#and they HAVE passed legislation that is currently hurting millions of US citizens | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

coprelawland · 4 years

Text

The Highest Priority: Corporate Influence Over Definitions Of Violence And Terrorism in the U.S.

By Sarah Rodowick, University of Colorado Boulder Class of 2021

January 22, 2021

On December 29th, 2020, over 3,000 Aspen, Colorado residents were left without heat due to what appeared to be tampering in several Black Hills Energy sites. This, along with a marking that reads “Earth First!”, as well as the FBI’s involvement, have led some to believe that this could be an act of eco-terrorism[i]. Eco-terrorism has not been very prevalent in Colorado – or the United States – ever since a major group belonging to the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) – which formed out of the Earth First! movement – was arrested and tried by the FBI for causing millions of dollars in damages to private property during the 1990s and early 2000s[ii]. Despite someone writing Earth First! at the site of the energy tampering, it is unlikely that this event was the work of a major eco-terrorist cell, nor would anybody belonging to such a group risk coming forward to claim the act out of fear of persecution. Even though this wasn’t an instance of eco-terrorism, it makes one wonder why eco-terrorist groups, and their actions, are no longer prevalent or talked about in the news cycle. For example, ELF’s arson in 1998, which targeted Vail Ski Resorts, remains the “largest act of ecoterrorism in the United States,” causing up to $12 million in damages, and yet seems to have become largely forgotten by the public[iii].

Part of the reason for ELF’s downfall can be attributed to the media’s presentation of its members as well as the United States political and legal systems’ protection of corporate interests, which eventually led ELF to become the United States’, “highest domestic terrorism priorities”[iv]. Organizations such as Wise Use which has been described as a “well financed right-wing effort that uses corporate funding to fashion a phony grassroots initiative in an attempt to derail the environmental movement,” influenced which kind of terminology was used in the news media coverage of ELF and their actions, which in turn influenced the public’s perception of the Earth Liberation Front[v]. On top of corporate influence, the FBI’s reaction to ELF also had a major influence on how seriously the public perceived eco-terrorism to be. 9/11 gave Homeland Security and the FBI the funding and political support they needed to properly handle ecoterrorism in the way they wanted[vi]. This, in combination with lobbyist funding, created more laws which specifically targeted members of ecoterrorist groups and placed greater sanctions on the actions of ecoterrorists, regardless of whether their actions caused harm or not[vii]. The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), according to the Atlantic, is to itself, “an organization dedicated to the advancement of free market and limited government principles,” while being “a shadowy back-room arrangement” between conservative lawmakers and corporations to its critics[viii]. ALEC drafted legislation that would crack down on the ecoterrorist threat, and a revised version of it was eventually introduced and agreeably passed by both the Democratic and Republican parties. ALEC’s law “succeeded in criminalizing ‘interference’ in the activities of any entity with a connection to an animal enterprise,” and “it also increased the maximum penalty for causing economic damage, from three years in prison to 20”[ix].

The harsh sanctions placed on ELF and its members makes one think about what the purpose of the law should be in the first place, and who exactly it should or is meant to protect. Laws should not be created solely or specifically to protect corporate interests and should instead reflect the concerns of the greater society. Unfortunately, large corporations have the money to invest in groups and activities that they believe can and will harm their business, and since we live in a consumerist capitalist society, many of us average citizens are compliant in letting this continue to happen. Not only is ELF’s story an example of how the law can be manipulated to protect corporate interests, but it also demonstrates the amount of control these interests have over the media’s presentation of corporate threats and therefore the control they have over public perceptions of certain issues. The right-wing domestic terrorist threat, for example, was not considered to be as much of a problem as the eco-terrorism movement, despite being responsible for 80 percent of “extremist related murders” between 2002 and 2018 (compared to 17 percent by Islamic movements)[x]. The lack of appropriate public outcry to this violence and terrorism comes from the lack of industry interest, and is evidence that, in the U.S., the destruction of assets and property is considered a worse crime than taking a human life. Despite the violence and extremism coming from the right, the media has constantly refused to label such acts as domestic terrorism, which sends a message that perhaps these crimes are not as bad as they seem to the public[xi]. The recent vandalism and riot at the United States Capitol is an example of this, since damaging government property and killing a capitol officer in an attempt to cause an uprising should fall under the definition of terrorism[xii]. All of this seems to signal that perhaps the law shouldn’t be protecting organizations that continue to hurt our health, the environment, and our pockets, and instead place more sanctions on companies’ ability to inform and influence the public’s general or popular belief.

Future and present radical movements such as the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, which reached new aggressive heights over this past summer over the perpetual police violence against African Americans and people of color, should be careful to make sure their goals don’t go against corporate interests. Despite some looting and vandalism, the BLM movement has overall been good at aligning their cause with those of the Democratic party and its lobbyists [xiii]. In this current age it has become popular or mainstream to be a politically correct activist, which creates a massive consumer base that can come together to boycott certain companies that don’t align with their ideas. Although there was a lot of opposition and terrorist branding of BLM protesters from the right, the black and college-aged vote and support is essential for the Democratic party to remain in power[xiv]. Therefore, their lobbyist groups are motivated to make sure their interests align themselves with the interests of BLM. Especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, when business had already slowed down and companies were beginning to suffer, many industry groups had no interest attacking the BLM movement out of fear that its supporters may stop providing these companies with the patronage they need. This was evident when various companies posted that they supported BLM on their social media pages[xv]. Whether or not this alignment of interests is honest and for the greater good and future of the BLM cause or if it was only created to protect corporate interests has yet to be seen. One thing is for sure though, unlike members of ELF who tended to belong to white middle-upper class families and who had never considered the prospects of jail time, many members of the BLM movement come from families who belong to a long line of individuals that have been oppressed, subverted, and vilified by the media. When compared to ELF, it therefore seems like the U.S. legal and political system will have a harder time belittling and silencing the BLM cause.

______________________________________________________________

[i] Tackett, Megan. (29 Dec 2020). “The Big Chill.” Aspen Daily News.

https://www.aspendailynews.com/news/the-big-chill/article_4e91556a-4989-11eb-81b0-47175cda31d7.html

Auslander, Jason. (28 Dec 2020). “FBI aids in investigation of gas pipeline sabotage that turned heat off in Aspen.”

The Colorado Sun. https://coloradosun.com/2020/12/28/aspen-gas-pipeline-ecoterrorism-sabotage/

[ii] Leader, H. Stephen and Probst, Peter. (2003). “The Earth Liberation Front and Environmental

Terrorism.” Terrorism and Political Violence, vol.14, no.4. Doi: 10.1080/09546550390449872.

[iii] Sullivan, Robert. (20 Dec 1998). “The Face of Eco-Terrorism.” The NewYork Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/20/magazine/the-face-of-eco-terrorism.html.

[iv] United States, Department of Justice. (2006). Eleven Defendants Indicted on Domestic Terrorism Charges: Group Allegedly Responsible for Series of Arsons in Western States, Acting onBehalf of Extremist Movements. Government Printing Office. https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2006/January/06_crm_030.html.

[v] Joosse, Paul. (April 2012). “Elves, Environmentalism, and “eco-terror”: Leaderless resistance and media coverage of the Earth Liberation Front.” Crime, Media, Culture: An InternationalJournal, vol.8, no.1. Doi: 10.1177/1741659011433366.

[vi] Brown, Alleen. (23 March 2019). “The Green Scare.” The Intercept.

https://theintercept.com/2019/03/23/ecoterrorism-fbi-animal-rights/

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Scola, Nancy. (14 April 2012). “Exposing ALEC: How Conservative Backed State Laws Are All Connected.”

The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/04/exposing-alec-how-conservative-backed-state-laws-are-all-connected/255869/

[ix] Brown, Alleen. (2019). [See above].

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Ibid.

[xii] Kanno-Youngs, Z., & Tully, T. (19 Jan 2021). “He Dreamed of Being a Police Officer, Then Was Killed by a Pro

Trump Mob.” The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/08/us/politics/police-officer-killed-capitol.html

[xiii] Radnitz, S., & Hsiao, Y. (24 Aug 2020). “Are Black Lives Matter protestors peaceful or violent? Depends on whom you ask.” The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/24/are-black-lives-matter-protesters-peaceful-or-violent-depends-whom-you-ask/

[xiv] Frey, William H. (12 Nov 2020). “Exit polls show both familiar and new voting blocs dealed Biden’s win.”

Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/research/2020-exit-polls-show-a-scrambling-of-democrats-and-republicans-traditional-bases/

[xv] Jan, T., McGregor, J., Merle, R., and Tiku, N. (13 June 2020). “As big corporations say, ‘black lives matter,’ their track records raise skepticism.” The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/06/13/after-years-marginalizing-black-employees-customers-corporate-america-says-black-lives-matter/

0 notes

news-lisaar · 4 years

Text

0 notes

saraseo · 4 years

Text

0 notes

jswdmb1 · 7 years

Text

The Scientist

“I was just guessing At numbers and figures Pulling the puzzles apart”

- Coldplay

I feel a need to give an unsolicited opinion on the tax bill so I’m ending my break early to weigh in on this topic while things are still pending. Wait, you say, didn’t the bill pass the Senate ending the debate? While that is true, but the bill is a long way from becoming law and I do not think the debate is over. The Senate version still must be reconciled with the House version and then the consolidated bill has to be passed by both houses. Since the Republicans are doing this with no bipartisan support (they aren’t even giving Democrats a copy of the bill), they should be able to accomplish that task. But, you never know in this political environment as the Senate bill passed 51-49 and the House is much harder to control. There could be last minute provisions that were put into the Senate bill that a caucus of House members will balk at. There is also the minor technically of having the president sign the bill into the law. While at this point, I question his ability to read anything beyond 140 characters, and I’m certain he would sign a blank piece of paper if put in front of him, he is a true wild card and his support should never be considered a given.

But, let’s assume what we have in front of us graduates from bill to law (cue the Schoolhouse Rocks music!) and our tax code is revamped. I’ll start by saying that I’ve worked with governments in a finance and accounting capacity at many levels for a number of years; so, I at least think it is an informed opinion. I’ll also qualify my comments by saying I haven’t read the pending legislation cover to cover (it is unlikely few in Congress or the White House have either), but I have read enough about it to give a macroeconomic perspective. Finally, I’ll state, for the record, that while my social views would be defined by most as liberal, my stance on fiscal policy skews conservative. I do believe in a central government that provides basic services to its citizens, social safety nets to those that need it, and a federal system that aids in the conservation of our natural resources to ensure a future for our country. Those are good things for which to raise taxes. What I am against is waste, special interest spending that doesn’t contribute to the common good, and inefficiency.

With that background, I would be voting no against any current version of the tax bill. A simplified explanation for my stance would be that no thought has been put into this bill, but that is not true. Actually, quite a bit of design by Republicans has been taking place for a long time to get to this point. No credit for that should be given to the current president, who would sign any bill just to say he did it. But, seasoned Republicans have been working on this for years waiting for their moment and they have it with their patsy in the Oval Office. The problem is that there are a few Republican senators left who can’t stomach the fact that this bill does nothing to fix the real problem with the tax code or the bigger issue of the dysfunctional way governments in this country approach finance and accounting. If any of them had real courage, they would not just ask for simple rate rollback triggers or settle for the last-minute throw-ins they got to support getting something passed. Instead, they should be leading the charge for true tax reform in these three areas:

Tax Rates - I agree that rates could be reduced. I also think that elimination of the estate tax should also occur (if you have a fair system in place to get people’s money when they are alive then there is no reason to tax them after they die). A flat tax is regressive and hurts those in poverty terribly, but rates should be simplified. I would have personal rates at two levels: 0% and 20%. The first $100,000 you earn is on the house. Everything after that gets taxed at a flat 20%. That creates an effective flat tax without being regressive. Corporations get three rates. They still get the first $100K on the house. That helps really small business that are essentially passing through their income to the owner. Everything after that up to $1,000,000 is taxed at 10%. That will really stimulate the economy for the mid-sized companies that are the oil in our economic engine. Everything over a million goes to the 20% rate. I am also in favor of elimination of capital gains taxes and the alternative minimum tax. The first penalizes growth and investment and is unnecessary if you properly tax the initial income earned that was used for the investment. The second is plain and simple just a stupid political mechanism. The reason no one understands AMT is because it is non-sensical, and it is completely unnecessary if your tax code is logical in the first place. The current plans I have seen seem to unfairly skew the cuts to big corporations, special interests and the wealthy that feed the politicians piggy banks. There is enough to spread it around to give everyone a taste, so why not do it (that is a rhetorical question – they won’t do it because politicians do not care about anyone that doesn’t write them a check). That’s why growth under current plans is independently projected to only be 0.8%. If more money went back into the hands of consumers and small businesses that are really the backbone of the American economy that number would be higher and the shocking deficits being projected would be much lower.

Deductions - I’ll give you an insider tip: deductions are stupid. Really stupid. Think Kohl’s. They give you all these coupons and deals with 50% off but it’s all a marketing ploy to get you to buy marked up crap that you could probably get cheaper on a net basis somewhere else without all the markdowns. Deductions work the same way. They are just vehicles for politicians in both parties to give breaks to special interests. I would eliminate all deductions except for two - charitable contributions and the use of pre-tax earnings to pay for health insurance and flexible spending accounts. I keep those two not because I’m altruistic (though I think both are good things to encourage with a tax break) but because both directly keep costs down at the federal level by reducing the need for social services. That’s it - everything else is gone. This is where you start screaming at me through the computer (I can’t hear you by the way), but remember the first $100,000 is on the house in my plan. Most of us won’t need a deduction because most of what we make isn’t getting taxed. Tax code is complicated mostly because of deductions. Get rid of them, and that problem is solved along with the unfair nature of their use.

Revenue Expansion & Expense Reduction - We all look at taxes through the narrow prism of what we have to fork over, but income tax code is one of many components in the federal accounting of things. I’ve lost most of you already with this post, so I won’t lose the rest with a detailed explanation of the way governmental accounting works, but it comes down to revenues are pluses and expenses are negatives. If you have more of the first, you have a surplus. If the opposite is true, you have a deficit. If you end up with a deficit, you finance that with debt. The federal government’s primary mechanism for that is issuing treasury bills and notes. The amount raised through income tax is a huge source of revenue, but the federal government is leaving a lot on the table due to xenophobia and mock piety. By that I mean, a thoughtful immigration plan and legalization of drugs and gambling could boost revenues immensely. With immigration, having undocumented workers that may or may not pay their fair share leaves a decent amount of untaxed income a lot of which gets repatriated to their native countries and thus out of our economy. It’s dumb to not and try and make some of these folks legal and keep that money here and tax it accordingly. With the “sin” taxes available to allowing drugs and gambling to occur legally at the federal level, even more money could be raised. I hear the objections to both already, but they will be handled in separate posts for each that also take into account the social issues both bring. But, for the purposes of this post, it is a fact that our deficits could be greatly reduced if these untapped sources were brought into play. The other side of the equation is cutting expenses. I don’t know anyone who doesn’t agree that we have waste at all levels of government. Obviously, getting at this reduces the need for revenue and can allow for potentially more tax relief or reduction of debt. Again, there is a whole separate post coming on this topic that I think you will enjoy ignoring.

So, there you go – tax reform solved in one blog post. Don’t be fooled into being told it is more complicated than this. Remember, we didn’t have an income tax for a long time and it was never intended to be this complicated. If there is political will to really get something done that is useful to us citizens, burning the code and starting from scratch with a scaled down version can be easily accomplished. This will never happen in my lifetime, but don’t think I blame only the Republicans. Most Democrats hate this idea because they love to do two things: raise taxes and pretend that they didn’t. The current tax code gives them plenty of cover to do both. If you are really agreeing with me here, the best advice I can offer you is start looking at third parties who would be more inclined to take this into their platform. I think that is going to be true for almost every issue we talk about going forward as the two major parties sold themselves out a long time ago and they are never coming back.

I hope you enjoyed your first post after coming back from my break. Nice and dry, huh? I’d like to think dry like a fine white wine on a summer day, but I’m guessing it was more like the dry you feel when you eat a sleeve of Saltines (Yes, I have done that and don’t ask why. If I really want to tell you it will be coming in a post). Don’t worry, I’ll make sure there are posts that come after the dry ones that wash things down nicely.

Cheers,

Jim

1 note · View note

epacer · 5 years

Text

Point/Counterpoint

Commentary

Why ethnic studies requirement empowers all California students

Increase seen in academic achievement, engagement

By Trica Gallagher-Geurtsen of July 31, 2019

Most people believe that public schools give students, no matter who they are or where they come from, an equal chance in life if only they work hard. However, research shows that not everyone is treated equally in schools. For example, schools with more students of color have less funding, less experienced teachers, fewer resources and harsher punishments than whiter schools. Unfortunately, because this powerful myth of meritocracy persists, students can end up blaming themselves for struggles they experience in schools. Schools need to empower all students to take responsibility for challenging the policies and history of how these struggles came to be.

California’s Assembly Bill 331 is a great start towards the goal of ensuring all high school students understand and prepare themselves to be active citizens in guaranteeing our schools and institutions offer students an equal chance at achieving their dreams. Assembly Bill 331 would require a semester course in ethnic studies for high school graduation. Each student who took such a course, designed based on the state’s ethnic studies model curriculum, would receive a more fine-grained analysis and inclusive history of our communities, state, nation and world.

Ethnic studies courses, instead of disproportionately focusing on the contributions, history and perspectives of European Americans, would present content from understudied populations like women, blacks, and Pacific Islanders, for example. When students learn, for instance, that women were not allowed to have credit cards in their name until 1974 or that California’s schools legally segregated Mexican American students in 1946 or that right here in our own Lemon Grove, one of the first school desegregation cases in the nation was won (Roberto Álvarez vs. the Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District), they will be better prepared to recognize and challenge similar policies and inequities in contemporary society. Perhaps more important is how ethnic studies knowledge helps students to more accurately identify the sources of those struggling in society instead of pointing blame, empowering everyone to engage as citizens in our democracy.

The growing body of research on ethnic studies shows it has great promise to increase academic achievement, improve cross-racial understanding, engage students more deeply in their school careers and lower dropout rates. Additionally, both students of color and white students have been found to benefit socially from ethnic studies with increased acceptance and understanding of one another.

Thomas Dee and Emily Penner, scholars at Stanford Graduate School of Education, found that ethnic studies participation increased student attendance by 21 percentage points, cumulative ninth-grade GPA by 1.4 grade points and credits earned by 23 credits. In more research on achievement effects, Nolan L. Cabrera, Jeffrey F. Milem, Ozan Jaquette, and Ronald W. Marx, found students who took ethnic studies courses had a higher probability of passing the state standardized tests and graduated at higher rates. Additionally, the researchers found positive effects of ethnic studies courses increased as students took more courses. Other researchers have uncovered similar academic results in which students of color in ethnic studies courses achieve at higher rates than comparable students who do not take ethnic studies courses.

Numerous professional education and advocacy organizations support Assembly Bill 331 including the Anti-Defamation League and the California Faculty Association. The California Teachers Association supports Assembly Bill 331, citing its promise to close the achievement gap as well as the need to become knowledgeable of the groups that make up our state’s tremendously diverse population.

When acknowledging the current and pervasive dehumanization of groups of people of color, the need for ethnic studies knowledge for all of California’s students is imperative. As Assembly Bill 331’s author, Assemblyman Jose Medina, reminds us: “At a time when the national climate drives divisiveness and fear of otherness, ethnic studies can play a critical role in increasing awareness and understanding.” The time has come to study the contributions, perspectives and histories of understudied groups and to end the denigration of students and communities of color through the normalization and acceptance of academic underperformance.

California is leading the way, ensuring all students know how our state, nation and world came to be. Education should be a source of learning that makes us freer and more able to participate in democratic life through taking responsibility for ourselves and the passage of Assembly Bill 331 gets us one step closer to this righteous dream.

*Gallagher-Geurtsen, Ed.D., is co-chair of the Ethnic Studies Advisory Committee of the San Diego Unified School District. UT article

Commentary

How ethnic studies requirement could hurt California students

Educational mandate would divert valuable resources

By James Debllo of July 31, 2019

There is no question that ethnic diversity is core to America’s exceptionalism. There are 224 languages spoken in Los Angeles alone. We are a nation of immigrants from every corner of the globe and embrace this fact. Injustices, prejudices and aggression have occurred, but the strength of the American culture is to learn, adjust and work together.

At a crucial time when job skills are evolving, and traditional jobs are being eliminated, California lawmakers are considering a bill that weakens the state Education Code by diverting valuable resources away from curriculum that will help our students succeed in a rapidly changing world. Assembly Bill 331 mandates adding an ethnic studies class to graduation requirements. The prosperity of California — and our nation — requires a renewed emphasis on teaching basic skills that Assembly Bill 331 fails to deliver.

Today’s students are more “woke” than any previous generation. They are far more plugged in, far more aware and far more respectful than adults. They excel at LGBTQ and ethnic sensitivity. What they lack are vital reading, writing and math skills that will give them a shot at jobs in this economy. This is especially important in our digital age. Members of all ethnicities have excelled in science, arts and business. Let the successes speak for themselves.

California’s public schools were once ranked among the nation’s best. But the largest network of public schools in the country is now one of the worst-performing. According to the 2018 Quality Counts study reported in Education Week, only 29.2% of fourth-graders in the state are proficient in math and only 27.8% are proficient in reading.

In an era of unprecedented challenges such as climate change, digital security and privacy, our state legislators are adding another educational mandate that will prevent our teachers from allocating resources effectively towards the most critical parts of an education: reading, writing and math, where California students continuously underperform.

The Wall Street Journal recently reported that “U.S. companies are increasingly paying up to retrain workers as new technologies transform the workplace and companies struggle to recruit talent [emphasis added] in one of the hottest job markets in decades.”

As a businessman and co-inventor of mobile check deposit used by 80 million Americans, I experienced firsthand the challenges of recruiting the talent we needed, especially in STEM disciplines. As an advocate for digital inclusion, we need to provide our students with the training to take full advantage of technology as these tools gain in popularity and provide broad access to important services. This is the challenge that the California Teachers Association and state Board of Education should prioritize.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology professors Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee argue in “The Second Machine Age” that we are at the tipping point of accelerated innovation. The convergence of high-speed networks, global access to computing devices (smartphones) and the ubiquity of data will spawn myriad new businesses and economic prosperity — but only for those who can keep pace through education. Assembly Bill 331 diverts valuable time and resources from mission critical education.

Elimination of Assembly Bill 331’s graduation mandate does not diminish the importance of ethnic histories. I support an inclusive and balanced history and civics curriculum that teaches the importance of myriad ethnic struggles and inclusive contributions to the American Experience. The understanding of history is foundational to our appreciation of our unique rights and privileges as Americans. Our Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Northwest Ordinance — which first mandated freedom of religion, free universal education and prohibition of slavery before our Constitution was ratified — should be celebrated as groundbreaking events along with the challenges we have faced as citizens.

Assembly Bill 331 is a feel-good curriculum that, upon reflection, doesn’t feel so good. By focusing on the inequities of past centuries, the bill does not prepare students for the 21st century. Education seeds, industry grows. Let’s use the resources planned for Assembly Bill 331 to strengthen the skills of our next generation to succeed in this economy. It’s a daunting task, and perhaps unpopular with some, but one which our elected officials, the teachers union and public must be willing to address with a disciplined approach to teaching 21st-century skills.

*DeBello is the former chairman, president and CEO of San Diego-based Mitek Systems. UT article

0 notes

proudliberal11 · 7 years

Text

LGBTQ Bigotry Wrapped in Religion

In yet another discussion with intolerant and hateful Trump supporters on social media I was once again reminded of what was at stake in this last presidential election. The hope was that if Hillary Clinton won then we would continue to be the compassionate and tolerant nation we were under Obama but when she didn’t the bigotry once again came to the forefront. Yes, we know that it is always there but now with a person who has a history of such bigotry in the highest office, they feel they are free reign to behave this way and one of the ways they behave is to show their intolerance towards the LGBT community in this country.

I had a discussion about LGBT people and once again these people showed who they really are while pretending that they are trying to “help” and pray for the “sinner”, nobody including me is buying that. Those who oppose Muslims, immigrants, LGBT people, and so many more have one thing in common and that is that they have hate in their hearts while claiming they do not. They always start off by saying, “I don’t hate gay people” and then go on to as you can guess, hate gay people and the remarks they make are harmful yet they cannot see it. They like to hide behind the Bible and claim that God said it not them but this is untrue.

Jesus never said one thing about the issue of homosexuality and was someone who loved and accepted everyone yet they use the six outdated verses in Bible about the issue to show that God is against homosexuality and thus as justification for them to discriminate and hate the LGBT community and also the GOP lawmakers whether they admit it or not also do this. They are always doing what they can to remove LGBT rights and hurt the community and this is obvious by them doing what they can to oppose things like the Equality Act, LGBT work and housing rights, and even go after marriage equality. They do everything to keep the people in this community unequal and fight against the progress we have made over the years and the non-politicians are worse.

They claim that it is the left who hates but it is the opposite, they are the ones that hate and it isn’t just the LGBT community they are against, they are very hateful towards Muslims, immigrants, the poor, and so many more. They like to use straw arguments and try to put it back on the left claiming that we are the intolerant ones but it is obvious they are. These people try to excuse their hateful behavior by pointing out that Muslims “throw gays off buildings” and call us hypocrites for supporting Islam when this also is a false argument and is just an excuse for their own hate.

Yes, we know that there countries that treat LGBT people poorly and kill us but that doesn’t mean we have to hate the tens of millions of decent and good Muslims like they do. It is possible to be gay and support Muslims while also opposing hate where it comes up whether that be Muslim nations who kill LGBT people or conservatives who try to hurt this community or the hate crimes done against them by the right. These folks like to excuse their behavior and what they do by demonizing others including Muslims. It will not work, we know that the Christian right isn’t very Christian at all as calling LGBT people things like “abnormal”, “mentally ill”, and “sick” are not only false but also very disrespectful and hateful.

The facts are that LGBT people are not any of those things and the American Psychiatric Association even stated so when they did the right thing and removed homosexuality from the DSM, which is the manual used for all psych disorders. There are many professionals and academic researchers who also say that homosexuality is completely normal and not a mental disorder but yet they continue to spread the lies that it is abnormal, it is a lie. Being LGBT is normal and should be accepted and the future for the movement depends on us standing up to these hurtful falsehoods and myths, we must do what we can to move forward and fight for the future of the community and LGBT rights despite what Trump, Pence, and the Christian right are trying to do to the progress we have made in recent years.

So, what is in store for the future for LGBT rights?

I believe that in order to know where we are going we first have to know where we have been to know where we are going and I hope people can see where we have been on this issue based on the previous posts on the issue I have written as well as in my book Defending Equality and by seeing this I hope that it helps to know where we are going and how we get there as that is the goal here. We have come so far my friends but we cannot stop here as the fight for equality never ends and is always raging on, especially when there are so many who want to see us fail, we cannot! We also cannot be silent about injustice around the world including how our LGBT brothers and sisters are treated in places like Chechnya even if Donald Trump will not call it out and stand up for oppressed LGBT people both here and abroad.

The reason we cannot give up is because those who have gone before us did not fight so hard for equality just so we would stop fighting, the time is now to keep going and to keep up the fight as there are those who will come after us who need to know there is hope will count on us like we counted on those who fought years ago for LGBT rights. The future for the movement is always happening in the present and it is up to each one of us to keep that fight going so people will know that change is possible but more than that, hope is possible, they need to know that and we must keep fighting so they do.

The future as we stand now is unknown as the LGBT rights victories of the past are at risk as there are many who want to get rid of LGBT rights and they may have the power to do just that, we cannot let them and that is why for the future of our movement to carry on each one of us has to commit to the fight. How do we do that? We do that by speaking out and by refusing to back down and we do that by believing in each other and believing in what we are fighting for. What happens in the coming weeks, months, and years for this movement depends upon what we do now and how we move forward and how we advance the rights of LGBT Americans as well as LGBT people across the globe.

Speaking of the Equality Act, it must be part of this future as LGBT rights deserve to be protected and the right has done nothing but try to take away these rights here in America for decades and continues to do so, this piece of legislation is essential to protecting the rights of every LGBT citizen in this country and is a must for us to have full equality. However, this will be difficult with the Republicans in control of the major parts of our government and seek to take away the rights that we have talked about in this book and the rights that would be protected by the Equality Act.

The Equality Act was more possible when Obama was president and when we had thought Hillary would be our next president but with Trump in office and a GOP controlled government it becomes much more difficult. Just to review, the piece of legislation known as the Equality Act that has been pushed to be passed for some time now but has been stalled and obstructed by the Republicans as they claim to value “freedom of religion” over LGBT rights but religious freedom doesn’t mean you can discriminate, guess they didn’t get the memo. The GOP fights against the Equality Act as they fight against all things that will help and protect LGBT people and have done so for some time now.

Even though we know that with Trump and the GOP in power they may not let us win over the next several years in regards to equality or the Equality Act we still must do what we can to fight and keep this movement moving forward like those before us have done and trusted us to do after their time passed. For us to continue the progress of the last decade or so in the future we have to do the things we have done in the past to win and sometimes this isn’t easy because when we have people oppose us it can be difficult to keep going but it is for sure something that we must do.

Keep fighting, that is what we must all do no matter where we live and no matter who we are. Many people think that you have to be a political figure or even a well-known TV personality in order to have an impact but the truth is that you for sure do not and anybody who has a passion and a drive to change things can do this. I am just your average American and I became an activist after I saw the issues that I care about not being changed like I believed they should be. I decided I needed to take a stand and fight for the issues dear to my heart and this particular issue is very important to me so I joined the ranks of millions of Americans who also care about it and began my journey advocating for LGBT rights.

The future is now and it is a future worth fighting for and I hope you and others like you will join this fight and do what you can to make a difference not only in America but across the earth fighting for the rights of LGBT people. You do not even have to be part of the LGBT community to fight for the rights of the people in this community, you just have to be a person who cares about people and wants to have an impact and if this is you then you for sure can make a difference and join the movement that has already come so far and cannot go back to how things were, we cannot allow those who are anti-LGBT to win and accomplish their goal of removing the rights of the LGBT community and hurting these people, we just cannot allow it.

I firmly believe the hate of the so-called Christian right as well as this current administration do not care about LGBT Americans and it shows in their words and actions and I know that what we are doing with fighting against the hate of homophobic agenda of those who oppose equality is the right thing to do, it for sure is and we will continue to do so. I also know that even though we have an administration that doesn’t value our rights we will continue to fight for these rights. The resistance will carry on and fight four our values with LGBT rights and so many more issues because we are the freedom fighters and humanitarians.

I will say as a bisexual man that the rights of the LGBT community matter and these rights must be protected against both the many anti-LGBT politicians who try to restrict and remove those rights as well as the anti-LGBT “Christian” citizens and organizations who fight against the LGBT community. The cost of giving up is far too great and the reward of continuing to fight for our rights and the rights of those who come after us is worth what we have to put into the battle. The many successes we have had over the years will motivate us to keep going and stand up to hate and oppression, we know it will not be easy with this administration and the current hate being thrown our way like what we experience in these debates , but it is possible as long as we believe and as long as we RESIST!

#lgbtq #lgbtq rights #bigotry #anti lgbt #love is love #equality #donald trump #politics #progressive

5 notes · View notes

itsrainingjellybeans · 7 years

Text

Trumpcare is here...what can you do....

Today, Mitch “Voldemort” McConnell finally let America see his disaster of a bill. It is worse than anyone expected after the House passed their bill in May . While it is described as slightly less austere than the House version, it isn’t anywhere near the “much better” bill that Upton kept promising.

Fred Upton walked out of the House Trumpcare vote and promised that the Senate would give us a much better bill and that the House bill would then be reconciled or reworked giving the impression that the horrific parts of the House bill would never come to fruition. But that didn’t happen. Fred needs to answer for this and explain his vote.

President Obama commented and as ever it was personal, eloquent, beautiful, intelligent, and thought provoking. Something we haven’t seen in 6 months (see below for the entire statement)

This is everything I know to date about Trumpcare House Version and Senate version. This is long but please read it all carefully and share it with. We need Americans to understand this.

I published this at 6:00 am after writing for 8 hours so if there are mistakes, please forgive me.

Indivisible :How the TrumpCare fight will play out

Ezra Levin Indivisible Founder sent out an email yesterday with this presumptive time table for Trumpcare Senate Version Senate Republicans have promised a vote by the end of next week. But there are still several steps between now and passage of TrumpCare. Here’s how the former congressional staff at Indivisible Team think the fight will unfurl:

Tomorrow, we’ll get a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score, which will quantify exactly how many millions of Americans will be screwed by this bill and in what ways.

On Monday or Tuesday, Republicans will officially announce the vote is happening by the end of the week and start debate on “the bill,” which is just a draft bill intended to make it look like they’re being transparent but in reality is a trick to hide just how awful their finished product will be.

Over the next couple days, Senators will submit amendments, most of which will fail and none of which would make this bill redeemable.

On Thursday, the Senate will plan to VOTE on the legislation, but first they will vote on all submitted amendments (known as “vote-a-rama”).

At the last possible minute, Senate Republicans will replace the entire bill they just got finished “debating” with an alternative TrumpCare bill secretly crafted behind closed doors.

By the end of Thursday, there will be a final vote in the Senate.

As soon as that same Thursday, the House may then pass the legislation and send it to Trump to sign. This could take longer, but this is the worst case scenario and quite possible.

Next weekend, one week of congressional recess begins. They’ll either have the bill done by then, or they’ll have to wait another week.

Throughout this process there will be precisely zero public hearings in the Senate. Make no mistake, this is a historically partisan, secretive, and undemocratic process for one of the most consequential pieces of legislation of our generation. This is atrocious.So let’s fight it. All you need to pressure your Republican Senators, including DAILY scripts and new materials, is on our

TrumpCareTen.org

website. Need more background materials? We’ve got ‘em for you

here

. It’s critical that you’re showing up and that when you’re not showing up, you’re calling your Senators every single day. (Indivisible Guide Email 6/22)

Vote-A-Rama

This is imperative that we all do- Add your own amendments to the bill based on your own story. Submit them to

OURAmendments.ORG.

Legislators are using these amendments to add to this bill and we can filibuster by amendment as they have to consider each one. Again this is NOT to actually improve this disaster of a bill but to slow down the vote so more Americans aware of how much this is going to hurt all of us.

Indivisible Group Facebook Live

Indivisible did a great FB Live Last night that explained a lot of the scheduling and answered some questions and explained Vote-A-Rama

American’s Don’t Like Trumpcare

According to a POLITICO/Morning Consult poll released 6/21

only 35% approved of the House Bill passed last month

49% disapprove of the House Bill

16% don’t know or care

This is a decrease from the poll taken after the House passed the bill in May

only 17% think it will decrease costs for their family

46% think it will make their costs increase

only 27% think it will make the US health care system better

41% think it will make the US health care system worse

65% of all voters want the Republicans to compromise with the Democrats for reach bipartisan reforms

Even among Republican voters 54% want a bipartisan bill

Trumpcare hurts Special Needs Kids.

Public schools use Medicaid funds to provide services for special needs children

$4 Billion in Medicaid services will be eliminated under the House version

Schools use the money on services, professionals, and equipment necessary to provide a safe and healthy environment in order for special needs children to attend public school.

Let me point out the most disgusting part of this.attack on literally our most vulnerable citizens is that this was not a thoughtless regulation that wasn’t intended as such or a mistake nobody caught. This was a deliberate regulatory change written into the House version of Trumpcare passed in May. Trumpcare deliberately decimates the entire $4-Billion Public Education Special Needs Medicaid program. The House version of Trumpcare changed the regulation so that public schools to no longer eligible Medicaid providers. . “Under the bill, states would no longer be required to recognize schools as eligible Medicaid providers or pay them for those services, which schools will still be required by law to provide.”

Survey of 1000 schools in 42 states shows schools use the money for 70% use money for salaries for health care professionals who serve special education students such as speech, behavior and physical therapist

equipment such as feeding tubes, wheelchairs, communication devices, vision and auditory assist devices, appropriate gym equipment and other adaptive devices

vision and hearing screenings

Oh the Games the GOP Plays...

Everyone is talking about the game that McConnell and the GOP is playing. Tell me if you have heard this one before ....Four GOP Senators have announced they cannot support the bill in its current form. Rand Paul of KY, Ron Jonson of WI, Ted Cruz of TX and Mike Lee of UT released a joint statement “...we are not ready to vote for this bill but we are open for negotiation and obtaining more information before it is brought to the floor” Where have I heard this before? It just seems to familiar but I just can’t put my finger on it....

The 4 go on to talk about how the draft “as written” doesn’t let them keep the promises they made to their voters- to repeal Obamacare and lower health care costs-though they do concede this bill is better than Obamacare in its current form. UGH. None of them have a soul.

Remember, under reconciliation- the game they are playing to get this bill through- they have to save money but they need a simple majority of Republican votes meaning they can only lose 2 votes with Pence as tie-breaker. Otherwise they have to deal with the Democrats and they are not interested in working with the Democrats on this bill AT ALL.

It seems that only Rand Paul is actually against the bill and that is because it is too liberal for his taste. That man is beyond obtuse.

One of the 4 game players will pretend to offer some ridiculously paltry amendment-say an $8 Billion amendment to compensate for the deplorable high-risk pools. The AHCA high-risk pools are underfunded by $200 Billion meaning the $8 Billion injection covers about 4% of the funding gap. The Senator who plays this role gets an extra cookie for dinner if he then goes around proclaiming that if that 4% underfunding isn’t enough then he will personally be up there fighting as hard as he can but then just ignores that every group who looks at the breakdown calls out how little it does to help those high-risk pools...said Senator just continues to stand in the corner, slowly picking the chocolate out of his cookie before sliding them into his mouth to suck on.

Expect 1 or more from the group of 4 to suddenly declare they found THE amendment suddenly makes the bill acceptable for them... even though it actually changes absolutely nothing of substance in this abhorrent bill. This is a the worst game of bluff I have ever seen.

NO AMENDMENT WOULD MAKE THIS BILL BETTER because it is just that bad. No amendment or group of amendments would help that.

It boils down to a horrific dystopian disgusting bill made more gross because of the tax cut.

Trumpcare DEFUNDS Planned Parenthood.

THIS IS ABHORRENT. I have discussed before how this will affect access to birth control and women’s health services.

This is about more than just getting affordable birth control but having access at all.

Women throughout American will be HARMED by this as they are unable to get birth control which will increase the abortion rate- unless the GOP is able to make it illegal whic his there goal for sure.

More women will have unplanned pregnancies ensuring they will never get out of poverty and often making single moms.

Unplanned pregnancies in low income women with Medicaid Cuts is a recipe for NO prenatal care and babies with long term health problems from lack of prenatal care. With no resources to pay for services for these children, the kids will suffer for life. I cannot express this enough. Lack of prenatal care leads to maternal and fetal complications that can and will affect babies for life.

Problems with Trumpcare according to Indivisible Guide Resource page

Lowers the percentage of consumer costs covered by insurance. The ACA requires that plans cover 70% of the cost of health care but Trumpcare only mandates they cover 58% of the cost so you will pay MORE out of pocket PERIOD.

Lowers the threshold for tax credits. The ACA gives tax credits for anyone who makes less than 400% of Federal Poverty Level- around $48K for a single person. Trumpcare lowers that to 350% BUT it is made worse by the fact that the Trumpcare plans will be lesser quality meaning even more out-of-pocket expenses

Allows states waivers for 10 Essential Health Benefits. Let’s review what those 10 EHB are shall we?

Emergency Room

Labs

Prescription Meds

Rehabilitation -post accident, stroke, illness

Mental Health and Substance Abuse aka opioid addiction programs

Ambulatory Care aka outpatient doctor appointments

Pediatrics

Maternity and child Birth

Preventative Health and Birth Control

Hospital care

5 ways Trumpcare is an assault on our freedom by LOLGOP

Trumpcare Chains us to jobs again- the ACA allowed people to change jobs without fear of losing their health insurance. Trumpcare will make insurance more expensive and also take away the freedom to move jobs. Trumpcare does away with the Individual Mandate in exchange for a rule that allows insurers to charge more to people who have an insurance lapse of over 63 days a year.

Trumpcare and 1 serious illness or accident puts you at risk for bankruptcy. The ACA did away with annual and lifetime caps but guess who is brining them back? If you think you are healthy and it won’t happen to you think again (my Fox News Loving neighbor told me that “only poor people get sick” but that isn’t true. Also remember that by definition accidents are accidental...and innocent people get caught in them all of the time. Remember that as you munch on kale chips and goji berries and chug Kombucha right after you post your latest tell-me-how-great-I-look Facebook photo cross-linked to Instagram #Progress #GynRat #HealthyLifrestyle. Someone else can smash into your car as you drive home from the gym and you are at suddenly playing the medical-bankruptcy roulette right along with the obese noncompliant diabetic and the family history heart disease. It CAN happen to you and I have seen it happen to people.

Trumpcare threatens the entire insurance market. The GOP -lead by Lord Voldemort - decided that something that affects 1/6 of our economy doesn’t deserve careful discussion and consideration. It is appropriate that a bill that affects 1/6 of our economy...

Trumpcare dooms Everyone. Trumpcare dooms anyone who has family or loved ones who may get old, sick, disabled, or have an accident but doesn’t have hundred’s of thousands of dollars saved for their care

Trumpcare gives the wealthy even more control of our politics. The richest 400 Americas get a $7 Million tax break EACH YEAR paid for by cutting Medicaid $880 Billion. 400x7,000,000=2.8 billion which just happens to be the cost of the last presidential election. Republicans are counting on a payback “Thank You” from those 400 wealthiest Americans in the form of donations for vulnerable MoC.

is simply a “win” and not actual reform.

is a bill that gives the wealthy a significant tax cut is more important than actual health care reform.

is rushed given an arbitrary “due date” that leads to an extreme rush through

is done so with the input, knowledge, and experience of as few people as possible, making sure that no experts represent the American people, disabled Americans, rural hospitals, teaching hospitals and large medical centers, Medicaid, nursing homes, AARP, nursing and doctor groups or even a doctor or a nurse. Ir does appear insurance lobbyist were involved.

even if it is based on choosing a due date that has more to do with getting a “win” on the books beside Trump’s

even if the rush job is caused simply because passing it before a recess is crucial...otherwise MoC might be talked out of voting “yes” by their constituents or they might find their conscience or realize that there have been terrific economic gains from Medicaid Expansion

by specifically excluding ALL Democrats in the House and Senate from the process

by excluding all Republican Senators except those in the working group

by including only wealthy, old, white men in the working group

by allowing lobbyist to work on the bill that had not even been seen

by pretending that a huge tax cut for the wealthy is actually a health care bill

by allowing NO time for public comments

by ignoring the precedent the legislative process

by ALL of the Democratic Senators ,

by ALL of the female Senators (there has been contradictory reports of 1 women maybe in the working group maybe at times)

by ALL of the minority Senators

keeping bill under lock-and-key from all but 15 Senators

by only allowing 15-man working group and lobbyist to see bill until it was entirely written

by giving the bill to CBO very late in the process; score expected Monday or Tuesday with Vote coming before end of next week (recess starts Friday)

by not allowing any women on the working group

by not working at all with democrats

by not bringing bill to committee for mark ups before brining it to floor

by only allowing 1 week to read and discuss the bill

by not allowing public hearings and time for public to get their comments to the MoC

by not allowing time for proper amendments

MOST OF ALL THEY MADE SURE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AREN’T GETTING THE BEST BILL POSSIBLE. ONE THAT WILL BUILD UPON THE PROTECTIONS GIVEN TO US BY THE ACA. Instead they are taking away ALL of those protections and more.

Trumpcare will cost everyone more money

According to a new report by the DHHS that hasn’t got much press, Trumpcare will

Lower Premiums- yes it will but beware of 2, 3 and 4.

Deductibles and Copays will be 61% higher

Because government assistance will end costs will be even higher to most people

The tax cut will cut into Medicare solvency by 2 years

Trumpcare will hurt our economy

(according to University of Michigan Study)

30,000 jobs per year

$2.4 billion dollars ANNUALLY in increased revenue

$1.5 million in tax revenue that is paying for itself by this increased tax revenue

Will hurt older Americans as 80% of Nursing Home expenses are covered by Medicaid

According to CBO the House version will cause 23 Million Americans to lose their health insurance

It’s about the Money Honey.....

The ACA requires insurers to spend 80% of premiums on health care costs and NOT on things like administrative overhead, CEO salaries, Ads, or PROFITS.

Money collected for premiums, not used for health care costs and above the 80% is refunded back to families.

The ACA returned $396 Million to 4.8 Million families in 2015.

On average, families that paid premiums got a rebate of $138 taken out of shareholder profits.

This my friend is why I suspect many companies got out of the exchanges....Not ENOUGH PROFIT and CEO PAY.

The Government documented this data by State and for the USA. Let’s look at Michigan and the US, shall we?

2015 MLR Rebates by State- click link for other states .

MiCHIGAN And USA Total llll

All Markets: Total Rebates

All Markets: Consumers Benefiting from Rebates

All Markets: Average Rebate per Family

Individual Market: Total Rebates

Individual Markets: Consumers Benefiting from Rebates

Individual Markets:Average Rebate per Family

Small Group Market: Total Rebates

Small Group Market: Consumers Benefiting from Rebates

Small Group Market: Average Rebate Per Family

Large Group Market: Total Rebates

Large Group Market: Consumers Benefiting from Rebates

Large Group Market: Average Rebate Per Family

MI $34,316,590

USA $396,684,376

MI 635,603

USA 4,850,555

MI $120

USA $138

MI $2,876,430

USA $107,360,358

MI 40,247

USA 1,188,509

MI $119

USA $124

MI $26,640,351

USA $153,761,425

MI 323,179

USA 1,928,008

MI $166

USA $142

MI $4,799,809

USA $135,562,593

MI 272,177

USA 1,734,038

MI $47

USA $146

Trumpcare eliminates this regulation starting in 2018. Individuals States will decide whether to keep protecting consumers from insurance wasteful spending.

Republicans think it is ok to radically alter Medicaid

without input, discussion, pubic hearings, expert advice

Trumpcare essentially ends Medicaid as we know it, radically changing

who is eligible including infants, prenatal care, disabled Americas and children and nursing home patients.

how much money states are given by changing the system to block grants and decreasing the program by $880 Billion

while also taking away the source of women’s health and BIRTH CONTROL for 3 million women

if they also make abortion illegal we will have a crisis of severely disabled babies born with life-threatening conditions including fatal a chromosomal abnormalities (Trisomy 13, Trisomy 18), Potters Syndrome, Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome, Ectocardia, gastroschisis, anencephalic, hydrocephalic,

Trumpcare will devastate our economy in Michigan and hurt the US

According to the

Commonwealth Fund

By 2018 Michigan loses

15,700 jobs

17,400 health jobs

$804 Million Gross State Product

$895 Million Business Output

By 2026 Michigan Loses

50,800 jobs

30,600 health jobs

$5,070,000.000 Gross State Product

$8,032,000.000 Business Output

* Gross state product (GSP), or gross regional product (GRP), is a measurement of the economic output of a state or province (i.e., of a subnational entity). It is the sum of all value added by industries within the state and serves as a counterpart to the gross domestic product (GDP).(Wikipedia)

Is 1 week enough time to read, debate and vote on a bill that affects 1/6 of our economy?

Lindsay Graham and John “the flip flopper” McCain

pretend...er, I mean think-they THINK- so.

Fred Upton Lies

The Michigan legislature was very hesitant to pass the Medicaid Expansion and wrote a provision that if the Federal Match Rate (normally is 65%) must offset all costs to the state or the Expansion is automatically terminated. According to a

Memo released by the state Senate:

barring any legislative action to change the Medicaid expansion ("Healthy Michigan") statute, would result in termination of Medicaid expansion in Michigan after FY 2019-20 (it should be noted that the SFA has projected that the Healthy Michigan statute’s net State costs provision would lead to the termination of the program after FY 2020-21 even absent any Federal changes).

“The bill would repeal ACA reductions in Medicaid disproportionate share hospital (DSH) allotments. It appears that this is being done to provide more money to states that, unlike Michigan, chose not to expand Medicaid. The intent would be to offset uncompensated care costs in those states.”

“The bill would reduce retroactive eligibility for Medicaid from three months to the month in which a person applied for Medicaid. When an application for Medicaid is approved, Medicaid covered services for the person are reimbursed by Medicaid retroactive to three months before the date of application”

“The bill would implement, beginning in FY 2019-20, a per capita Gross cap on Federal Medicaid reimbursement” AKA BLOCK GRANT

Mitch McConnell Lies

McConnell keeps saying that the ACA was kept under secrecy as well but he is lying.

“Simply put, if there’s a chance you might get sick, get old, or start a family – this bill will do you harm”

President Obama posted a perfect post today. I am sure most if not all of ou read it but I wanted to post it again and to highlight the parts that i found the most important or poignant. “Our politics are divided. They have been for a long time. And while I know that division makes it difficult to listen to Americans with whom we disagree, that’s what we need to do today.I recognize that repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act has become a core tenet of the Republican Party. Still, I hope that our Senators, many of whom I know well, step back and measure what’s really at stake, and consider that the rationale for action, on health care or any other issue, must be something more than simply undoing something that Democrats did.We didn’t fight for the Affordable Care Act for more than a year in the public square for any personal or political gain –we fought for it because we knew it would save lives, prevent financial misery, and ultimately set this country we love on a better, healthier course.Nor did we fight for it alone. Thousands upon thousands of Americans, including Republicans, threw themselves into that collective effort, not for political reasons, but for intensely personal ones – a sick child, a parent lost to cancer, the memory of medical bills that threatened to derail their dreams.And you made a difference. For the first time, more than ninety percent of Americans know the security of health insurance. Health care costs, while still rising, have been rising at the slowest pace in fifty years. Women can’t be charged more for their insurance, young adults can stay on their parents’ plan until they turn 26, contraceptive care and preventive care are now free. Paying more, or being denied insurance altogether due to a preexisting condition – we made that a thing of the past.We did these things together. So many of you made that change possible.At the same time, I was careful to say again and again that while the Affordable Care Act represented a significant step forward for America, it was not perfect, nor could it be the end of our efforts – and that if Republicans could put together a plan that is demonstrably better than the improvements we made to our health care system, that covers as many people at less cost, I would gladly and publicly support it.That remains true. So I still hope that there are enough Republicans in Congress who remember that public service is not about sport or notching a political win, that there’s a reason we all chose to serve in the first place, and that hopefully, it’s to make people’s lives better, not worse.But right now, after eight years, the legislation rushed through the House and the Senate without public hearings or debate would do the opposite. It would raise costs, reduce coverage, roll back protections, and ruin Medicaid as we know it. That’s not my opinion, but rather the conclusion of all objective analyses, from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which found that 23 million Americans would lose insurance, to America’s doctors, nurses, and hospitals on the front lines of our health care system.The Senate bill, unveiled today, is not a health care bill. It’s a massive transfer of wealth from middle-class and poor families to the richest people in America. It hands enormous tax cuts to the rich and to the drug and insurance industries, paid for by cutting health care for everybody else. Those with private insurance will experience higher premiums and higher deductibles, with lower tax credits to help working families cover the costs, even as their plans might no longer cover pregnancy, mental health care, or expensive prescriptions. Discrimination based on pre-existing conditions could become the norm again. Millions of families will lose coverage entirely.Simply put, if there’s a chance you might get sick, get old, or start a family – this bill will do you harm. And small tweaks over the course of the next couple weeks, under the guise of making these bills easier to stomach, cannot change the fundamental meanness at the core of this legislation.I hope our Senators ask themselves – what will happen to the Americans grappling with opioid addiction who suddenly lose their coverage? What will happen to pregnant mothers, children with disabilities, poor adults and seniors who need long-term care once they can no longer count on Medicaid? What will happen if you have a medical emergency when insurance companies are once again allowed to exclude the benefits you need, send you unlimited bills, or set unaffordable deductibles? What impossible choices will working parents be forced to make if their child’s cancer treatment costs them more than their life savings?To put the American people through that pain – while giving billionaires and corporations a massive tax cut in return – that’s tough to fathom. But it’s what’s at stake right now. So it remains my fervent hope that we step back and try to deliver on what the American people need.That might take some time and compromise between Democrats and Republicans. But I believe that’s what people want to see. I believe it would demonstrate the kind of leadership that appeals to Americans across party lines. And I believe that it’s possible – if you are willing to make a difference again. If you’re willing to call your members of Congress. If you are willing to visit their offices. If you are willing to speak out, let them and the country know, in very real terms, what this means for you and your family.After all, this debate has always been about something bigger than politics. It’s about the character of our country – who we are, and who we aspire to be. And that’s always worth fighting for.

Choose the facts that upset you the most or you feel Fred should have to answer for and call his office. Call

the list of people is also pinned to the front page of our homepage

www.facebook.com/indivisiblekalamaz...

Call Mitch McConnell

Call John Cornyn

CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE find your Representative at www.house.gov

CALL YOUR SENATOR. Find your Senator at www.senate.com

Mitch McConnell (R-KY) 317 Russell Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510 (202)224-2541 http://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/

They may ask you for your Zip Code: Lexington, Kentucky zips are 40501-05, NOT 06, 40507-11, NOT 12, 40513-17. OR find zip codes for another city in Kentucky at USPS.

John Cornyn (R-TX) 517 Hart Senate Office Bldg. Washington, DC 20510 Main: 202-224-2934 Email: https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/contact

Lubbock zip codes (I picked it because we used to live there) 79401-07, NOT 08, 79409-24 or pick any TX city and look up a zip code

Washington 202-224-6621Grand Rapids (616) 233-9150

Call the White House White House 202-456-1111

Please consider donating to Indivisible

The Indivisible movement has profoundly changed the course of history in America. After the 2016 election many of us were devastated; terrified about the unwanted and dangerous changes that seemed destined to come to our country. We were confused about how to use our voices in a political system that I- and I know a lot of you-had no idea how to navigate in a way that would effect change. Prior to the Indivisible Movement, the only way I understood how to use my voice was by voting and I couldn’t wait two years...I had things to say in 2017 and I needed someone to tell me how to do that.

Ezra Levin and Angel Padilla stepped up and gave us the Indivisible Guide... a tangible and simple plan for using our voices TODAY.

The guide was a hastily typed, typo-laden document, released online with the expectation that a maybe a few hundred people would see it. Instead it quickly gained traction and became a beacon of hope for so many of us because it was so simple and based on a movement that had been shockingly effective in shutting down Obama’s agenda. Based on the Tea Party strategy of communicating with one’s local Members of Congress to act in our best interest. The Indivisible Movement expressly shuns the portion of the Tea Party’s strategy that involved abhorrent behavior like spitting at lawmakers, starting fights at town hall meetings, and using disgusting and rude signage to get our point across.

Ezra, Angel and some of their friends quickly formed a loose group under the name Indivisible Guide and partnered with Move.On to start the Ready To Resist calls that gave me the information I need to get this group started. Since January, they have become a formal group providing information and encouragement as well as a platform for exchanging ideas with other Indivisible Groups. They are constantly updating the materials and resources available online at Indivisibleguide.com.

They are pushing back hard against Trumpcare and are distributing a digital ad informing Americans what Trumpcare really will mean for America. They are asking for donations to pay for this push.

If you can, please consider donating to the Indivisible Guide.

To read their June Action Plan here.

Need a Script? Indivisible has Daily Call Scripts

To see a breakdown of how each state will be effected by Trumpcare here.

1 note · View note

theconservativebrief · 3 years

Link

The Democrat Party’s negative fixation with former President Trump continues, despite him being out of the White House.

Already, many on the left are fuming because the Justice Department hasn’t released the former president’s tax returns. Ironically, some Democrats now allege that their beloved President Biden isn’t doing enough in regards to releasing Trump’s financial records.

“180528-D-SV709-0677” (CC BY 2.0) by U.S. Secretary of Defense

Democrats have much more to worry about than Trump, though. Under leftist leadership, crime has gone up, as have cyberattacks against essential American resources. Meanwhile, gas prices are $6 per gallon in some states and inflation continues to rise.

Some Democrats within the party are worried that what’s happening now may cost them in midterm elections. According to Breitbart News, some Democrats are now working to distance themselves from attacks against Trump with 2022 congressional races approaching.

Steering Clear of Trump

Many Democrats have expressed an interest in distancing themselves from the 45th president altogether and instead focusing on their own goals and policies. Chris Taylor, the spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, relayed this sentiment.

Meanwhile, other Democrats, such as Rep. Madeleine Dean, Sen. Ben Ray Luján, and others stated that Trump will eventually place his own foot into his mouth. Dean, Luján, and additional Democrats maintain that continued focus on Trump only has the potential to hurt Democrats.

That a lifelong Democrat (me) is so grateful for DeSantis, no matter how crappy he may be in other areas, might be a problem come the midterms. I may never vote Republican, but I might not ever vote for a Democrat again, either. I wonder how many other voters are the same. https://t.co/wALtDlqVZf

— Xtal (@Xtal) June 2, 2021

Rep. Stephanie Murphy even stated not too long ago that Trump is currently a “private citizen” and that any transgressions he did or didn’t commit will be handled by the justice system.

This new push within the Democrat Party to steer clear of Trump is interesting. It certainly marks a major reversal from Democrats’ years of an ongoing obsession with Trump, an obsession that hasn’t fully waned even with Biden in office.

Changing the Narrative?

Some Democrats may indeed be ready to end the party’s collective fixation upon former President Trump. However, this doesn’t mean that Democrats will have a smooth-sailing victory in the 2022 midterms.

Everywhere@RepDean: "Look what we did though. We passed the American Rescue Plan – sending millions of dollars to every single person's district…I'll tell you what: my constituents are darn glad." pic.twitter.com/O4XhBQ1L6t

— Robyn Patterson (@RM_Patterson) June 2, 2021

Even with Trump out of the equation, Democrats have shown how they handle power; they’ve also shown that they will go to any lengths to get what they want. The left is currently emboldened by a Biden presidency and they’ve laid all their cards on the table.

Democrats backed the defund the police movement; then, they shifted gears after crime rates surged in leftist communities. The left has also backed ending the filibuster, making Washington D.C. the 51st state, federalizing state-run election, and more.

BREAKING: We just announced House Democrats' initial Districts In Play for the 2022 election cycle. These 22 competitive districts across the country will be critical battlegrounds as we work to protect our Democratic House Majority.

Take a look at our first offensive targets: pic.twitter.com/Brz4nF4Kdu

— DCCC (@dccc) April 6, 2021

In the few months of the Biden presidency alone, Democrat lawmakers have rejected bipartisanship as well; the most obvious display of this arrived when Democrats froze out GOP legislators to pass the $1.3 trillion spending package on party vote alone.

What do you think about certain Democrats working to distance themselves from Trump attacks ahead of the midterms? Let us know in the comments section below.

The post Some Democrats Distance Themselves from Trump Attacks Ahead of Midterms appeared first on The Conservative Brief.

via The Conservative Brief

#IFTTT #The Conservative Brief

0 notes

hviral · 5 years

Text

Confederate monuments: Where are they now?

According to the latest SPLC tally, there are roughly 780 Confederate monuments standing across the U.S. That’s a staggering number of tributes to the losing side of a treasonous insurrection; a war that ended not with a treaty, but with the South’s full surrender. More importantly, those statues honor people who fought for a nation founded to preserve black enslavement — a fact enshrined in its Constitution, its member states’ declarations of reasons for secession, its vice president’s most famous speech. It’s no wonder that white supremacists of every stripe — from the neo-Nazis who occupied Charlottesville to the man who currently occupies the executive office — are so fiercely defensive of them.

As Trump and the violent racists in his base contribute to an atmosphere of fear and hatred, one in which white racial terror violence is on the rise, the need to take down Confederate monuments has gained even greater urgency. Since the 2015 white supremacist murder of nine black parishioners in Charleston — a horrific meeting of America’s gun and race problems — 114 monuments have been removed in cities from Brooklyn to Durham to Dallas. Yes, that’s a mere fragment of the total number of Confederate monuments. But communities across the country are currently embroiled in fights to remove white supremacist symbols from their public spaces, and few of those battles make it to the national press.

Below is an overview of the status of just a few Confederate monuments around the country.

Confederate-Named Army Bases: There are 10 Army bases in the South named for Confederate soldiers. Fort Gordon is named for General John Brown Gordon, the reputed head of the Reconstruction-era Ku Klux Klan in Georgia; Virginia’s Fort Lee honors Robert E. Lee, the man who led the treasonous fight to maintain black enslavement. In late July, the League of United Latin American Citizens proposed that Texas’s Fort Hood — currently named for John Bell Hood, who ditched the U.S. Army to take up arms for the insurrectionist Confederacy — be renamed for Special Forces Master Sgt. Roy Benavidez, a Texas native who received the Medal of Honor and five Purple Hearts for his service during the Vietnam War. Military news outlet Stars and Stripes notes that LULAC’s proposal “will go to the secretary of the Army then to the appropriate committees in Congress.” In related news, an amendment to the House version of the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act would prohibit the Pentagon from naming any assets after Confederates going forward.

District of Columbia: The statue of Confederate General Albert Pike in D.C. stands on National Park Service grounds. On July 30, Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton introduced legislation to remove the statue from the plot of federal land it currently occupies. Instead, Norton is advocating for the rendering of Pike to be moved to a museum, or some other place it can be properly contextualized. She notes that the Freemasons, who funded the statue’s placement back in 1901, have co-signed her call for removal. A press release on Norton’s website declares that Pike “was a Confederate general who served dishonorably and was forced to resign in disgrace. It was found that soldiers under his command mutilated the bodies of Union soldiers, and Pike was ultimately imprisoned after his fellow officers reported that he misappropriated funds. Adding to the dishonor of taking up arms against the United States, Pike dishonored even his Confederate military service. He certainly has no claim to be memorialized in the nation’s capital. Even those who do not want Confederate statues removed will have to justify awarding Pike any honor, considering his history.”

Georgia: In 2010 the Georgia General Assembly passed a law that prohibits the removal of Confederate monuments. (Nearly identical “Heritage Laws” exist in Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia.) In April 2019, Governor Brian Kemp signed a bill that made relocation of Confederate statues, even to museums, illegal, and increased penalties for those caught protesting Confederate markers using defacement. Legislators in Atlanta — the blue dot in this Confederate-obsessed red sea — recently announced that they plan to put up plaques that add historical context about slavery next to four of the city’s Confederate markers. “This monument should no longer stand as a memorial to white brotherhood,” one sign notes; “rather, it should be seen as an artifact representing a shared history in which millions of Americans were denied civil and human rights.”

Tennessee: In 2017, the lawmakers in Memphis undertook a brilliant political strategy to circumnavigate the state’s repressive “Heritage Law” that prevents the removal of Confederate monuments. The law prohibits removal of Confederate statuary on public grounds, so city legislators sold two downtown parks to a private nonprofit for just $1,000 each. This allowed for the successful removal of statues honoring Confederate President Jefferson Davis and General Nathan Bedford Forrest, the first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. The Sons of Confederate Veterans (a neo-Confederate group) are currently trying to convince a court to force the return of the statues. In the meantime, the statues are sitting in storage while a new site for them is chosen.

Louisiana:

New Orleans: Formed in 2014, Take ’Em Down NOLA was the primary organizing entity behind the movement to take down New Orleans’ Confederate statues. In June 2015, following the massacre of nine black church parishioners in Charleston, South Carolina, Mayor Mitch Landrieu publicly called for the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee; the next month he officially tasked the City Council to begin the legal processes necessary to remove the statues. In December of that year, the Council voted 6-1 to remove four statues that glorified the Confederacy. They remained up until May 2017, their takedown forestalled by lawsuits filed by “preservationist” groups, as well as the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Those suits failed in federal court. The Confederate statues came down over 25 days in April and May 2017. Among the conditions of removal was a clause that the statues could never again be displayed outdoors on public grounds in New Orleans. The statues are currently in a city storage facility.

Shreveport: The Shreveport, Louisiana, chapter of the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) appealed a federal judge’s 2017 decision to dismiss their lawsuit to keep up a Confederate monument in front of a local courthouse. In April 2019, the UDC lost their case.

North Carolina:

Chapel Hill: North Carolina’s Heritage Law was passed in July 2015, roughly a month after the Charleston church massacre, a hasty and transparent effort to protect the state’s racist Confederate statuary from the groundswell of calls for removal. The law made efforts to remove the UNC-Chapel Hill Confederate statue known as “Silent Sam” — which student and local anti-racist activists had been legally trying to take down for over five decades — yet more difficult. Inaction by UNC administration added to student outrage. In August 2018, community frustrations boiled over and the statue was toppled by a crowd of protesters. Since then, the school’s chancellor has stepped down and its Board of Governors has repeatedly punted on plans for the statue’s new permanent placement.

Winston-Salem: North Carolina’s 2015 Heritage Law prevents the removal of statues from public land, but has no say over markers on private property. After Winston-Salem Mayor Allen Joines made public his intent to remove a local Confederate marker, the United Daughters of the Confederacy (the group who erected a local Confederate statue), which had previously claimed ownership of marker, denied ownership in court papers to establish it as a public object protected by the law. The UDC sued the city, which moved forward with plans for removal on March 12, placing it in storage until it could be erected in the Salem Cemetery. A UDC lawsuit to have the marker put back failed in court. “It is a symbol of oppression and the subjugation of the African-American people and so it’s hurtful to many in our community,” Mayor Joines told news outlets. The city has announced plans that it will move the statue to a Confederate cemetery.

Texas:

Dallas: After 81 years, an equestrian statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee was removed from a Dallas park in September 2017 — one month after the white nationalist Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. The statue sold in an online auction for $1.4 million to a buyer using the screen name “LawDude,” who was later identified as Texas law firm owner Ron Holmes.

Back in February 2019, the Dallas City Council voted 11-4 to take down the city’s Confederate War Memorial, a 60-foot-tall monument featuring statues of Confederate President Jefferson Davis and Generals Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Albert Johnston. In the months that followed, the city’s Landmark Commission and Plan Commission would both concur with the Council’s vote, and a win seemed just over the horizon for Dallas anti-racist activists, who’ve worked tirelessly for years to bring the monument down. Unfortunately, two lawsuits in two different courts have stalled progress on removal. In recently filed court papers, the city argues against the contention that the statue must remain standing for its “protection.” The city’s brief notes that it is “not threatening to sell or destroy the Confederate Monument” but “only to have the monument safely removed and archivally stored.” In other words, it’ll be as safe in storage as it is in the park, where it’s currently covered by a tarp.

San Antonio: In 2017, the UDC chapter in San Antonio, Texas, filed a federal lawsuit against local officials after the City Council, following the racist violence in Charlottesville, voted to remove a Confederate monument from public property. It’s been nearly two years since the Confederate monument was removed from Travis Park, taken down in the dead of night after a 10-1 City Council vote. The suit is still being litigated; the statue is now in storage.

Florida:

Gainesville: The Alachua County Commission voted 4-1 to take down a Confederate monument known locally as “Old Joe” in 2017. After both a local history museum and the county’s Veterans Memorial Park refused to take it, the UDC — which erected the statue in 1904 — stepped in to “save” the marker by taking it back and paying for its removal. It was removed by a construction crew on August 14, 2017, roughly 48 hours after the Unite the Right rally. According to the Gainesville Sun, the statue was relocated to the Oak Ridge Cemetery, a private graveyard near Rochelle, Florida.

Lake County: The National Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol Building is a grand chamber filled with statues of noteworthy Americans, two submitted by each state. For the first time since the statue collection began in 1870, a U.S. state will be represented by a black American. Mary McLeod Bethune — educator, civil rights pioneer, antilynching advocate, adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt and founder of Bethune-Cookman University in Daytona Beach — will now be the figure depicting Florida. She will replace an outgoing statute of Confederate General Edmund Kirby Smith. In a highly controversial move, commissioners in Lake County, Florida, voted to take possession of the Confederate statue, despite intense outcry from residents. Per one local outlet, “Nine of the 14 municipalities in Lake County approved formal resolutions opposing the relocation of the statue.” According to the paper, “the Lake County Historical Society Museum intends to house the museum in a facility above the historic county jail.”

California: It’s a testament to the insidiousness of the Confederacy — if not the insurrectionist uprising, certainly the ideology — that California was once the home to many Confederate markers. Honorifics to Confederates included the Dixie School District just outside San Francisco (renamed Miller Creek Elementary School District just this past July) and the two sequoias in Sequoia National Park named for Robert E. Lee (both still standing, names unchanged). In 2004 — again, 2004 — the Sons of Confederate Veterans erected a nine-foot-tall monument honoring Confederates in Santa Ana Cemetery. The marker praised “the sacred memory of the pioneers who built Orange County after their valiant efforts to defend the Cause of Southern Independence.” In July, protesters showed their disdain for the granite marker using defacement, spray painting one side red and scrawling the word “racists” down its face. Less than a month later, on August 1, the monument was removed by the city and placed in storage. Orange County Cemetery District General Manager Tim Deutsch reportedly stated the protesters’ paint job had made the monument “an unsightly public nuisance.”

Missouri:

Kansas City: Days after the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, protesters defaced the “Loyal Women of the Old South” Confederate monument. A local chapter of the UDC “gifted” the statue to Kansas City in 1934; following the defacement, the group accepted an anonymous donor’s offer to remove the statue to prevent further harm. Then-Parks Director Mark McHenry told press that the monument was placed “in storage in an undisclosed location, not on park property.”

St. Louis: After Mayor Lyda Krewson publicly declared in 2017 the city’s intent to remove a Confederate memorial put up by the UDC in 1912, a local chapter of the group signed over ownership to the Missouri Civil War museum. The museum then successfully sued the city for custody of the structure. The director of the museum has noted that the removed structure had been “painted by protestors and the city’s resulting use of paint stripper damaged the work. It will be undergoing restoration.” The museum is ultimately looking for the right property to place it in, such as “a Civil War battlefield, a Civil War cemetery, or a museum property.”

Montana: Disgusted by the murderous violence in Charlottesville, members of the American Indian Caucus of the Montana Legislature drafted an open letter to appeal to state legislators to remove a Confederate memorial. “The fountain was commissioned by the United Daughters of the Confederacy, an organization that openly supported the white supremacist views and mission of the early Ku Klux Klan,” the letter noted. “This is the only Confederate monument in the northwestern United States.” The memorial — a fountain that sat for 101 years in the city’s Hill Park — was removed in on August 18, 2017. A group called the Equity Fountain Project put out a call for new designs to replace the old monument and raised the funds needed to build and maintain the marker. Citizens of Helena chose, via vote, the final fountain design, titled the “Sphere of Interconnectedness.” Equity Fountain Project head Ron Waterman expressed hopes the fountain will showcase the “values of equity and equality, diversity, respect, generosity and compassion, tolerance, service, peace and justice.” Once the new monument is placed, Montana will become the first city to remove and replace a Confederate marker.

Tennessee: The city of Franklin, Tennessee, has an ongoing lawsuit against the UDC to determine who owns the land in one local public park containing a Confederate monument erected by the UDC in the late 19th century. The UDC threatened legal action when Franklin city leaders announced plans to add markers recognizing African-American historical figures to the park. Despite those threats, the city is going forward with construction of the markers.

Maryland: For months, Baltimore’s political leaders debated the fate of its Confederate statuary. After the white supremacist violence at the Unite the Right rally, the city acted swiftly to remove those monuments, taking down four markers on the night of August 15 and the wee hours of the morning that followed. Those statues were placed in storage. A recent New York Times investigation notes that city officials are “asking for a detailed plan from anyone interested in acquiring” the monuments.

Virginia:

Charlottesville: The equestrian statues of Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson — rallying points for the neo-Nazis of the Unite the Right rally — still stand in two Charlottesville parks. The Charlottesville City Council voted to relocate the Lee statue in 2017 (a move the white supremacists cited to justify their violence), but the removal has been stalled by a lawsuit filed by 13 plaintiffs, including the Sons of Confederate Veterans. The judge in the case, who at intervals has made clear his Lost Cause-influenced view of Southern history, has often sided with the plaintiffs at critical points throughout the case. It is very likely that whatever the final decision in the case, the lawsuit will end up in the Virginia Supreme Court.

Hampton: In 1956 — two years after the Supreme Court decision that legally desegregated Southern schools — the UDC funded an archway at Fort Monroe Army base in Hampton, Virginia, that decreed the area “Jefferson Davis Memorial Park.” As Virginia officials have more recently noted, the peninsula on which Fort Monroe is located was originally known as Point Comfort, where the first Africans enslaved in this country arrived in 1619. (Fort Monroe was decommissioned as a military base in 2011.) On August 6, “Jefferson Davis” was removed from the archway. The letters were donated to the Fort Monroe Casemate Museum.

The post Confederate monuments: Where are they now? appeared first on HviRAL.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/2TFF6rz

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

buynsellsolar-blog · 5 years

Text

July solar policy snapshots A guide to recent legislation and research throughout the country.

New Post published on http://roofnrays.com/july-solar-policy-snapshots-a-guide-to-recent-legislation-and-research-throughout-the-country/

July solar policy snapshots A guide to recent legislation and research throughout the country.

Salt Lake City became an even worthier site for Solar Power International 2019 after the city sped up its timeline to reach 100% renewable energy.

Commercial solar projects now allowed on Michigan farmland Lansing, Michigan

Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer and the state’s agriculture director decided to allow land currently enrolled in the Farmland and Open Space Preservation Program to be used for commercial solar array purposes. Developers previously had trouble siting solar on farmland that was preserved for agricultural use only, so this move opens up more greenfield solar opportunities.

Maine governor signs three renewable energy bills Augusta, Maine

Governor Janet Mills signed three bills that will spur renewable energy development in Maine, according to WMTW. The bills create a goal to reduce the state’s greenhouse gas emissions, double the RPS and create new solar incentive programs. “Codifying these goals sends a strong signal that the nascent solar market in Maine is about to take off, bringing clean energy, jobs and new investments along with it,” said Sean Gallagher, VP of state affairs at SEIA, in a statement.

@GovJanetMills signs LD1711 landmark solar bill for solar energy in Maine. Lots of work left to do but this is truly a great step forward for the State! Congratulations to all who worked so hard to make this happen. pic.twitter.com/MIwmU8EUEx

— fortunat mueller (@4_2_knot) June 26, 2019

New Hampshire governor vetoes net-metering expansion for second time Concord, New Hampshire

New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu has again vetoed a bill that would have raised the size of projects that would qualify for net metering. This bill would have raised the qualifying project size from 1 MW up to 5 MW. Sununu said in his veto message that he made the decision because the bill was “a regressive cost burden on citizens that benefits large-scale solar developers while hurting all ratepayers,” but NHPR reported that utilities say net metering is only a minor driver of rate increases. There’s still a chance for the legislature to override Sununu’s veto.

Oregon’s climate bill is dead Salem, Oregon

A plan in Oregon that would have established a cap-and-trade policy to cap carbon emissions and make polluting entities pay for greenhouse gas production has died after Republican senators fled the state, according to NPR. The GOP exodus prevented a quorum on the Senate floor, so the Democratic majority couldn’t vote on the bill. Senate President Peter Courtney announced that the Senate didn’t have the votes to pass the bill on June 25, in what NPR describes as an apparent attempt to bring Republicans back to the statehouse.

Salt Lake City moves faster toward 100% RPS Salt Lake City, Utah

The 2019 site of Solar Power International became even more worthy after the city moved up its goal to reach 100% renewable energy by two years, according to Fox 13. Salt Lake City now aims to be carbon-free by 2030 instead of 2032. The mayor said all city buildings will already be powered by 100% renewable energy by 2020.

North Carolina solar decommissioning bill is relaxed Raleigh, North Carolina

A North Carolina senator adjusted his original bill that set a September 2019 deadline for setting decommissioning and cleanup rules for solar projects after getting pushback from solar lobbyists, according to the Carolina Journal. His new proposed bill gives regulators until 2022 to study environmental impacts involved with solar decommissioning and adopt rules for dismantling and disposing of utility-scale solar facilities and batteries.

Survey finds 70% of Americans support nationwide solar mandate on new homes Washington, D.C.

A new study by a research group on behalf of Vivint Solar found 70% of Americans would support a nationwide mandate requiring solar panels to be installed on all newly built homes. The survey of 2,000 U.S. adults age 25 and up also found that significant others and environmental experts are the most influential when deciding to install residential solar for the good of the environment, while politicians are the least influential.

New York sets goal for enough solar to power 1 million homes Albany, New York

After two years of work, the Million Solar Strong coalition finally succeeded in its mission: The Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act passed the legislature and is expected to be signed by the governor. The law sets a goal for New York to procure 6 GW of solar power, enough solar to power 1 million homes, by 2025. The bill also requires at least 70% of New York’s electric generation to come from renewables by 2030.

EPA officially replaces Clean Power Plan Washington, D.C.

The Trump administration took a big step to protect the coal industry by replacing the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan with one that would keep coal plants open longer and leave carbon regulations to the states, according to The New York Times. Multiple state attorneys general have already said they plan to sue and block the new regulation called the Affordable Clean Energy rule.

0 notes

bountyofbeads · 5 years

Text

Democratic rivals attack Biden, with Harris leading the way on race issues

https://wapo.st/31YTUFm

I believe Kamala Harris @KamalaHarris was the biggest winner of last night's debate along with Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Michael Bennett. What are your thoughts? 👇👇🤔

Democratic rivals attack Biden, with Harris leading the way on race issues

By Michael Scherer, Toluse Olorunnipa and Chelsea Jane's | Published June 28 at 12:06 AM ET | Washington Post | Posted June 28, 2019 |

MIAMI — Rival Democratic presidential contenders pummeled former vice president Joe Biden with searing, emotional critiques Thursday at their first debate — denouncing his record on racial issues and calling on him to pass the torch to a new generation of leaders.

In one of the most dramatic moments of the campaign season, Biden found that his long-held stature as a beloved party leader offered him no respite at the center of a crowded debate stage, given his early domination of national polling in the race.

Sen. Kamala D. Harris of California, who commanded the event at several points in the night, led the charge.

“I do not believe you are a racist. I agree with you when you commit yourself to the importance of finding common ground,” Harris said. “But I also believe, and it’s personal . . . it was hurtful to hear you talk about the reputations of two United States senators who built their reputations and career on segregation of race in this country.”

She accused him of opposing policies that allowed black girls like her to attend integrated schools. “There was a little girl in California who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools, and she was bused to school every day,” she said. “That little girl was me.”

Biden looked away as Harris spoke, appearing emotionally affected by the attack as he attempted to defend himself. “Mischaracterization of my position across the board,” Biden said. “I did not praise racists. That is not true.”

“I was a public defender. I didn’t become a prosecutor,” he added, referencing controversy over Harris’s own record on criminal justice in California before she became a senator.

Harris was not the only one to set her sights on Biden. Sen. Michael F. Bennet (Colo.) attacked him for striking a deal with Republican leaders to keep some of George W. Bush’s tax cuts. And Rep. Eric Swalwell (Calif.), 38, opened a generational front, calling Biden, 76, to “pass the torch” to a new generation of leaders.

Biden’s game plan — to focus on Trump and his own policies and experience — was thrown off track by rivals who repeatedly interrupted each other and disregarded the instructions of moderators. Candidates had clearly learned from watching Wednesday’s debate between a different group of Democratic candidates that there was little cost for breaking the debate rules.

Biden was able at times to lead the rest of the stage in a set of direct attacks on Trump. Calling him a liar, a phony and a failure who did not have the interests of the American people, the candidates collectively took a different approach than the Wednesday debate participants.

Policy distinction between the liberal and moderate wings of the party, a focus of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, also faded into the background for much of the night.

Biden went so far as to blame President Trump for the current state of income inequality in the country, which has been growing by most measures for decades. “Look, Donald Trump has put us in a horrible situation,” he said, slamming the tax cuts signed into law by Trump as a source of “enormous income inequality.”

Others piled on. “He’s torn apart the moral fabric of this country,” said Sen. Kristin Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). Author Marianne Williamson accused the Trump administration of kidnapping migrant children, a reference to the president’s family-separation policy.

Trump, who was attending the Group of 20 summit in Japan, was paying attention to the debate and weighed in after all 10 Democrats raised their hands to declare that they would support providing health care for undocumented immigrants.

“All Democrats just raised their hands for giving millions of illegal aliens unlimited health care,” Trump said on Twitter during the debate. “How about taking care of American Citizens first!? That’s the end of that race!”

Asked if they believed crossing the border into the United States without proper documentation should be downgraded from a criminal offense to a civil offense, almost every candidate again raised their hand.

The display, which Republicans seized on as evidence of Democratic support for “open borders,” came a day after the issue of decriminalizing undocumented migrants emerged as a flash point during the first round of the debate. Former housing and urban development secretary Julián Castro sharply criticized former congressman Beto O’Rourke of Texas for opposing legislation to repeal part of U.S. immigration law that allows for criminal prosecution of migrants who come to the United States without proper documentation.

On Thursday, there was near unanimity in supporting that kind of policy — an example of the leftward shift of the party since Trump’s election.

“Let’s remember, that’s not just a theoretical exercise,” South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg said. “That criminalization, that is the basis for family separation.”

Biden appeared to raise his hand in favor or decriminalization as well, but sidestepped the question when asked directly whether he supported decriminalizing crossing the border without proper documentation.

“The first thing — the first thing I would do is unite families,” Biden said.

Health care dominated the early portion of the debate, with the candidates discussing ideas for moving toward universal coverage. Sanders and Harris were the only two candidates to raise their hands when asked if they would eliminate private health insurance in favor of a government-run plan, echoing similar pledges Wednesday by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.

“We will substantially lower the cost of health care in this country because we’ll stop the greed of the insurance companies,” Sanders said, arguing that Americans would pay higher taxes — but lower overall costs — under his plan.

Several candidates sought to show their personal experience with a health-care system that many Americans tell pollsters is their top priority.

Buttigieg said his father was able to navigate the health-care system during a terminal illness due to his Medicare coverage. Bennet, who recently battled prostate cancer, said he opposed getting rid of private insurance. Swalwell, the father of a young child, said he was just in the emergency room and battles insurance companies weekly.

Buttigieg’s appearance was his first national appearance since a police officer in South Bend shot and killed an African American man. The shooting highlighted the racial tensions that have lingered there under his leadership, and Buttigieg drew public criticism of his inability to diversify the South Bend police force and his handling of the victim’s family. Buttigieg, a Harvard graduate and military veteran, has acknowledged his need to build trust with minority voters.

The race conversation began with Buttigieg, who was asked why his city, which is 26 percent black, is policed by a force that is just 6 percent black.

“Because I didn’t get it done,” Buttigieg said.

“This is an issue that is facing our community and so many communities around the country,” Buttigieg said. “And until we move policing out from the shadow of systemic racism, whatever this particular incident teaches us, we will be left with the bigger problem of the fact that there is a wall of mistrust put up one racist act at a time.”

That response did not satisfy others on the stage. Former Colorado governor John Hickenlooper contrasted Buttigieg’s response with his own handling of a police shooting when he was mayor of Denver.

“The community came together and we created an Office of the Independent Monitor, a Civilian Oversight Commission, and we diversified the police force in two years,” Hickenlooper said. “We actually did de-escalation training.”

Swalwell also added to the critique, saying Buttigieg should shake up the police department. “You’re the mayor,” Swalwell told Buttigieg. “You should fire the chief.”

[Transcript: Night 2 of the first Democratic debate]

Then Harris, one of only two people of color on the stage, asked to speak, positioning herself as the candidate best qualified to handle racial tension — and therefore, best able to stage what amounted to a personal attack on the former vice president.

It was one of many authoritative moments for Harris, who channeled the forceful prosecutor approach that earned her national attention in Senate hearings with Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, Attorney General William P. Barr and others. Since drawing 22,000 people to her January campaign launch in Oakland, Calif., Harris has failed to seize a place in the top three in early polls, hovering just outside the tier consistently occupied by Biden, Sanders and, more recently, Warren.

Harris began making a case against Biden by offering delicate criticism of former president Barack Obama’s record of deporting millions of undocumented immigrants — saying that while she respected Obama, she disagreed with his deportation policy.

She went in for the more direct hit on Biden’s record on race, which ended with her asking if Biden stands by his position on busing today.

“I did not oppose busing in America,” Biden said. “What I opposed is busing ordered by the Department of Education.”

At one point, as Swalwell argued that Biden should pass the torch, Buttigieg jumped in to say he, the youngest person on the stage, should be talking about generational change. Gillibrand tried to jump in over him. Harris raised her voice through the cacophony.

“Hey, guys. America does not want a food fight,” Harris said. “They want to hear how we’re going to put food on their table.”

#donald trump #u.s. news #politics #trump administration #politics and government #us: news #democratic party #democrats #elections #political science #2020 candidates #2020 election #2020 Presidential Candidates #2020 presidential election

0 notes

whittlebaggett8 · 5 years

Text

A Visual Dialogue of the 2014 Sunflower Movement, 5 Years Later

This previous March 18 marked the five-yr anniversary of Taiwan’s 2014 Sunflower Motion, a months-prolonged protest occupation of Taipei’s administrative district, which at its top included half a million individuals and the occupation of equally the Legislative Yuan and the Govt Yuan.

The protests began as a reaction to the Ma administration’s (2008-2016) tries to unexpectedly negotiate a trade and expert services offer with China as element of the greater 2010 Economic Cooperation Framework Arrangement, which critics say stalled real economic advancement in Taiwan, hollowed out the economic climate, and threatened to pressure the island further into Beijing’s orbit. The Sunflower Movement began as an endeavor to gradual down the system. Lots of were opposed to the deal because it was getting railroaded as a result of without dissenting voices staying listened to. The motion is noteworthy for quite a few motives, chief amid them it disclosed broad political dissatisfaction throughout a massive spectrum of Taiwanese. Its document numbers, period (the legislative chamber was occupied for 23 days), effects on the well-known culture, pageant-like ambiance, and amazingly lower stages of violence and crime had in no way been witnessed prior to. In its speedy aftermath, curation attempts commenced.

Curation initiatives have been carried out by Academia Sinica in Taipei, where by 1000’s upon countless numbers of posters, banners, and protest ephemera have been collected and are becoming catalogued. The Daybreak venture, operated by Sunflower protestor-activist Brian Hioe, whom I interviewed last calendar year, is also establishing an on-line encyclopedia of the movement.

Enjoying this article? Click listed here to subscribe for entire access. Just $5 a month.

Inside the Legislative Yuan, a jumble of artwork, donated comfort merchandise, media, communications volunteers, translators – all properly-organized and disciplined. Photo by Tobie Openshaw.

Later that same yr Ma’s celebration, the pro-China Kuomintang (KMT), dropped to the professional-independence leaning Democratic Progressive Social gathering (DPP) in area elections. The DPP would go on to gain handle of the presidency and legislature in 2016’s countrywide elections. Now five several years on, the strength surrounding the movement that led to the DPP surge has dissipated and eyes are turning again to the KMT, which regained a the vast majority of the island’s counties and metropolitan areas in the 2018 midterms.

Irrespective of the loss of momentum in new years, the Sunflower Movement continue to exists in the popular consciousness as something reverential, a “Summer of Love” for the Taiwanese. Now, with the clarity of hindsight, the curation efforts are shelling out off.

Visitors read the captions for pics shown at “Sunflowers in the Avenue: Protest Photos from Taiwan”on opening day at The Pink Area in Taipei. Image by James X. Morris.

“Sunflowers in the Street: Protest Photos from Taiwan” is a curation by South Africa-born filmmaker and journalist Tobie Openshaw now on display screen at The Red Home in Taipei right up until June 14. Openshaw has lived in Taiwan for 21 a long time and arrived at the Legislative Yuan following the 1st working day of protests, getting obtain to the legislative chamber on various instances with a press pass issued by France24. On the exhibit’s opening evening Openshaw was joined by Chang Jiho, 1 of the primary March 18 occupiers, now a town councilman for Keelung in northern Taiwan.

The authentic occupiers of the legislature, Chang integrated, acknowledged their protest was one thing more substantial than they experienced envisioned. In the aftermath, the motion “created huge vitality for the entire society” discussed Chang at the exhibition. Quite a few protest leaders like Chang would enter into politics.

On the ground, the protest movement very first occupied the Legislature with sympathetic lawmakers standing guard to stop police from relocating in. As tensions rose, yet another group attempted to occupy the Government offices, but were in the end unsuccessful, currently being pressured out and hit with drinking water cannons. The overall time the protestors designed use of social media to coordinate and keep the world current on activities. “The revolution won’t be televised. It will be livestreamed,” suggests Openshaw.

Wherever people today collected, there have been volunteers marshaling the crowds, earning guaranteed items stayed orderly and harmless. That a lot of persons coming with each other for a one cause — in peace and unity — is a incredibly impressive detail. 500,000 men and women on a Sunday afternoon. Photograph by Tobie Openshaw.

I a short while ago experienced an chance to talk with Openshaw in extra element about his exhibit and how his curation came to be.

The Diplomat: What was your assumed when you to start with arrived at the scene?

Tobie Openshaw: I wasn’t guaranteed what to count on but my very first perception was that it was way larger than I expected and way a lot more actual. I could explain to that it wasn’t just a type of random, rapid flash mob sort of point for the reason that when I arrived it was a working day or two soon after the occupation started off. It was crystal clear they experienced settled in. I did assume at any time that law enforcement were being likely to genuinely shift in. I predicted there would be clashes in the road. Which is what I expect from protests, in particular being a lengthy functioning thing, there would be a strong governing administration response. But I also found that the sheer selection of folks there would make it quite challenging for the government [and] for the law enforcement to basically do a thing.

… When I was in South Africa, I did my armed service support there. We have obligatory two-yr army service. And all through that time we experienced very major rioting in South Africa. The ANC was performing with the mentioned object of making the region ungovernable. They were environment hearth to schools, submit offices, they experienced a slogan: “liberation in advance of education” and men and women had been killed if they had been thought to be law enforcement informants. … The issue I’m making is that I have been on the other facet. … In essence I was prepared for anything [at the Sunflower Movement] you know, but rather shortly it turned distinct […] that this protest was incredibly really strongly crafted on, doing work to, and creating confident that it was non-confrontational and that it kept the peace. So incredibly quickly I became in awe of the way that the organizers [of the movement] managed to hold a lid on it, defuse or stay away from confrontation with the police, and then also from the other aspect the point that the authorities was obviously not overreaching in conditions of allowing this protest to materialize and not just sending in the cops.

… Coming out from the MRT station I could hear the people singing. They ended up singing that music from Les Mis — “Can you hear the people sing, singing the tune of indignant men” but they were singing it in Taiwanese. It was attractive. I’ve received a recording of it. Just the point that everybody arrived out in solidarity, everyone plopped themselves down: “Here I am. Here I’m sitting down. I’m having up this area in purchase to make my voice heard, but I’m not going to be hurting anyone and I’m not likely to be harmful any residence.” That just truly grabbed me. It was an astounding experience.

I’ve listened to a ton of persons examine the event with virtually veneration. Do you feel the veneration is suitable? Is it misplaced? Was it just one more protest in a extensive string of Taiwan protests?

I unquestionably speak of it with veneration… it’s possible the lengthy-jogging outcomes and the benefits have not been as utopian as a person would have hoped — so there’s a specific diploma of disappointment now 5 a long time later, but at the time, […] as it occurred, I truly feel it’s continue to worthy of talking about with great regard and admiration simply because of the way it was run and managed. … [T]hey in essence followed the product of Occupy Wall Road but it was way extra helpful and thriving. They made needs that had been sensible and as soon as the majority of individuals requires ended up achieved they created a choice to go away. … [They] explained, “Okay we’ve acquired 6 of our eight requires to our fulfillment … so let us pack up and go residence. Let’s go again to our experiments. Let’s be liable citizens, and most of all let’s cleanse up this house.” And I think that’s one of the truly significant factors that set this aside from any protest that I have at any time been associated or seen. I noticed little ones on their knees scrubbing out dirt places on the carpet inside this setting up. It actually was a pretty, extremely going event and course of action, and again what you noticed there was… you saw and you noticed and you lived democracy as it need to be practiced. Democracy in action. From protestors, from police, and from the federal government. They all performed the democracy sport by the policies and it was attractive to see.

“The long term belongs to her…” Lots of built the day on the streets into family outings. Photograph by Tobie Openshaw.

Now there’s this aura about it these times, but people today are a tiny more bitter. Is the veneration missing the position of the protests at all?

Actually I really do not believe so. … The veneration is about the simple fact that democracy was seen to be done. And it was performed nicely. Another portion of the veneration is the shock that individuals felt for how these young little ones stood up for their rules and how they managed it. They used to be referred to as the “strawberry technology,” very easily squished, effortlessly bruised, and nonetheless I saw little ones linking arms and sitting down on the floor, as the law enforcement in their riot equipment and as their water cannons approached. And all those little ones sat there. They didn’t split, they didn’t operate absent. They did not start crying. They sat and took what was coming to them, and that was sheer bravery. And irrespective of whether the final results in the end are not thoroughly as what a single would have hoped or what ever, that you just cannot take absent from it. The system took place and it took place so perfectly and with these types of heat and this kind of assistance from this kind of a significant percentage of Taiwan folks.

What is the information you want to convey by your exhibition?

I guess specifically what I’ve been saying: democracy can do the job. These young persons have shown us how to make your voice heard, how to converse reality to power, devoid of harmful items, without breaking matters down, with no being anarchic. It was a guide or textbook in how to manage effectively, how to choose your battles, how to opt for your battleground, and how to drum up guidance for the proper matter and how to have that through to a excellent conclusion.

Journalist and documentary filmmaker Tobie Openshaw (left) and Sunflower protestor turned Keelung Town Councilman Chang Jiho greet website visitors on the opening working day of the show. Photograph by James X. Morris.

Of everybody that you noticed, they were all youthful grown ups — in their late teens, 20s, 30s? Were they young, or were there older persons as well?

Undoubtedly the bulk were youthful persons. There were being college students. College college students and even high faculty students. I observed a ton of superior faculty college students out there. There were being more mature persons. There was a hole in the center. There had been not a entire great deal of center-aged individuals. That has to be a operate of who are the persons who have time to go sit in the avenue. It’s younger pupils and more mature folks who are previously retired. The more mature people today I saw there primarily experienced some kind of agenda — some sort of protest of their possess or a topic they had been on about by themselves. So I saw practically nothing of more mature persons guiding or orchestrating nearly anything. That was all the younger people today. All the folks I dealt with in the motion, the spokespeople, the translators… were young persons.

Do you take into account on your own a curator?

Sure. Totally. This exhibition I curated to emphasize people things that I talked about: the organization, the youth … the other players. This is how far-reaching it was. That sort of matter. I did try to provide in as several aspects as doable. But they are all factors that I noticed. There’s nothing there of the internal workings of the management group, since I was not privy to any of that. And a different aspect that I hope my exhibition demonstrates is that expats who were in Taiwan who were being both journalists, photographers, or just interested arrived there. There were quite a few issues this wasn’t getting more than enough global consideration. I pointed out this in my converse. It was really hard to get the worldwide media to comprehend the nuances of what was going on.

They needed violence and you experienced no violence.

Yeah. They just wished the clashes. But what I wanted to present with my exhibition was that indeed there ended up outsiders hunting with an outsider’s eye, and this is what they observed. And I explain to that tale because that is the only tale I have… the outsider tale. That is the story that is mine to convey to.

Chang An-lo, also acknowledged as “White Wolf,” of the Chinese Unification Advertising Celebration displays up with a crowd of rowdy supporters to challenge the pupils, April 1, 2014. Photo by Tobie Openshaw.

Not all of the images are yours. With the exception of Chang Jiho, all of the pictures are by outsiders — people not born and elevated in Taiwan. Do you imagine this impacts the standpoint of your exhibition? Does it affect the way that it’s been curated? Does it effects the information?

Yes… But I also absolutely really don’t really feel that our viewpoint strays incredibly significantly from the acknowledged narrative of what the Sunflowers stood for and what it meant for Taiwan culture. There is unquestionably nothing radical about our interpretation. We probably discovered or commented on or uncovered especially touching some things that to Taiwanese men and women would not be strange.

You have been in this article for the past five yrs. Now we’re looking at a swing back to the KMT, and this populist viewpoint of some of the candidates… Do you see yet another motion of that form of scale and vitality developing all over again in Taiwan?

I sincerely question it. Activities like this have a time and a area where everything comes with each other and the time is suitable and the ambiance is proper for every little thing to take place. And I really do not see that taking place listed here anytime shortly. Also I know that, for instance, a couple of years in the past the KMT tried to orchestrate one thing identical and it completely colossally failed. There was a thing like “oh yeah they are plainly hoping to have an additional Sunflower Movement” due to the fact they saw how helpful it was the previous time and they tried out to change the tables, but I imagine the dissatisfaction at the instant is pretty broad and it’s devolved into various fascination groups… the LGBT protest, the pension fund protest, but none of them have captured the preferred creativity the way the Sunflowers did. I believe situations like that of that scale and of that depth and that depth are incredibly uncommon in the environment.

… Another component is the government, possessing experienced that knowledge the initial time around, in all probability, I assume, would act far more quickly and additional decisively just before something like that can take maintain. It was vastly disruptive to the govt at that time so I’m very confident they’ve sat all over the desk and mentioned, “If this ever takes place once again you shut that making down, you turn off the lights, whatsoever it can take. You get individuals people today out of there and stop that factor just before it usually takes keep.”

Within the Legislative Yuan, a jumble of artwork, donated convenience items, media, medical volunteers and, to the correct, law college students who volunteered their time to give totally free legal suggestions. Photo by Tobie Openshaw.

How very long have you been in Taiwan?

21 yrs. I photographed the [2008 Wild Strawberry Movement] as properly. I literally just swung by, did not understand what it was about, and it was extremely little. They have been camped out in front of Chiang Kai-Shek Memorial Hall and I just took some images there and got an notion. But I was also mindful from an early-ish stage that the Sunflowers — because it transpired so rapidly and seemingly out of the blue — it was one thing that experienced been coming up in techniques from the earlier.

You ended up capable to gauge this would be distinctive from the Strawberries?

Yeah. Just in phrases of scale, the minute I arrived there I could see “wow this is massive.”

Do you think that’s aspect of this veneration? This aura? That it is a little something which is fully various sort what had been in the earlier?

Completely. It is also for me, what I have been making an attempt to say about it in my exhibition, is this is the very best of Taiwan. This is Taiwan. Simply because anyplace else in the planet it would have possibly absent very in a different way. In South Africa it would have absent way in another way. In The usa with Occupy Wall Road it went otherwise. In Hong Kong it went in different ways. So yeah, it is very damn exceptional and is a testomony to Taiwan and Taiwan’s people that it went the way it did.

The exhibit “Sunflowers in the Avenue: Protest Photos from Taiwan” can be considered at The Pink Space in Taipei right up until June 14, 2019.

The post A Visual Dialogue of the 2014 Sunflower Movement, 5 Years Later appeared first on Defence Online.

from WordPress https://defenceonline.com/2019/04/25/a-visual-dialogue-of-the-2014-sunflower-movement-5-years-later/

#Asia Life #Sunflower Movement #Taiwan democracy #Taiwan freedom of speech #Taiwan politics #Taiwan P

0 notes

gigglesndimples · 5 years

Text

The STATES Act Reintroduced: Bipartisan Measure Limits Federal Government’s Ability To Interfere With State-Sanctioned Marijuana Business, Policies

Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Cory Gardner (R-CO), along with Representatives David Joyce (R-OH) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), have reintroduced The Strengthening the Tenth Amendment Through Entrusting States (STATES) Act of 2019. This Act amends the Controlled Substances Act to reduce the number of instances in which federal law enforcement agencies could carry out legal actions against state-licensed cannabis businesses or other related enterprises.

“The majority of states now regulate either the medical use or the adult use of marijuana. It is time for the federal government to cease standing in the way of these voter-backed regulatory policies being implemented throughout the country,” said NORML Political Director Justin Strekal. “Ultimately, however, we must remove marijuana from the federal Controlled Substances Act entirely in order to allow those in legal states to ultimately be free from undue federal discrimination and the fear of federal prosecution.”

Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) said: “Forty-seven states have legalized some form of cannabis and the majority of Americans support its legalization. Our outdated laws have ruined lives, devastated communities, and wasted resources for critical medical treatment and research. The STATES Act is the next logical step in a comprehensive blueprint for more rational federal cannabis policy. It’s time for Congress to catch up with the rest of America are and fix a badly broken system.”

Said Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH): “The current federal policy interferes with the ability of states to implement their own cannabis laws, and the resulting system has stifled important medical research, hurt legitimate businesses and diverted critical law enforcement resources needed elsewhere. It’s past time for Congress to clarify cannabis policy on the federal level and ensure states are free to make their own decisions in the best interest of their constituents. The STATES Act does just that by respecting the will of the states that have legalized cannabis in some form and allowing them to implement their own policies without fear of repercussion from the federal government.”

The STATES Act joins multiple bills have been filed to amend the Controlled Substances Act to restrict federal enforcement actions against state-legal marijuana businesses.

They include:

HR 493: The Sensible Enforcement Of Cannabis Act, introduced by Congressman Lou Correa (D-CA).

HR 1455: The REFER Act (Restraining Excessive Federal Enforcement & Regulations of Cannabis Act), introduced by Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA).

HR 2012: The Respect States’ and Citizens’ Rights Act, introduced by Congresswoman Diane DeGette (D-CO).

Supporters of cannabis reform can contact their lawmakers regarding these bills via the NORML Action Center HERE.

General information regarding cannabis reform:

According to the most recent FBI Uniform Crime Report, police made 659,700 arrests for marijuana-related violations in 2017. That total is more than 21 percent higher than the total number of persons arrests for the commission of violent crimes (518,617) in 2017. Of those arrested for marijuana crimes, just under 91 percent (599,000) were arrested for marijuana possession offenses, a slight increase over last year’s annual totals. Total marijuana arrests in 2017 increased for the second straight year, after having fallen for nearly a decade.

Thirty-three states, Washington, D.C. and the U.S. territories of Guam and Puerto Rico have enacted legislation specific to the physician-authorized use of cannabis. Moreover, an estimated 73 million Americans now reside in the ten states where anyone over the age of 21 may possess cannabis legally. An additional fifteen states have passed laws specific to the possession of cannabidiol (CBD) oil for therapeutic purposes.

Sixty-eight percent of registered voters “support the legalization of marijuana,” according to 2018 national polling data compiled by the Center for American Progress. The percentage is the highest level of support for legalization ever reported in a nationwide, scientific poll.

Majorities of Democrats (77 percent), Independents (62 percent), and Republicans (57 percent) back legalization. The results of a 2017 nationwide Gallup poll similarly found majority support among all three groups.

To date, these statewide regulatory programs are operating largely as voters and politicians intended. The enactment of these policies have not negatively impacted workplace safety, crime rates, traffic safety, or youth use patterns. They have stimulated economic development and created hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue.

Specifically, a 2019 report estimates that over 211,000 Americans are now working full-time in the cannabis industry. Tax revenues from states like Colorado, Oregon, and Washington now exceed initial projections. Further, numerous studies have identified an association between cannabis access and lower rates of opioid use, abuse, hospitalizations, and mortality.

Source: https://blog.norml.org/2019/04/04/the-states-act-reintroduced-bipartisan-measure-limits-federal-governments-ability-to-interfere-with-state-sanctioned-marijuana-business-policies/

The post The STATES Act Reintroduced: Bipartisan Measure Limits Federal Government’s Ability To Interfere With State-Sanctioned Marijuana Business, Policies is available on https://gigglesndimples.com/

from Giggles N Dimples - Feed https://gigglesndimples.com/2019/04/04/the-states-act-reintroduced-bipartisan-measure-limits-federal-governments-ability-to-interfere-with-state-sanctioned-marijuana-business-policies/

0 notes

mikalajanie · 6 years

Text

The healthcare miracle that this election could ratify

Public health officials, advocates and scholars are mostly good souls. When healthcare access for poor or sick people is curtailed they think it’s a tragedy. And they’re right.

At the same time, professional and personal commitment to improving access may have partially blinded some of these fiercely committed souls to the miracle that progressive citizen action has wrought on the healthcare front in the Trump era.

Since January 2017, Republicans have hurt access to healthcare – by multi-front sabotage that’s driven up the cost of ACA-compliant, comprehensive insurance in the individual market by (conservatively) 16 percent – and via Medicaid work requirements, sought or implemented by 14 states, which could reduce ACA expansion gains by perhaps 20 to 25 percent in those states.

More broadly, the U.S. healthcare system remains a hot mess, distorted by a profit-maximizing ethos, relentless consolidation, private equity ownership and balance billing that renders most people’s insurance at least partially illusory.

What we haven’t lost

Nonetheless, the revenue streams and basic program structure implemented by the ACA to provide comprehensive health insurance to low-to-moderate-income Americans who might otherwise be uninsured remain intact. About 20 million people currently hold insurance directly subsidized through the ACA – 60 percent of that through the Medicaid expansion.*

$110 billion in federal spending will flow to those programs in 2018, and $1.6 trillion from 2019 through 2028, according to the Congressional Budget Office (page 18). The percentage of uninsured Americans under age 65 has dropped from 17 percent in 2013 to 10 percent in 2018.

That’s the miracle – its durability contingent on Democrats taking control of the House of Representatives on Tuesday.

The damage done

In coming years, Republican actions to undercut the ACA marketplace by creating a parallel market of medically underwritten, lightly regulated insurance may further drive up premiums and limit options for people with pre-existing conditions who need coverage in the individual market and don’t qualify for ACA subsidies. The latest blow is new guidance to states encouraging them to radically redesign their ACA marketplaces, including by allowing premium subsidies to be applied to short-term plans for which insurers can vary price according to an applicant’s medical condition and exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions.

youtube

States always had the option of proposing alternative designs for their marketplaces, but previously those proposals had to stay within strict “guardrails” stipulating that the alternative scheme had to cover just as many people just as comprehensively as the default ACA design – and not hurt vulnerable groups such as low-income, sick or older enrollees. The new guidance allows “slight” disadvantaging of such groups if more people are covered as a whole.

Under these loose rules, Republican-governed states might favor lightly regulated markets catering to healthy people, driving up the cost for those who don’t qualify for ACA subsidies of comprehensive insurance offered on equal terms to people with pre-existing conditions. They might also weaken or eliminate vital Cost Sharing Reduction (CSR) subsidies available to lower income enrollees – and currently accessed by more than half of marketplace enrollees. Those changes could indeed disadvantage vulnerable groups.

Battered but still standing

But these blows to the ACA goal of making affordable insurance available to all – which the ACA at its best only half attained – should be viewed in light of what seemed an overwhelming likelihood in the wake of the November 2016 election and through the first half of 2017: repeal of the ACA’s core programs and funding, coupled with additional deep long-term cuts to Medicaid – which covers 75 million Americans.

The repeal bill that passed the House in May 2017 would have un-insured 23 million Americans and cut $834 billion in Medicaid funding, according to the estimate of the Congressional Budget Office. If you’d have told progressives in January 2017 that the ACA would still be standing for Open Enrollment 2019 – albeit with a parallel “short-term” market and an open invitation to states to take their federal funding and redesign their markets – most would have sung hosannas.

The alternative barely-regulated market and new freedom for states should also be viewed in light of the ACA’s longer history. The law has been under existential threat since it was enacted – endangered not only by the prospect of Republican takeover (avoided in 2012) but by two court challenges that made it to the Supreme Court. The second suit, King v. Burwell, which challenged the authority of the federal ACA exchange then serving 36 states, HealthCare.gov, to issue ACA premium and CSR subsidies, prompted talk of legislative compromises that would guarantee funding in exchange for creating “superwaivers” empowering states to take marketplace funding and do what they would with it. A conservative scholar, Stuart Butler of the Brookings Institute, proposed such a “superwaiver” compromise while King was awaiting a Supreme Court ruling, in April 2015. His progressive Brookings colleague, Henry Aaron, presciently forecast in January 2017 that Republicans would fail to repeal the ACA and the Trump administration would fall back on opening up the waiver process.

The waiver requests ahead

Progressives won’t like red states’ waiver requests. In 2017, Iowa proposed cutting out CSR and making just one plan design, with a deductible in excess of $7,000, available to all, albeit at very low premiums. Oklahoma floated a proposal, never formally submitted**, to begin subsidy eligibility at zero income (in lieu of Medicaid expansion), cut it off at 300 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (instead of the ACA’s 400 percent FPL), and, again, end CSR, shifting some of the funding to Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to be used for out-of-pocket expenses. CSR radically cuts out-of-pocket costs for enrollees with incomes up to 200 percent FPL (with a much weaker benefit at 200 to 250 percent FPL) and thus makes actual healthcare, as opposed to mere “insurance,” affordable for many.

But there’s something to be said for letting red states be … red states. Many Republican-controlled states have resisted effective ACA implementation, actively or passively – refusing to expand Medicaid eligibility, declining to actively regulate their insurance markets, putting roadblocks in the way of nonprofit enrollment assistance programs established by the ACA. A state government that redesigns its program would presumably feel a sense of ownership and try to make the scheme work, whether it struck most health care experts as good policy or not. There’s something to be said for such state ownership.

More broadly, the battle over ACA repeal, embroiled as it’s been in ideological combat over marketplace design, has always fundamentally been about federal funding to provide healthcare access to those who might otherwise lack it. Republicans tried – and failed – to repeal roughly $1 trillion in healthcare funding over 10 years. They tried – and failed – to repeal expanded access to Medicaid, which provides the poor and near-poor access to healthcare free of out-of-pocket costs they can’t manage. They tried – and failed – to restructure the marketplace so that low-income enrollees got less assistance and affluent people – earning over 400 percent FPL – got more.

They failed because massive, spontaneous and highly effective citizen protest induced just enough Republicans – three in the Senate, to be exact – to take their fingers off the trigger – one of them (the late John McCain) after midnight on a vote where repeal seemed certain. That was a miracle of not-dead-yet democracy.

Election day – and health reform’s fate

That miracle will either be extended or negated on election day. If Republicans hold House and Senate, they have vowed to get repeal done – and this time, with McCain dead and their Senate majority likely extend, they won’t fail. If Democrats win control of the House of Representatives, Republicans will lose power to redesign or defund the ACA. That’s one of the many existential choices facing Americans on November 6.

* Probably another 8 to 10 million are insured through indirect effects of the ACA – increased enrollment in Medicaid by people who would have been eligible even without the ACA’s expansion of eligibility, unsubsidized enrollment in the individual market by those who would have been shut out because of pre-existing conditions or who were induced by the individual mandate, and other effects of the mandate.

** Oklahoma did submit a more limited waiver proposal to establish a reinsurance program, as several states have done successfully. The state withdrew the proposal when CMS failed to approve it in time to affect premiums for 2018.

Andrew Sprung is a freelance writer who blogs about politics and policy, particularly health care policy, at xpostfactoid. His articles about the rollout of the Affordable Care Act have appeared in The Atlantic and The New Republic. He is the winner of the National Institute of Health Care Management’s 2016 Digital Media Award.

from https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/2018/11/02/the-healthcare-miracle-that-this-election-could-ratify/

0 notes