202204985caic2324 - Tumblr blog

[202204985caic2324]

Washington’s finest: Bill Gates, a Bambi award winner, philanthropist and Microsoft co-founder.

Bill Gates, a Seattle native, is well known for both his philanthropy work and his work in Microsoft, the company he co-founded with Paul Allen in 1975 in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The company’s headquarters have been in Bellevue, Washington since 1979 and remain there to this day. 

Microsoft is one of Washington’s largest employers providing over 50,000 jobs as well as working closely with Washington State University to provide a scholarship designed to support students from Washington who are pursuing STEM degrees and are from low and middle income households. 

As well as his work with Microsoft he runs the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation with his now ex-wife, Melinda and in 2013 received a Bambi Millenium Award for their work in global health and development. 

He described the Bambis as “a bit like the German Oscars” and spent his time on stage while accepting his award thanking Germany for their leadership in foreign aid and their support and actions relating to the work he and Melinda were being recognised for. 

The Bill & Melinda Foundation has spent over $65 billion since 2000 working to create equal opportunities for every child, campaigning to raise the visibility of global health and ultimately lowering the number of children under five who die each year globally. 

In 2000 there were over 65 deaths per 1000 live births of children under five globally but in 2022 there were 37 deaths per 1000 live births of children under five globally. 

The Gates’ were new parents when they set up their foundation and found that the majority of children under five were dying from entirely preventable diseases like pneumonia, diarrhea and malaria which was a horrifying reality for any parent. 

While Bill Gates enjoyed a rather lavish awards ceremony with a traditional red carpet filled with spectators and photographers, it doesn’t take away from the good work he and Melinda won the award for and the incredible work their foundation continues to do.

[202204985caic2324]

Pressure mounts on Biden over war in Gaza after "Uncommitted WA" campaign successfully causes over 80,000 uncommitted ballots.

For many, especially young Democrats, the way Biden has handled the war in Gaza is concerning and has made many doubt if they can, in good conscience, vote for him again.

A recent poll found that 69% of Democrats believe Biden “should do more to pressure Israel to ease the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.” and despite his recent expression of heartbreak in relation to the civilian casualties for some it feels too little too late. 

Across the country those opposed to the war have been protesting for months in an attempt to pressure officials to support a ceasefire and in January 2024 Waleed Shield, a Democratic strategist, outlined the idea of using an uncommitted vote to “demonstrate a large rejection of President Biden’s backing and financing of the Israeli government’s war in Gaza”. 

This was a massively effective strategy with organisers only aiming for 10,000 uncommitted votes in the Michigan primaries and in the end more than 101,000 Michigan Democrats cast a ballot for uncommitted. 

Not every state has the option to cast an uncommitted ballot but within just a couple of weeks of the Michigan campaign launch the “Uncommitted WA” campaign began and it has proven to be almost just as effective. The Washington democratic primaries saw uncommitted ballots represent 9.9% of the total vote (86,652 votes). 

As of the 5th of March there are 20 uncommitted delegates heading to the Democratic National Convention in August and while Biden is already the presumptive nominee those uncommitted delegates represent hundreds of thousands of democrats whose faith in Biden has taken a serious hit. 

Washington hasn’t voted Republican in a presidential election in almost 40 years and that is unlikely to change in 2024 but the uncommitted ballots clearly demonstrates a disconnect on crucial issues between Biden and a large proportion of Democrats.

[202204985caic2324]

The Road to Reform: Washington's Journey to Abolish the Death Penalty and the racial inequality that drove it.

In 2014 Democratic Governor Jay Inslee announced he would be enforcing a moratorium on the death penalty in Washington after ‘careful review’ as it was clear that the use of capital punishment was inconsistent and unequal. 

In 2018 in State v. Gregory the Washington Supreme Court declared the state’s death penalty was unconstitutional as it was applied in ‘an arbitrary and racially discriminatory manner’. 

A study by the University of Washington, which was cited by the judges, proved that juries were about four times more likely to sentence a Black defendant to death compared to a white defendant for similar crimes.

The court's decision meant that the eight people who had been on death row had their sentences converted to ‘life in prison without release’.

There had been previous attempts to remove the death penalty from the state’s statute but they failed to receive a vote in the full House until the state legislature voted in favour of SB 5087 which officially removed execution from state law in April 2023.  

This bill faced criticism from Republicans with one claiming it was an ‘example of the interests of criminals being put ahead of… victims and their families’. 

Inslee hasn’t always advocated for the end of capital punishment but for the past decade has been clear on his stance that the death penalty cannot be given without unfair racial implications. 

Not only are there moral responsibilities at play but also fiscal ones, for the five executions Washington has carried out since 1976, each one cost the state around $24 million. 

According to Inslee it’s ‘vastly cheaper to put people in jail for life’ but he also doesn’t believe victims' families should be dragged through the many court battles and appeals that usually come with death penalty cases. 

No one has been executed by Washington since 2010 and as of right now no one ever will be again but with 62% of Americans believing the death penalty should be legal including 45% of Black Americans, 51% of Democrats and 54% of 18 to 29 year olds this deeply divisive issue is far from solved. 

[202204985caic2324]

Persecuted, septic and forced to give birth: the realities of a post-Roe America.

For many the reality is far worse than they could have ever expected so some are fighting back, potentially a fight for their health, liberty and the future generations to come. 

The repeal of Roe vs Wade in June 2022 may not have taken a lot of people by surprise, especially after the initial majority draft indicating that the court was going to strike down Roe v Wade was leaked in May 2022 but the devastating impact of the abortion bans that have since come into effect have been unprecedented. As of January 8th 2023 there were 14 states including Texas, North Dakota and Mississippi that had bans in place that mean abortions are prohibited in almost all circumstances with one of the most extreme bans being in Texas. 

In 2021 Texas enacted a trigger ban that meant extremely restrictive abortion measures would come into effect almost immediately if Roe was overturned and the S.B.8 bill was also enacted that essentially put a ban on abortions at six weeks, which is often before a person would know they were pregnant. This piece of legislation allowed private individuals to pursue legal action against abortion providers or those who aid and help with abortions and the effect of this extreme legislation was almost immediate; a nearby abortion clinic in Denver saw an increase of 520% in patients travelling from Texas. Technically women should be allowed an exemption to the six weeks ban if there is a ‘medical emergency’ where the mother has a ‘life threatening condition’ while pregnant or there is a ‘serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function’. 

This exemption doesn’t account for any situation where the foetus is diagnosed with a fatal or life limiting condition and even a pregnant person who is often having a medical emergency may struggle to be awarded an exemption to the extreme ban. In many cases medical professionals and hospitals are fearful of the threatened jail time and potential six figure fines if they provide emergency healthcare that could potentially be seen as an illegal abortion. There is such a lack of clarity surrounding what care medical professionals can provide when someone is experiencing pregnancy complications that there is often a delay in care or patients are so worried about being accused of having an abortion they don’t seek help until it is almost too late. 

Recently Kate Cox sought an abortion in Texas after she discovered that her unborn child had a fatal condition that according to her physician would have meant the child was unlikely to survive birth and if Kate continued with the pregnancy it would have likely impacted her ability to become pregnant again in the future. Kate already had two children with her husband and had been clear that she wished to have more in the future so this wasn’t a choice she made lightly but she felt as if this was the best choice for her and her family.

In the eyes of her doctor Kate should have received a ‘good-faith exception’ to the abortion ban to allow her to safely end the non viable pregnancy but the Texas Attorney General got involved in the case after a lower Texas court granted the exemption. The Attorney General responded by threatening Kate’s doctors and the hospitals they worked at with criminal consequences like 99 years of jail time and the loss of medical licences. 

The Texas Supreme court refused to uphold the decision made by the lower court but by the time the ruling was made Kate had left the state to have an abortion elsewhere, as she should have been free to do in her home state surrounded by her loved ones. Regardless of a person’s personal circumstances any person capable of pregnancy should be free to make their own medical choices under the advice and support of their medical team. Especially when the consequence of not being able to do that is having a child in a country with no guaranteed paid parental leave, extremely high levels of child poverty and an unacceptably high maternal mortality rate, as of 2018 there was a massive 17.4 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births. 

Not to mention that any reason a pregnancy isn’t the right choice for the person carrying that pregnancy is a perfectly acceptable reason to have an abortion, it doesn’t matter if that person already has kids and can’t afford anymore or simply doesn’t want to bear the burden of pregnancy and child rearing. 

When Kate first researched her options she found that many other women in Texas had also been unable to have an abortion in medical emergency situations and had come together to tell a court about their experiences. Kate decided that she also wanted to go public with the heartbreaking and frustrating situation she found herself in, at the time she became the first woman to sue for abortion access while pregnant since the repeal of Roe v Wade. 

For many, Kate’s story particularly resonated with them and sent the message very clearly that the Texas laws are too extreme and border on cruel. It makes it seem like Texas has very little regard for people capable of pregnancy and their concerns about their welfare and their future health. Doctors have been forced under these laws to delay life saving treatment and watch a patient almost reach a point of no return before being able to act under the fear of legal and professional repercussions. 

While the repeal of Roe v Wade has undoubtedly increased the persecution and fear associated with abortion there has always been situations that seem to be examples of law enforcement criminalising reproductive healthcare. Between 2000 and 2020 61 people, including 7 minors, were criminally investigated or arrested for either helping someone end their pregnancy or ending their own. In many of these cases ‘self-managed abortions’ are not actually banned and only 14 of these cases were illegal under ‘self-managed abortion’ laws but in many of the cases they were charged under laws that prosecutors were able to make fit their criminal case. 

In these cases, which could absolutely be seen as a state is using its power illegitimately to wrongfully charge people, 54 cases involved adults and of the 42 that made it to criminal court 40% of the cases involved people of colour. 

People of colour are far more likely to be disproportionately affected by the repeal of Roe v Wade and the further abortion bans especially when states limit organisations and clinics like Planned Parenthood. In 45% of the cases that were reported to the police for a suspicion of a ‘self-managed abortions’ a healthcare provider or social service worker were the ones who tipped off the police. People of colour are more likely to experience racism in the healthcare sector and are often at a much higher risk for complications and death during birth but the injustice in their reproductive freedoms doesn’t end there. 

Historically, abortion was fairly common and unregulated until the mid 1800s with the limit usually being around the four month mark before a woman could feel any foetal movements but over 50% of those who were supplying reproductive care were black women, some of whom were enslaved, as white men were rarely involved in anything obstetric before the civil war. While abortion didn’t become illegal until after the civil war the rules for black women and white women were vastly different and the systematic racism black women face when accessing reproductive healthcare now has a dark history revolving around slavery and the idea that white men had the ultimate say. 

According to the laws pre-civil war a white woman could have an abortion with the help of a midwife, who were massively trusted and important parts of the community, yet a black woman couldn’t. Under law, a white man would own his enslaved women in all ways including their reproductive systems and by ensuring black women had children he was able to continue the cycle of enslavement. 

Some enslaved women had access to herbs that would stimulate menstruation and essentially end the pregnancy but they would often have to do it in secret and if anything were to go wrong there would be no time to recover or access medical care. While slavery may have been abolished over 150 years ago black women and women of colour in general still face far harsher judgement around their choices regarding having children or not. Yet black women in particular have to take into account the dangers associated with giving birth as the rate for maternal mortality in black women is 2.6 times higher than the rate for white women. 

This figure depicts maternal mortality rates by race and Hispanic origin in the United States 2018-2021 and clearly shows how disproportionately black women are affected by the maternal mortality crisis in the US, in 2021 alone black women had a maternal mortality rate of 69.9 deaths per 100,000 live births. Contributing factors to this include the deeply entrenched racism in US society and doctors' seeming unwillingness to believe black women when they are in pain or feel as if something is not right, this causes higher maternal deaths but also leads to black babies being more likely to die or be born prematurely. 

Angelica Lyons is a black woman from Birmingham, Alabama who worked as a public health instructor at the University of Alabama and when she became pregnant with her first child it was a time of great joy and excitement yet it soon turned into a painful and terrifying experience. Angelica began to experience extreme stomach pain that sent her to the hospital on more than one occasion but she was often ignored and just sent home despite her extreme pain and begging for help. She was ignored until the pain became so bad that her baby’s heart rate plummeted and she had no other option but an emergency caesarean where it soon became clear that she had been suffering from an undiagnosed case of sepsis. 

This healthcare scenario had nothing to do with an abortion or Angelica being forced into pregnancy but it has everything to do with the experiences black women have when it comes to making choices surrounding childbirth, pregnancy and contraception. Alabama has the third highest maternal mortality rate in the country and has an almost complete ban on abortion but why should a black woman be forced into pregnancy when she is 2.6 times more likely to die during birth? Situations like this make it so unbelievably obvious that while the ‘pro-life’ movement claims to be about saving innocent lives or advocating for those that can't, they are willing to ignore systemic racism that negatively impacts millions of adults and children. 

Black Americans experience higher rates of illnesses like asthma, diabetes, high blood pressure and Alzheimer’s largely in part due to having less access to medical care which also means their life expectancy is shorter. For a long time black people have almost been blamed for their health conditions as if their genetics or lifestyle choices were mainly responsible but in reality things like housing restrictions and lack of access factor massively. In the past two decades alone the increased mortality rate in African Americans means there have been an additional 1.6 million deaths compared to white Americans. 

Now more than ever the lack of paid parental leave, high maternal deaths and deeply entrenched racism in both society and the healthcare system are incredibly important issues as by losing the legal protection Roe V Wade provided millions of people capable of pregnancy it means they no longer have full control over their own bodies. For many people who are capable of pregnancy the Supreme Court's decision to send the United States of America back decades if not more in terms of reproductive healthcare and liberation was a devastating blow and something that made it seem as if their country is making choices that are not only unpopular but dangerous. 

The US is one of four countries in the past 30 years to have rolled back abortion protections alongside Poland, El Salvadour and Nicaragua making it a part of forcing 40% of women of reproductive age to live under restrictive laws, that is around 753 million women. Not only was the choice to repeal Roe V Wade extremely dangerous and a choice that I personally found deeply upsetting, it was also a decision that massively goes against what the majority of Americans believe is the right thing to do. Around 80% of Americans believe abortion should be legal in some form with around two thirds of women disapproving of the decision and 52% of people saying that the overturning is a ‘step backward for America’. 

Currently ongoing in Texas is a lawsuit that was filed by ‘The Center for Reproductive Rights’ on behalf of seven original plaintiffs but that number has since grown to over 20 but when it was originally filed it was on behalf of five Texas women who were denied abortion care and as a result faced risks to their health, fertility and lives. Alongside those five were two doctors (obstetrician gynaecologists) who felt trapped by these extreme bans and as if they were unable to help their patients in any meaningful way. 

Amanda Zurawski is the lead plaintiff in this case and was denied an abortion despite experiencing preterm labour while only 18 weeks pregnant and when she went to a Catholic hospital was turned away as they could still detect a foetal heartbeat. Only three days later she returned to the hospital showing signs of an extreme infection and was diagnosed with sepsis but by this point the only option was an emergency abortion that caused her to spend three days in intensive care fighting for her life. 

The infection damaged her fallopian tubes to the point it has permanently closed and has impacted her ability to become pregnant again and she now has to rely on IVF which is both an expensive and very invasive process. Surely the Texas exemption on the basis of there is a ‘serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function’ would be applicable here but Amanda was left to suffer for far too long and her situation is unfortunately a perfect example of doctors and hospitals living in fear of the backlash of performing abortions to the detriment of their patients lives. 

In August 2023 a judge ruled on this lawsuit and stated that the state’s abortion ban is far too restrictive for women who are suffering from severe pregnancy complications and that doctors must be allowed to act in their best interests without fear of criminal charges. This ruling could have been seen as a potential victory but almost immediately the Attorney General blocked this ruling and sent an appeal to the Texas supreme court much like what happened with Kate Cox. 

For Amanda Zurawski the brief joy was immense when it seemed possible that a court in Texas might actually side with those who are suffering the consequences of these extreme and cruel bans and for her and the other plaintiffs it felt worth sharing their experiences and trauma despite the immense pain it causes them. 

Yet why should these women have to expose themselves to extreme hatred and vile comments from the right wing when all they want is to be able to access the medical care that is guaranteed to them by their human rights? 

On a personal note, I find the choice to overturn Roe V Wade one I physically feel ill over and while I do not have to live under these bans myself the idea of how many people are going to be forced into pregnancy, child rearing or trapped in a dangerous situation due to their pregnancy makes me so deeply sad and frustrated. This very much feels like a step backwards for millions of people and I am not sure who this choice benefits but I know for a fact it is going to more harshly impact those of a lower economic class and people of colour. 

Being able to make their own choice regarding abortion for some, is the difference between life and death and by taking such a personal medical choice out of the hands of the individual it effectively places them at the mercy of their state and often the conservative politicians and judges that sees these abortion bans as the right way forward. 

Is there any recovery from this or is America doomed to be the land of the free but only for those without the capability of pregnancy?

[202204985caic2324]

Hungry for the Holidays: Christmas reality isn’t always fitting of a Hallmark storyline.

Hallmark movies are known for being ‘gentle affairs’ that aim to give people a sense of nostalgia and some ‘harmless entertainment’ but in actual fact they often depict very traditional, conservative ideas of family and romance and are always apolitical. 

These stories are primarily centred around white characters and often include women leaving their independent, career focused lives in favour of a rural life with their male love interest. There is always a happy ending and even if many of the storylines may seem a little far fetched these films are hugely popular. 

For many children this year the reality of Christmas is quite different with 12.8% of US households facing food insecurity and 1 in 5 children (13 million) not knowing where their next meal is coming from. This food insecurity and living in poverty overwhelmingly affects children of colour with 1 in 7 children of colour living in poverty. 

This time of year is hugely stressful for low-income families with the average American spending around $1000 on Christmas each year. For many this just isn’t an option as bills still need to be paid and there isn’t any money for extras- this pressure exists all year round but is far more intense around the holidays which often centre around food and gift-giving. 

When an AI bot was shown 1000 hours of Hallmark movies it created its own screenplay about a heartwarming tale of a widowed single mother who worked for a small-town globe company but the reality for a lot of single parent families living in rural towns is a lack of job opportunities, limited transportation and high poverty rates- around 46% of families with a single mother live in poverty. 

Jill Biden may have been inspired by ‘childlike marvel and awe’ for this year's White House decorations but as the year comes to an end and federal relief programs covering healthcare, food assistance, housing and childcare expire many children won’t feel much ‘Magic, Wonder and Joy’ as their families continue to struggle. 

[202204985caic2324]

Is this really the end? SAG-AFTRA National Board says yes to deal with AMPTP but the 160,000 union members may feel differently.

In June members of Screen Actors Guild- American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) voted to go on strike if they couldn’t reach a deal with studios by June 30th and this vote was approved by a 98% margin. However, members didn’t actually walk off set until July 14th as their contract with industry representatives didn’t expire until midnight on July 12th. 

SAG-AFTRA was not alone with voting on strike action as the Writers Guild of America (WGA) announced its 11,500 members would walk off set on May 2nd after six weeks of negotiations with Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP). AMPTP represents more than 350 producers, streamers, studios and networks including Disney, Netflix and Amazon during negotiations for industry-wide contracts. 

This was the first time in 63 years that both unions were  on strike simultaneously and caused massive repercussions as even acting alone WGA had been able to shut down most productions in N.Y and LA with use of picket lines. By having both unions on strike, struck companies (those represented by AMPTP) were missing key actors and crew members which meant new projects weren’t being promoted and continuing production was virtually impossible. 

Although the SAG-AFTRA National Board voted to approve the new deal for contracts, some board members have concerns regarding the AI provisions in this new deal. Both Shaan Sharma and Anne-Marie Johnson voted against the new contract due to AI, “Without staving off AI, everything we achieved is for naught.” said Johnson while Sharma commented that in regards to AI “We didn’t get any meaningful protection”. 

In the new contract with AMPTP, Studios would be required to seek an actor’s consent before a “digital replica” of their voice or likeness could be used and would receive compensation when it was. When using their digital likeness for photography or sound track Studios must get consent based on a “reasonably specific description of the intended use”.  If an actor has died the Studios must get permission from either their estate or the union. 

For some these protections don’t go far enough as the use of “synthetic performers”, which are AI creations which don't look like any specific actor, aren’t prohibited. The companies will only have to notify the union of their use and will “bargain in good faith” if they want to use a synthetic creation instead of a human performer. 

There is some disagreement over whether the language around the appearance of synthetic creations is enough to ensure these creations don’t closely mimic existing actors.

[202204985caic2324]

Insurrectionist or Presidential candidate? The 14th Amendment may just render Trump ineligible to take office again.

A five day lawsuit hearing began in Colorado on the 30th of October to disqualify Donald Trump from being on the US Presidential ballot for 2024 through the use of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This section bars anyone who may “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the Constitution after having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution, as Trump would have as President. 

This lawsuit as well as ones in Minnesota, New Hampshire and Michigan have been filled on the basis that Trump's actions regarding the January 6th Capitol attack could be seen as an incitement to rebel against the Constitution after he told supporters “they rigged an election” referring to Biden and what Trump called “radical left Democrats”. He then went on to say “We will never concede” before encouraging the crowd to “fight like hell” and telling them “we’re going to the Capitol”. 

Trump’s attorneys have argued that the Colorado case should be dismissed as the plaintiffs have been unable to prove that Trump’s actions went beyond giving a speech and cannot prove he “incited” anything. All attempts made by Trump’s legal team to have the lawsuit dismissed were denied by Colorado judges, including on the 26th of October only four days before the start of the trial. 

The Colorado lawsuit was filed back in September in Denver by 6 Colorado voters, 4 Republicans and 2 independents with the help of a watchdog group from Washington, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics. These individuals argue that if Mr Trump were to win the Republican nomination it would deprive them of the opportunity “to vote for a qualified candidate”. 

Trump’s campaign has drawn attention to the fact that this particular lawsuit is being supported by a ‘liberal nonprofit’ in a state that voted for Biden in 2020. Trump’s spokesperson Jason Miller said “They send money to these dark money groups- they go to a Democratic jurisdiction and a Democratic Judge,”. 

This section of the constitution was originally designed to prevent Confederates from taking over the government by returning to their old federal and state positions. Gerard Magliocca from Indiana University began researching this section of the Constitution in late 2020, and without even mentioning Trump, testified in court that he had discovered 150 year old court rulings that would seemingly prove this section applies to Presidents that encouraged an insurrection as well as those who physically participated.  

Regardless of the outcome of Colorado’s lawsuit Trump isn’t finished facing legal challenges and this case will likely end up in the US Supreme Court. 

[202204985caic2324]

Biden tells Israel ‘You’re not alone’ but will he extend the same message to Muslim Americans?

Tragically on the 14th of October 2023 Palestine-American 6-year-old Wadea Al-Fayoume was murdered after he was stabbed 26 times by the landlord of the property he and his family were living in. His Mother was also injured in the attack and suffered over a dozen stab wounds that meant she was unable to attend her own son's funeral.  

This attack has been regarded by local police as a “senseless and cowardly act of violence.” and is now being investigated by the Department of Justice as a hate crime. 

This attack is a horrifically violent example of the Islamophobic attacks Muslim Americans have suffered for decades. In the days,  months and years after 9/11 Muslims increasingly found themselves as the victims of anti-Arab and Islamophobic attacks. According to the FBI hate crimes against Muslims rose 1617% from 2000 to 2001 with some victims being beaten, attacked or even held at gunpoint for even being perceived as Muslim. 

For many Muslim Americans they feel as if time is limited before attacks like the ones that were seen in the aftermath of 9/11 become common in response to the Israel-Hamas war. It is also important to mention while Muslim Americans are fearful of violent repercussions as a result of this war Anti-Jewish sentiments are also on the rise as well as the risk of violent retaliation.  

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Israeli-Palestinian affairs, Andrew Miller,  has stressed in recent interviews that the Biden administration has no intent to “stoke anti-Arab sentiment” and that the administration is taking the safety of minority groups “very, very seriously”. 

Despite these reassurances many Muslim Americans feel abandoned and let down by Biden, specifically Muslim voters in Michigan which was a key Swing State in 2020. Rep. Alabas Farhat, a democrat representing Dearborn which includes one of the largest Muslim and Arab American communities in the country, is already mobilising voters to leave the top of their ticket blank when they vote next year. He says “It’s never too late to do the right thing” but also warns Biden and Democrats “do not be surprised if there are consequences for your actions.”

[202204985caic2324]

The clear divisions among Republicans was like blood in the water for Democrats, practically guaranteeing the end of McCarthy’s speakership. 

On the 2nd of October 2023 Matt Gatez, who has long been a thorn in McCarthy’s side as one of the most difficult conservative Republicans, formally filed a motion to eject the speaker in a move that has not been attempted since 1910 and no attempt before has ever been successful. However, on the 3rd of October 2023 Kevin McCarthy became the first speaker to ever be ejected with 216-210 voting to remove him, this included all Democrats and eight Republicans. 

For many the motivations behind Gatez, who is a fierce Trump ally, filing this motion could be seen as revenge for McCarthy working with Democrats to prevent a Government Shutdown through the stop-gap plan that passed 355 to 91, with 209 democrats and 126 Republicans voting in favour and 90 Republicans and 1 Democrat in opposition. 

This plan ensured the Government would remain open until mid-November and included natural disaster aid as well ensuring salaries for millions of federal and military personnel. Previous versions of the bill had called for slashing spending and imposing harsh immigration restrictions but McCarthy knew those measures would not pass the Democrat controlled Senate. 

In the eyes of many McCarthy paid the ultimate price for months of unsuccessfully attempting to appease extreme right wing Republicans as it simultaneously created tension and grievances with Democrats who strongly oppose the ideas and policies of those hard-right conservatives. Senator Chuck Schumer commented, after the Senate vote had closed, "After trying to take our government hostage, MAGA Republicans won nothing.” which adds to this idea that cooperation with members like Gatez and other Trump allies is just not something Democrats see as an option. 

Initially after his removal McCarthy informed House Republicans he had no intentions of running for speaker again but the situation developing in the Middle East may have caused a change of heart. McCarthy has now signalled that if elected he would step back into the Speaker role to ensure the bipartisan calls for emergency aid to Israel could be answered quickly.

[202204985caic2324]

Learning Agreement

I am hoping to develop a new understanding and perspective of the social and political events that influence and inspire a large amount of the news stories I consume and I think an important way of doing this will be by engaging with my peers and sharing our individual perspectives based on the same new stories. Blog-writing isn't a format I have much experience with and I feel as a student blogger I have a certain responsibility to ensure any content I share is factual and without prejudice and to make it clear this blog represents my interpretations of current events. In my mind a blog is a less formal format of assignment and without adapting my writing style I will struggle to meet these specific marking criteria, so it is vital I spend more time formatting and editing my writing to adapt to this different style and criteria. I can sometimes struggle to remain impartial when discussing more sensitive new stories relating to things like trans rights, abortion, migrant detention centres and gun reform but I hope by hearing my peers engage respectfully with their views, even if they differ from mine, I will be able to remain respectful and offer critical and insightful input to class discussion.