , development grants , low-interest loans and other inducements to spur investment across Ohio β s Mahoning Valley .\nAn electronics tester works on a Chevrolet Cruze at Jamestown Industries in Youngstown , Ohio , on Nov. 28 , 2018 . Jamestown Industries supplied parts for the Cruze , the key product at the former Lordstown GM plant . ( Tony Dejak/AP Photo )\nIn 2009 , with gas prices soaring , the state offered the company massive tax breaks to help it expand and retool the Lordstown plant to produce a new , fuel-efficient model , the Chevrolet Cruze . Under the terms of the deal , GM got a 75 % reduction in its income taxes over 15 years β worth $ 14.2 million β in exchange for agreeing to add 200 jobs and maintain operations at the site until 2039 . A separate agreement awarded the company an additional $ 46.1 million in tax breaks on the condition that it retain 3,700 employees over 15 years and maintain operations at the site until 2027 .\nBut eight years after signing those pacts , the small car market softened , and GM started to slash jobs at the plant . In January 2017 , it eliminated the so-called third shift at Lordstown . A second shift was cut in June 2018 , the same day the automaker announced it would build its new Chevrolet Blazer in Mexico . Together , the reductions resulted in the loss of more than 2,700 jobs , according to an economic impact report by Cleveland State University .\nIn November 2018 , the automaker announced that it would end production of the Lordstown-built Cruze and place the plant on β unallocated β status , meaning a new product had not been selected for the factory . Trump , who had pledged to resuscitate manufacturing in Ohio and across the Rust Belt , lashed out . β The U.S. saved General Motors , and this is the THANKS we get ! We are now looking at cutting all @ GM subsidies , β he wrote on Twitter .\nThe president did not follow up on the threat , and the last vehicle rolled off the assembly line on March 6 , 2019 . The shutdown eliminated the remaining 1,500 jobs , while hundreds of other automotive supplier positions tied to the plant were also lost .\nOfficials were outraged . U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown , D-Ohio , said at the time that GM β s decision was β corporate greed at its worst . β\nCommunity groups held prayer vigils throughout the area in support of attracting a new vehicle , while children whose parents were employed at the plant wrote letters to GM CEO Mary Barra pleading to keep it open . A choir of middle school students even produced a video singing β We Love GM ! β to the tune of β Under the Sea β from Disney β s animated film β The Little Mermaid . β\nIt came to nothing . In October , after a 40-day strike was settled with the United Auto Workers union , GM announced it would officially close Lordstown and not award a new product to the plant . In a five-page letter to Ohio regulators in April , Kennedy , the GM official , called it an β extremely difficult decision . β\nβ It had been our hope to keep operations at Lordstown going , β he wrote , noting that GM had exceeded its job creation and retention targets through 2016 . β However , we have continued to maintain significant operations in Ohio and make important new investments in the Mahoning Valley . β\nRead More Why a Struggling Rust Belt City Pinned Its Revival on a Self-Chilling Beverage Can Welcome to Youngstown , Ohio , home of Chill-Can , the self-chilling beverage container you β ve probably never heard of . Officials have gambled millions of dollars and demolished a neighborhood for the product . Not one job has been created yet .\nThe company highlighted its sale of the Lordstown plant to startup automaker Lordstown Motors , which plans to introduce its first electric-powered pickup , the Endurance , next week and begin production in the first quarter of next year . The Business Journal reported in December that GM had provided $ 40 million in financing to the firm so it could purchase the facility and retool the operation .\nGM also underscored its plans to build a $ 2.3 billion electric-vehicle battery plant in Lordstown , next to the shuttered auto facility . The automaker is partnering with Korea-based LG Chem as part of a new joint venture named Ultium . The new battery plant would employ about 1,100 workers earning between $ 10 and $ 17 per hour , lower than those who work in auto assembly .\nβ GM β s plans for the Mahoning Valley position Lordstown as a crucial manufacturing location for the electric vehicle supply chain , β Kennedy said in his letter .\nIn the meantime , Lordstown is coping with the loss of GM as one of its biggest revenue generators . Eager for the new battery plant , its village council approved new tax breaks for the joint venture in February . The project will receive a 75 % abatement on property levies for 15 years .\nβ What we had to get done and needed to get done for General Motors , we did , β Mayor Arno Hill said after the vote .
|
allsides-corpus-266
|
New York governor Andrew Cuomo is attempting to prop up public-sector unions in anticipation of a Supreme Court ruling that could end coercive payments .\nA group of Illinois government workers are asking the Supreme Court to overturn four decades of precedent that allow agencies to require union dues or fee payments as a condition of employment . The plaintiffs argued in Janus v. American Federation of State , County , and Municipal Employees that public-sector unions are inherently political and funding them violates an individual 's association and speech rights . Many in labor circles fear the Supreme Court will endorse this view , dealing a severe blow to union coffers if partial fee payers win the right to opt out of union membership entirely . New York Democrats passed a bill to shore up public-sector dues collections , limit employees ' ability to cut off the unions representing their workplaces , and `` deter the federal government 's attempts to dismantle unions . ''\n`` Too often , and at the hands of this federal administration , we are seeing the labor movement going backwards β¦ our efforts to protect working men and women are moving labor forward , making the workplace fairer and more just than ever before , '' Governor Cuomo said in a statement . `` We will not let this federal administration silence New York 's working class , we will support every voice in every community and in every industry , and we will do everything in our power to protect the right to achieve the American Dream . ''\nThe law would automatically reenroll workers into labor organizations each year and bolster union officials ' ability to approach new hires . New York has the highest union membership rate in the countryβone in four workers belong to labor groups , more than double the national rate of 10.7 percent , according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics . The Janus case could deal a heavy blow to New York unions . An analysis from the Empire Center for Public Policy estimated they could lose as much as $ 110 million if workers win the right to withdraw their support .\nBig Labor has been one of Cuomo 's strongest financial supporters . Union organizations have donated about $ 2 million to his campaigns , according Project Vote Smart . The Cuomo administration did not return requests for comment about the legislation .\nCuomo said the Janus case is designed to hurt workers ' collective bargaining rights . He praised public-sector unions as an `` equalizer '' in a speech to labor leaders as he signed the bill into law .\n`` You are the equalizer at the bargaining table during collective bargaining and they do n't want that , '' he said . Republicans `` want more power in the hands of management so they can exploit the worker . ''\nLabor watchdogs criticized Cuomo for using the legislation to prop up his political allies . Vinnie Vernuccio , a labor policy expert at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy , said it would `` trap '' government workers .\n`` Gov . Cuomo is trying to circumvent a Supreme Court case before it 's even decided to trap public employees into paying union dues , '' he said . `` Gov . Cuomo in New York and other states are looking to do anything they can for unions to keep collecting forced dues including making arbitrary windows in which workers can exercise their rights . ''\nPeter List , a former union organizer who now works as a labor consultant , said Cuomo 's bill should be seen in light of his tough primary fight with Sex and the City actress Cynthia Nixon .\n`` Cuomo 's action is nothing more than a not-so-hidden attempt to curry favor with his union backers . He needs the union bosses in his back pocket as he tries to fend off Cynthia Nixon . This action does that , '' List said in an email . `` Meanwhile , it puts New York State 's public-sector employers into the position of being likely accomplices in potentially circumventing whatever the Supreme Court rules in the Janus decision . ''\nGreg Mourad , vice president of the National Right to Work Committee , called the bill `` shameful . ''\n`` This is a shameful handout to the union bosses that fund the campaigns of Governor Cuomo and his allies , all at the expense of taxpayers and independent workers who would never join or financially support a union if it were actually voluntary . ''\nCuomo said he hopes the legislation inspires other states to take measures to safeguard union privilegesβsimilar legislation has passed in New Jersey as well .\n`` We 're going to be the state that shows how to mobilize and how to win , '' he said .
|
allsides-corpus-267
|
Like more than half of Americans , I live in the suburbs . Luckily , I don β t have to commute to the city every dayβor even wear pantsβbecause I β m a writer . But if I had a real job , it would take me well over an hour to get from my door to βββ β s offices . As it is , going into New York City for a meeting starts with a 12-minute walk from my house to the commuter rail . That train takes 38 minutes to get to Grand Central station . I then spend about six minutes walking up and down various ramps to get to a subway . The subway takes about eight minutes to get to Port Authority . From there it β s a 10-minute walk to the office . And that β s when everything is running on time . Everything takes longer if it β s raining or snowing or if I β m hungover . The whole process has to be reverse engineered to get home . Ad Policy\nThat was before the coronavirus . Now commuting to a meeting takes one minute from my bedroom door to my desk chair . Sometimes I take the scenic route and chat with my wife on my way to work . I β ve gone two months without being within coughing distance of any office . Why would I ever go back ? Why would anybody ? Office workers have known forever that spending hours per day commuting is nonessential and a gigantic waste of time .\nSuburban living isn β t a phase . It β s not new . Americans have been moving to the suburbs for nearly a century . That trend has had all sorts of deleterious social and political ramifications . Urban decay , white flight , housing market bubbles , and massively unequal school resources are just a few of the ills caused by suburbanization . And don β t even get me started on the anodyne , sterile , normative consumerist β culture β championed by the suburban ideal .\nIt would be good for the country if the suburbs were razed to the studs and the land returned to nature . But since that β s not going to happen , the pandemic is a great opportunity to finally bring our work expectations in line with how and where people actually live .\nDespite technological advances that would look like magic to Alexander Graham Bell , we β ve remained tied to an Industrial Revolution idea of workers showing up to the giant widget place so an overseer can motivate them to produce profits . Many nonservice industries have had the technology to exist without a centralized office for 30 years , and over the past 20 , the Internet could have made a central office nearly obsolete . But until 10 weeks ago , most people were trudging in to work every day . Current Issue View our current issue\nThat β s maddening because , while the technology is there to allow many people to work from home , the infrastructure is not there to support the overwhelming and ever-increasing number of commuters . Our infrastructure hasn β t kept up with our suburban expansion ( or any expansion , really ) . Our bridges and tunnels are crumbling . Our trains and buses are so inefficient that Europeans wonder why we don β t set them aflame in riots . Our roads and highways are poisonous parking lots warming the planet one traffic jam at a time .\nThe negative environmental impact of commuting is undeniable . Studies show that the average drive to work adds 4.3 metric tons of carbon to the atmosphere a yearβper car . If everyone in the US drove just 10 percent less , it would have the equivalent environmental effect of taking 28 coal-fueled power plants off-line for a year . And let β s not forget : Commuting is unhealthy . People with longer commutes tend to be less physically active and have higher rates of obesity and high blood pressure . Every commuter has been told to take the stairs as a way to build in some daily exercise , but β don β t spend three hours a day sitting on a train β is also solid physical fitness advice .\nAnd that β s where we were before Covid-19 made us more aware that our public transportation systems are petri dishes for communicable diseases . One of the most mind-blowing moments in the whole pandemic was when New York City announced , triumphantly , that it would start bleaching its subway cars every night . I did not know until that moment that I had spent most of my life riding around in yesterday β s filth , not just today β s . I β m going to need a hazmat suit before I get on the subway again .\nI simply can not fathom a world in which the pandemic is declared over and everybody starts commuting to work again . I do not think that we can go back to expecting people to fork over hours and hours a day sitting in traffic or trapped on a disease tube simply because they have a meeting . Zoom or Skype or Google Hangouts might not be the ideal way to conduct face-to-face business , but the lockdown has shown that any number of daily , mind-numbing check-in meetings can be handled remotely . More from Mystal Bill de Blasio Has Failed the Test of This Moment Elie Mystal\nThere will be resistance to allowing people to work from home after the pandemic has passed . What β s the point of having a sweet corner office if nobody β s there to cower outside it ? Working from home robs many bosses and brownnosers of some of their favorite methods for doling out favors and establishing loyalty . When everybody is working remotely , the work kind of has to stand for itself . But that β s a bad paradigm if you β re a talentless man who has your job only because your dad and the boss are golfing buddies . There are a lot of people whose only professional skill is laughing at their boss β s jokes at happy hour , and those people can β t wait to get back to the office .\nBut the raw efficiency of working from home will , with any luck , cause most offices to embrace working remotely . Now that people have had this taste of managing their own time like the adults they β ve always been , dragging them back into a daily routine of inefficiency and health risks will be hard . Telecommuting was one of the big ideas to emerge in the late 20th century . In the post-pandemic 21st century , it might finally become a reality .
|
allsides-corpus-268
|
John O. Brennan , President Obama β s pick to lead the CIA , defended the administration β s drone execution program before Congress on Thursday , saying that in war the commander in chief has the right to order a targeted killing β but agreeing that Congress should be more involved in knowing what is happening .\nMr. Brennan , who is Mr. Obama β s homeland security adviser and is considered one of the key architects of the war on terrorism in recent years , also said he is not sure whether interrogation techniques such as waterboarding produced any valuable information from suspected terrorist detainees .\nIn a hearing interrupted repeatedly by anti-war protesters , Mr. Brennan denied he had leaked classified information to reporters and told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that he will try to work with Capitol Hill so that lawmakers are aware of the administration β s operations in the war on terrorism .\nSenators homed in on targeted killings by armed unmanned aerial vehicles , begun under President George W. Bush and dramatically expanded by Mr. Obama . The drone program has come under scrutiny after the Obama administration used it to kill an American citizen living in Yemen .\nβ I understand you can β t have co-commanders in chief , but having the executive being the prosecutor , the judge , the jury and the executioner all in one is very contrary to the traditions and the laws of this country , β said Sen. Angus S. King Jr. , Maine independent .\nMr. Brennan replied that this was not a judicial proceeding .\nβ The actions that we take on the counterterrorism front , again , are to take actions against individuals where we believe that the intelligence base is so strong and the nature of the threat is so grave and serious , as well as imminent , that we have no recourse except to take this action that may involve a lethal strike , β he said .\nWith some senators threatening to delay Mr. Brennan β s nomination to be CIA director until more information is disclosed , the White House late Wednesday said it would provide to the committee legal memos detailing advice about the drone program .\nNBC News this week obtained and released a 16-page Justice Department memo laying out the legal justification for the program .\nThree Americans are known to have been killed by the program β all of them in Yemen and all by missile strikes from drones .\nThe three are radical Islamic preacher Anwar al-Awlaki , a senior leader in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula ( AQAP ) ; his 16-year-old son , Abdulrahman al-Awlaki ; and AQAP propagandist Samir Khan .\nU.S. officials have said that al-Awlaki was targeted directly only because he had an β operational role β in recruiting and training suicide terrorists including the Nigerian would-be β underwear bomber β Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab . The other two were killed in strikes targeting other AQAP leaders .\nSeveral Republicans closely questioned Mr. Brennan about leaks to the news media regarding Obama administration national security successes . Mr. Brennan denied that he was the source of any of them .\nβ I never provided classified information to reporters , β Mr. Brennan said . He added that his contacts with the news media were arranged by the White House press office and aimed at explaining administration policy .\nSen. Ron Wyden , Oregon Democrat , told the hearing that Congress , and eventually the American public , needed to see the documents outlining the legal basis for the targeted-killing program .\nβ We β ve got to see any and all opinions before the vote β on the nomination , Mr. Wyden said .\nHe also called for the legal opinions to be made public so that Americans could judge for themselves the exact extent of the authority President Obama asserts to kill U.S. citizens without charge or trial if they are senior al Qaeda leaders who can not be captured .\nβ What it really goes to is the issue of checks and balances , β he said .\nMr. King asked Mr. Brennan to allow the judicial branch to oversee targeted killings of U.S. citizens , as it authorized intelligence surveillance against Americans , through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ( FISA ) court β a secret tribunal that grants warrants for the electronic and physical surveillance of Americans suspected of espionage or terrorism .\nβ I would like to suggest to you that you consider a FISA court-type process , where an American citizen is going to be targeted for a lethal strike , β Mr. King told Mr. Brennan .\nβ At least that would be some check , β Mr. King said . β I have great confidence in you . I have great confidence in President Obama . But all the lessons of history are , it shouldn β t matter who β s in charge , because we should have procedures and processes in place that will protect us . β\nSome Republicans asked Mr. Brennan whether the administration β s expanded use of the lethal strikes by remotely piloted drone aircraft grew from its decision to abjure the capture , detention and harsh interrogation techniques employed by the Bush administration .\nβ Is your testimony today that the huge increase in the number of lethal strikes has no connection to the change in the Obama administration β s detention policy ? β said Sen. Susan M. Collins , Maine Republican . β Because obviously , if we β re capturing a terrorist , we have the opportunity to interrogate that individual and perhaps learn of ongoing plots . But if the strike is done , that opportunity is lost . β\nβ There β s never been occasion that I β m aware of where we had the opportunity to capture a terrorist and we didn β t and we decided to take a lethal strike , β replied Mr. Brennan . β So certainly there is no correlation there . β\nHe added that the expanding use of drones was in part a result of β the maturation of capabilities and insights into [ al Qaeda ] plots as a result of the investment that was made in the previous administration . β\nOther Republicans focused on questioning Mr. Brennan about administration leaks to the media .\nβ I engaged in discussions with reporters about classified issues that they might have had access to because of unfortunate leaks of classified information , and I frequently work with reporters , if not editors of newspapers , to keep out of the public domain some of this country β s most important secrets , β Mr. Brennan said .\nβ Whenever I deal with reporters , I do so at the request of the White House press office and they set the ground rules , β he said .\nHe said that he voluntary cooperated with the Department of Justice investigation into the leak of information about a double agent inside al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula ( AQAP ) who helped U.S. and allied agencies foil an underwear bomb plot .\nMr. Brennan said he had β been interviewed on it β and his office turned over β all relevant materials , β including any notes of the conference call .\nHe denied that a statement he made in a conference call with former officials last year about the plot had compromised intelligence sources and methods .\nThe call had been arranged because the former officials were all going on news programs to discuss the foiling of the plot , which targeted U.S. aviation .\nMr. Brennan said , in a statement later repeated publicly by several of the former officials , that the United States had β inside control β of the plot and that the underwear bomb was never a threat to American aviation .\nLater that day , news agencies broke the story that an a U.S. allied agency had an agent inside the AQAP cell planning the bombing .\nMr. Brennan said he needed to explain that the U.S. had β inside control , β because during the time of the plot β around the first anniversary of the Navy SEAL raid on Osama bin Laden β s compound in Pakistan β he and other officials had reassured that there was no specific actionable intelligence about threats or plots .\nβ We had said publicly that there was no active plot at the time of the bin Laden anniversary , β he said .\nMr. Brennan is a 25-year career intelligence officer who served in the Bush administration as the first head of the National Counterterrorism Center . In 2008 , he was a close adviser to Mr. Obama in the Senate .
|
allsides-corpus-269
|
In his first major policy speech Wednesday , Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel signaled he will be taking a hard look at the way the Pentagon spends its money and at whether the US military needs quite so many officers .\nHe also said that while the US military β remains an essential tool of American power , β it is also β one that must be used judiciously , with a keen appreciation of its limits . β\nSpeaking at the National Defense University in Washington , Secretary Hagel invoked the memory of President Dwight Eisenhower , who came up as a young officer in the wake of the Great Depression . He noted that the World War II general spoke at the same university 50 years ago .\nβ The wise and prudent administration of the vast resources required by defense calls for extraordinary skill in meshing the military , political , economic , and social machinery of our modern life , β Hagel said , quoting Eisenhower . β So the greatest effective use is made of resources with a minimum of waste and misapplication . β\nNow that the β gusher β of war-time military spending is turned off , Hagel said , top Pentagon officials will be taking a hard look at some key spending areas .\nThis speech signaled precisely what those areas will be : acquisitions , personnel costs , and overhead .\nβ Left unchecked , spiraling costs to sustain existing structures and institutions , provide benefits to personnel , and develop replacements for aging weapons platforms will eventually crowd out spending on procurement , operations , and readiness Ββ the budget categories that enable the military to be and stay prepared , β Hagel warned .\nThis will mean taking a hard look at Pentagon employees , including β how many people we have β military and civilian β how many we need , what these people do , and how we compensate them for their work , service , and loyalty with pay , benefits and health care . β\nThis will in turn prompt β tough questions , β Hagel concedes , including `` what is the right mix of civilians and military , and whether the force has the right balance of officers and enlisted . β\nMuch of the DOD β s organizational chart dates back β to the early days of the Cold War , β Hagel said , noting that the last major defense reorganization was drafted during the height of the Reagan defense buildup .\nWhile the military β is not , and never should be , run like a corporation , β Hagel noted , there is a danger that the DOD could go from β an agency protecting the nation to an agency administering benefit programs , capable of buying only limited quantities of irrelevant and overpriced equipment . β\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nThat β s because too often the weapons systems that Pentagon officials buy β are vastly more expensive and technologically risky than what was promised or budgeted for. β And the hard truth is that the most pressing problems the world faces β do not necessarily lend themselves to being resolved by conventional military strength , β he said .\nβ Indeed the most destructive and horrific attack ever on the United States came not from fleets of ships , bombers , and armored divisions , but from 19 fanatical men wielding box cutters and one-way plane tickets . ''
|
allsides-corpus-270
|
Obama said he 's not like Cheney during a closed-door Senate Democratic conference . | AP Photos Obama on drones : I 'm not Cheney\nPresident Barack Obama β s defense to Democratic senators complaining about how little his administration has told Congress about the legal justifications for his drone policy : Dick Cheney was worse .\nThat β s part of what two senators in the room recounted of Obama β s response when , near the outset of his closed-door session with the Senate Democratic conference on Tuesday , Sen. Jay Rockefeller ( D-W.Va. ) confronted the president over the administration β s refusal for two years to show congressional intelligence committees Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel memos justifying the use of lethal force against American terror suspects abroad .\nObama recently allowed members of those panels to see the memos , but only after senators in both parties threatened to hold up the confirmation of John Brennan as Central Intelligence Agency director . Brennan was confirmed last week , but lawmakers not on one of the intelligence panels are still being denied access to the memos and several are steamed over being frozen out .\nIn response to Rockefeller β s critique , Obama said he β s not involved in drafting such memos , the senators told βββ . He also tried to assure his former colleagues that his administration is more open to oversight than that of President George W. Bush , whom many Democratic senators attacked for secrecy and for expanding executive power in the national security realm .\nβ This is not Dick Cheney we β re talking about here , β he said , according to Democratic senators who asked not to be named discussing the private meeting .\nTwo Obama administration officials , who asked not to be named , confirmed Rockefeller raised the drone oversight issue with the president at the session . The White House had no comment on Obama β s alleged reference to the former vice president .\nWhile Obama defended his handling of the issue , he told his former Senate colleagues he understood their concerns about being left out of the loop on such sensitive decisions , senators said . The president noted that he would have β probably objected β over the White House β s handling of this issue if he were still a senator , they said . But , according to the sources , he noted his viewpoint changed now that he occupies the Oval Office β not a room in a Senate office building .
|
allsides-corpus-271
|
In the end , President Obama was forced to listen to his generals β not his political instincts β on Afghanistan troop levels , and he decided to split the difference .\nMr. Obama is keeping 5,500 troops in Afghanistan beyond his presidency , about half the strength recommended by his top general in-country . It marks the sixth time he has rejected the advice of a ground commander on the force size in the long Iraq and Afghanistan wars . Military experts call that streak unprecedented for a commander in chief .\nLike the current 9,800 U.S. troops there , the drawdown force of 5,500 will maintain a noncombat stance in training Afghan forces and hunting al Qaeda terrorists , Mr. Obama said Thursday . Administration officials said the U.S. will spend about $ 14.6 billion a year to house the troops at a total of four bases in Kabul , Kandahar , Jalalabad and Bagram β an increase over the estimated $ 10 billion annual cost of keeping a force at the U.S. Embassy in the Afghan capital .\nThe president had wanted to deliver a speech saying that all American troops were out of Afghanistan at the end of next year , as he did in 2011 for the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq . But he was swayed by the dark picture of the Afghan conflict that the top brass has been drawing for him , and now Mr. Obama will pass the war onto the next president in 2017 .\nThe battlefield facts delivered to the White House by Army Gen. John Campbell , the top NATO commander in Afghanistan , and other generals :\nβ’ The Taliban mounted a ferocious offensive in the 2015 β fighting season β that took a heavy casualty toll on the shaky Afghan National Security Forces .\nβ’ Those forces still lack competent leaders to win decisive battles without American troops to guide them .\nβ’ A new enemy has emerged , the ultraviolent Islamic State ( also known as ISIL or ISIS ) in a province next door to Kabul , the Afghan capital . This confronted the elected government with new security threats , especially the terrorist army β s trademark vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices .\nβ The security situation in Afghanistan is so far from stable that to pull out all the troops , even for this president , doesn β t make any sense , β said retired Army Gen. John Keane , who devised the 2007 Iraq troop surge and has advised Afghan commanders in the past .\nMr. Keane , whose guidance is sought by Congress , said Gen. Campbell wanted to retain the current force of 9,800 , but Mr. Obama β cut that in half . β\nβ He still does not listen to his combat field general , who wanted the current force to remain as is , β Mr. Keane said . β Quite unprecedented , this is the sixth time President Obama has not listened to a field commander recommendation on force levels for troops in combat . β\nThe six times : Mr. Obama rejected a recommendation from Army Gen. Lloyd Austin , chief of U.S. Central Command , to keep about 20,000 troops in Iraq ; at five transition points in Afghanistan , he approved troop numbers below those urged by commanders .\nStill , Mr. Obama did compromise on troops and infrastructure instead of ordering the complete withdrawal he had wanted .\nβ The goodness in this decision are the four bases , β Mr. Keane said . β If he had reduced it to one base , which they were thinking of doing , that would be a disaster .\nβ The four bases permits the military to conduct counterterrorism operations in the east , south and in vicinity of the capital , which is absolutely critical , one of the crucial capabilities we lost when we pulled all troops out of Iraq , β he said . β Also , the four bases permits the next president to expand the troop presence rapidly based on the security situation 15 months from now .\nβ What suffers as a result of this decision is the train-and-assist mission , because we won β t have sufficient troops to do it properly , β the retired general said .\nTrain-and-assist is one of three major missions now carried out by American forces . The other two : advise and accompany Afghan forces on counterterrorism operations and provide force protection .\nOn Thursday , the administration defended the president against criticism that he ignored the advice of his top military advisers , with White House press secretary Josh Earnest saying that Mr. Obama β s decision is β consistent with β Gen. Campbell β s recommendation .\nIt is likely that Gen. Campbell β s communications with the White House in recent months mirrored the somber report he delivered Oct. 6 to the Senate Armed Services Committee .\nThere he spoke of a β struggling β Afghan force that faced its longest fighting season as the Taliban began early β in February . In the east , the Islamic State β further complicated the theater landscape and potentially expanded the conflict , β Gen. Campbell said .\nAll the while , he said , the Afghans lacked the robust U.S. air power they had come to rely on to arrive on the scene in minutes and deliver precision fire . Such air support β is no longer the norm but the exception , β he said .\nThe commander β s report card on the Afghan force : β They must improve their intelligence fusion , command and control utilization of their forces . They don β t possess the necessary combat power and numbers to protect every part of the country . This makes it very difficult for the Afghan security forces to counter the Taliban β s ability to temporarily seize an objective and then blend back into the population . β\nMarine Corps General Joseph Dunford , the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , is now Mr. Obama β s chief military adviser .\nDuring his July confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee , Gen. Dunford all but broke with the president β s then-desire to pull all troops out by the end of 2016 . One could extrapolate from his answers to questions from committee Chairman John McCain , Arizona Republican , that he would attempt to talk the president out of that plan .\nβ Is this a wise decision on your part to have a calendar-based withdrawal of American troops rather than a condition-based withdrawal given your background and experience there ? β Mr. McCain asked Gen. Dunford , a former Afghan NATO commander .\nβ I β m aware of the consequences of our mission and importance of our mission in Afghanistan , β the general answered . β I can assure you , if I β m confirmed , I β ll provide advice to the president that will allow us to meet our desired end state . And I think that that will be based on the conditions on the ground , as you β ve articulated . β\nMr. McCain said Thursday β it makes no military sense to withdraw U.S. forces β below the current 9,800 .\nβ Once again , President Obama is putting our mission in Afghanistan , as well as our men and women serving there , at greater risk , and he is doing so for the sake of a troop reduction that has no political benefit but could have significant military implications , β he said .
|
allsides-corpus-272
|
Iran , Israel , Defense Cuts To Be Key Topics At Hagel Hearing\nWhat 's shaping up to be one of the more contentious nomination hearings for one of President Obama 's cabinet choices is set to open at 9:30 a.m . ET when members of the Senate Committee on Armed Services get their chance to publicly grill former Sen. Chuck Hagel , R-Neb. , who has been tapped for the post of defense secretary .\nAs Ari Shapiro reported on Morning Edition , Obama 's choices of Hagel , Sen. John Kerry , D-Mass. , for secretary of state , and counterterrorism adviser John Brennan for CIA director , `` represent a shift in the way the U.S. wages war . It 's a shift from big to small , from the Pentagon to the CIA . ''\nBut today 's Hagel hearing , as Defense News writes , is expected to be dominated by the issues of Israel , Iran and looming defense budget cuts and sharp questions about the nominees views :\n`` Since Hagel 's name was floated for the post in early December , Hagel has been sharply criticized by his former fellow-GOP senators and pro-Israel groups for his past comments on the U.S.-Israel alliance , whether the Pentagon budget can and should be trimmed , how to confront Iran over its nuclear arms program , gay rights and the proper size of the U.S. nuclear arms fleet . Expect questions on all those topics . ''\nAccording to the Los Angeles Times , Hagel `` will stress at his confirmation hearing Thursday that he opposes letting Iran acquire nuclear weapons and will focus on developing military options to set back Tehran 's program , according to a U.S. official familiar with his planned testimony . ''\nThe conventional wisdom in Washington seems to be that after some initial doubts , it 's now likely Hagel will be confirmed . The Washington Post 's The Fix blog this morning suggests there are `` 5 senators to watch '' during the hearing : Sen. Ted Cruz , R-Texas ; Sen. Kirstin Gillibrand , D-N.Y. ; Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. ; Sen. Jim Inhofe , R-Okla. ; and Sen. John McCain , R-Ariz .\nWe 'll monitor the hearing and post highlights later . C-SPAN.org will be streaming here .\nUpdate at 10:45 a.m . ET . Early News From The Hearing :\nHagel : 'No One Individual Vote , Quote Or Statement Defines Me '
|
allsides-corpus-273
|
Hagel β s nomination now proceeds to the Senate floor . | John Shinkle/βββ Hagel nomination clears Senate committee\nSplitting along party lines , the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 14-11 on Tuesday to advance Chuck Hagel β s nomination after a tense two-hour meeting that closed the latest chapter in a weeks-long political saga .\nThe nomination heads to the full Senate , where Republicans may demand a 60-vote threshold in a vote expected later this week .\nDemocrats and Republicans broke sharply over whether the former Republican senator from Nebraska is the right man to run the Pentagon . Supporters cited Hagel β s experience as an enlisted soldier in Vietnam and his service in the Senate and elsewhere as reasons he should succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta while opponents stuck with their criticisms about Hagel β s past positions on Iran , Israel and the defense budget .\nA few Republicans kept up their bid to stop Hagel β s nomination from moving ahead , arguing he has kept some information from the committee , but Democrats insisted that he has satisfied its disclosure requirements and accused Republicans of tarring Hagel unfairly .\nSen. Bill Nelson ( D-Fla. ) said Sen. Ted Cruz ( R-Texas ) had `` gone over the line '' and `` basically ... impugned the patriotism of the nominee β by pointing out that the Iranian Foreign Ministry had praised Hagel .\nThe top Republican on the committee , Sen. Jim Inhofe ( R-Okla. ) , shot back later in defense of Cruz , `` You do n't get any cozier than that . ''\nFormer ranking member Sen. John McCain ( R-Ariz. ) interjected soon thereafter with a message for his colleagues : `` Sen. Hagel is an honorable man who has served his country , and no one on this committee at any time should impugn his character , '' McCain said .\nBut for most of the meeting , senators referred to Hagel β s late January confirmation hearing . McCain slammed Hagel β s performance as β the worst I have seen of any nomination for office β and said it was β disturbing β that Hagel would not directly respond to his question about whether the Iraq surge was a success . Democrats said the criticism of Hagel β s day in the spotlight was unfair , and they defended his description of a policy of β containment β for a nuclear Iran β which the White House does not support β as a simple slip of the tongue .\nApart from the politics involved with Hagel himself , Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin ( D-Mich. ) had warned senators that rejecting him would endanger the Pentagon at a time it could ill afford another complication .\nβ If there β s a risk here , it is that the defeat of this nomination would leave the Department of Defense leaderless at a time when we face immense budgetary challenges and our military is engaged in combat operations overseas , '' Levin said .\nWhile he acknowledged that many senators oppose President Barack Obama 's foreign policy , `` our vote on Sen. Hagel 's nomination will not change those policies . ''\nThe meeting ultimately proved civil compared with what might have been β Republican aides had suggested earlier that some GOP senators were considering walking out to protest what they called Hagel β s insufficient financial disclosures . Inhofe and Cruz later ruled that out .\nβ I don β t think anything is gained by theatrics , β Cruz told βββ .\nJust the same , Republicans continued to try to put on the brakes . Louisiana Sen. David Vitter quarreled with Levin over what Vitter said was an incomplete disclosure from Hagel of past speeches , and Cruz renewed the GOP line of questioning about whether Hagel had taken payments from β foreign sources . β\nHagel β s nomination now proceeds to the Senate floor , where Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid ( D-Nev. ) has said he hopes the chamber could vote on it Wednesday or Thursday .\nSome Republicans said they might continue to oppose Hagel before the full Senate , but Reid responded with a single word on Tuesday when asked whether he β d honor an attempt at a hold : β No . β\nWith 55 Democrats controlling the Senate and two Republicans β Mike Johanns of Nebraska and Thad Cochran of Mississippi β already publicly supporting Hagel , only three more Republicans would need to support him for confirmation under a request from Republicans for a 60-vote threshold .\nInhofe said Monday night that he would not use his privilege to delay Hagel β s confirmation into the weekend or early next week , so long as Democrats produced 60 votes upfront to support Hagel .\nThis article first appeared on βββ Pro at 5:05 p.m. on February 12 , 2013 .
|
allsides-corpus-274
|
A federal appeals court Thursday ruled in favor of faith-based nonprofits who fought Obamacare β s birth control rules , dealing an elusive victory to religious employers who now have a stronger hand in urging the Supreme Court to shield them from the administration β s β contraception mandate . β\nIn a pair of opinions , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit sided with religious universities and ministries that object to insuring contraceptives they equate with abortion and feel that opt-out routes provided by the Department of Health and Human Services keep them complicit in sin .\nThe rulings upheld a lower court β s finding and marked a significant break from other circuit rulings that said HHS β s efforts to accommodate the groups were sufficient .\nUnder HHS rules , religious employers who object to covering birth control must notify an insurer , plan administrator or the government in writing so that a third party can manage and pay for the coverage .\nβ If one equates the self-certification process with , say , that of obtaining a parade permit , then indeed the burden might well be considered light . But if one sincerely believes that completing [ the opt-out form ] or HHS Notice will result in conscience-violating consequences , what some might consider an otherwise neutral act is a burden too heavy to bear , β wrote Judge Roger L. Wollman , an appointee of President Ronald Reagan , joined by judges William D. Benton and Steven M. Colloton , both appointees of President George W. Bush .\nThe contraception mandate is an outgrowth of the Affordable Care Act of 2010 that requires employers to cover 20 types of FDA-approved drugs and services as part of their health plans or else pay hefty fines . Pitched as a boon for women β s health , the rules quickly spawned controversy , with dozens of religious nonprofits and devout business owners filing suit .\nMany Catholic employers object to all forms of contraception , while evangelical groups and others say they β re only opposed to morning-after pills they equate with abortion .\nFamily owned for-profits were victorious before the Supreme Court last year , forcing HHS to draft an accommodation for them . The same rules that HHS drafted for religious nonprofits now apply to the closely held companies , although they must meet certain standards .\nPlaintiffs on the nonprofit side are not satisfied though . They want the same blanket exemption from the mandate that houses of worship enjoy .\nSeveral faith-based nonprofits have asked the justices to take up their case in the coming term .\nWith a circuit split in hand , they β ve got a much better shot at grabbing the court β s attention .\nβ The government keeps telling the Supreme Court β Move along , nothing important here β in hopes that the court will ignore this crucial issue . But with today β s decisions , the court will have great reason to decide this issue in the next term , β said Lori Windham , senior counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty .\nThe Eighth Circuit cited the justices β holding in the for-profit case , known as β Hobby Lobby , β that enforcing the mandate violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act β a bipartisan 1993 law that says the government had to have a compelling interest in carrying out a law that substantially burdens a person β s religious beliefs , and must do so in the least restrictive way possible .\nUnlike other circuits , Thursday β s panel said the HHS accommodation presented a substantial burden on faith-based nonprofits .\nCiting the 2014 decision , the panel said β it is not our role to second-guess [ the plaintiffs β ] honest assessment of a β difficult and important question of religion and moral philosophy , namely , the circumstances under which it is wrong for a person to perform an act that is innocent in itself but that has the effect of enabling or facilitating the commission of an immoral act by another . β β\nBrigitte Amiri , a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union β s Reproductive Freedom Project , said she disagreed with the decision but acknowledged that it increases the likelihood that the justices will take up one of the faith group β s cases .\nβ Although we all have the right to our religious beliefs , those beliefs can not be used to harm or discriminate against others , β she said . β Today β s decision is also an outlier β all of the other seven courts of appeals to consider the issue have found that the accommodation available for nonprofit organizations does not substantially burden the employers β religious beliefs . β\nThursday β s ruling addressed lawsuits from Dordt College in Iowa , Heartland Christian College in Missouri and CNS International Ministries , Inc. ( CNS ) , a Missouri nonprofit that helps people with substance abuse and behavioral problems .\nThe groups said intrauterine devices ( IUDs ) and emergency contraceptives covered by the mandate are the same as β abortion on demand . β
|
allsides-corpus-275
|
Despite barely beating a midnight deadline , hundreds of jeering protesters helped stop Texas lawmakers from passing one of the toughest abortion measures in the country .\nAs the protesters raised the noise to deafening levels in the Texas Senate chamber late Tuesday , Republicans scrambled to gather their colleagues at the podium for a stroke-of-midnight vote .\n`` Get them out ! '' Sen. Donna Campbell shouted to a security guard , pointing to the thundering crowd in the gallery overhead that had already been screaming for more than 10 minutes .\n`` Time is running out , '' Campbell pleaded . `` I want them out of here ! ''\nIt did n't work . The noise never stopped and despite barely beating the midnight end-of-session deadline with a vote to pass the bill , Lt. Gov . David Dewhurst said the chaos in the chamber prevented him from formally signing it before the deadline passed , effectively killing it .\nDewhurst denounced the protesters as an `` unruly mob . '' Democrats who urged them on called the outburst democracy in action .\nIn either point of view , a raucous crowd of chanting , singing , shouting demonstrators effectively took over the Texas Capitol and blocked a bill that abortion rights groups warned would close most abortion clinics in the state .\n`` They were asking for their voices to be heard , '' said Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth , who spent nearly 11 hours trying to filibuster the bill before the outburst . `` The results speak for themselves . ''\nInitially , Republicans insisted the vote started before the midnight deadline and passed the bill that Democrats spent the day trying to kill . But after official computer records and printouts of the voting record showed the vote took place Wednesday , and then were changed to read Tuesday , senators retreated into a private meeting to reach a conclusion .\nAt 3 a.m. , Dewhurst emerged from the meeting still insisting the 19-10 vote was in time , but said , `` with all the ruckus and noise going on , I could n't sign the bill '' and declared it dead .\nHe denounced the more than 400 protesters who staged what they called `` a people 's filibuster '' from 11:45 p.m. to well past midnight . He denied mishandling the debate .\n`` I did n't lose control ( of the chamber ) . We had an unruly mob , '' Dewhurst said . He even hinted that Gov . Rick Perry may immediately call another 30-day special session , adding : `` It 's over . It 's been fun . But see you soon . ''\nMany of the protesters had flocked to the normally quiet Capitol to support Davis , who gained national attention and a mention from President Barack Obama 's campaign Twitter account . Her Twitter following went from 1,200 in the morning to more than 20,000 by Tuesday night .\n`` My back hurts . I do n't have a lot of words left , '' Davis said when it was over and she was showered with cheers by activists who stayed at the Capitol to see her . `` It shows the determination and spirit of Texas women . ''\nDavis ' mission was cut short . Lt. Gov . David Dewhurst halted the filibuster after determining Davis had strayed off the topic when she talked about a sonogram bill passed in 2011 and how the new abortion restrictions only compounded the anti-abortion laws in Texas . Democrats immediately appealed the decision and set off a heated debate over rules . At one point , Austin Democratic Sen. Kirk Watson appeared to be positioning himself to launch a new filibuster on Dewhurst 's decision .\nBut Davis ' effort ultimately helped Democrats earn a rare victory in a Legislature dominated by Republicans for more than a decade .\n`` It 's a bad bill , '' said Sen. Watson , leader of the Senate Democrats .\nThe bill would ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy and force many clinics that perform the procedure to upgrade their facilities and be classified as ambulatory surgical centers . Also , doctors would be required to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles β a tall order in rural communities .\nIf signed into law , the measures would have closed almost every abortion clinic in Texas , a state 773 miles wide and 790 miles long with 26 million people . A woman living along the Mexico border or in West Texas would have to drive hundreds of miles to obtain an abortion if the law passed . The law 's provision that abortions be performed at surgical centers means only five of Texas ' 42 abortion clinics are currently designated to remain in operation .\nRepublicans and anti-abortion groups insisted their goal was to improve women 's health care , but also acknowledged wanting clinics to close .\n`` If this passes , abortion would be virtually banned in the state of Texas , and many women could be forced to resort to dangerous and unsafe measures , '' said Cecile Richards , president of Planned Parenthood Action Fund and daughter of the late former Texas governor Ann Richards .\nThe showdown came after Davis had slogged her way through about 11 hours of speaking while Senate Republicans β and several House members β watched and listened for any slipup that would allow them to end the filibuster and call a vote .\nDemocrats chose Davis , of Fort Worth , to lead the effort because of her background ; she had her first child as a teenager and went on to graduate from Harvard Law School .\nRules stipulated she remain standing , not lean on her desk or take any breaks β even for meals or to use the bathroom . But she also was required to stay on topic , and Republicans pointed out a mistake and later protested again when another lawmaker helped her with a back brace .\nLawmakers can vote to end a filibuster after three sustained points of order . As tension mounted over Davis ' speech and the dwindling clock , Campbell , a first-term lawmaker from New Braunfels , made the call on the third violation , sparking nearly two hours of debate on how to handle it .\nAfter much back and forth and senators shouting over each other , the Republican majority forced a vote to end the filibuster minutes before midnight , sparking the raucous response from protesters .\nSenate security and several Department of Public Safety state troopers tried to quiet the crowd but were simply outnumbered and had no hope of stopping the outburst .\nSen. Dan Patrick , R-Houston , blamed the confusion surrounding the final vote on the demonstrators and Democratic senators who urged them on .\n`` Had that not happened , everyone would have known , '' what was happening , Patrick said .\nStanding next to him was Sen. Juan `` Chuy '' Hinojosa , a Democrat .\n`` This is democracy , '' Hinojosa said . `` They have a right to speak . ''\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy
|
allsides-corpus-276
|
It β s not that Democrats support infanticide : They just aren β t against it . What other conclusion can one reach when 44 out of 47 Senate Democrats blocked the Senate from voting on a bill requiring that any baby who survives an abortion β in other words , a baby who was born β must be brought to a hospital for care and treated with β the same degree of professional skill , care , and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age . β\nWhoever intentionally performs or attempts to perform an overt act that kills a child born alive described under subsection ( a ) , shall be punishedβ¦ for intentionally killing or attempting to kill a human being .\nGood grief , who could object to that ? At least six want-to-be presidents β Kamala Harris , Bernie Sanders , Kirsten Gillibrand , Amy Klobuchar , Cory Booker , and Elizabeth Warren β did . That β s stunning .\nWe have been here before . During the height of the eugenics movement in the 1920s and 30s , activists sought to β improve β the human herd by preventing the so-called β unfit β from being born β generally through involuntary sterilization of those considered eugenically incorrect . Appallingly , some 60,000 people were involuntarily sterilized under color of law in the United States during the first half of the 20th century .\nSome famous advocates wanted to go even further , advocating the killing of babies who did not pass eugenics muster . For example , in his splendid history of the eugenics movement , War Against the Weak , Edwin Black reports that birth control advocate and social Darwinist Margaret Sanger , proudly spouted β the extreme eugenic view that human β weeds β should be β exterminated. β β Bizarrely , so did Helen Keller β as if the fact that her disabilities weren β t congenital would have protected her once the slaughter of the β defectives β began .\nSystematic infanticide was never legalized in the United States . But in Germany , doctors killed tens of thousands of disabled babies between 1939-1945 . It is important to note that Hitler did not force medical personnel to kill disabled babies ( although doctors and midwives were required legally to report their births ) . Rather , doctors who committed infanticide did so willingly , believing that their killing was a β healing treatment β for the child , the family , and the Reich .\nAfter the war , infanticide was scorned universally as evil . But now , that moral consensus has frayed . Indeed , one could say that infanticide is making a comeback .\nOne need only look at the world β s foremost medical and bioethics journals to see the trendline . Princeton University β s bioethics professor Peter Singer became famous by claiming that newborn babies are killable because they have not yet developed the cognitive capacities to be considered a β person. β He wrote in Rethinking Life and Death , β Since neither a newborn infant nor a fish is a person the wrongness of killing such beings is not as great as the wrongness of killing a person. β In other words , to Singer , a newborn infant is the moral equivalent of a mackerel .\nIn a 2010 Harvard symposium on abortion and infanticide , Singer tied infanticide to the legality of abortion : β The position that allows abortion also allows infanticide under some circumstances.β¦ If we accept abortion , we do need to rethink some of those more fundamental attitudes about human life . β\nIn another world and time , Singer β s advocacy would make him an intellectual outcast . Instead , far from being a fringe character , Singer is invited to present at seminars , symposia , and philosophy association conventions throughout the world . He is often quoted respectfully in the mainstream media , including frequently in New York Times , where he is also a recurring contributor .\nSinger is far from alone . A few years ago , the Journal of Medical Ethics published an advocacy article entitled , β After-Birth Abortion : Why Should the Baby Live ? β Consider the following quotes that the editors of one of the world β s most prestigious bioethics journals considered worthy of respectful dissemination :\nβ The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus , that is , neither can be considered a β person β in a morally relevant sense . β\nβ In spite of the oxymoron in the expression , we propose to call this practice β after-birth β abortion , β rather than β infanticide , β to emphasize that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetusβ¦ rather than that of a child . β\nβ We claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all circumstances where abortion would be . β\nβ Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life . β\nThe authors also claim that killing healthy and able-bodied babies should be allowable because , β we also need to consider the interests of the mother who might suffer psychological distress from giving up her child for adoption. β The mind boggles .\nAlas , infanticide has gone beyond mere advocacy in the modern world . For decades , China turned a blind eye to chronic female infanticide that resulted from its odious β one child policy , β recently abandoned because it led to a catastrophic demographic imbalance between males and females . India has also seen a problem with sex-selection β after-birth abortions . β\nThe Netherlands has embraced wartime Germany β s scorned policy of allowing babies born with terminal illnesses and serious disabilities to be subjected to homicide by doctors . And , it is done under color of law under a bureaucratic checklist known as β The Groningen Protocol , β which permits doctors to lethally inject infants under three scenarios :\nThe baby has no chance of survival ( a circumstance that is sometimes misdiagnosed ) ; The baby β may survive after a period of intensive treatment but expectations for their future are very grim β ; The baby does β not depend on technology for physiologic stability β but has β suffering [ that ] is severe , sustained , and can not be alleviated . β\nThus , Dutch doctors not only speed up dying babies β deaths , but also kill those with serious disabilities who do not need intensive care . Showing the dark currents that are flowing in favor of infanticide , the Groningen Protocol was published with all due respect in the New England Journal of Medicine .\nSome politicians and advocates are slightly less blatant , arguing in support of what could be called infanticide-by-neglect . The most well-known recent example was Virginia Governor Ralph Northam ( D-VA ) , who falsely ( according to a study published by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute ) claimed that late-term abortions are restricted to β cases where there may be severe deformities , there may be a fetus that β s non-viable. β And if such babies are born alive , Northam was asked in a radio interview . He stated coldly :\nSo , in this particular example , if a mother is in labor , I can tell you exactly what would happen . The infant would be delivered . The infant would be kept comfortable . The infant would be resuscitated if that β s what the mother and the family desired , and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother .\nThink about this . The Governor of Virginia endorsed the moral equivalent of the Roman Empire β s ancient practice of exposing disabled infants on hills β except that instead of leaving the baby in the weeds to be consumed by animals , the child would be left to die unattended in a bassinette . Awful .\nThe recent open and notorious support for infanticide by society β s most powerful voices forces us to support , reject , or be openly indifferent to the sanctity of human life . If there is moral accountability in creation , we had better be very careful about what we do next . History will judge us most harshly if we turn a blind eye to the killing of the most weak , defenseless , and innocent among us .\nAward winning author Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute β s Center on Human Exceptionalism and a consultant to the Patients Rights Council . His most recent book is Culture of Death : The Age of β Do Harm β Medicine .
|
allsides-corpus-277
|
FILE - In this Jan. 19 , 2018 file photo , President Donald Trump speaks to participants of the annual March for Life event , in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington . The Trump administration will resurrect a Reagan-era rule that would ban federally-funded family planning clinics from discussing abortion with women , or sharing space with abortion providers , a senior White House official said Thursday , May 17 , 2018 . The Department of Health and Human Services will be announcing its proposal Friday , the official said on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to confirm the plans before the announcement . ( AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta , File )\nFILE - In this Jan. 19 , 2018 file photo , President Donald Trump speaks to participants of the annual March for Life event , in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington . The Trump administration will resurrect a Reagan-era rule that would ban federally-funded family planning clinics from discussing abortion with women , or sharing space with abortion providers , a senior White House official said Thursday , May 17 , 2018 . The Department of Health and Human Services will be announcing its proposal Friday , the official said on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to confirm the plans before the announcement . ( AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta , File )\nWASHINGTON ( AP ) β The Trump administration acted Friday to bar taxpayer-funded family planning clinics from referring women for abortions , energizing its conservative political base ahead of crucial midterm elections while setting the stage for new legal battles .\nThe Health and Human Services Department sent its proposal to rewrite the rules to the White House , setting in motion a regulatory process that could take months . Scant on details , an administration overview of the plan said it would echo a Reagan-era rule by banning abortion referrals by federally funded clinics and forbidding them from locating in facilities that also provide abortions .\nPlanned Parenthood , a principal provider of family planning , abortion services and basic preventive care for women , said the plan appears designed to target the organization . β The end result would make it impossible for women to come to Planned Parenthood , who are counting on us every day , β said executive vice president Dawn Laguens .\nBut presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway told Fox News that the administration is simply recognizing β that abortion is not family planning . This is family planning money . β\nThe policy was derided as a β gag rule β by abortion rights supporters , a point challenged by the administration , which said counseling about abortion would be OK , but not referrals . It β s likely to trigger lawsuits from opponents , and certain to galvanize activists on both sides of the abortion debate going into November β s congressional elections .\nThe policy β would ensure that taxpayers do not indirectly fund abortions , β White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement .\nSocial and religious conservatives have remained steadfastly loyal to President Donald Trump despite issues like his reimbursements to attorney Michael Cohen , who paid hush money to a porn star alleging an affair , and Trump β s past boasts of sexually aggressive behavior . Trump has not wavered from advancing the agenda of the religious right .\nTuesday night , Trump is scheduled to speak at the Susan B. Anthony List β s β campaign for life β gala . The group works to elect candidates who want to reduce and ultimately end abortion . It says it spent more than $ 18 million in the 2016 election cycle to defeat Hillary Rodham Clinton and promote a β pro-life Senate . β\nThe original Reagan-era family planning rule barred clinics from discussing abortion with women . It never went into effect as written , although the Supreme Court ruled it was an appropriate use of executive power . The policy was rescinded under President Bill Clinton , and a new rule took effect requiring β nondirective β counseling to include a full range of options for women .\nThe Trump administration said its proposal will roll back the Clinton requirement that abortion be discussed as an option along with prenatal care and adoption .\nKnown as Title X , the family-planning program serves about 4 million women a year through clinics , costing taxpayers about $ 260 million .\nAlthough abortion is politically divisive , the U.S. abortion rate has dropped significantly , from about 29 per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 1980 to about 15 in 2014 . Better contraception , fewer unintended pregnancies and state restrictions may have played a role , according to a recent scientific report .\nAbortion remains legal , but federal family planning funds can not be used to pay for the procedure . Planned Parenthood clinics now qualify for Title X family planning grants , but they keep that money separate from funds that pay for abortions .\nAbortion opponents say a taxpayer-funded program should have no connection to abortion . Doctors β groups and abortion rights supporters say a ban on counseling women trespasses on the doctor-patient relationship .\nThe American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said the administration action amounts to an β egregious intrusion β in the doctor-patient relationship and could force doctors to omit β essential , medically accurate information β from counseling sessions with patients .\nPlanned Parenthood β s Laguens hinted at legal action , saying , β we will not stand by while our basic health care and rights are stripped away . β\nJessica Marcella of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association , which represents clinics , said requiring physical separation from abortion facilities is impractical and would disrupt services for women .\nβ I can not imagine a scenario in which public health groups would allow this effort to go unchallenged , β Marcella said .\nBut abortion opponents said Trump is merely reaffirming the core mission of the family planning program .\nβ The new regulations will draw a bright line between abortion centers and family planning programs , just as ... federal law requires and the Supreme Court has upheld , β said Tony Perkins , president of the Family Research Council , a key voice for religious conservatives .\nKristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America said , β Abortion is not health care or birth control and many women want natural health care choices , rather than hormone-induced changes . β\nAbortion opponents allege the federal family planning program in effect cross-subsidizes abortions provided by Planned Parenthood , whose clinics are also major recipients of grants for family planning and basic preventive care . Hawkins β group is circulating a petition to urge lawmakers to support the Trump administration β s proposal .\nAbortion opponents say the administration plan is not a β gag rule. β It β will not prohibit counseling for clients about abortion ... but neither will it include the current mandate that ( clinics ) must counsel and refer for abortion , β said the administration β s own summary .
|
allsides-corpus-278
|
VATICAN CITY β Just when you think Pope Francis has nothing left up the sleeve of his cassock , he does it again . This time , the popular pontiff has announced that during the Holy Jubilee year beginning this December 8 , priests will have the discretion to forgive penitent Catholic women for having abortionsβone of the biggest sins of the Catholic Church .\nIn what has become classic Francis style , he apparently doesn β t care about the political ramifications of offering limited forgiveness for an act on which entire political campaigns are made and unraveled . Instead , he wrote in a letter to the president of the Pontifical Council of New Evangelization that priests ought to look deep to understand what leads a woman to abort her unborn child .\nβ The tragedy of abortion is experienced by some with a superficial awareness , as if not realizing the extreme harm that such an act entails , β said the pope β s letter . β Many others , on the other hand , although experiencing this moment as a defeat , believe that they have no other option . β\nβ I think in particular of all the women who have resorted to abortion , β Francis said . β I am well aware of the pressure that has led them to this decision . I know that it is an existential and moral ordeal . I have met so many women who bear in their heart the scar of this agonizing and painful decision . β\nBy no means , of course , is the pope or the Catholic Church actually endorsing , condoning or somehow approving the ending of a pregnancy at any point after conception . That will never happen . On the contrary , by allowing Catholic women to be absolved from the sin , rather than automatically excommunicating them , as has been the practice , he ensures that they retain their faith . Or , more to the point , return to the pews .\nAt a time when more Catholics are leaving the Church than joining , keeping the faithful on the roster is vital . As we have seen time and time again , on issues like divorced and remarried Catholics , unwed parents , those who use birth control , those living in same-sex unions , Francis seems to be sending the same message that Catholics are welcome no matter how flawed they are or , it would seem , what sins they have committed . That mercy , above all , has been the key to the pope β s popularity .\nPrior to this decree , the only way a woman could be forgiven for having an abortion was to go directly to the chief confessor in her diocese or the equivalent in certain situations . Now , instead of petitioning a higher prelate , any priest anywhere in the world can do this .\nβ The forgiveness of God can not be denied to one who has repented , especially when that person approaches the Sacrament of Confession with a sincere heart in order to obtain reconciliation with the Father , β Francis wrote . β For this reason too , I have decided , notwithstanding anything to the contrary , to concede to all priests for the Jubilee Year the discretion to absolve of the sin of abortion those who have procured it and who , with contrite heart , seek forgiveness for it . β\nWriting in Crux Now , Vatican expert John Allen points out that the move will no doubt be twisted to suit both the pro-life and pro-choice movements . β Some anti-abortion activists may wince at any step , however well-intentioned , which could be seen as reducing the level of moral seriousness the Church attaches to the act , β he writes , adding , β On the other hand , some may be grateful for the reminder that abortion actually triggers excommunication. β The takeaway likely will be that Francis β s talk about mercy β isn β t mere rhetoric . β\nWhile there is no statute of limitations on when the forgiven abortion took place , there is a catch . The offer of forgiveness is for a limited time only , starting when the Holy Jubilee kicks off on December 8 , 2015 and ending November 20 , 2016 .
|
allsides-corpus-279
|
( CNN ) Donald Trump 's election , and a presumption that he 'll appoint conservative Supreme Court justices , spurred Ohio Republicans to pass what would effectively be the nation 's strictest time-based abortion law , a legislator said .\nOhio lawmakers on Tuesday passed a `` Heartbeat Bill '' that would ban abortions in that state from the moment the heartbeat of a fetus can be detected -- which usually occurs about six weeks into a pregnancy .\nThe state 's current law generally bans abortions after a fetus has begun its 20th week of gestation , unless a doctor determines that the fetus is n't viable outside the womb . Exceptions are made if the pregnancy puts the woman 's health at serious risk .\nWhat happens next for the bill , which would prohibit post-heartbeat abortions even in cases of rape or incest , depends on Republican Gov . John Kasich , who , after he receives the legislation , has 10 days to decide whether to veto it .\nState legislators had considered the bill in previous years but it never passed the Senate . So what made the legislature 's Republican majority move now ?\n`` One , a new President , new Supreme Court justice appointees change the dynamic , and that there was a consensus in our caucus to move forward , '' Ohio Senate President Keith Faber , a Republican from Celina , told reporters after the final vote .\nAsked if he thought the bill would survive a legal challenge , he said : `` I think it has a better chance than it did before . ''\nIf Kasich signs the bill , or if he does nothing within 10 days , the measure would become law early next year . A veto would stop the bill unless three-fifths of the state House and Senate vote for an override .\nShould the bill become law , a court battle likely would ensue . The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio already has said it would press a legal challenge .\nOn Tuesday , the Ohio Legislature sent the bill to Kasich 's desk after a day filled with legislative maneuvering .\nJUST WATCHED Ohio considers Down syndrome abortion ban Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Ohio considers Down syndrome abortion ban 01:43\nEarlier in the day , state Sen. Kris Jordan , a Republican from Ostrander , called for an amendment that added provisions from the House-sponsored `` Heartbeat Bill '' to another measure , House Bill 493 , that sought to streamline the process in which medical professionals report child abuse situations .\n`` We are a pro-life caucus ... , '' Jordan said in a statement . `` The passage of this legislation in the Ohio Senate demonstrates our commitment to protecting the children of Ohio at every stage of life . ''\nThe Senate voted twice : First , they approved 20-11 the decision to tack on the `` Heartbeat Bill '' language onto House Bill 493 . After the amendment passed , the state senators passed the bill with a 21-10 vote that largely went along party lines .\nOhio state Sen. Charleta Tavares , a Columbus Democrat , had planned on voting for the child abuse bill as originally presented , but ultimately voted against it because she opposed the `` Heartbeat Bill '' amendment and change in language .\n`` I believe everyone has a right to their own body , '' Tavares told CNN . `` We allowed a good bill that protects the health and safety of our children to be bastardized into a government takeover of women 's wombs . ''\nAfter the bill went back the House , state representatives easily approved the revised bill 56-39 on Tuesday night . It now goes to Kasich for his signature .\nForty-three states currently restrict abortions , with some exceptions , by time or phase of fetal development .\nSome of those states prohibit abortions after a doctor determines the fetus is viable . There 's no fixed time period in such laws , but the nonprofit American Pregnancy Association says that viability generally can begin as soon as 24 weeks .\nOther states prohibit abortion after a certain time following conception -- as soon as 20 weeks in some states .\nBecause heartbeats develop at around six weeks , Ohio 's bill appears to offer what would be the country 's shortest window for abortions .\nAt least two other states -- Arkansas and North Dakota -- passed fetal heartbeat abortion laws . But those measures were found to be unconstitutional in federal court .\nEmmalee Kalmbach , a former Ohio Right to Life staffer who is now Kasich 's press secretary , said the governor does not typically comment on pending legislation .\nEarlier this year , Kasich told CNN that he was `` pro-life with the exceptions of rape , incest and the life of the mother . ''\nAnd earlier this year Kasich signed a bill to ban the state from contracting for health services with any organization that performs or promotes abortions -- a measure widely seen as a way to defund Planned Parenthood .\nThe Columbus Dispatch and the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that Kasich expressed concerns about previous attempts to pass a `` Heartbeat Bill , '' including that it may not withstand legal challenges .\nMike Gonidakis , president of Ohio Right to Life , said his group is neutral on the bill because it does n't believe the measure would hold up in federal court .\n`` We believe in an incremental approach , '' Gonidakis said . `` When you overreach , sometimes the courts get the last say . There 's a reason why no state has a 'Heartbeat Bill ' yet . ''\nThis might not be the only abortion restriction law to reach Kasich 's desk this month .\nSenate Bill 127 would prohibit abortions at the 20th week of gestation , except those necessary to prevent serious health problems for the woman . The Senate already has passed it , and the House may vote on it this week .\nGonidakis said he believes that bill has a greater chance of surviving court challenges , in part because other states have such a restriction .\nTavares said she hopes Kasich would line-item veto the `` Heartbeat Bill '' language .\nThe Heartbeat Bill has been called `` unconstitutional '' by members of both parties in the past , Tavares said . Though it passed the state House over a year ago , it previously met opposition in the Senate . On the heels of Donald Trump 's election , momentum for the bill 's approval resurfaced .\nThe ACLU of Ohio tweeted , `` Just a reminder , if the unconstitutional # HeartBeatBill passes and becomes law , we will challenge it in court . ''\nOhio state Sen. Joe Schiavoni , a Democrat from Boardman , said the bill would lead to `` expensive lawsuits '' that would divert resources away from more pressing issues like the opioid crisis .\n`` To the taxpayers of Ohio , I am sorry that your money will have to be used to defend this bill in the court system . ''\nJohn Fortney , a spokesman for the Senate 's Republican caucus , said that `` as far as the threat of abortion advocates suing , we do n't base our decisions on protecting the lives of babies on the threat of someone threatening to file a lawsuit . ''\nPresident-elect Trump has expressed interest in reversing the 1973 Roe v. Wade landmark decision that made abortion legal nationwide .\nTrump will get to nominate at least one justice during his term to fill the seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia , who died in February . Scalia was known for dissenting opinions on abortion rights .\nIn an interview with `` 60 Minutes '' last month , Trump said opposition to abortion would be a criteria for nominating justices .\nBut replacing Scalia with someone of the same mold alone may not change the status quo . In June , the Supreme Court ruled 5-3 against a Texas abortion access law that opponents argued would have shut down all but a handful of clinics , with perennial swing-vote Justice Anthony Kennedy joining the court 's four liberal justices .\nCORRECTION : An earlier version of this story incorrectly described current Ohio abortion law . The current law prohibits most abortions of viable fetuses . Doctors are required to test for viability beginning at 20 weeks ' gestation .
|
allsides-corpus-280
|
When the economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton first published their research on β deaths of despair β five years ago , they focused on middle-aged whites . So many white working-class Americans in their 40s and 50s were dying of suicide , alcoholism and drug abuse that the overall mortality rate for the age group was no longer falling β a rare and shocking pattern in a modern society .\nBut as Case and Deaton continued digging into the data , it became clear that the grim trends didn β t apply only to middle-aged whites . Up and down the age spectrum , deaths of despair have been surging for people without a four-year college degree :\nDeaths from alcohol , drugs and suicide 5 per 100K 147 per 100K\nIn the early 1990s , the number of white adults without a college education who were dying from a drug overdose , alcoholism or suicide was fairly low β and the death rates for younger adults were lower than for older adults . But over the past three decades , deaths of despair among whites without a college degree β especially those under age 50 β have soared . The death rate for whites with a college degree , by contrast , has risen only modestly across all age groups and remains lower for the young than the old .\nCase and Deaton β a married couple who are both economists at Princeton β try to explain the causes in a new book , β Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism. β Their basic answer is that working-class life in the United States is more difficult than it is in any other high-income country . β European countries have faced the same kind of technological change we have , and they β re not seeing the people killing themselves with guns or drugs or alcohol , β Case says . β There is something unique about the way the U.S. is handling this . β\nMore people are dying Number of β deaths of despair β per 100,000 non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 Non- college 100 50 College grads 0 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Non- college 100 50 College grads 0 1992 β 96 β 00 β 04 β 08 β 12 β 16\nInequality has risen more in the United States β and middle-class incomes have stagnated more severely β than in France , Germany , Japan or elsewhere . Large corporations have increased their market share , and labor unions have shriveled , leaving workers with little bargaining power . Outsourcing has become the norm , which means that executives often see low-wage workers not as colleagues but as expenses .\nAnd the United States suffers from by far the world β s most expensive health-care system . It acts as a tax on workers and drains resources that could otherwise be spent on schools , day care , roads , public transit and more . Despite its unparalleled spending , the American medical system also fails to keep many people healthy .\n[ Make sense of the news with David β s commentary and reading suggestions every weekday morning . Sign up for his newsletter . ]\nThe two economists initially focused on non-Hispanic whites because the mortality trends were worst for them . Deaths rates from suicide , alcoholism and drug abuse among whites surpassed the rates for blacks shortly after 2000 , for example . But the black working class is hardly thriving -- and deaths of despair have surged among them in the last few years . Overall life expectancy remains significantly higher for whites than blacks . So , of course , do incomes and wealth .\nMany of the problems afflicting the working class span racial groups , and Case and Deaton emphasize that these problems aren β t merely financial . Life for many middle- and low-income Americans can lack structure , status and meaning . People don β t always know what days or hours they will be working the following week . They often don β t officially work for the company where they spend their days , which robs them of the pride that comes from being part of a shared enterprise .\nβ Many people used to associate the meaning of their life with what their corporation or institution was doing , β says Deaton , a Nobel laureate in economics . Miners and factory workers identified themselves as such . Warehouse workers , especially those whose paycheck is signed by a staffing company , rarely feel the same connection .\nThe result of these trends has been a β coming apart , β as Case and Deaton put it , of day-to-day life for whites without a college degree versus those with a college degree :\nMarriage rates have diverged Share of non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 currently married 80 % College grads 70 Non- college 60 50 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 80 % College grads 70 Non- college 60 50 1980 β 90 β 00 β 10\nPeople without college degrees are also less likely to attend church Share of non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 attending church weekly 30 % College grads 25 Non- college 20 15 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 30 % College grads 25 Non- college 20 15 1975 β 85 β 95 β 05 β 15\nSurveys show that a growing number of working-class Americans find it difficult to do basic things , like climb a flight of stairs or socialize , partly because of chronic problems with their mental or physical health :\nChronic pain is more widespread Share of non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 experiencing neck , back or joint pain 60 % Non- college 50 College grads 40 30 20 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 60 % Non- college 50 College grads 40 30 20 1998 2002 2006 2010 2014\nMany people are also drinking more Average number of drinks ( on days when drinking ) among non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 Non- college 2.5 2.0 College grads 1.5 1.0 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Non- college 2.5 2.0 College grads 1.5 1.0 1994 β 98 β 02 β 06 β 10 β 14\nAnd they are unhappier Share of non-Hispanic whites aged 45-54 who say they are β not too happy these days β Non- college 15 % 10 College grads 5 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Non- college 15 % 10 College grads 5 0 1975 β 85 β 95 β 05 β 15\nGiven all of these alarming social indicators , it β s not surprising that some other causes of death β in addition to suicide , alcoholism and drug overdose β have also started rising for Americans without a college degree . Heart disease is the most significant , exacerbated by obesity , drinking and drug use .\nThe combined result is a divergence in the life expectancy of white college graduates and non-graduates . Overall mortality for whites between the ages of 45 and 54 has held roughly steady in the last 25 years . But that average hides a big increase in death rates for non-graduates and a big decline for graduates .\nWhat can be done about all of this ? Many of the solutions are obvious , if difficult to accomplish . The medical system should be overhauled to put a higher priority on health than on wealth for people who work in the industry , Case and Deaton argue . ( And that doesn β t necessarily mean a mandatory version of Medicare , they add . )\nThe federal government should do a better job of keeping big business from maximizing profits at the expense of their workers , by enforcing antitrust laws and encouraging new kinds of labor unions . Governments at all levels should help more people earn college degrees , both four-year degrees ( like B.A. β s ) and meaningful vocational degrees .\nOther economic research has found that a college degree isn β t simply a marker . Students who attend and graduate from college do better in life than otherwise similar students who didn β t get the same opportunities . Graduates are more likely to be employed , earn more , marry and stay married , be satisfied with their lives , be healthy and live longer . These findings suggest that college itself β both the classroom learning and the experience of successfully navigating college β brings long-term benefits .\nThe focus of Case and Deaton β s book isn β t education , but it lingers as the backdrop to all of their findings . β This B.A./non-B.A . divide , β Deaton says , β just comes up again and again and again . β
|
allsides-corpus-281
|
More than a third of opioid-related deaths in the United States link back to long-acting drugs like OxyContin that are approved for prescription by the US Food and Drug Administration . But lax oversight at the agency is hampering efforts to ensure doctors don β t overprescribe these medications , according to a new study .\nThe FDA has failed to adequately track whether one of its key strategies for addressing opioid misuse has been effective .\nResearchers from Johns Hopkins University scoured thousands of pages of internal FDA documents , obtained through public records requests , and found that the agency has failed to adequately track whether one of its key strategies for addressing opioid misuse has been effective . The study , published Monday in JAMA Internal Medicine , looks at a federal program that teaches doctors about the risks of prescribing addictive opioids .\nStarting in 2012 , the FDA β s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy Program required opioid makers to pay for this training for doctors prescribing long-acting opioids , and to monitor whether it had an impact on overdoses and deaths . But according to the internal documents surfaced by the Johns Hopkins researchers , it appears the FDA has not been able to show that its training program worked : Opioid makers did not collect the right data to track how the training was going , and even after the FDA discovered this , according to the Johns Hopkins researchers , the agency did not correct the problem .\nβ What β s surprising here is the design of the program was deficient from the start , β Caleb Alexander , an author on the study , told the New York Times . As early as 2013 , the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services warned that the FDA was β not receiving crucial information from pharmaceutical manufactures β about the training . β It β s unclear why the FDA didn β t insist upon a more scientifically rigorous evaluation of this safety program . β\nSome of the data that was collected isn β t encouraging . The goal was for 60 percent of doctors who prescribe long-acting opioids to enroll in a training class , but only 27 percent of them did between 2012 and 2016 , the Johns Hopkins study found . Manufacturers also surveyed physicians who participated in the training , and concluded they had β modestly greater β knowledge of safe prescribing practices , but these surveys came at a time when opioid prescribing rates were dropping overall in the United States , and they were not designed to prove the classes were responsible for the change .\nNearly 50,000 people around the country died from opioid overdoses in 2017 .\nResponding to the study , an FDA spokesperson told βββ that the issue of opioid misuse was a top priority for the Trump administration , and that assessing the impact of the training program while accounting for other opioid interventions at the municipal , state , and federal levels could be be challenging . He said that after learning about difficulties with the data assessment , the agency talked with drug manufacturers about how to better study the effect of the training on prescriber behavior and patient outcomes , and that it continues to work with these companies to evaluate the impact of the program . He noted that the agency has also taken other steps to curb the epidemic , like going after illegal imports and sales of opioids and supporting more treatment for people struggling with addiction .\nAfter reaching a peak in 2012 , opioid prescription rates fell in 2017βto 58.7 prescriptions per 100 people nationally , compared with 81.3 prescriptions per 100 people in 2012 . But rates are still high in certain parts of the country , the researchers warned . And while deaths are now starting to drop , nearly 50,000 people around the country died from opioid overdoses in 2017 , a record high .
|
allsides-corpus-282
|
In 2019 , The Legal Fight Over Opioids Unraveled Into Confusion And Infighting\nLegal experts expected this to be the year we answered big questions about the liability that drug companies face for the deadly opioid epidemic and for their role in marketing high-risk prescription pain medications .\nInstead , the legal fight over who will pay to clean up the addiction crisis dissolved into confusion and infighting .\n`` I do n't know if there 's a clear road map , '' said Adam Zimmerman , a professor at Loyola Law School and an expert in opioid litigation .\nAll sides agree the stakes are high . Every day , 130 Americans die from opioid overdoses , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . Without some kind of national settlement with Big Pharma , communities wo n't get serious money to help with the crisis any time soon . Speaking this fall with reporters , Pennsylvania state Attorney General Josh Shapiro warned that there could be legal chaos .\n`` We will randomly and haphazardly litigate these cases , with no particular rhyme or reason , '' Shapiro said . `` The needs of people across this country will not be met . ''\nFor much of 2019 , a deal seemed close . Federal Judge Dan Polster in Ohio was holding high-level settlement talks while at the same time channeling thousands of civil lawsuits against the drug industry into a tidy legal pipeline .\nThen came a big federal case in Polster 's court in October that was expected to test the liability of drugmakers and distributors . At the very last minute , however , companies reached a local settlement with a couple of Ohio counties . The trial was abruptly called off .\nGreg McNeil , an activist whose son died from an opioid overdose in 2015 , told NPR outside the courthouse in Cleveland that he was flattened .\n`` We have no admission of wrongdoing , '' McNeil said . `` It seems as if nothing is changing . ''\nEven attorneys involved in the case acknowledged that the outcome left big questions unanswered .\n`` We do n't have a chance to test the legal theories that are being used here , if they are being properly used , what there limits are , '' said Mark Lanier who represents communities suing Big Pharma .\nSettlement talks aimed at reaching a deal with the pharmaceutical industry comparable to the tobacco settlement of the 1990s also splintered , with Polster still leading negotiations in Ohio while state attorneys general across the country pushed for a separate deal . Neither set of talks produced a `` global '' resolution .\nAdam Zimmerman at Loyola thinks it made sense for Polster and others to push for a big settlement this year , but it just did n't pay off .\n`` The opioid crisis has just presented such an emergency and it 's called for quick action , '' Zimmerman said . `` To the extent that it has n't worked , I do n't think that 's necessarily the fault of Judge Polster as much as just the extremely complicated nature of this litigation . ''\nThousands of states , local governments , school districts and Native American tribes have sued drug companies for aggressively marketing prescription opioid medications while allegedly downplaying the risks of addiction and overdose . More than 400,000 Americans have died during the epidemic that began in the 1990s .\nThe legal muddle that remains is scary for those cash-strapped towns and cities . It also leaves a big cloud over the pharmaceutical industry . In August , a state judge in Oklahoma found Johnson & Johnson liable for hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties for `` misleading '' marketing of prescription opioids . Johnson & Johnson is appealing that decision , but it was a shot across the bow for drug companies , a sign that courts across the U.S. might rule in favor of communities\nA month later , in September , the avalanche of lawsuits pushed Purdue Pharma , another big opioid-maker over the edge . The company filed for structured bankruptcy , with the company 's owners , the Sackler family , offering to pay roughly $ 3 billion of their personal cash to help communities and giving up control of the firm to settle all opioid-related claims .\nBut here again , there 's a fight underway . Some states agreed to the deal , while others sued members of the Sackler family directly , accusing them of pulling more than $ 12 billion out of Purdue Pharma and hiding much of it in offshore accounts .\n`` I do n't see how states can basically sign on to a settlement without knowing the valuation of how much resources the Sacklers have in their position , how much they 're worth and or the worth of Purdue , '' said Attorney General Letitia James of New York .\nWhat this all adds up to is more uncertainty and more opioid trials next year , including another federal case scheduled for Polster 's court in Cleveland that will test the liability of big pharmacy chains CVS , Walgreens and Rite Aid , which sold opioids in huge quantities to their customers .\nMeanwhile , thousands of cities and small towns will keep scrambling to pay for the overdose medications , rehab and supportive housing programs that keep people alive .
|
allsides-corpus-283
|
β You might say one of the essential functions the courts can play is where one party can hold another to account , β says Adam Zimmerman , an associate professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles . β To not have some kind of adjudication about what happened and who did what and who β s responsible , it feels like something β s lost there . β\nIn a crisis that has killed about 400,000 Americans and cost the country an estimated $ 504 billion in 2015 alone , settlements help ease the financial burdens on cities and states . But some say accountability is key .\nLast week , a Boston jury convicted five executives of opioid manufacturer Insys of racketeering charges , including bribing doctors to prescribe its opioid medication to patients who didn β t need it . West Virginia and Oklahoma have settled lawsuits with McKesson and Purdue Pharma , for $ 37 million and $ 270 million respectively . Both companies denied wrongdoing .\nWhat does justice look like in the opioid crisis ? Three recent decisions in bellwether lawsuits offer different models of how best to move forward and help individuals and communities rebuild as more than 1,600 lawsuits chug through America β s legal system .\nAs hundreds of lawsuits against opioid manufacturers , distributors , and retailers chug through the U.S. legal system , a trio of recent decisions gives a hint of what may be coming .\nOn May 2 , a Boston jury convicted the onetime billionaire CEO of Insys Therapeutics and four former executives on racketeering charges , in connection with bribing doctors to prescribe opioid medication to patients who didn β t need it and deceiving insurers into paying for it .\nβ Today β s convictions mark the first successful prosecution of top pharmaceutical executives for crimes related to the illicit marketing and prescribing of opioids , β said United States Attorney Andrew E. Lelling in a statement . β Just as we would street-level drug dealers , we will hold pharmaceutical executives responsible for fueling the opioid epidemic by recklessly and illegally distributing these drugs , especially while conspiring to commit racketeering along the way . β\nThe same day , West Virginia settled for $ 37 million with McKesson Corp. , the country β s largest pharmaceutical distributor . And in March , Oklahoma settled with manufacturer Purdue Pharma , for $ 270 million . These settlements could provide a blueprint for more than 1,600 opioid lawsuits pending in courts around the country , most of which have been consolidated under a federal judge in Cleveland .\nWhile the substantial payouts will help states fund treatment and other services , the drug companies involved in both settlements have denied any wrongdoing , and experts say the settlement amounts are not large enough to change corporate behavior . That underscores a key question : What does justice look like ? Is it most important that drug companies are held accountable , or compelled to change ? That the public understands where the blame lies , and why ? Or is it more important that resources to combat the problem are mobilized so the suffering can end ?\nβ You might say one of the essential functions the courts can play is where one party can hold another to account , β says Adam Zimmerman , an associate professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and an expert in the type of multidistrict litigation ( MDL ) being used in Cleveland . β To not have some kind of adjudication about what happened and who did what and who β s responsible , it feels like something β s lost there . β\nBut for communities struggling to cover the tremendous public costs of the opioid crisis , from staffing for 911 calls to overdose-reversal drugs to treatment facilities , settlement payouts provide urgently needed funds .\nSteven Senne/AP Insys Therapeutics founder John Kapoor leaves federal court in Boston on Jan. 30 , 2019 . He and four other former company executives were found guilty in May of bribing doctors to prescribing a powerful fentanyl painkiller to patients who did not need it .\nAt the first hearing in the opioid MDL , Judge Dan Polster in Cleveland declared that his objective was β to do something meaningful to abate this crisis , and to do so in 2018. β While he has missed his self-imposed deadline , he has sought a global settlement that would enable communities to rebuild β rather than getting bogged down in years of litigation .\nWest Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey also sought to settle quickly rather than await the uncertainty and likely delays of a trial . His office says that the McKesson payout is the largest won from any pharmaceutical distributor in the country , and tops the state β s previous settlements with Cardinal Health ( $ 20 million ) and Amerisource Bergen ( $ 16 million ) . In total , the attorney general has now won $ 84 million from more than a dozen distributors , bolstering his efforts to reduce the supply and demand of opioids .\nBut for some in West Virginia , the McKesson settlement amount pales in comparison to the devastating impact of the opioid epidemic .\nβ I thought it was a joke , β says Justin Marcum , a former state legislator and lawyer involved in the MDL . β Big Pharma has basically just ruined America and targeted the innocent , working people . β\nThose people include the 400 or so residents of Kermit , a coal town in Mingo County that Mr. Marcum represented in the statehouse until last year .\nIn 2006 and 2007 , McKesson supplied nearly 5 million doses of hydrocodone to a single pharmacy in Kermit . The attorney general β s complaint against McKesson calculates that its supply of hydrocodone and other prescription opioids to Mingo County in 2007 was enough to provide every patient with a dose every hour and 15 minutes . Physicians can not prescribe more than one dose every four hours .\nThe complaint charges that the state β has been damaged by the Defendant β s intentional and reckless actions in failing to investigate , report , and cease fulfilling suspicious orders β across the state . McKesson denied it was liable , and the settlement says the deal is not to be construed as an admission by the company of any β wrongdoing , negligence , or failure to comply with any law or regulation . β\nDemocratic Sen. Joe Manchin , who served as governor from 2005 to 2010 , called the settlement a β sweetheart deal β that sells out the state and prevents it from recouping billions of dollars in damages .\nAttorney General Morrisey β s press secretary , Curtis Johnson , dismisses that as political hypocrisy .\nβ While Attorney General Morrisey and subsequent governors have fought to realize historic recoveries from drug distributors , it seems [ Mr. ] Manchin β s most significant impact in the opioid epidemic was the record breaking numbers of pills he allowed to proliferate throughout the state during his watch , β said Mr. Johnson .\nMr. Morrisey has fashioned himself as a fighter who is cleaning up West Virginia , bringing more accountability and record settlement amounts . He launched the lawsuit against McKesson and sued the Drug Enforcement Administration over quotas on opioid pill production .\nBut before coming to office , Mr. Morrisey earned $ 250,000 for lobbying Congress on behalf of an association of drug distributors , though not on opioid issues . His wife , meanwhile , is listed on disclosure forms for lobbying on legislation to tighten restrictions around the prescription opioid hydrocodone , dubbed America β s No . 1 most abused drug . The bill failed , but the federal government enacted the change the following year .\nUnder Mr. Morrisey , the flow of opioid pills into West Virginia has dropped 35 percent . But overdose deaths have risen to more than 800 per year as addicts have turned to heroin and fentanyl .\nSOURCE : Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) , National Center for Health Statistics | Jacob Turcotte/Staff\nChelsea Carter , who was addicted to opioids as a teenager but turned her life around and now serves as lead therapist at Ohio Valley Health in Logan County , says drug companies should acknowledge that they pushed drugs into West Virginia and provide money for treatment . But , she adds , it would be wrong to pin the blame on drug companies alone .\nβ Everybody has to take responsibility , from the drug companies to the pharmacies to the doctors to the people who take the drugs and get addicted , β she says . β The only difference is they [ the drug companies ] have the money to try to help the problem instead of making the problem worse . β\nMcKesson is one of the wealthiest corporations in the world and is ranked sixth on the Fortune 500 list , ahead of Amazon . Its annual revenue in 2018 was $ 198 billion .\nβ McKesson is committed to working with others to end this national crisis , however , and is pleased that the settlement provides funding toward initiatives intended to address the opioid epidemic , β the company said in a statement last week , noting that the funds it is paying to West Virginia are aimed at rehabilitation , job training , and mental health , among other areas .\nSettlements can have an avalanche effect , providing a framework and baseline that leads to more settlements , which can boost subsequent efforts β or limit them , if early settlements set too low a bar .\nβ We see this movement [ of settlements ] as helpful , certainly , but we haven β t even begun to see the types of settlements that are necessary to start to impact this epidemic and to change the practices β of drug manufacturers , distributors , and chain pharmacies , says Jayne Conroy , a partner at Simmons Hanly Conroy , a firm representing plaintiffs in the MDL .\nA study from the American Enterprise Institute in Washington estimates the opioid crisis β s annual cost to West Virginia β s economy at more than $ 8 billion , including lost productivity of those who have died . Nationwide , the crisis has killed 399,202 people from 1999 to 2017 , taking an economic toll of more than $ 500 billion on the country .\nβ It seems to me even if the drug companies pay a large amount of money , $ 20 to 30 billion , that β s chicken feed compared to the social costs of the addiction problem , β says Richard Ausness , a professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law who has been following opioid lawsuits across the country .\nThe Oklahoma case comes closest to what most experts and lawyers consider the ideal outcome in a settlement of this nature : a large payout that not only compensates plaintiffs but also makes a significant investment toward stemming the crisis that prompted the lawsuit in the first place .\nThat the case involved Purdue Pharma , maker of the prescription painkiller OxyContin , could be significant . The manufacturer β and its owners , the Sackler family β have emerged as the β the poster child for really bad corporate behavior , β according to Professor Ausness , while distributors like McKesson have had a lower profile .\nPart of that is due to their different roles in the supply chain , with Purdue manufacturing opioids and McKesson distributing them . The claims being made against them , and the standards of proof and possible penalties , are thus different as well .\nAs allegations of Purdue β s role in fueling the opioid epidemic have emerged , there have been protests outside the company β s Connecticut headquarters , museums have begun turning down Sackler family donations , and mothers of victims have asked Harvard University to remove the Sackler family name from campus buildings . Oklahoma had initially sought billions of dollars in damages in its case against Purdue and the other defendants .\nFor Purdue , Professor Ausness says , the Oklahoma settlement β is a small step , maybe , to rehabilitating their reputation . β\nWhile not a party to the Oklahoma lawsuit against Purdue , the Sackler family voluntarily pledged $ 75 million toward the addiction research and treatment center being established through the settlement .\nβ We have profound compassion for those who are affected by addiction and are committed to playing a constructive role in the coordinated effort to save lives , β the family said in a statement after the settlement .\nThat kind of long-term approach to healing root causes of the crisis did not happen in the $ 200 billion Big Tobacco settlement in 1998 , says Professor Ausness β though funds from the 1998 settlement do fund an anti-smoking advocacy group .\nBut other states don β t seem as willing to settle . β We will continue to aggressively pursue our case against Purdue and the Sackler family , β said Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey in a statement to the Monitor . β Families in Massachusetts and across the country deserve answers and accountability from this company and its executives and directors . β\nOn May 28 , Oklahoma is slated to become the first state to go to trial against opioid companies , confronting remaining defendants Johnson & Johnson , Allergan , and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA .\nTrials and convictions can bring that sense of accountability , especially when , as is the case with the convictions of the five former Insys executives this month , it could involve prison time . Having to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is such a high standard , however , that criminal charges have been rare in opioid litigation so far .\nβ I β m hopeful that we β ll see more criminal convictions of executives for opioid manufacturers in the future , β says Andrew Kolodny , an M.D . at Brandeis University who is involved in the Oklahoma case . β If you want to deter corporations from killing people in their pursuit of profit , I believe criminal prosecutions are required . I don β t think fines and civil litigations are adequate . They can be seen as the cost of doing business . β
|
allsides-corpus-284
|
The Sackler family , which owns Purdue Pharma , used Swiss and other hidden bank accounts to transfer around $ 1 billion from the company to themselves , the New York attorney general β s office claimed Friday .\nThe family stands to lose billions after a litany of lawsuits claiming that their company marketed the painkiller OxyContin as nonaddictive despite knowing otherwise .\nThe transfers support allegations by New York and other states that the Sacklers have worked to shield their wealth in the face of mounting legal threats .\nThose transfers include $ 20 million from a Purdue parent company to former board member Mortimer D.A . Sackler , who then redirected the money to shell companies that own homes in Manhattan and the Hamptons , prosecutors said . Another $ 64 million came to Sackler from a previously unknown family trust , by way of a Swiss account .\nThe New York attorney general 's office has already rejected a tentative settlement with the Sackler family and Purdue Pharma , arguing it does not do enough to make amends for the company β s and the Sackler β s supposed roles in kick-starting the prescription opioid crisis that has killed 400,000 Americans over the past two decades , according to the CDC .\nGAMER SENTENCED TO 15 MONTHS IN FEDERAL PRISON IN DEADLY 'SWATTING ' CASE\n`` While the Sacklers continue to lowball victims and skirt a responsible settlement , we refuse to allow the family to misuse the courts in an effort to shield their financial misconduct . The limited number of documents provided to us so far underscore the necessity for compliance with every subpoena , '' said New York Attorney General Letitia James in a statement .\nAs part of the settlement , Purdue is likely to file for bankruptcy protection . But New York and other states have promised they will continue to pursue the Sacklers , alleging that family members drained more than $ 4 billion from the company over the past dozen years . The Sacklers have used a complex chain of companies and trusts to control their holdings , some located in offshore tax havens .\nThe Sacklers had an estimated net worth of $ 13 billion as of 2016 , making them America 's 19th-richest family , according to Forbes magazine .\nThis does not include the amount many believe is hidden away .\nIn its filing Friday , New York told a state judge that the only way it can determine the full extent of those transfers is if all those it has subpoenaed are forced to provide documents detailing their interactions with the Sackler family . James has issued subpoenas to 33 financial institutions and investment advisers with ties to the Sacklers .
|
allsides-corpus-285
|
For the first time in more than a half century , life expectancy declined for two consecutive years in the United States .\nThe CDC reports that β accidental injuries β rising to third on the list of killer categories helped account for the shortening of American lives . Neither a spike in banana-peel misadventures nor a spate of missing manhole covers led to this epidemic of misfortune . The use of opioids , which the medical profession prescribes to relieve pain , dramatically increased . Overdoses constitute a massive portion of β accidental injuries . β\nThe Barack Obama presidency coincided with Americans using large amounts of dangerous narcotics ( people coped in their own ways ) and the suicide rate ( alas , some could not cope ) ballooning to its highest level in three decades .\nAmericans , apparently , felt more pain in recent years and took drastic measures to relieve such feelings that unfortunately resulted in many deaths , which , of course , caused even more pain , which resulted in people seeking relief from that pain , and so on .\nOstensibly a medical problem , the drug boom really stems from a spiritual decay . People reach for heroin and oxycontin and the rest after a hollowing out . Before one attempts to fill a void , emptiness must occur .\nMaterial hopelessness appears as one , and just one , likely contributing factor to the spiritual rot . Americans suffered through economic growth under Obama more anemic than for any postwar president . Whereas postwar GDP growth averaged 2.9 percent annually , no year under Obama even approached that mediocre number . And to achieve this paltry growth , the government compiled massive debts . The debt-to-GDP ratio reached the highest point in Obama β s lifetime under Obama . The national debt doubled in eight years .\nPolitical leaders during this era dubbed their policies as β progressive. β This strikes as a cruel irony . Is it progress that more Americans kill themselves , voluntarily via a rope and rickety stool and involuntarily through needles and pills , than they did in the past ? I once heard Joe Sobran say that if the termites eating your house could speak , and you asked them the question β What are you doing ? β they would exclaim : β Progress ! β From the perspective of the termites , devouring a house stands as momentous progress . Likewise , many decidedly non-termite humans regard the Obama years as progressive , even if too often the economy , the deficit , our medical bills , and even our lifespans went in the wrong direction .\nWhen Ronald Reagan dubbed , β I β m from the government and I β m here to help , β the most terrifying words in the English language , he spoke from experience and observation . But he also spoke as a prophet .\nEven before President Obama tried to help you with your hospital bills through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act β an unintentionally hilarious moniker β George W. Bush imagined it the government β s duty to buy people drugs through the Medicare Part D entitlement .\nA study published last year in Health Affairs notes , β Consumer out-of-pocket spending on opioids per 100 morphine milligram equivalents ( a standard reference measure of strength for various opioids ) declined from $ 4.40 to $ 0.90 between 2001 and 2012 . Since the implementation of Medicare Part D in 2006 , Medicare has been the largest payer for opioid pain relievers , covering about 20β30 percent of the cost . Medicare spends considerably more on these drugs for enrollees younger than age sixty-five than it does for any other age group or than Medicaid or private insurance does for any age group . β\nSo , Americans pay for one government program to buy opioids for addicts and pay for another government program to tell us that the rise in opioid addiction led to a decline in lifespans . This is the progressive state in action , managers deciding who and what gets subsidized and experts studying , if unconsciously so , the effects . And neither group lifts their noses from their narrow task to make sense of the big picture .\nβ If you are on the wrong road , progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road , β C.S . Lewis famously wrote in Mere Christianity , β and in that case the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive man . β\nAmerica requires reorientation , not β progress β β particularly not progress of an ideological sort divorced from the word β s meaning . Sometimes progress requires , as Dorothy taught us , going home .\nIt is perhaps too much to expect perhaps the most abnormal man ever to sit in the Oval Office to engineer a β return to normalcy , β as did the last Republican tasked with putting America β s house in order after the wreckage left by progressive termites . But Trump β s instincts , as his tax bill indicates , favor more individual control than administrative control over lives . People taking responsibility for their own lives , in contrast to government meddling and intrusiveness , goes a long way toward solving problems , drug problems and otherwise .\nAlas , even material improvements will not wean Americans off opioids . If you doubt this , give each addict you meet a $ 100 bill and see where he or she spends it . They need goals , spiritual direction , will , and much else the state can not provide .\nGovernment exacerbated this problem . It can help alleviate it . It can not solve it .
|
allsides-corpus-286
|
A US lawmaker investigating alleged Russian election meddling says an ex-Trump aide should testify on wild claims he has made about the president .\nMr Nunberg said Mr Trump was aware of a 2016 meeting between his aides and a Russian lawyer , and may have `` done something '' during the campaign .\nDemocrat Adam Schiff responded by saying his congressional panel `` needs to explore '' Mr Nunberg 's allegation .\nMr Nunberg is the latest figure to become embroiled in the Russia inquiry .\n`` Certainly if Mr Nunberg has light to shed about what the president knew about the Trump Tower meeting , we would like to find out , '' Mr Schiff said , referring to his House Intelligence Committee 's investigation on Monday night .\nUS President Donald Trump has denied any knowledge of that meeting , which has become a central focus of a separate inquiry by special counsel Robert Mueller into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election and whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin .\nCongressman Mike Conway , who serves as leading chairman of the House Intelligence Committee , dismissed the idea of calling Mr Nunberg to testify , saying of the Trump Tower meeting : `` I think we 've pretty much explored that to death . ''\nMr Nunberg told the New York Daily News on Tuesday he is contemplating seeking treatment for alcohol abuse , a day after his extraordinary series of interviews on live television .\nHe complained to US media on Monday about being asked to share his email conversations with a long list of ex-campaign aides in response to a subpoena from Mr Mueller 's team .\nThe political operative , who helped launch Donald Trump 's presidential campaign before losing his job in 2015 , said in a round of media interviews at first he would not comply with Mr Mueller 's demand to testify before a grand jury .\nBut he later told the Associated Press he would probably end up complying .\n`` I think it would be really , really funny if they wanted to arrest me because I do n't want to spend 80 hours going over emails , '' he told MSNBC .\nWhile he thought investigators believed they had something on Mr Trump , he argued that the subpoena was unfair and added he would like Robert Mueller 's team to narrow its scope of inquiry .\nWhite House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders would not be drawn on Mr Nunberg 's remarks , saying : `` I 'm not going to weigh in on somebody that does n't work at the White House . ''\nSam Nunberg worked on the Trump campaign in 2015 until he was fired in August that year over racially charged Facebook posts .\nHe was later sued by Mr Trump for $ 10m ( Β£7.2m ) for breach of confidentiality .\nThe lawsuit was `` amicably settled '' out of court , a lawyer for the Trump Organization said at the time .\nMr Nunberg said Mr Trump was aware at the time of a June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower when a group of Russians offered his campaign staff damaging information about Hillary Clinton .\n`` You know he knew about it , '' Mr Nunberg told CNN . `` He was talking about it a week before . I do n't know why he went around trying to hide it . ''\nThe White House has repeatedly denied Mr Trump knew anything about that meeting .\nDuring Monday 's interviews with US media , Mr Nunberg said he had met Mr Mueller 's team for five-and-a-half hours over the weekend .\nHe said he would not appear before a grand jury to testify on Friday .\n`` I 'm not co-operating . Arrest me , '' Mr Nunberg said on live television . `` You want to arrest me ? Arrest me . ''\nAt times during the interviews , Mr Nunberg appeared to contradict himself .\nHe said : `` Trump may very well have done something during the election with the Russians . If he did that , I do n't know . ''\nBut Mr Nunberg also told CNN 's Jake Tapper : `` It 's the biggest joke to ever think Donald Trump colluded with the Russians . ''
|
allsides-corpus-287
|
The Obama administration β despite repeatedly assuring Congress that Iran would remain barred from the U.S. financial system β secretly mobilized to give Tehran access to American banks to convert the windfall of cash it received from sanctions relief under the 2015 nuclear deal into dollars , an investigative report by the Senate has revealed .\nA copy of the report , obtained by The βββ , outlines how Obama-era State and Treasury Department officials discreetly issued a special license for the conversion to a major Omani bank and unsuccessfully pressured two U.S. banks to partake in the transaction , all while misleading lawmakers about the activities .\nThe document , compiled by the Senate β s Republican-led chief investigative subcommittee , began circulating Tuesday , just as the Trump administration issued its harshest warnings to date to foreign governments and companies to avoid doing business with Iran or find themselves in the crosshairs of Washington β s reimposition of sanctions as part of Mr. Trump β s withdrawal from the nuclear deal .\nβ Companies doing business in Iran face substantial risks , and those risks are even greater as we reimpose nuclear-related sanctions , β said Sigal Mandelker , Treasury Department undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence .\nShe also called on foreign governments to harden their financial systems against β deceptive β Iranian transactions that ultimately channel money to terrorists .\nThe Iranian government β uses shell and front companies to conceal its tracks β as part of an elaborate scheme designed to procure cash for the Quds Force of Iran β s militant Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps , which the U.S. designates as a terrorist organization , Ms. Mandelker said .\nShe issued the warnings in a speech at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank as Iran announced Tuesday that it was formally moving ahead with preparations to increase its nuclear enrichment capacities β the sharpest response to date by the Islamic republic to Mr. Trump β s pullout from the nuclear accord .\nIranian officials said the increase , while provocative , does not violate its commitments under the nuclear accord .\nThe president sent shock waves around the world with his May 8 decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear pact and begin reimposing U.S. sanctions , which the U.S. , Europe , China and Russia had collectively lifted in 2015 in exchange for Iran β s promise to curb its suspect nuclear programs and allow international inspections .\nWhile Iran told the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency on Tuesday that it plans only to increase enrichment within limits set by 2015 deal , the announcement came with threats from a top Iranian official that the activities could be quickly expanded . The warning put fresh pressure on European leaders to keep the nuclear accord alive despite Mr. Trump β s withdrawal .\nThe head of Iran β s nuclear agency , Ali Akbar Salehi , said Tehran is prepared to dramatically increase its capacity for enrichment but that the work so far is limited to building a facility for assembling the centrifuges . He made the comment a day after Iran β s supreme leader , Ayatollah Ali Khamenei , ordered the increase in capacity and vowed that Iran would preserve its nuclear program despite the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 accord .\nThe Senate report focuses new scrutiny on the lengths President Obama β s team was willing to go to ensure the deal β s success as it was still being negotiated .\nThe Senate Homeland Security Committee β s permanent subcommittee on investigations probe contends that the Obama administration went out of its way to keep U.S. lawmakers in the dark about calculated and secretive efforts to give Tehran a back channel to the international financial system and to U.S. banks , facilitating a massive U.S. currency conversion worth billions of dollars .\nβ Senior U.S. government officials repeatedly testified to Congress that Iranian access to the U.S. financial system was not on the table or part of any deal , β according to a draft copy of the document obtained by The Times . β Despite these claims , the U.S. Department of the Treasury , at the direction of the U.S. State Department , granted a specific license that authorized a conversion of Iranian assets worth billions of U.S. dollars using the U.S. financial system .\nβ Even after the specific license was issued , U.S. government officials maintained in congressional testimony that Iran would not be granted access to the U.S. financial system , β the report said .\nSen . Rob Portman , the Ohio Republican who chairs the subcommittee , is set to outline his panel β s findings Wednesday .\nUnder terms of the nuclear deal , Iran was given the right to reclaim billions of dollars in state assets and bank accounts frozen by international sanctions , but it remained β illegal for U.S. persons , entities , and financial institutions to do business with Iran or parties on behalf of Iran . β\nThe ban included any β intermediary β transactions by U.S. banks to convert currency for Iran β a development that would have elevated the value of the Iranian assets on the global market and allowed Tehran to more easily move the money through the international banking system .\nOn the day the nuclear deal was implemented in 2015 , Tehran had some $ 5.7 billion worth of assets at Bank Muscat in Muscat , Oman , according to Senate investigators , who said Tehran moved quickly to request access to the U.S. dollar .\nOn Tehran β s request , Bank Muscat contacted the U.S. Treasury Department β s office of foreign assets control .\nAccording to the Senate report : β Muscat sought to convert $ 5.7 billion in Omai rials into euros . [ But ] because the rial is pegged to the U.S. dollar , the most efficient conversion was with an intermediary step through a U.S. bank using U.S. dollars . β\nObama Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in July 2015 that Iran would β continue to be denied access to the [ U.S. ] financial and commercial market β under the proposed accord , but the Treasury office went ahead with attempts to quietly allow the currency transaction sought by Iran .\nβ On February 24 , 2016 , OFAC issued a specific license to Bank Muscat authorizing Iranian assets worth roughly $ 5.7 billion to flow through the U.S. financial system , β according to the Senate report , which claims the move was made β even though U.S. sanctions prohibited it . β\nEven as office of foreign assets control officials directly β encouraged two U.S. correspondent banks to convert the funds , β the Treasury Department continued to deny it was working to facilitate the currency transaction , said the report , which cites a 2016 letter from the department to Sen. Marco Rubio , Florida Republican , and Sen. Mark Kirk , Illinois Republican , that contended the Obama β administration has not been and is not planning to grant Iran access to the U.S. financial system . β\nThe catch , according to Senate investigators , was that neither of the U.S. banks approached by the office of foreign assets control would take on the Iranian currency exchange β in part because of political concerns over the prospect of being found out to have secretly circumvented the remaining ban on U.S. transactions with the Islamic republic .\nDespite the Obama administration β s efforts , Iran was ultimately forced to convert its Bank Muscat assets to euros in small increments using European banks and without accessing the U.S. financial system , the Senate investigators said .\nMr. Portman said in a statement Tuesday night that β the Obama administration misled the American people and Congress because they were desperate to get a deal with Iran . β\nβ Despite claims both before and after the Iran deal was completed that the U.S. financial system would remain off limits , the Obama administration issued a specific license allowing Iran to convert billions of dollars in assets using the U.S. financial system , β Mr. Portman said . β The only reason this transaction wasn β t executed was because two U.S. banks refused , even though the administration asked them to help convert the money . β\nSuch sanctions , he added , β are a vital foreign policy tool , and the U.S. government should never work to actively undermine their enforcement or effectiveness . β
|
allsides-corpus-288
|
Washington ( CNN ) Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Friday that the US is suspending the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty , a key pact with Russia that has been a centerpiece of European security since the Cold War .\n`` For years , Russia has violated the terms of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty without remorse , '' Pompeo said , speaking from the State Department . `` Russia 's violations put millions of Europeans and Americans at greater risk . ''\n`` It is our duty to respond appropriately , '' Pompeo said , adding that the US had provided `` ample time '' for Russia to return to compliance .\nThe long-expected suspension , which has raised concerns about a renewed arms race with Moscow and put European allies on edge , goes into effect on Saturday . Pompeo 's announcement starts a 180-day clock to complete withdrawal unless Russia returns to compliance with the 1987 agreement .\nPresident Donald Trump and his senior officials had been signaling for months that they were ready to pull out of the INF treaty , which the US accuses Moscow of violating since 2014 .\n`` The United States has fully adhered to the INF Treaty for more than 30 years , but we will not remain constrained by its terms while Russia misrepresents its actions , '' Trump said in a statement Friday . `` We can not be the only country in the world unilaterally bound by this treaty , or any other . ''\nLater , at the White House , the President hinted to reporters that he 'd be open to negotiations on a new treaty but did not mention Russia by name -- the only other signatory to the pact .\n`` I hope that you 're able to get everybody in a big and beautiful room and do a new treaty that would be much better , but certainly I would like to see that , '' Trump said , according to pool reports . `` But you have to have everybody adhere to it and you have a certain side that almost pretends it does n't exist . '\n`` So unless we 're going to have something we all agree to we ca n't be put at the disadvantage of going by a treaty , limiting what we do , when somebody else does n't go by that treaty , '' Trump said .\nWhile Russia and the US are the only two parties to the treaty , but it significantly affects European security .\nThe ground-based nuclear tipped cruise missiles covered by the bilateral agreement can fly between 310 to 3,100 miles , making them a threat to Europe , where officials have unanimously backed the US decision , even as they consider their next steps and admit having little to no optimism that the treaty can be saved .\nIn a statement , NATO said America 's allies `` fully support '' the US decision because of Russia 's threat to Euro-Atlantic security and its refusal to provide any credible response or take any steps towards full and verifiable compliance .\nNATO urged Russia to use the next six months to `` return to full and verifiable compliance to preserve the INF Treaty . ''\nJUST WATCHED Top Kremlin official : We are not that threatening Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Top Kremlin official : We are not that threatening 02:21\n`` We are heading into a direction we have not been in in 40 years : no arms control limits or rules that we are both following , and that is very dangerous , '' said Lynn Rusten , a senior director for arms control and nonproliferation at the National Security Council during the Obama administration who is now a vice president at the Nuclear Threat Initiative .\nUS officials and lawmakers have expressed concern that the treaty is allowing China to gain a military advantage , as Beijing is not bound by the INF treaty 's limits on intermediate range missiles that currently constrain the US .\nTrump appeared to confirm this in his Friday remarks to reporters , saying , `` first of all you have to add countries '' to the treaty .\nBut a senior US administration official denied Beijing is a factor .\n`` There 's a lot of discussion about China , '' this official said , briefing reporters on the suspension . `` It is a reality that China is unconstrained , it is a reality they have more than 1,000 of these weapons , but for the United States this has nothing to do with China . This is solely about Russia 's violation of this treaty . ''\n`` We simply can not tolerate this kind of abuse of arms control , '' the official said .\nRussia has consistently denied being in violation of the treaty , and on Thursday , Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said talks with the US had n't yielded progress .\n`` Unfortunately , there is no progress . The US position remains rather tough and ultimatum-like , '' Ryabkov said , according to Russian state media outlet TASS .\n`` We told the US side that it is impossible to hold dialogue in the conditions of attempted blackmailing of Russia , '' he added .\nSenior US administration officials countered Thursday by laying out Russia 's repeated efforts to get the US to agree to dissolve the treaty and years of American effort to get Russia to comply , including 35 diplomatic engagements ranging from the highest political levels to technical talks .\n`` We have , unfortunately , very little to show for it , '' said a US official who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity , stressing that `` the onus is on Russia . ''\n`` Russia continues to deny its violations ... Russia will have this chance . If they are truly interested in preserving this treaty , this is their final chance , '' the official continued . `` It would be in Russia 's best interests to return to full and verifiable compliance . ''\nThis official noted the `` remarkable unity '' among the US and its European allies , but European officials say they 're concerned about the treaty dissolving and say they will use the six-month window to urge Russia to comply .\n`` It is clear to us that Russia has violated this treaty and that 's why we need to speak to Russia , '' German Chancellor Angela Merkel said at a press conference in Berlin on Friday , shortly before the US announced its intention to suspend the treaty .\nGermany will `` do everything we can '' to use the six-month deadline after the termination to hold further talks with Russia , Merkel said .\nEuropean officials discussing the fallout in the coming months point to a possible increase in Russian cyber activities , including its influence campaigns , Russia is likely to use the US withdrawal as an excuse to deploy systems elsewhere and the certainty of finger-pointing , as Moscow works to assign blame .\n`` Russia will feel more legitimized to continue what it 's doing now , but also increasing some of its efforts on missile technology and deploying them , '' said a European official .\nA second European official said that `` they will threaten , they will try to divide NATO , they 'll do anything but stay quiet . '' The Russians will likely argue that `` this is about the US and the US trying to destabilize the international order , '' this official said , stressing that Europe has been united in its stance , alongside the US , that Russia has been violating the treaty .\n`` The bigger picture is what kind of sign you 're sending out , what message you 're sending , '' said a third European official . `` For us , this treaty was extremely important for our security . What are we looking at instead '' if it is scrapped , the official asked .
|
allsides-corpus-289
|
Attorney General Bill Barr testified Wednesday that he believes `` spying did occur '' on the Trump campaign in 2016 , as he vowed to review the conduct of the FBI 's original Russia probe -- and the focus of a related internal review shifted to the role of a key FBI informant .\n`` I think spying did occur . The question is whether it was adequately predicated . β¦ I think it β s my obligation . Congress is usually very concerned with intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies staying in their proper lane , '' he testified before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee , while noting that `` spying on a political campaign is a big deal . ''\nBARR VOWS MUELLER REPORT RELEASE 'WITHIN A WEEK , ' AS DEMS RIP 'UNACCEPTABLE ' HANDLING AT HEATED HEARING\nThe comments follow a new report that the Justice Department β s internal watchdog also is scrutinizing the role of an FBI informant who contacted members of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election , as part of a broader review of the early stages of the Russia investigation . The New York Times reported that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz is looking into informant Stefan Halper β s work during the Russia probe , as well as his work with the FBI prior to the start of that probe .\nBARR REVEALS HE IS REVIEWING 'CONDUCT ' OF FBI 'S ORIGINAL RUSSIA PROBE\nHalper , an American professor who reportedly is deeply connected with British and American intelligence agencies , has been widely reported as a confidential source for the FBI during the bureau β s original investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election . That official counterintelligence operation was opened by then-senior agent Peter Strzok , who has since been fired from the bureau .\nDuring the 2016 campaign , Halper contacted several members of the Trump campaign , including former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos and former aide Carter Page . Page also was the subject of several Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ( FISA ) warrants during the campaign -- which is an issue at the heart of the IG 's investigation . Republicans , including President Trump , have alleged misconduct in the bureau and Justice Department β s handling of those FISA warrants .\n`` It was an illegal investigation . ... Everything about it was crooked , '' Trump told reporters on Wednesday , describing it as an attempted `` coup '' and reiterating his interest in digging into the probe 's origins . `` There is a hunger for that to happen . ''\nThe Times , in its report , noted that Halper also contacted former Trump campaign aide Sam Clovis . It is unclear whether Halper had the FBI β s permission to contact Clovis , according to the report .\nHorowitz , more broadly , is probing alleged wrongdoing related to the issuance of FISA warrants to surveil Page during the election . During a prior hearing on Capitol Hill on Tuesday , Barr testified that Horowitz β s investigation is expected to be complete by May or June .\nWhile vowing to release Special Counsel Robert Mueller 's now-completed Russia report in a matter of days , Barr also announced Tuesday that he was reviewing the origins of the Russia investigation at the FBI and the Justice Department , amid mounting calls for scrutiny of the probe 's beginnings from Trump and prominent congressional Republicans .\nβ More generally , I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all of the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted in the summer of 2016 , β Barr told the House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday .\nBARR ASSEMBLES 'TEAM ' TO LOOK INTO COUNTERINTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION ON TRUMP CAMPAIGN IN 2016 , OFFICIAL SAYS\nAlso on Tuesday , Fox News reported that a source said Barr had assembled a β team β to investigate the origins of the bureau β s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign .\nOn Wednesday , Barr testified that he has n't technically `` set up a team '' but has colleagues helping him as he reviews the case .\n`` This is not launching an investigation of the FBI , '' he stressed . `` Frankly , to the extent there were issues at the FBI , I do not view it as a problem of the FBI . I think it was probably a failure of the group of leadersβthe upper echelons of the FBI . I think the FBI is an outstanding organization and I am very pleased Director Chris Wray is there . ''\nHe added , `` If it becomes necessary to look over former officials , I expect to rely on Chris and work with him . I have an obligation to make sure government power is not abused and I think that β s one of the principal roles of the attorney general . ''\nThe FBI β s 2016 counterintelligence investigation , formally opened by Strzok , began with a β paucity β of evidence , according to former FBI counsel Lisa Page , with whom Strzok was romantically involved . During a closed-door congressional interview , Page admitted that the FBI β knew so little β about whether allegations against the Trump campaign were β true or not true β at the time they opened the probe , adding that they had just β a paucity of evidence because we [ were ] just starting down the path β of vetting allegations .\nPage also said in her interview that it was β entirely common β that the FBI would begin an investigation with just a β small amount of evidence . β\nBarr β s team will also review the FISA warrants issued against Carter Page . The issuance of the FISA warrants relied , in part , on the unverified anti-Trump dossier authored by ex-British Intelligence Agent Christopher Steele , who worked on behalf of Fusion GPSβa firm paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee through law firm Perkins Coie to do opposition research against the Trump campaign . In the dossier , Steele accused Page of conspiring with Russians . Page was not charged with any wrongdoing in either the FBI β s Russia probe or Mueller β s .\nFox News exclusively obtained internal FBI text messages last month showing that just nine days before the FBI applied for the Page FISA warrant , bureau officials were battling with a senior Justice Department official who had `` continued concerns '' about the `` possible bias '' of a source pivotal to the application .\nBarr β s review could also dovetail with the work U.S. Attorney John Huber has been doing . In 2017 , former Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Huber to review not only alleged surveillance abuses by the Justice Department and the FBI but also the handling of the probe into the Clinton Foundation and other matters .\nThe day following Barr β s release of his summary of the Mueller report , Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham , R-S.C. , said his panel also would investigate alleged FISA abuses at the start of the Russia investigation and called on Barr to appoint a new special counsel to investigate β the other side of the story. β Graham has been calling for a second special counsel since 2017 to investigate β whether or not a counterintelligence investigation was opened as a back door to spy on the Trump campaign . β\nAlso , House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes , R-Calif. , said over the weekend he was preparing to send eight criminal referrals to the Justice Department this week regarding alleged misconduct by DOJ and FBI officials during the Trump-Russia investigation . It is unclear whom Nunes will refer for investigation , and what the process at the Justice Department might be .\nWhen asked Tuesday about Nunes β referrals , Barr said he hasn β t seen them yet , but , β Obviously , if there is a predicate for investigation , it will be conducted . β
|
allsides-corpus-290
|
The White House has assailed President Donald Trump 's critics after he was cleared of Russian election collusion .\nPress Secretary Sarah Sanders told cable morning shows that Mr Trump is happy for the full report by special counsel Robert Mueller to be released .\nShe said the summary of the findings issued by the attorney general amounted to a full vindication of the president .\nMr Mueller 's long-awaited report , however , stops short of exonerating Mr Trump of obstruction of justice .\nIt was the culmination of a nearly two-year investigation that saw some of the president 's closest former aides prosecuted and , in some cases , imprisoned , though not for collusion with Russia .\nWhite House aides took to the airwaves on Monday to depict the president as the victim of an inquiry that should never have been allowed .\nWhen asked whether Mr Trump would support the release of the full report , Mrs Sanders told NBC News ' Today programme : `` He 's more than happy for any of this stuff to come out . ''\nSpeaking on CNN later on Monday , Mrs Sanders said it was `` outrageous '' that Democrats and journalists had spent two years portraying the president as an agent of a foreign power .\n`` That 's equivalent to treason , '' said the press secretary . `` That 's punishable by death in this country and that is outrageous . ''\nMrs Sanders said the `` obscene lie '' was used to try `` to overthrow the president of the United States '' .\nWhite House adviser Kellyanne Conway on Monday called on Democrat Adam Schiff , Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee , to step down .\n`` He ought to resign today , '' she told Fox News . `` He has been on every TV show 50 times a day for practically the last two years promising Americans that the president would be impeached or indicted . ''\n`` It was a complete and total exoneration , '' Mr Trump declared on Sunday , even though the report specifically states that he has not been fully exonerated .\nSpeaking at Palm Beach International Airport in Florida , he said : `` It 's a shame that our country had to go through this .\n`` To be honest , it 's a shame that your president has had to go through this . Before I even got elected it began and it began illegally . ''\nThe Republican president said the inquiry was an `` illegal takedown that failed '' .\nIn his four-page summary released on Sunday , Trump-appointed Attorney General William Barr wrote : `` The special counsel did not find that any US person or Trump campaign official conspired or knowingly co-ordinated with Russia . ''\nBut on the issue of whether justice was obstructed , Mr Mueller 's report says : `` While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime , it also does not exonerate him . ''\nThese include a federal inquiry in New York into possible election law violations by the Trump campaign and his businesses , and possible misconduct by the Trump inaugural committee .\nCongress is also continuing its own inquiries , mostly in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives .\nRepublican Senator Lindsey Graham summed up the conservative response on Monday , telling reporters Mr Trump was stronger today than ever .\n`` This cloud has been removed , '' he said . `` To those wanting an outcome of removing Trump , you 're going to be disappointed . ''\nOpposition Democrats are demanding full access to Mr Mueller 's report .\nThe Democratic Chair of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee , Jerry Nadler , said he would ask Mr Barr to testify in front of the House Judiciary Committee `` in the near future '' over `` very concerning discrepancies and final decision making at the Justice Department '' .\nRussia has denied being involved in hacking to influence the 2016 US election result .\nKremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov mocked suggestions there had been collusion , saying : `` I recall the words of the Chinese philosopher who said that it 's hard to find a black cat in a dark room , especially if it 's not there . Well , centuries pass and unfortunately they still do n't understand that across the ocean . ''\nAlexei Pushkov , a member of Russia 's upper house , tweeted : `` Democrats , Russophobes and leading media created a virtual conspiracy which existed only in their heads and in headlines , and nowhere else . ''\nLegally , the House Judiciary Committee will want to get its hands on the full Mueller report . They will want to see why Robert Mueller felt he could n't exonerate the president on obstruction of justice .\nAnd remember , obstruction of justice is one of the `` high crimes and misdemeanours '' that can lead to impeachment .\nThere will be an endless back and forth over that . And I would n't be in the least bit surprised if the subpoenas start to fly .\nCommittees have the right to call people and papers . They are bound to flex their muscles as much as they can . They want to play this long . They want to damage the president .\nTo prosecute the president for obstruction of justice there would have needed to be evidence of intent to obstruct . So even though the president fired former FBI chief James Comey and unleashed regular torrents of abuse on Twitter about the investigation , if his only motivation for those acts was to vent his spleen rather than break the law , then he 's done nothing wrong legally .
|
allsides-corpus-291
|
Michael Zeldin , a CNN legal analyst , served as deputy independent counsel , and later as independent counsel , in the investigation into allegations that the administration of George H. W. Bush violated the privacy rights of candidate Bill Clinton in the 1992 presidential campaign . He also served as a special counsel to Robert Mueller in the Department of Justice . Julian Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University , and author , with Kevin Kruse , of the new book `` Fault Lines : A History of the United States Since 1974 . '' The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the authors ; view more opinion articles on CNN .\n( CNN ) At the end of independent counsel Ken Starr 's investigation of Bill Clinton , Starr submitted directly to Congress his final report , which included 11 specific bases for possible impeachment .\nGiven the numerous obstruction of justice findings in part two of special counsel Robert Mueller 's report , many ca n't understand why Mueller did n't do the same .\nUnder the independent counsel law that was in effect at the time of Starr 's report , the independent counsel was required to advise the House of Representatives of any substantial and credible evidence that may constitute grounds for an impeachment .\nIn reaction to what some perceived as Starr 's `` salacious '' public report , however , in 1999 , Congress allowed the independent counsel law to lapse . In its place , the Department of Justice issued the special counsel regulations . These regulations , which remain in effect today , do not permit a special counsel to submit a report to Congress . They only permit a special counsel to submit a confidential report to the Attorney General .\nWe believe , and Michael Zeldin has written , that this constraint on Mueller ( and other limitations in the regulations ) make it imperative for Congress to consider resurrecting the independent counsel statute or a similar law .\nJUST WATCHED Former Whitewater Independent Counsel defends AG Barr amid criticism Replay More Videos ... MUST WATCH Former Whitewater Independent Counsel defends AG Barr amid criticism 04:27\nIt would take time to pass any new legislation , however , and that would only affect future investigations . But meanwhile , Congress is struggling to figure out what to do with Mueller 's findings . Our view is that it would be sensible for Congress to consider analyzing the Mueller report 's obstruction findings under the same standard as that of independent counsels -- by asking whether Mueller would have been obligated to advise the House of Representatives of any substantial and credible evidence that may constitute grounds for an impeachment .\nThis would give Congress , in its oversight capacity , a workable framework for analyzing whether they believe that an impeachment inquiry is warranted .\nIn the interest of time and to cut to the heart of the matter , Congress should primarily focus on the three key areas Mueller identified as most legally problematic . Specifically , Trump 's efforts to remove Mueller as special counsel and create a false narrative of those efforts ; Trump 's efforts to put an end to the Russia investigation ; and Trump 's firing of FBI director James Comey . ( Other acts -- for example , those relating to the investigation of Michael Flynn -- could be considered , too , if warranted by the initial inquiry . )\nIn each of these areas , Mueller found that all of the statutory requirements for an obstruction of justice prosecution were met . In each case , he found an obstructive act , a nexus to an official proceeding , and corrupt intent .\nIn his report , Mueller set forth substantial direct and corroborative evidence of obstructive conduct for each inquiry . And , as to each , Mueller refuted the constitutional and statutory defenses he anticipated would be made if charges were brought against the President .\nCongress , of course , will need to make its own determination , as impeachment is a political judgment informed by , but not dependent on , violations of statutory law .\nTo do this , each member of Congress will need to read the full Mueller report . In addition , Congress will need to be able to obtain all the evidence underlying the Mueller report ( as was done in the Starr investigation ) that pertains to the issues under review , compel the testimony of relevant witnesses ( so that Congress and the American people can assess their credibility ) , and hear from lawyers ( including Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein ) , constitutional scholars , and historians to obtain insight into whether the specific acts of alleged obstruction as well as the overall pattern of behavior that Mueller describes meets the Constitutional threshold of `` high crimes and misdemeanors . ''\nStay up to date ... Sign up for our new newsletter . Join us on Twitter and Facebook\nAs articulated by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 65 , high crimes and misdemeanors are `` offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men , or in other words , from the abuse or violation of some public trust . They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political , as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself . ''\nAfter that , Congress , with informed input from their constituents , will be in the best position to determine whether an impeachment inquiry is warranted .
|
allsides-corpus-292
|
Share All sharing options for : Intellectual humility : the importance of knowing you might be wrong\nJulia Rohrer wants to create a radical new culture for social scientists . A personality psychologist at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development , Rohrer is trying to get her peers to publicly , willingly admit it when they are wrong .\nTo do this , she , along with some colleagues , started up something called the Loss of Confidence Project . It β s designed to be an academic safe space for researchers to declare for all to see that they no longer believe in the accuracy of one of their previous findings . The effort recently yielded a paper that includes six admissions of no confidence . And it β s accepting submissions until January 31 .\nβ I do think it β s a cultural issue that people are not willing to admit mistakes , β Rohrer says . β Our broader goal is to gently nudge the whole scientific system and psychology toward a different culture , β where it β s okay , normalized , and expected for researchers to admit past mistakes and not get penalized for it .\nThe project is timely because a large number of scientific findings have been disproven , or become more doubtful , in recent years . One high-profile effort to retest 100 psychological experiments found only 40 percent replicated with more rigorous methods . It β s been a painful period for social scientists , who β ve had to deal with failed replications of classic studies and realize their research practices are often weak .\nβ Not knowing the scope of your own ignorance is part of the human condition β\nIt β s been fascinating to watch scientists struggle to make their institutions more humble . And I believe there β s an important and underappreciated virtue embedded in this process .\nFor the past few months , I β ve been talking to many scholars about intellectual humility , the characteristic that allows for admission of wrongness .\nI β ve come to appreciate what a crucial tool it is for learning , especially in an increasingly interconnected and complicated world . As technology makes it easier to lie and spread false information incredibly quickly , we need intellectually humble , curious people .\nI β ve also realized how difficult it is to foster intellectual humility . In my reporting on this , I β ve learned there are three main challenges on the path to humility :\nIn order for us to acquire more intellectual humility , we all , even the smartest among us , need to better appreciate our cognitive blind spots . Our minds are more imperfect and imprecise than we β d often like to admit . Our ignorance can be invisible . Even when we overcome that immense challenge and figure out our errors , we need to remember we won β t necessarily be punished for saying , β I was wrong. β And we need to be braver about saying it . We need a culture that celebrates those words . We β ll never achieve perfect intellectual humility . So we need to choose our convictions thoughtfully .\nThis is all to say : Intellectual humility isn β t easy . But damn , it β s a virtue worth striving for , and failing for , in this new year .\nIntellectual humility is simply β the recognition that the things you believe in might in fact be wrong , β as Mark Leary , a social and personality psychologist at Duke University , tells me .\nBut don β t confuse it with overall humility or bashfulness . It β s not about being a pushover ; it β s not about lacking confidence , or self-esteem . The intellectually humble don β t cave every time their thoughts are challenged .\nInstead , it β s a method of thinking . It β s about entertaining the possibility that you may be wrong and being open to learning from the experience of others . Intellectual humility is about being actively curious about your blind spots . One illustration is in the ideal of the scientific method , where a scientist actively works against her own hypothesis , attempting to rule out any other alternative explanations for a phenomenon before settling on a conclusion . It β s about asking : What am I missing here ?\nIt doesn β t require a high IQ or a particular skill set . It does , however , require making a habit of thinking about your limits , which can be painful . β It β s a process of monitoring your own confidence , β Leary says .\nWhen I open myself up to the vastness of my own ignorance , I can β t help but feel a sudden suffocating feeling\nThis idea is older than social psychology . Philosophers from the earliest days have grappled with the limits of human knowledge . Michel de Montaigne , the 16th-century French philosopher credited with inventing the essay , wrote that β the plague of man is boasting of his knowledge . β\nSocial psychologists have learned that humility is associated with other valuable character traits : People who score higher on intellectual humility questionnaires are more open to hearing opposing views . They more readily seek out information that conflicts with their worldview . They pay more attention to evidence and have a stronger self-awareness when they answer a question incorrectly .\nWhen you ask the intellectually arrogant if they β ve heard of bogus historical events like β Hamrick β s Rebellion , β they β ll say , β Sure. β The intellectually humble are less likely to do so . Studies have found that cognitive reflection β i.e. , analytic thinking β is correlated with being better able to discern fake news stories from real ones . These studies haven β t looked at intellectual humility per se , but it β s plausible there β s an overlap .\nMost important of all , the intellectually humble are more likely to admit it when they are wrong . When we admit we β re wrong , we can grow closer to the truth .\nOne reason I β ve been thinking about the virtue of humility recently is because our president , Donald Trump , is one of the least humble people on the planet .\nIt was Trump who said on the night of his nomination , β I alone can fix it , β with the β it β being our entire political system . It was Trump who once said , β I have one of the great memories of all time. β More recently , Trump told the Associated Press , β I have a natural instinct for science , β in dodging a question on climate change .\nA frustration I feel about Trump and the era of history he represents is that his pride and his success β he is among the most powerful people on earth β seem to be related . He exemplifies how our society rewards confidence and bluster , not truthfulness .\nYet we β ve also seen some very high-profile examples lately of how overconfident leadership can be ruinous for companies . Look at what happened to Theranos , a company that promised to change the way blood samples are drawn . It was all hype , all bluster , and it collapsed . Or consider Enron β s overconfident executives , who were often hailed for their intellectual brilliance β they ran the company into the ground with risky , suspect financial decisions .\nThe problem with arrogance is that the truth always catches up . Trump may be president and confident in his denials of climate change , but the changes to our environment will still ruin so many things in the future .\nWhy it β s so hard to see our blind spots : β Our ignorance is invisible to us β\nAs I β ve been reading the psychological research on intellectual humility and the character traits it correlates with , I can β t help but fume : Why can β t more people be like this ?\nWe need more intellectual humility for two reasons . One is that our culture promotes and rewards overconfidence and arrogance ( think Trump and Theranos , or the advice your career counselor gave you when going into job interviews ) . At the same time , when we are wrong β out of ignorance or error β and realize it , our culture doesn β t make it easy to admit it . Humbling moments too easily can turn into moments of humiliation .\nSo how can we promote intellectual humility for both of these conditions ?\nIn asking that question of researchers and scholars , I β ve learned to appreciate how hard a challenge it is to foster intellectual humility .\nFirst off , I think it β s helpful to remember how flawed the human brain can be and how prone we all are to intellectual blind spots . When you learn about how the brain actually works , how it actually perceives the world , it β s hard not to be a bit horrified , and a bit humbled .\nWe often can β t see β or even sense β what we don β t know . It helps to realize that it β s normal and human to be wrong .\nIt β s rare that a viral meme also provides a surprisingly deep lesson on the imperfect nature of the human mind . But believe it or not , the great β Yanny or Laurel β debate of 2018 fits the bill .\nFor the very few of you who didn β t catch it β I hope you β re recovering nicely from that coma β here β s what happened .\nAn audio clip ( you can hear it below ) says the name β Laurel β in a robotic voice . Or does it ? Some people hear the clip and immediately hear β Yanny. β And both sets of people β Team Yanny and Team Laurel β are indeed hearing the same thing .\nWhat do you hear ? ! Yanny or Laurel pic.twitter.com/jvHhCbMc8I β Cloe Feldman ( @ CloeCouture ) May 15 , 2018\nHearing , the perception of sound , ought to be a simple thing for our brains to do . That so many people can listen to the same clip and hear such different things should give us humbling pause . Hearing β Yanny β or β Laurel β in any given moment ultimately depends on a whole host of factors : the quality of the speakers you β re using , whether you have hearing loss , your expectations .\nHere β s the deep lesson to draw from all of this : Much as we might tell ourselves our experience of the world is the truth , our reality will always be an interpretation . Light enters our eyes , sound waves enter our ears , chemicals waft into our noses , and it β s up to our brains to make a guess about what it all is .\nβ The first rule of the Dunning-Kruger club is you don β t know you β re a member of the Dunning-Kruger club β\nPerceptual tricks like this ( β the dress β is another one ) reveal that our perceptions are not the absolute truth , that the physical phenomena of the universe are indifferent to whether our feeble sensory organs can perceive them correctly . We β re just guessing . Yet these phenomena leave us indignant : How could it be that our perception of the world isn β t the only one ?\nThat sense of indignation is called naive realism : the feeling that our perception of the world is the truth . β I think we sometimes confuse effortlessness with accuracy , β Chris Chabris , a psychological researcher who co-authored a book on the challenges of human perception , tells me . When something is so immediate and effortless to us β hearing the sound of β Yanny β β it just feels true . ( Similarly , psychologists find when a lie is repeated , it β s more likely to be misremembered as being true , and for a similar reason : When you β re hearing something for the second or third time , your brain becomes faster to respond to it . And that fluency is confused with truth . )\nOur interpretations of reality are often arbitrary , but we β re still stubborn about them . Nonetheless , the same observations can lead to wildly different conclusions .\nDifferent scientific models can have equivalent observational consequences . In # statistics , this is known as statistical equivalence ; in the philosophy of science , underdetermination of theory by # data . This GIF is a really good ( and beautiful ) # dataviz.https : //t.co/7P8wjdAjgO pic.twitter.com/eLTREWzh7F β Talia Bronshtein ( @ ininteraction ) December 7 , 2018\nFor every sense and every component of human judgment , there are illusions and ambiguities we interpret arbitrarily .\nSome are gravely serious . White people often perceive black men to be bigger , taller , and more muscular ( and therefore more threatening ) than they really are . That β s racial bias β but it β s also a socially constructed illusion . When we β re taught or learn to fear other people , our brains distort their potential threat . They seem more menacing , and we want to build walls around them . When we learn or are taught that other people are less than human , we β re less likely to look upon them kindly and more likely to be okay when violence is committed against them .\nNot only are our interpretations of the world often arbitrary , but we β re often overconfident in them . β Our ignorance is invisible to us , β David Dunning , an expert on human blind spots , says .\nYou might recognize his name as half of the psychological phenomenon that bears his name : the Dunning-Kruger effect . That β s where people of low ability β let β s say , those who fail to understand logic puzzles β tend to unduly overestimate their abilities . Inexperience masquerades as expertise .\nAn irony of the Dunning-Kruger effect is that so many people misinterpret it , are overconfident in their understanding of it , and get it wrong .\nWhen people talk or write about the Dunning-Kruger effect , it β s almost always in reference to other people . β The fact is this is a phenomenon that visits all of us sooner or later , β Dunning says . We β re all overconfident in our ignorance from time to time . ( Perhaps related : Some 65 percent of Americans believe they β re more intelligent than average , which is wishful thinking . )\nSimilarly , we β re overconfident in our ability to remember . Human memory is extremely malleable , prone to small changes . When we remember , we don β t wind back our minds to a certain time and relive that exact moment , yet many of us think our memories work like a videotape .\nDunning hopes his work helps people understand that β not knowing the scope of your own ignorance is part of the human condition , β he says . β But the problem with it is we see it in other people , and we don β t see it in ourselves . The first rule of the Dunning-Kruger club is you don β t know you β re a member of the Dunning-Kruger club . β\nPeople are unlikely to judge you harshly for admitting you β re wrong\nIn 2012 , psychologist Will Gervais scored an honor any PhD science student would covet : a co-authored paper in the journal Science , one of the top interdisciplinary scientific journals in the world . Publishing in Science doesn β t just help a researcher rise up in academic circles ; it often gets them a lot of media attention too .\nOne of the experiments in the paper tried to see if getting people to think more rationally would make them less willing to report religious beliefs . They had people look at a picture of Rodin β s The Thinker or another statue . They thought The Thinker would nudge people to think harder , more analytically . In this more rational frame of mind , then , the participants would be less likely to endorse believing in something as faith-based and invisible as religion , and that β s what the study found . It was catnip for science journalists : one small trick to change the way we think .\nβ How would I know if I was wrong ? β is actually a really , really hard question to answer\nBut it was a tiny , small-sample study , the exact type that is prone to yielding false positives . Several years later , another lab attempted to replicate the findings with a much larger sample size , and failed to find any evidence for the effect .\nAnd while Gervais knew that the original study wasn β t rigorous , he couldn β t help but feel a twinge of discomfort .\nβ Intellectually , I could say the original data weren β t strong , β he says . β That β s very different from the human , personal reaction to it . Which is like , β Oh , shit , there β s going to be a published failure to replicate my most cited finding that β s gotten the most media attention. β You start worrying about stuff like , β Are there going to be career repercussions ? Are people going to think less of my other work and stuff I β ve done ? β β\nGervais β s story is familiar : Many of us fear we β ll be seen as less competent , less trustworthy , if we admit wrongness . Even when we can see our own errors β which , as outlined above , is not easy to do β we β re hesitant to admit it .\nBut turns out this assumption is false . As Adam Fetterman , a social psychologist at the University of Texas El Paso , has found in a few studies , wrongness admission isn β t usually judged harshly . β When we do see someone admit that they are wrong , the wrongness admitter is seen as more communal , more friendly , β he says . It β s almost never the case , in his studies , β that when you admit you β re wrong , people think you are less competent . β\nSure , there might be some people who will troll you for your mistakes . There might be a mob on Twitter that converges in order to shame you . Some moments of humility could be humiliating . But this fear must be vanquished if we are to become less intellectually arrogant and more intellectually humble .\nHumility can β t just come from within β we need environments where it can thrive\nBut even if you β re motivated to be more intellectually humble , our culture doesn β t always reward it .\nThe field of psychology , overall , has been reckoning with a β replication crisis β where many classic findings in the science don β t hold up under rigorous scrutiny . Incredibly influential textbook findings in psychology β like the β ego depletion β theory of willpower or the β marshmallow test β β have been bending or breaking .\nI β ve found it fascinating to watch the field of psychology deal with this . For some researchers , the reckoning has been personally unsettling . β I β m in a dark place , β Michael Inzlicht , a University of Toronto psychologist , wrote in a 2016 blog post after seeing the theory of ego depletion crumble before his eyes . β Have I been chasing puffs of smoke for all these years ? β\nβ It β s bad to think of problems like this like a Rubik β s cube : a puzzle that has a neat and satisfying solution that you can put on your desk β\nWhat I β ve learned from reporting on the β replication crisis β is that intellectual humility requires support from peers and institutions . And that environment is hard to build .\nβ What we teach undergrads is that scientists want to prove themselves wrong , β says Simine Vazire , a psychologist and journal editor who often writes and speaks about replication issues . β But , β How would I know if I was wrong ? β is actually a really , really hard question to answer . It involves things like having critics yell at you and telling you that you did things wrong and reanalyze your data . β\nAnd that β s not fun . Again : Even among scientists β people who ought to question everything β intellectual humility is hard . In some cases , researchers have refused to concede their original conclusions despite the unveiling of new evidence . ( One famous psychologist under fire recently told me angrily , β I will stand by that conclusion for the rest of my life , no matter what anyone says . β )\nPsychologists are human . When they reach a conclusion , it becomes hard to see things another way . Plus , the incentives for a successful career in science push researchers to publish as many positive findings as possible .\nThere are two solutions β among many β to make psychological science more humble , and I think we can learn from them .\nOne is that humility needs to be built into the standard practices of the science . And that happens through transparency . It β s becoming more commonplace for scientists to preregister β i.e. , commit to β a study design before even embarking on an experiment . That way , it β s harder for them to deviate from the plan and cherry-pick results . It also makes sure all data is open and accessible to anyone who wants to conduct a reanalysis .\nThat β sort of builds humility into the structure of the scientific enterprise , β Chabris says . β We β re not all-knowing and all-seeing and perfect at our jobs , so we put [ the data ] out there for other people to check out , to improve upon it , come up with new ideas from and so on. β To be more intellectually humble , we need to be more transparent about our knowledge . We need to show others what we know and what we don β t .\nAnd two , there needs to be more celebration of failure , and a culture that accepts it . That includes building safe places for people to admit they were wrong , like the Loss of Confidence Project .\nβ In the end , β Rohrer says , after getting a lot of positive feedback on the project , β we ended up with just a handful of statements . β\nThere β s a personal cost to an intellectually humble outlook . For me , at least , it β s anxiety .\nWhen I open myself up to the vastness of my own ignorance , I can β t help but feel a sudden suffocating feeling . I have just one small mind , a tiny , leaky boat upon which to go exploring knowledge in a vast and knotty sea of which I carry no clear map .\nWhy is it that some people never seem to wrestle with those waters ? That they stand on the shore , squint their eyes , and transform that sea into a puddle in their minds and then get awarded for their false certainty ? β I don β t know if I can tell you that humility will get you farther than arrogance , β says Tenelle Porter , a University of California Davis psychologist who has studied intellectual humility .\nOf course , following humility to an extreme end isn β t enough . You don β t need to be humble about your belief that the world is round . I just think more humility , sprinkled here and there , would be quite nice .\nβ It β s bad to think of problems like this like a Rubik β s cube : a puzzle that has a neat and satisfying solution that you can put on your desk , β says Michael Lynch , a University of Connecticut philosophy professor . Instead , it β s a problem β you can make progress at a moment in time , and make things better . And that we can do β that we can definitely do . β\nFor a democracy to flourish , Lynch argues , we need a balance between convictions β our firmly held beliefs β and humility . We need convictions , because β an apathetic electorate is no electorate at all , β he says . And we need humility because we need to listen to one another . Those two things will always be in tension .\nThe Trump presidency suggests there β s too much conviction and not enough humility in our current culture .\nβ The personal question , the existential question that faces you and I and every thinking human being , is , β How do you maintain an open mind toward others and yet , at the same time , keep your strong moral convictions ? β β Lynch says . β That β s an issue for all of us . β\nTo be intellectually humble doesn β t mean giving up on the ideas we love and believe in . It just means we need to be thoughtful in choosing our convictions , be open to adjusting them , seek out their flaws , and never stop being curious about why we believe what we believe . Again , that β s not easy .\nYou might be thinking : β All the social science cited here about how intellectual humility is correlated with open-minded thinking β what if that β s all bunk ? β To that , I β d say the research isn β t perfect . Those studies are based on self-reports , where it can be hard to trust that people really do know themselves or that they β re being totally honest . And we know that social science findings are often upended .\nBut I β m going to take it as a point of conviction that intellectual humility is a virtue . I β ll draw that line for myself . It β s my conviction .\nCould I be wrong ? Maybe . Just try to convince me otherwise .
|
allsides-corpus-293
|
Ready for Thanksgiving ? Before you eat that turkey , I hope you think about why America has turkeys for you to eat . Most people do n't know .\nEveryone 's heard about that first Thanksgiving feast -- Pilgrims and Indians sharing the harvest . We like the drawings of it we saw in schoolbooks -- shared bounty .\nFewer people know that before that first feast , the Pilgrims nearly starved .\nThey almost starved because they acted the way some Bernie Sanders fans want people to act . They farmed collectively .\nBut communal farming creates what economists call `` the tragedy of the commons . ''\nThink about what happens if a bunch of ranchers hold land in common . Everyone brings cattle to graze . While that sounds nice , it also means every rancher has an incentive to bring lots of cattle to the pasture . They bring cow after cow until the pasture is overgrazed -- destroyed .\nFor this week 's YouTube video , I repeated an experiment economics teachers sometimes do to demonstrate the tragedy of the commons .\nI assembled a group of people , put coins on the floor in front of them and said , `` I 'll give you a dollar for each coin you pick up . But if you leave them down there for a minute , I 'll give you two bucks per coin , and then three bucks . Each minute the coins increase in value by a dollar . ''\nAs soon as I said `` Go ! '' everyone frantically grabbed for coins . No one wanted to wait because someone else would have gotten the money .\nCollective action makes people more greedy and short-sighted , not less .\nThen I changed the rules of the game . I divided the floor into segments , so each person had his or her own property . Then we played the game again .\nThis time there was no coin-grabbing frenzy . Now patient people anticipated the future .\n`` I want to reap the most benefit , '' said one . `` ( On the previous test ) I wanted it now , whereas this is going up , and it 's mine . ''\nExactly . When you own property , you want to preserve it , to allow it to keep producing good things .\nThat beneficial pattern disappears under collectivism , even if the collectivists are nice people . The Pilgrims started out sharing their land . When crops were ready to harvest , they behaved like the people in my experiment .\nSome Pilgrims sneaked out at night and grabbed extra food . Some picked corn before it was fully ready . The result ?\n`` By the spring , '' Pilgrim leader William Bradford wrote in his diary , `` our food stores were used up and people grew weak and thin . Some swelled with hunger . ''\nAdding to the problem , when people share the results of your work , some do n't work hard . The chance to take advantage of others ' joint labor is too tempting . Teenage Pilgrims were especially likely to steal the commune 's crops .\nHad the Pilgrims continued communal farming , this Thursday might be known as `` Starvation Day '' instead of Thanksgiving .\nFortunately , the Pilgrims were led not by Bernie Sanders fans or other commons-loving socialists , but by Governor Bradford , who wrote that he `` began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could ... that they might not still thus languish in misery ... After much debate ( I ) assigned each family a parcel of land ... ( T ) his had very good success , because it made every hand industrious . ''\nThere 's nothing like private ownership to make `` every hand industrious . ''\nThe Pilgrims never returned to shared planting . Owning plots of land allowed them to prosper and have feasts like the ones we 'll have Thursday .\nPrivate property became the foundation for building the most prosperous nation in the history of the world , a place where people have individual rights instead of group plans forced on everyone .\nWhen an entire economy is based on collectivism , like the Soviet Union was , it eventually collapses from inefficiency and misuse of resources .\nSo this Thanksgiving , thank private property . Every day , it protects us from the tragedy of the commons .
|
allsides-corpus-294
|
Washington ( CNN ) House Speaker Paul Ryan and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi projected a message of unity Thursday evening at the outset of the congressional baseball game .\nThe joint interview , a first for the two , with CNN 's Jake Tapper on `` Erin Burnett OutFront , '' came a day after House Majority Whip Steve Scalise and others were shot at a Republican baseball practice .\n`` He 's got a ways to go , '' Ryan said of Scalise . `` He 's going to recover . It 's going to take him some time . ''\nPelosi , who like Ryan was wearing Louisiana gear in honor of Scalise , said the injured member was a `` lovely person , '' and hailed the bipartisan spirit of the annual game .\nAsked if the political climate and incidents like Wednesday 's shooting indicated an increased threat to lawmakers , Ryan said it was incumbent on politicians to cool things down across the nation .\nRyan said , `` What we 're trying to do is tone down the rhetoric , lead by example and show people we can disagree with one another , we can have different ideas without being vitriolic , without going to such extremes . ''\nHe added that members of Congress had to meet with the public and needed to strike a balance between `` openness and security . ''\nPelosi noted that in the 2011 shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords , several of her constituents were also shot -- including a nine-year-old girl who died .\n`` When we evaluate the needs of our members it 's about protecting the members and their constituents as well , '' Pelosi said .\nBoth stressed repeatedly the need for politicians to step away from inflammatory remarks .\nAs for the prospect of passing legislation on a bipartisan basis that could prevent gun violence incidents like Wednesday 's shooting , Ryan pointed to existing mental health legislation .\n`` We 've made some pretty good progress on that , '' Ryan said . `` We now have to execute and implement that progress . ''\nPelosi said there is desire among Democrats for a task force on gun safety to study the issue .\n`` But that 's not for today , '' Pelosi said . `` Today is about coming together and celebrating the greatness of Steve Scalise . ''\nRyan and Pelosi have sought to present a unified front since the shooting . Shortly after the incident , the pair addressed a packed House chamber , calling for unity and condemning the attack .\nSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer echoed Pelosi and Ryan 's calls for unity .\n`` We want everybody to know that we 've always had a robust discussion of the issues in this country throughout our history , '' McConnell told CNN 's Anderson Cooper on Thursday in a joint interview with Schumer . `` But we do n't dislike each other . We work together all the time . ... We have our political arguments but at the end of the day , we are all Americans . And I think everybody needs to remember that because we 're all in this thing together . ''\nSchumer said he hopes the tragedy can bring the parties even `` closer together . ''\n`` We work together pretty closely before this tragedy , '' he said . `` But if it can help bring things closer together and help us all work closer together , it 's a horrible way to do it . We all pray for Mr. Scalise and all the other people 's speedy recovery , but let 's hope we can get some good at this tragedy. ``\nBoth agreed that arguments between Republicans and Democrats often make the news , but cooperation between the two parties does n't .\n`` If we can still , despite the rhetoric , work together in areas where we can work together and the Senate as the cooling saucer help and bring people together a little bit , that 's a very good thing and I know Mitch does because we 've talked about it , and I do -- we aim to do it , '' Schumer said .\nBut as several voices supportive of President Donald Trump , like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich , drew lines between anti-Trump rhetoric and the shooting , Pelosi pushed back earlier Thursday , arguing the Republican insistence that Democratic rhetoric was to blame for the shooting rang hollow , given the long record of `` vitriolic '' language from the Republican side of the aisle .\nThe alleged gunman expressed intense opposition to Republicans on social media and identified himself as a supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders .\nSanders took to the Senate floor on Wednesday to say the gunman had `` apparently volunteered '' for his campaign . He said the shooting `` sickened '' him and stressed his commitment to nonviolent action .\nIn the Thursday interview , Ryan said he wanted to find more opportunities for Republicans and Democrats to `` break bread '' together .
|
allsides-corpus-295
|
Are people who disagree with us necessarily evil ? Of course not . While advocating , defending , or fighting for our own principles and positions , harboring feelings of animosity toward our opponents is a poison that can rob us of our happiness and health .\nWhen I was in law school at Michigan nearly half a century ago , my criminal law professor shared a statement that I β ve never forgotten . He said that a clever person focuses on how he is different from others , while a wise person focuses on what he has in common with others . ( Thank you , professor Kamisar . )\nRecently , I found a point of agreement with a hardcore socialist . While doing some research about the allegations of sexual assault leveled against Virginia β s Lt. Gov . Justin Fairfax , I came across an article from the World Socialist Web Site . The author , Barry Grey , made two points that agreed with my conservative values : 1 ) Fairfax should not be denied due process of law ; and 2 ) we can β t automatically accept as true every allegation of sexual assault . ( Anyone familiar with the 1955 torture-murder of 14-year-old Emmett Till , whose female accuser recanted years later , would resist the siren call to β always believe women . β )\nI disagree with Grey β s overall politics . In his article , he laments the removal of Al Franken from the Senate β after he was accused of minor sexual improprieties. β His reason : Franken β s resignation shifted the balance of the Senate slightly toward the conservative side , rendering β abortion rights β less secure . Aha , I thought . Would Grey have defended pro-life Brett Kavanaugh β s right to due process last fall during Justice Kavanaugh β s confirmation hearings ?\nI went first to the Socialist Worker website , where I found a collection of opinions from eight of its contributors . Every single one of them called for Kavanaugh β s scalp , due process be damned . But when I tracked down Grey β s Oct. 4 commentary on the Kavanaugh hearings , he unflinchingly rebuked the Democratic lynch mob for rejecting β the presumption of innocence β and for showing β contempt for basic democratic rights , including due process. β Bravo ! While I remain miles apart from Grey β s political goals , I commend him for his integrity and courage in adhering faithfully to crucial principles of justice .\nThere is another recent issue where I find myself in agreement with a large number of people on the left . When Amazon announced that it was abandoning its plan to expand its headquarters into Queens , New York , the left exulted for a variety of reasons , most of them nonsensical and riddled with standard class-warfare boilerplate . Typical of the latter , Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) effusively wrote on Twitter , β Today was the day a group of dedicated , everyday New Yorkers & their neighbors defeated Amazon β s corporate greed , its worker exploitation , and the power of the richest man in the world . β\nWhat actually happened was that Amazon decided to walk away from nearly $ 3 billion in tax breaks because of the financial beating they were facing from a cabal of NYC unions and politicians . Whatever β greed β Amazon was guilty of was exceeded by the unions β greed . The scheme that had been hatched in the cesspool of Big Apple politics was that Amazon would be lured by tax breaks , and then the unions would latch onto Amazon and leech billions away from it . Amazon was being wooed as the patsy , or the conduit , through which the $ 3 billion of tax breaksβtax breaks that would have to be covered by the rest of the local taxpayersβwould pass through Amazon and end up in the pockets of unions and other political insiders .\nWhat Ocasio-Cortez called β the power of the richest man in the world β ( Jeff Bezos ) was no match for the power of the NYC political machine . That β s why Bezos wisely bailed out before his company could be fleeced . That prudent decision is a shame for the thousands of New Yorkers who would love to have been β exploited β ( Ocasio-Cortez β s characterization ) by one of the many six-figure jobs that Amazon would have created in Queens .\nAll that having been said , I join with the progressives in celebrating that NYC β s taxpayers will no longer have to be stuck paying for a $ 3 billion subsidy to a private business . There is no principle of justice that justifies such a lavish privilege being bestowed on any private enterprise , much less a business as large and profitable as Amazon . Such political cronyism is unfair and corrupt .\nTragically , such cronyism is often erroneously called β crony capitalism. β The truth is that there is no such thing as β crony capitalism β any more than there is β liquid ice β ; both terms are oxymorons . Capitalism is a social system of economic cooperation , based on private property and voluntary exchanges , in which the government plays the role of an impartial referee while consumers choose winners and losers in freely competitive marketplaces . Cronyism , on the other hand , is a repudiation of capitalism . With cronyism , the government abandons its role as impartial arbiter and instead intervenes to enrich special interests at the expense of everybody else . By its very nature , cronyism is a step toward socialism , because both involve the government picking economic winners and losers .\nProgressives deservedly win lots of popular support by opposing the abuses and unfairness of cronyism . Those of us who believe in free markets should oppose and denounce cronyism with equal vigor . When I read polls showing that capitalism is viewed with increasing negativity by Americansβparticularly young AmericansβI can β t help but feel that cronyism plays a big part in fostering that antipathy . What is so insidious about this is that people keep mislabeling cronyism as crony capitalism . Consequently , capitalism β s reputation sustains damage from unmerited association with the corrupt practice of cronyism .\nWe conservatives oppose cronyism because it is an assault on property rights and the rule of law . We can join with progressives in denouncing a privilege that politicians give to those who neither need it nor deserve it , and who certainly have no just claim to the wealth of their fellow citizens . If there is one area of public policy where left and right may unite today , it would be around the goal of eliminating the cronyism of corporate welfare .\nMark Hendrickson is an adjunct professor of economics and sociology at Grove City College . He is the author of several books , including β The Big Picture : The Science , Politics , and Economics of Climate Change . β\nViews expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times .
|
allsides-corpus-296
|
Latinos in Iowa , overlooked as a political force for years in the state that kicks off the U.S. presidential race , have been getting unprecedented attention in a too-close-to-call Democratic White House nominating fight .\nThe predominantly white state has seen the Hispanic share of its population more than double to 6.2 % since 2000 , making it Iowa β s biggest minority group and a crucial voting bloc that could spell the difference in Monday 's state caucuses and in the November election .\nA young girl is carried down steps during a Spanish spoken church service at St. Joseph Catholic Church . The population growth has spurred many Democrats seeking the nomination to face President Donald Trump in November to hire Latino or Spanish-speaking staff and tailor some campaign events to court Latinos , while activists have scrambled to register new Hispanic voters and maximize their clout .\nA lit up sign reading 'We speak Spanish ' in Spanish , stands outside a dental clinic . It has also changed the nature of life in some cities and towns in Iowa . In West Liberty , a small Hispanic-majority community with 3,700 residents , the school system has a dual-language program and some churches hold two services , one in English and one in Spanish . `` It has strengthened the town to have two cultures living and working together , with mutual respect , and it opens the door to more people moving here , '' said Brenda Arthur-Miller , the high school principal in West Liberty and director of the dual language program .\nPeople listen to the West Liberty Area Arts Council Friday Night Concert in Ron-de-Voo Park . But the growth in Iowa 's Hispanic population , a community largely of Mexican heritage , so far has not been matched by progress in its political power . Language barriers have hindered participation , particularly in the sometimes confusing caucuses . Hispanic activists estimate as few as 3,000 Latinos participated in Iowa 's 2016 presidential caucuses , out of more than 50,000 who were registered to vote . To help remedy that , the state Democratic Party has agreed to at least five Spanish-language satellite caucus sites on Monday . Some local officials are scrambling to get interpreters in place at other locations .\nA man drinks a beer during a Quinceanera celebration at Flamas Night Club . The League of United Latin American Citizens , a Hispanic advocacy group known more commonly as LULAC , launched a registration drive it says has signed up 10,000 new Hispanic voters ahead of Monday 's caucuses . It also held mock caucus sessions to spread the word on the process and help train potential voters on how they work . `` Our long-term goal is to keep doing the same thing through the November election and beyond . We want to keep the momentum going , '' said Nick Salazar , state director of LULAC and state co-chairman of the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign .\nLeft : A Pioneer sign stands in a field , on a farm .\nRight : An eagle model decoration , sits on the front yard of a house .\nChildren dance during a Quinceanera celebration at Flamas Night Club . The crowded field of Democratic presidential contenders has made up for it in this campaign , however , heavily courting Latinos in the state ahead of a general election campaign likely to be influenced by Trump 's divisive rhetoric and policies on immigration . For instance , the Sanders campaign , which has hosted more than a dozen `` Unidos con Bernie '' events around the state , created a Spanish-language digital ad featuring Sanders ' father , who immigrated to the United States from Poland .\nBilly Danner , a farmer , moves soy beans from a grain elevator to a truck , to be transported in the town of West Liberty .\nStory With the Hispanic population expected to more than double again by 2050 , according to the State Data Center of Iowa , Salazar said the community was trying to build a tradition of civic engagement . `` When people think about rural Iowa they think of white farmers , but many of these communities will keep becoming more diverse and more Latino , '' Salazar said .
|
allsides-corpus-297
|
β Biden is calming at a time when people are hearing nothing but nasty noise , and that juxtaposition is to his advantage , β says Jeff Link , an Iowa-based Democratic consultant .\nFor Mr. Biden , the volatile landscape is presenting an increasingly challenging balancing act . He is under renewed pressure to shore up support among progressives , without alienating swing voters who had been moving in his direction . Above all , he must somehow convince a fractured and exhausted nation that the problems it faces are fixable β and that finding consensus is both possible and desirable .\nThe pandemic has taken more than 100,000 American lives and sent the economy into a tailspin that has left millions unemployed . Over the past two weeks , the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police has sparked massive protests for racial justice across the country .\nBut after a stretch of tumultuous events nearly unprecedented in modern U.S. history , the task of unifying the nation has never seemed more daunting .\nFrom the start , Joe Biden has framed his candidacy around the concept of unity . β The country is sick of the division . They β re sick of the fighting , β the former vice president said at his campaign kickoff in Philadelphia last year .\nFrom the start , Joe Biden has framed his candidacy around the concept of unity . In his campaign kickoff speech last year , he accused President Donald Trump of fanning , rather than working to bridge , partisan and racial divides β evoking a nation that , in his view , was yearning to come together .\nβ The country is sick of the division . They β re sick of the fighting , β the former vice president said in Philadelphia .\nβ Our Constitution doesn β t begin with the phrase β We the Democrats , β β We the Republicans , β β he said . β We are all in this together . We need to remember that today , I think more than any time in my career . β\nMr. Biden β s decisive primary victories earlier this spring seemed to affirm that view . But as the campaign now moves into the general election phase β after a stretch of tumultuous events nearly unprecedented in modern U.S. history β the task of unifying the nation has never seemed more daunting .\nThe past three months have upended politics as usual , with the pandemic taking more than 100,000 American lives and sending the economy into a tailspin that has left millions unemployed . Over the past two weeks , the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police has sparked massive protests for racial justice across the country .\nFor Mr. Biden , the volatile landscape is presenting an increasingly challenging balancing act . He is under renewed pressure to shore up support among progressives who have been less enthusiastic about his candidacy , without alienating the swing voters who had been moving in his direction . Above all , he must somehow convince a fractured and exhausted nation that the problems it faces are fixable β and that finding consensus on those challenges is both possible and desirable .\nβ He β s being challenged to balance all these things , because Trump has so utterly failed to balance them , β says Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware . β This is a moment that demands leadership from someone who understands how to respond to a pandemic and bring us together . ... I think [ Mr. Biden ] is exactly the right man for the moment . β\nMr. Biden has seized multiple opportunities in recent weeks to try to cast himself as a healer in chief .\nOn the same day U.S. Park Police in Washington cleared a group of peaceful protesters from Lafayette Square with tear gas and rubber bullets so that Mr. Trump could pose for a photograph outside historic St. John β s Church , Mr. Biden was sitting in a black church in Wilmington , Delaware , listening to community leaders from 6 feet away .\nLess than 24 hours later , Mr. Biden gave a speech in Philadelphia to a country he described as β crying out for leadership. β He called on Congress to enact a law banning police chokeholds and to create β a model use-of-force standard. β He also promised to create a national police oversight commission .\nOn Monday , Mr. Biden was scheduled to meet privately with the Floyd family , and he is expected to attend Mr. Floyd β s funeral in Houston on Tuesday .\nβ Biden is calming at a time when people are hearing nothing but nasty noise , and that juxtaposition is to his advantage , β says Jeff Link , an Iowa-based political consultant who has advised several Democratic presidential candidates . β Biden doesn β t have to outshout Trump , but he has to show how he β s different . β\nMr. Biden has deep reservoirs of affection in the African American community , among whom he built enduring relationships during the Obama years . It was black voters who carried him to a resounding win in South Carolina , reviving a candidacy that had appeared to be on its last legs , and ultimately helping make him the Democratic nominee . He officially secured the 1,991 delegates needed to claim the nomination this weekend .\nBut he is viewed less favorably by a younger , more left-wing generation , which sees him as too moderate to bring about needed change . Mr. Biden does not support calls to β defund the police , β which has become a rallying cry on the left in recent days . While he favors increased spending on other social programs , his campaign said Monday , he wants to increase , not decrease , police budgets for things like body cameras and training .\nMr. Biden has long-standing ties to union groups , including cops and firefighters , some of which have been trending more conservative in recent election cycles , and which Democrats were hoping to win back this year . In recent days , some law enforcement groups have expressed unhappiness with what they see as Mr. Biden β s failure to demonstrate sufficient support for their side , showing just how difficult it may be for him β or anyone β to bridge those divides .\nIn a poll released last week by Monmouth University , 89 % of Democrats said they had β no confidence at all β in Mr. Trump β s ability to handle race relations . But only 32 % of Democrats had a β great deal β of confidence in Mr. Biden on the matter . Among Republicans , 58 % had a great deal of confidence in Mr. Trump , while 58 % had no confidence at all in Mr. Biden .\nProtesters gathering around a graffitied Robert E. Lee statue in Richmond , Virginia , last week said recent events had heightened their expectations of Mr. Biden from just two weeks ago .\nβ He thinks he β s automatically got the black vote because he was the right-hand man to a black president , β says Chenae Kirkland . β But he β s got to have a hand in these police departments , show us what he β d do , β adds her friend Leshayne Vialet , both bank employees .\nMaking promises is better than a photo op , they say β but it β s not enough .\nSome express concerns about Mr. Biden β s own track record during his 36-year career in the Senate . In the 1970s , he was a vocal opponent of school busing , and he helped write the 1994 crime bill , which many believe was a key contributor to mass incarceration that has disproportionately affected black men .\nβ I felt like he was involved with all the stuff that β s led to where we are now , β says Andre Lynch , an Uber driver , gesturing to the dozens of activists climbing up the Lee statue . He adds , β When he ends up running this country , he β ll have a chance to redeem himself , especially after watching all of this unfold . β\nOf course , to have that opportunity , Mr. Biden needs to win the election . Recent polls have shown him gaining ground against the president . According to a Fox News survey , Mr. Biden is now ahead in Wisconsin , Ohio , and Arizona β all battleground states the president won in 2016 , while the Monmouth poll has Mr. Biden with an 11-point lead over Mr. Trump overall . But these polls are mostly about Mr. Trump , says Patrick Murray , director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute .\nβ More so than any prior incumbent election , this is a referendum , β Mr. Murray says . But Mr. Biden still has to β get out there β and prove himself to Democratic voters .\nAnd Mr. Biden faces unique challenges when it comes to unifying his party , not least because of COVID-19 , says Robert Shrum , a longtime Democratic strategist and director of the University of Southern California β s Center for the Political Future . For three months , all campaign rallies have been canceled or turned into awkward β virtual β events , making it difficult for a candidate who thrives on rope lines and personal connections to reach voters .\nThe nominee β s acceptance speech at the party convention is typically an important moment , notes Mr. Shrum . β Just look at Al Gore in 2000 , β he says . β He gained 15 to 18 points in 47 minutes. β But this year β s Democratic convention is increasingly looking like it will be held online , diminishing Mr. Biden β s ability to generate a big bounce .\nIt β s also unclear if televised debates between the candidates will happen . In a debate , Mr. Biden would have an opportunity to try to blunt Mr. Trump β s charges that the former vice president is β senile β and β sleepy , β just as John F. Kennedy countered Richard Nixon β s claims that he was too young and inexperienced to assume the presidency in 1960 .\nIn the potential absence of these traditional events , Mr. Biden will need to be creative in how he engages voters , says Mr. Shrum . And his vice presidential pick will likely carry even more weight β not only because of Mr. Biden β s age , but also because of the absence of other high-profile campaign moments .\nAbove all , say several strategists , Mr. Biden needs to try to stay in the public eye as he has over the past week , and propose policies that follow through on his promise to bring unity .\nβ Part of [ Mr. Trump β s ] strategy will be to undermine voters β confidence in Joe Biden , β says Monmouth β s Mr. Murray . β That β s why Biden has to be out there β so he can change people β s minds from β I think he can do a good job β to β I know he can do a good job . β β\nAt the same time , Mr. Biden has made a point throughout the campaign of keeping the focus less on himself and more on the country .\nIn 2019 , Mr. Biden β s campaign announcement video was centered on Charlottesville , Virginia , where two years earlier white supremacists had shocked the nation as they marched with tiki torches . In the video , Mr. Biden referenced Mr. Trump β s response to the event as a key moment that pushed him to run for president .\nβ We are in a battle for the soul of this nation , β he said . β We can β t forget what happened in Charlottesville . Even more important , we have to remember who we are . β\nGet the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox . By signing up , you agree to our Privacy Policy\nβ I see Joe responding in a way that reflects who he β s always been , β says Senator Coons . β It β s not about him . It β s about us . β
|
allsides-corpus-298
|
Jordan Peterson , the controversial academic , has launched a new anti-censorship website that will only take down offensive content if specifically ordered to by a US court .\nThe psychology professor from Toronto said that Carl Benjamin , the failed Ukip MEP candidate who speculated about raping the Labour MP Jess Phillips , had agreed to test the subscription-only site , named Thinkspot .\nHow dangerous is Jordan B Peterson , the rightwing professor who 'hit a hornets ' nest ' ? Read more\nPeterson has a cult following among rightwingers for controversial views about identity politics and has become a hate figure for many on the left . Earlier this year the University of Cambridge rescinded an offer of visiting fellowship to Peterson after backlash from staff and students .\nPeterson said he hoped the site would be a censorship-free alternative to Patreon , an online membership service that at one stage made the Canadian $ 80,000 per month .\nHe said : β It β ll be a subscription service . And so that β s partly what makes it a replacement for Patreon to some degree , because we want to be able to monetise creators . β\nThe terms of service for the new site take an extreme position on free speech . Peterson said : β Once you β re on our platform , we won β t take you down , unless we β re ordered to by a US court of law . That β s basically the idea . So we β re trying to make an anti-censorship platform . β\nPeterson , who describes himself as a β professor against political correctness β said that Benjamin , who blogs under the name Sargon of Akkad , was one of a handful of controversial figures who had been invited to test the initiative .\nHe said : β I think we β ve got four , five or six people who are lined up . [ Dave ] Rubin is going to use it . I β m going to use it , James Altucher , Jocko Willink , Michael Shermer , oh and Carl Benjamin , Sargon of Akkad . They β ll be our first beta testers fundamentally . β\nPeterson called for more testers of the site on his Twitter account . He said : β I β m backing a new platform called Thinkspot , currently in beta . Get on the waitlist here , exciting announcements coming very soon . β\nComments on the site would be voted on by users on a thumbs up or down basis . β If your ratio of down votes to up votes , falls below 50/50 , then your comments will be hidden , β Peterson said .\nHe said there were still problems on the site to iron out , but added : β It would be nice to have a censorship-free platform if we could figure out how to do that . β\nβ’ This article β s subheading was amended on 24 June 2019 to change the description of Jordan Peterson from a β rightwing academic β to a β controversial academic β .
|
allsides-corpus-299
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.