text
stringlengths 2.57k
160k
| hyperpartisan
bool 2
classes | bias
int64 0
4
| cleaned_text
stringlengths 1.79k
91.8k
| word_count
int64 512
12.5k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
<p>It is no longer a curiosity these days for a county medical society in the midst of discussing its professional business to pass a resolution on a nuclear test ban (supportive, almost invariably); or for a deanery, taking a pause from an argument about, say, the prayer book, to declare itself on administration policy in Central America (against, usually); or for a group of architects to conduct its own foreign policy vis-à-vis agencies of the Soviet state (friendly to the max, as they say on the street). That doctors probably know very little about nuclear testing or deans about Sandinistas or architects about apparatchiks doesn’t seem to worry anyone very much.</p>
<p>There is a certain democratic charm to these exercises. But they can also be dangerous-to the organizations involved and to the wider civic community. Professional organizations, gathered for their own distinctive purposes, can become the instruments of the politics of whatever cadre within the organization is the best organized, the loudest, and/or the most passionate. Then the authority of the organization in question (doctors, clergy, teachers, whomever) ends up as a buttress for policies that may have little or nothing to do with the organization’s formal purposes, and still less with many members’ values and convictions. Rancorous division within the organization is the kindly outcome of many such enterprises; the really bad outcomes can be left to the imagination of readers.</p>
<p>Perhaps no man in contemporary America has a broader experience working with voluntary organizations on war/peace issues than our James Madison Foundation board chairman, Robert Pickus of the World Without War Council. His record, as he will be the first to admit, is a decidedly checkered one. Opening an organization to its right role in the war/peace debate can also set the stage for the organization to play dramatically different roles. Getting the National Federation of Priests’ Councils (NFPC) into the war/peace debate is one thing; watching the NFPC later adopt positions supporting the most intransigently violent forces in Central America is, sadly, another.</p>
<p>Yet Pickus keeps at it. Most recently, he brought, as he inimitably put it, “. . . a lifetime of experience in aiding groups as diverse as the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Evangelicals, Seattle-First National Bank, and the Ex-Latvian Miners’ Association (a Chicago-based Communist party front group of the 1950s) . . .” to bear at the 1987 annual conference of the National Association for Foreign Student Affairs (NAFSA). NAFSA is the professional association for advisers to foreign students on American campuses. Some within NAFSA wanted their organization to get into the passing-resolutions-on-Central-America-and-South-Africa business.</p>
<p>It seems a natural, for NAFSA has “… special credentials: regular experience in encountering people from so many parts of the world directly and personally, and doing so from a base in American centers of learning.”</p>
<p>Yet Pickus warned that “… a judgment on NAFSA’s entry into the war/peace policy arena is not obvious. Much depends on how the organization enters the public arena. I have seen organizations deeply damage themselves, and even relationships within an entire profession, while doing little that in fact serves the public good. Organizations like NAFSA can make a legitimate and important contribution to public opinion and the public policy arena. But you will most likely do so only if you give serious attention to designing your appropriate role and to charting guidelines for fulfilling it.”</p>
<p>Pickus urged NAFSA to enter the war/peace debate on a playing field considerably larger than passing-resolutions-on-Central-America-and-South-Africa. To begin the process he suggested NAFSA should analyze seriously, and without moral humbug, the many reasons not to get into the war/peace debate and have a thoughtful answer to them (that alone would help raise the level of civic argument).</p>
<p>Get a set of guidelines that don’t so much say where you stand as why you stand there-guidelines that make clear, in other words, the beliefs and values the organization intends to serve.</p>
<p>Have a set of standards, related to those core values, which will help you judge your success (and failure).</p>
<p>Get all the perspectives represented in your organization into the debate, and let them be fairly heard.</p>
<p>Be clear on the difference between genuine education and propagandizing and/or lobbying.</p>
<p>Don’t, in other words, start with passing-resolutions-on-Central-America-and-South-Africa.</p>
<p>But if, eventually, an organization does want to get into the resolutions business, Pickus had further suggestions, applicable far beyond the boundaries of NAFSA:</p>
<p>“1. Define clearly the routes for determining whether the organization will take a stand on this issue. These routes should be well understood by the membership. Constraints on the board or committees issuing statements in the organization’s name should also be defined.</p>
<p>“2. Require that responsible information-gathering precede action on a resolution and that the results are available to those asked to make a decision.</p>
<p>“3. Address your own membership first. Only address the wider community after assessing the levels of agreement and the points of disagreement within your own membership.</p>
<p>“4. Treat data in your statements responsibly, so as to preserve confidence in the reliability and credibility of your organization’s contributions to public issues.</p>
<p>“5. Provide opportunities for a well-conceived educational program. . . . We have almost forgotten what it is like to hear different perspectives on an issue and to probe them for their differing assessments of the facts, their expectations with regard to the results of policy choices, and their fundamental purposes and values. . . . Don’t underestimate the difficulty in setting up such a program but do help change a very bad situation by making the effort.</p>
<p>“6. Accurately report who supported the resolution and with what authority. Also report how many didn’t. Distinguish between the sense of a particular meeting and the formal policy position of the organization.</p>
<p>“7. Provide for minority reports and see that they are also publicized.</p>
<p>“8. Give priority to areas in which your special knowledge and experience applies. . . .</p>
<p>“9. Think through the conditions which should determine to whom you address your resolution.”</p>
<p>Foreign policy professionals, and the realist school in particular, often wish that the great unwashed would keep clear of the war/peace debate. The experience of the past generation suggests that there is wisdom in the professionals’ cautions. But cautions are one thing and political celibacy another. Organizations of doctors, educators, architects, clergy, and everyone else “for social responsibility” are going to be at least a semi-permanent feature on the American landscape. If, with appropriate adjustments for particular situations, those wishing to get into the passing-resolutions-on-Central-</p>
<p>America-and-South-Africa business would take Robert Pickus’s suggestions to heart, their efforts might make agreement on this country’s right role in world affairs more, rather than less, likely.</p>
<p>George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. and holds EPPC’s William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | longer curiosity days county medical society midst discussing professional business pass resolution nuclear test ban supportive almost invariably deanery taking pause argument say prayer book declare administration policy central america usually group architects conduct foreign policy visàvis agencies soviet state friendly max say street doctors probably know little nuclear testing deans sandinistas architects apparatchiks doesnt seem worry anyone much certain democratic charm exercises also dangerousto organizations involved wider civic community professional organizations gathered distinctive purposes become instruments politics whatever cadre within organization best organized loudest andor passionate authority organization question doctors clergy teachers whomever ends buttress policies may little nothing organizations formal purposes still less many members values convictions rancorous division within organization kindly outcome many enterprises really bad outcomes left imagination readers perhaps man contemporary america broader experience working voluntary organizations warpeace issues james madison foundation board chairman robert pickus world without war council record first admit decidedly checkered one opening organization right role warpeace debate also set stage organization play dramatically different roles getting national federation priests councils nfpc warpeace debate one thing watching nfpc later adopt positions supporting intransigently violent forces central america sadly another yet pickus keeps recently brought inimitably put lifetime experience aiding groups diverse american association advancement science national association evangelicals seattlefirst national bank exlatvian miners association chicagobased communist party front group 1950s bear 1987 annual conference national association foreign student affairs nafsa nafsa professional association advisers foreign students american campuses within nafsa wanted organization get passingresolutionsoncentralamericaandsouthafrica business seems natural nafsa special credentials regular experience encountering people many parts world directly personally base american centers learning yet pickus warned judgment nafsas entry warpeace policy arena obvious much depends organization enters public arena seen organizations deeply damage even relationships within entire profession little fact serves public good organizations like nafsa make legitimate important contribution public opinion public policy arena likely give serious attention designing appropriate role charting guidelines fulfilling pickus urged nafsa enter warpeace debate playing field considerably larger passingresolutionsoncentralamericaandsouthafrica begin process suggested nafsa analyze seriously without moral humbug many reasons get warpeace debate thoughtful answer alone would help raise level civic argument get set guidelines dont much say stand stand thereguidelines make clear words beliefs values organization intends serve set standards related core values help judge success failure get perspectives represented organization debate let fairly heard clear difference genuine education propagandizing andor lobbying dont words start passingresolutionsoncentralamericaandsouthafrica eventually organization want get resolutions business pickus suggestions applicable far beyond boundaries nafsa 1 define clearly routes determining whether organization take stand issue routes well understood membership constraints board committees issuing statements organizations name also defined 2 require responsible informationgathering precede action resolution results available asked make decision 3 address membership first address wider community assessing levels agreement points disagreement within membership 4 treat data statements responsibly preserve confidence reliability credibility organizations contributions public issues 5 provide opportunities wellconceived educational program almost forgotten like hear different perspectives issue probe differing assessments facts expectations regard results policy choices fundamental purposes values dont underestimate difficulty setting program help change bad situation making effort 6 accurately report supported resolution authority also report many didnt distinguish sense particular meeting formal policy position organization 7 provide minority reports see also publicized 8 give priority areas special knowledge experience applies 9 think conditions determine address resolution foreign policy professionals realist school particular often wish great unwashed would keep clear warpeace debate experience past generation suggests wisdom professionals cautions cautions one thing political celibacy another organizations doctors educators architects clergy everyone else social responsibility going least semipermanent feature american landscape appropriate adjustments particular situations wishing get passingresolutionsoncentral americaandsouthafrica business would take robert pickuss suggestions heart efforts might make agreement countrys right role world affairs rather less likely george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc holds eppcs william e simon chair catholic studies | 632 |
<p>It’s time for the Academy to change the way it awards foreign-language film.</p>
<p>This year, 92 distinct nations have selected and submitted what the Academy blindly accepts as each country’s best film to compete for the foreign-language Oscar. However magnanimous the Academy’s intent, that’s an overwhelming number of movies that now need to be divided up and screened by a dedicated subset of the membership in an imperfect process that results in a shortlist of nine movies, from which a separate committee will choose the final five nominees.Ironically, while 92 is a record-setting number for this category, the year’s best foreign language film may not even be among them. That’s because the system —&#160;a squirrely, ever-evolving set of rules —&#160;is based on a pair of outdated premises.</p>
<p>First, the award was created in 1945 to raise awareness for foreign cinema at a time when overseas movies were either dubbed or ignored in the U.S. (Prior to the new category’s creation in 1947, only one foreign film, Jean Renoir’s “The Grand Illusion,” had ever been nominated for best picture.) The prize was originally decided by a small committee of studio execs — Robert M.W. Vogel of MGM, Luigi Luraschi of Paramount and Bill Gordon of RKO — and later expanded to include reps from the other four majors, who proposed a single exceptional foreign language film “released commercially in the United States during the awards year” to receive a special award from the Academy.</p>
<p>Second, in 1955, the Academy&#160;officially adopted a dedicated&#160;foreign-language category, designed to function like the Olympics or the World Cup of film, where the prize would be awarded not to the director, but to the nation that stood behind him. Each country would send one team to represent itself, and they should all compete on equal footing for the prize (as such, every film is screened and scored individually, meaning that an Azerbaijani film has the same odds as an Italian one).</p>
<p>This model no longer makes sense. Today, there exists a healthy (albeit limited) market for non-English-language cinema in the States, and even if these imported gems seldom earn more than $1 million in theaters, hundreds are released in Los Angeles theaters each year (although only about 40 bother to submit the official screen credits paperwork that qualify them for best picture). Considering that volume, it’s unfair to limit prolific countries to a single film — a process that inevitably invites needless political squabbles over which film gets picked.</p>
<p>It’s time that the Academy scrap its current, needlessly convoluted foreign language contest and switch to one that better reflects the marketplace for subtitled movies — and the Oscars at large. Critics perennially grouse about high-profile “snubs” in this category, while ignoring that Oscar nominations represent the Academy’s consensus preferences, rather than any one person’s exceptional good taste. That lesson should also apply to foreign- language committee chair <a href="http://variety.com/t/mark-johnson/" type="external">Mark Johnson</a>, who has created elaborate workarounds to overrule his own branch’s often-embarrassing biases — which have historically relied on those members with enough free time on their hands (typically the oldest and least active professionally)&#160;to screen two dozen or more films each November, resulting in nominees about very old men (“To Begin Again,” “The Grandfather”), very young kids (“Secrets of the Heart,” “The Thief”) or some combination of the two (“Cinema Paradiso,” “Kolya”).</p>
<p>Rather than tweaking the rules each year to make the nominees more respectable, Johnson and company should push to adopt the same process by which feature films qualify for every other Oscar category: with a seven-day theatrical release in Los Angeles, ads in a local paper and the submission of credits forms.</p>
<p>Bizarrely, under the current system, international films can be eligible in two separate years:&#160;first, for the foreign-language award the year they debut in their native country, and then for every other category after receiving an Oscar-qualifying run in the U.S. As it is, a film could win the foreign language Oscar one year and be nominated for best director the next (as happened to Federico Fellini on “Amarcord” and François Truffaut with “Day for Night”). Rather than ghettoizing foreign movies to the one category, the Academy should be encouraging its entire membership to see and consider as many foreign films as possible in all categories.</p>
<p>Now, imagine if the Academy made the following logical change: What if the foreign category weren’t listed on the nominations ballot at all, but instead, the five subtitled films that received the greatest number of best picture mentions&#160;from the entire Academy&#160;were then announced as the finalists for the foreign language prize? Naturally, they would still be eligible to compete for best picture (the way “Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon,” “Life Is Beautiful” and “Amour” did in their respective years)&#160;without being arbitrarily disqualified from the foreign-language race (the way “City of God” and “Talk to Her” were when the committees in their home countries decided to submit other films instead).</p>
<p>Granted, obscure films from countries such as Latvia and Kyrgyzstan wouldn’t stand a chance. But who are we kidding? They don’t stand a chance now, and asking Academy members to sit through these instead of the year’s most visible foreign releases is a waste of their time.</p>
<p>To put it bluntly, the Oscars’ purpose is not to help small movies. Rather, they celebrate impact and excellence. Many countries have yet to produce a single film that your typical Academy voter might consider “Oscar worthy,” while others —&#160;including France, Italy, Romania, South Korea and Israel —&#160;generate multiple Oscar-caliber movies a year, many of which aren’t eligible under the current rules. France alone is responsible for generating between 60 and 70 films released in the U.S. each year (noteworthy 2017 breakouts include “Personal Shopper,” “Frantz,” “Heal the Living,” “Lost in Paris,” “The Midwife,” “Raw” and “Faces, Places,” none of which are eligible). The country’s selection committee tries desperately to second-guess Academy voters by selecting the one film most likely to be nominated, to no avail. France has not won the award in 25 years, since 1992’s “Indochine.”</p>
<p>And yet, when considering global cinema, it’s unrealistic to think of a film as belonging to any one country. Filmmaking is an expensive pursuit, and apart from the U.S., few nations have an industry expansive enough to produce a film entirely from within. Rather, most international movies represent a confluence of different countries coming together to back a project they all believe in.</p>
<p>To then put the eligibility of each film in the hands of a committee (often a mix of bureaucrats, professionals and pundits) inevitably leads to problems like last year’s scandal, in which the Brazilian committee reportedly nixed “Aquarius” because the film’s director and cast had taken a stand at the Cannes film festival against the political coup unfolding back home at the time, or recurring cases in countries such as Iran where films critical of the status quo have been sidelined in favor of government-backed propaganda.</p>
<p>What if the Academy told American distributors — including studios that produce and release dozens of critically acclaimed films per calendar year — they could only submit a single movie to compete for best picture? The one-film-per-country rule is just as arbitrary toward countries, even as it allows English-speaking countries (such as Australia, Ireland and the U.K.) to participate. Imagine if the U.S. was required to select just one film to compete for the foreign language prize at France’s César Awards. How would they choose? (In 2005,&#160;all five&#160;of the César foreign language nominees were American. Surely, the Oscars could allow multiple French films to compete in a strong year for the country.)</p>
<p>And what about foreign language movies made by Hollywood directors? But surely Mel Gibson’s blockbuster “The Passion of the Christ” (in Aramaic, Latin and Hebrew) and “Apocalypto” (in Mayan) ought to qualify as “foreign language” just as Clint Eastwood should have been rewarded for his decision to shoot 2006’s “Letters From Iwo Jima” in Japanese. A filmmaker shouldn’t be forced to rely on receiving honorary Cambodian citizenship to qualify, the way <a href="http://variety.com/t/angelina-jolie/" type="external">Angelina Jolie</a> did with “First They Killed My Father” this year — that film deserves to compete on its own merits.</p>
<p>Some have proposed expanding the eligibility to include foreign films that win prizes at major international film festivals, like Cannes (repairing the fact that France passed over Palme d’or winners “Blue Is the Warmest Color” and “Dheepan,” for instance), but again, that relies on pre-selection by a small, fallible group of people outside the Academy, and does not reflect the way foreign films resonate with American audiences.</p>
<p>The only system that makes sense is one tied to a film’s U.S. release, open to all subtitled movies that Academy members could have seen in theaters that year. Such a change still allows plenty of room for debate over whether the nominees are indeed the “best,” while ensuring that all foreign-language films shown that year in theaters are at least eligible.</p> | false | 1 | time academy change way awards foreignlanguage film year 92 distinct nations selected submitted academy blindly accepts countrys best film compete foreignlanguage oscar however magnanimous academys intent thats overwhelming number movies need divided screened dedicated subset membership imperfect process results shortlist nine movies separate committee choose final five nomineesironically 92 recordsetting number category years best foreign language film may even among thats system 160a squirrely everevolving set rules 160is based pair outdated premises first award created 1945 raise awareness foreign cinema time overseas movies either dubbed ignored us prior new categorys creation 1947 one foreign film jean renoirs grand illusion ever nominated best picture prize originally decided small committee studio execs robert mw vogel mgm luigi luraschi paramount bill gordon rko later expanded include reps four majors proposed single exceptional foreign language film released commercially united states awards year receive special award academy second 1955 academy160officially adopted dedicated160foreignlanguage category designed function like olympics world cup film prize would awarded director nation stood behind country would send one team represent compete equal footing prize every film screened scored individually meaning azerbaijani film odds italian one model longer makes sense today exists healthy albeit limited market nonenglishlanguage cinema states even imported gems seldom earn 1 million theaters hundreds released los angeles theaters year although 40 bother submit official screen credits paperwork qualify best picture considering volume unfair limit prolific countries single film process inevitably invites needless political squabbles film gets picked time academy scrap current needlessly convoluted foreign language contest switch one better reflects marketplace subtitled movies oscars large critics perennially grouse highprofile snubs category ignoring oscar nominations represent academys consensus preferences rather one persons exceptional good taste lesson also apply foreign language committee chair mark johnson created elaborate workarounds overrule branchs oftenembarrassing biases historically relied members enough free time hands typically oldest least active professionally160to screen two dozen films november resulting nominees old men begin grandfather young kids secrets heart thief combination two cinema paradiso kolya rather tweaking rules year make nominees respectable johnson company push adopt process feature films qualify every oscar category sevenday theatrical release los angeles ads local paper submission credits forms bizarrely current system international films eligible two separate years160first foreignlanguage award year debut native country every category receiving oscarqualifying run us film could win foreign language oscar one year nominated best director next happened federico fellini amarcord françois truffaut day night rather ghettoizing foreign movies one category academy encouraging entire membership see consider many foreign films possible categories imagine academy made following logical change foreign category werent listed nominations ballot instead five subtitled films received greatest number best picture mentions160from entire academy160were announced finalists foreign language prize naturally would still eligible compete best picture way crouching tiger hidden dragon life beautiful amour respective years160without arbitrarily disqualified foreignlanguage race way city god talk committees home countries decided submit films instead granted obscure films countries latvia kyrgyzstan wouldnt stand chance kidding dont stand chance asking academy members sit instead years visible foreign releases waste time put bluntly oscars purpose help small movies rather celebrate impact excellence many countries yet produce single film typical academy voter might consider oscar worthy others 160including france italy romania south korea israel 160generate multiple oscarcaliber movies year many arent eligible current rules france alone responsible generating 60 70 films released us year noteworthy 2017 breakouts include personal shopper frantz heal living lost paris midwife raw faces places none eligible countrys selection committee tries desperately secondguess academy voters selecting one film likely nominated avail france award 25 years since 1992s indochine yet considering global cinema unrealistic think film belonging one country filmmaking expensive pursuit apart us nations industry expansive enough produce film entirely within rather international movies represent confluence different countries coming together back project believe put eligibility film hands committee often mix bureaucrats professionals pundits inevitably leads problems like last years scandal brazilian committee reportedly nixed aquarius films director cast taken stand cannes film festival political coup unfolding back home time recurring cases countries iran films critical status quo sidelined favor governmentbacked propaganda academy told american distributors including studios produce release dozens critically acclaimed films per calendar year could submit single movie compete best picture onefilmpercountry rule arbitrary toward countries even allows englishspeaking countries australia ireland uk participate imagine us required select one film compete foreign language prize frances césar awards would choose 2005160all five160of césar foreign language nominees american surely oscars could allow multiple french films compete strong year country foreign language movies made hollywood directors surely mel gibsons blockbuster passion christ aramaic latin hebrew apocalypto mayan ought qualify foreign language clint eastwood rewarded decision shoot 2006s letters iwo jima japanese filmmaker shouldnt forced rely receiving honorary cambodian citizenship qualify way angelina jolie first killed father year film deserves compete merits proposed expanding eligibility include foreign films win prizes major international film festivals like cannes repairing fact france passed palme dor winners blue warmest color dheepan instance relies preselection small fallible group people outside academy reflect way foreign films resonate american audiences system makes sense one tied films us release open subtitled movies academy members could seen theaters year change still allows plenty room debate whether nominees indeed best ensuring foreignlanguage films shown year theaters least eligible | 864 |
<p>The <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/independent-payment-advisory-board" type="external">Independent Payment Advisory Board</a>, or IPAB, is one of the more notorious provisions of the Affordable Care Act because it is the perfect embodiment of belief in technocratic expertise. The IPAB’s 15 “expert” members would have great power and little accountability.</p>
<p>Since the law’s passage in 2010, opponents have successfully publicized the danger the IPAB poses to sensible Medicare policy and constitutional self-government, to the point that many in Congress now assume it will never go into effect. In June 2015, the House passed legislation to repeal the IPAB in its entirety.</p>
<p>And, yet, it is also clear that Congress’ attention is elsewhere. The slowdown in Medicare spending growth in recent years has made the IPAB less relevant – for now.</p>
<p>But IPAB’s demise is not a foregone conclusion, especially when Medicare spending growth accelerates again, as it almost inevitably will. For now, the IPAB remains on the books. Opponents, therefore, must keep up the pressure and look for opportunities to kill it altogether.</p>
<p>The basic idea of the IPAB is to impose a cap on Medicare spending and then allow the board’s fifteen members to come up with ways to keep program spending under control.</p>
<p>In one sense, it is surprising that the ACA’s authors supported this concept. Those who wrote the law are generally in favor of expanding entitlement programs, not restricting them with caps on spending.</p>
<p>But not all spending “caps” are the same. The key feature is how the cap is enforced. A closer look at how the IPAB and its associated cap on Medicare spending show that they are more aligned with the overall philosophy of the ACA than it might first appear.</p>
<p>The cap on spending is based on per capita Medicare spending growth. From 2013 to 2017, the target growth rate is the average of the general consumer price index and the CPI for medical care. After 2017, the target growth rate is GDP growth plus one percentage point.</p>
<p>If spending is projected to exceed the cap, as determined by the chief actuary of the Medicare program, the IPAB is charged with making recommendations to bring Medicare spending back under the statutory limit.</p>
<p>The law specifies strict rules for IPAB members. They cannot engage in any other “business, vocation, or employment,” which means they must rely entirely on their salary from IPAB. IPAB members are also supposed to be nationally-recognized experts in medical care, health insurance, or economics, and a majority of the members must not be physicians or professionally associated with other health care service providers, such as hospitals. These rules are so onerous that most qualified people will steer clear of serving.</p>
<p>The IPAB is also severely constrained in what it can recommend to slow the pace of Medicare spending growth. The law states that IPAB recommendations cannot increase beneficiary premiums or cost-sharing — and cannot reduce benefits in any way. The IPAB also cannot recommend tax increases. The only options available are adjustments to what Medicare pays for various medical services.</p>
<p>Submission of the IPAB recommendations triggers an expedited process of consideration in Congress. The default assumption is that the House and Senate will consider the IPAB’s recommendations, but that Congress can also choose to approve a different set of changes. If those provisions were to pass Congress and also be signed into law by the president, then of course the IPAB’s recommendations would become irrelevant.</p>
<p>However — and this is the most important point about IPAB — if Congress fails to pass legislation that overrides what the IPAB recommends, then the IPAB’s recommendations automatically go into effect. This is by far the most likely scenario. Although the law theoretically allows Congress to substitute its own ideas for the IPAB’s reforms, in reality, the IPAB’s recommendations would be very hard to override. The timeline is too short. The IPAB must submit its plan for reducing Medicare spending to Congress by January 15, and those recommendations automatically go into effect on August 15 unless Congress passes, and the president signs, an alternative plan before that date. Inevitably, the changes needed to reduce Medicare spending below the target will be controversial, making swift congressional consideration difficult, at best.</p>
<p>Moreover, even if Congress passed an alternative to the IPAB’s plan, that alternative would need to be approved by the president. It seems far more likely that the president will prefer the recommendations of the board to which he will have appointed several members than recommendations coming from Congress. In the unlikely event Congress were able to pass a bill, overriding a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate — a very rare occurrence.</p>
<p>The IPAB is fundamentally flawed concept for two reasons:</p>
<p>It tramples on Congress’ power to write laws. The IPAB would have the authority to rewrite any aspect of Medicare’s payment policies — everything from hospital payments, to physician fees, and even how Part D prescription drug plans pay for covered medications — to achieve additional savings. Congress has the constitutional power to write new legislation for a reason; voters can hold their elected representatives accountable for the kinds of laws they pass. Not so with the IPAB. IPAB members will get six-year terms and will be allowed to be reappointed once. Removing them from their positions will be extremely difficult.</p>
<p>It emphasizes payment reductions at the expense of real Medicare reform. The constraints placed on what the IPAB can recommend were not accidental. The authors of the ACA support restraining Medicare spending, but only with government-imposed payment restrictions, not financial incentives. So the IPAB can impose blunt payment cuts on physicians and hospitals — and for the HMOs serving Medicare Advantage patients — but it cannot recommend structural changes, like giving participants in the program incentives for selecting low-cost, high-value care. If payments are reduced too much, the network of willing providers of medical services becomes very constrained, and the participants in the program begin to have trouble securing access to the care they need. Congress could easily find itself undoing payment cuts it previously approved, much like it did for years with the “doc fixes” aimed at undoing the Sustainable Growth Rate formula for physician fees.</p>
<p>Although the IPAB was supposed to begin operations in 2013, the president has yet to nominate anyone to fill the fifteen seats. And the actuaries have not yet projected that spending would breach the cap and trigger the need for an IPAB recommendation.</p>
<p>But spending could accelerate again at any time. Indeed, in the 2015 Medicare trustees’ report, the actuaries predicted spending would exceed the target growth rate in 2017.</p>
<p>The concept of the IPAB has taken a beating in Congress since it was enacted, but the administration still supports it. Moreover, the legal authorization for the IPAB remains on the federal books. Opponents must therefore remain vigilant and keep working until they have the opportunity to repeal it once and for all.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a <a href="" type="internal">senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>, a <a href="https://www.aei.org/scholar/james-c-capretta/" type="external">visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute</a>, and an <a href="http://mercatus.org/james-c-capretta" type="external">affiliated scholar at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University</a>.&#160; He is the author of <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/independent-payment-advisory-board" type="external">“The Independent Payment&#160;Advisory Board,”</a> published by Mercatus.</p> | false | 1 | independent payment advisory board ipab one notorious provisions affordable care act perfect embodiment belief technocratic expertise ipabs 15 expert members would great power little accountability since laws passage 2010 opponents successfully publicized danger ipab poses sensible medicare policy constitutional selfgovernment point many congress assume never go effect june 2015 house passed legislation repeal ipab entirety yet also clear congress attention elsewhere slowdown medicare spending growth recent years made ipab less relevant ipabs demise foregone conclusion especially medicare spending growth accelerates almost inevitably ipab remains books opponents therefore must keep pressure look opportunities kill altogether basic idea ipab impose cap medicare spending allow boards fifteen members come ways keep program spending control one sense surprising acas authors supported concept wrote law generally favor expanding entitlement programs restricting caps spending spending caps key feature cap enforced closer look ipab associated cap medicare spending show aligned overall philosophy aca might first appear cap spending based per capita medicare spending growth 2013 2017 target growth rate average general consumer price index cpi medical care 2017 target growth rate gdp growth plus one percentage point spending projected exceed cap determined chief actuary medicare program ipab charged making recommendations bring medicare spending back statutory limit law specifies strict rules ipab members engage business vocation employment means must rely entirely salary ipab ipab members also supposed nationallyrecognized experts medical care health insurance economics majority members must physicians professionally associated health care service providers hospitals rules onerous qualified people steer clear serving ipab also severely constrained recommend slow pace medicare spending growth law states ipab recommendations increase beneficiary premiums costsharing reduce benefits way ipab also recommend tax increases options available adjustments medicare pays various medical services submission ipab recommendations triggers expedited process consideration congress default assumption house senate consider ipabs recommendations congress also choose approve different set changes provisions pass congress also signed law president course ipabs recommendations would become irrelevant however important point ipab congress fails pass legislation overrides ipab recommends ipabs recommendations automatically go effect far likely scenario although law theoretically allows congress substitute ideas ipabs reforms reality ipabs recommendations would hard override timeline short ipab must submit plan reducing medicare spending congress january 15 recommendations automatically go effect august 15 unless congress passes president signs alternative plan date inevitably changes needed reduce medicare spending target controversial making swift congressional consideration difficult best moreover even congress passed alternative ipabs plan alternative would need approved president seems far likely president prefer recommendations board appointed several members recommendations coming congress unlikely event congress able pass bill overriding presidential veto requires twothirds majority vote house senate rare occurrence ipab fundamentally flawed concept two reasons tramples congress power write laws ipab would authority rewrite aspect medicares payment policies everything hospital payments physician fees even part prescription drug plans pay covered medications achieve additional savings congress constitutional power write new legislation reason voters hold elected representatives accountable kinds laws pass ipab ipab members get sixyear terms allowed reappointed removing positions extremely difficult emphasizes payment reductions expense real medicare reform constraints placed ipab recommend accidental authors aca support restraining medicare spending governmentimposed payment restrictions financial incentives ipab impose blunt payment cuts physicians hospitals hmos serving medicare advantage patients recommend structural changes like giving participants program incentives selecting lowcost highvalue care payments reduced much network willing providers medical services becomes constrained participants program begin trouble securing access care need congress could easily find undoing payment cuts previously approved much like years doc fixes aimed undoing sustainable growth rate formula physician fees although ipab supposed begin operations 2013 president yet nominate anyone fill fifteen seats actuaries yet projected spending would breach cap trigger need ipab recommendation spending could accelerate time indeed 2015 medicare trustees report actuaries predicted spending would exceed target growth rate 2017 concept ipab taken beating congress since enacted administration still supports moreover legal authorization ipab remains federal books opponents must therefore remain vigilant keep working opportunity repeal james c capretta senior fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute affiliated scholar mercatus center george mason university160 author independent payment160advisory board published mercatus | 673 |
<p>In 2015 — a lifetime ago — I wrote a rave review of “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/louie/" type="external">Louie</a>’s” fifth season. <a href="https://www.salon.com/2015/04/08/louie_returns_as_hapless_and_sublime_as_ever/" type="external">Here it is.</a> It’s embarrassing to look at now. Not just because if I’d known what I know now, I would have written a different review of “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/louie-season-6-louis-ck-fx-1202520980/" type="external">Louie</a>,” a show that hinged both on comedian Louis C.K.’s performed self-awareness and his uncomfortable relationship with sex. Not just because this review is the first one you’ll see on&#160; <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louie_(season_5)" type="external">Wikipedia’s entry</a> for “Louie,” Season 5. But also because it’s clear, reading between the lines of my review, how much faith I had in his comedy. In a paragraph that begins with me positing that C.K. is “one of TV’s greatest comedians,” I went on to write this painfully short-sighted analysis of his perspective: “What makes ‘Louie’ work, time and time again, is that C.K. goes in as hard on himself as he does on the world around him—harder, perhaps. The show is suffused with a take-no-prisoners poignancy that spares no one, and that makes it sublime.”</p>
<p>I couldn’t have been more wrong. Or at least, I was right in the marginal sense that I thought that’s what was happening, and certainly “Louie” intended to leave the viewer with the takeaway that there’s nobody he’s harder on than himself. But I was not at all right about what made “Louie” sublime. It’s not that C.K. actually went in on himself, it’s that he made it look like he did — enough to get away with a pattern of sexually intimidating female colleagues for a span of at least 15 years. Maybe Louis C.K. was able to interrogate himself, sometimes quite ruthlessly, in some of the finest episodes of “Louie.” But he sure wasn’t interrogating himself when he denied misconduct for years on end. C.K.’s self-awareness had a nice, convenient threshold to it.</p>
<p>I feel betrayed. This strikes me as a singularly useless feeling, especially because I became aware of the rumors around C.K. at least a year before the New York Times exposé. (I think I learned about them after writing all those raves. I think. I don’t know. This might be my own self-delusion.) Those of us in the entertainment-media complex have been waiting for the C.K. story to drop for about a month. But I still didn’t feel prepared for this empty, sick feeling in my gut, like I left a burner on in a remote corner of the universe and this whole time I knew I was forgetting something.</p>
<p>What strikes me looking back at the pieces I wrote about him — about <a href="https://www.salon.com/2016/02/01/surprise_louis_c_k_drops_new_must_see_comedy_horace_and_pete_with_no_warning/" type="external">“Horace and Pete,”</a> his sublime dramatic turn; about “Louie,” a show whose episodes have sparked ideas for some of my <a href="https://www.salon.com/2015/02/24/just_let_them_kiss_already_why_are_tv_shows_so_weird_about_male_relationships/" type="external">genre-crossing thinkpieces</a>;&#160;about even a <a href="https://www.salon.com/2016/02/29/this_oscar_is_going_home_in_a_honda_civic_louis_c_k_steals_the_show_with_a_real_tribute_to_an_unloved_category/" type="external">Honda Civic joke</a> he made during the Oscars — is how much I trusted him. I even sometimes used that word, “trust” — “trust C.K. to be able to drop something unconventional like this onto the internet with no salesmanship whatsoever and have it land beautifully,” I said in my “Horace and Pete” review. I wrote up a reaction to his Honda Civic Oscar speech that ended on this sentimental note, as if I knew him: “To me, as someone familiar with his work, his words on documentary filmmakers seemed to come from a sense of similarly felt passion for his own art… C.K. has many golden statuettes now, but he won his first back in 1999, with the rest of the writers on ‘The Chris Rock Show.’ Maybe he felt exactly the same way about his.”</p>
<p>I am frustrated with myself. I wanted Louis C.K. to be a good guy. I thought he was smart — I still think he’s smart — and if I get over the images that come to mind when I see his face, I might even enjoy revisiting “Louie,” a show that is in fact responsible for much of half-hour comedy’s innovation over the last several years. But I’m more frustrated with him. C.K. asked for this kind of trust, from critics and viewers and fans. His stand-up persona was himself; he was synonymous with the character he put into the world, like Woody Allen before him. He joked a lot, and quite specifically, about gender and sexuality; “Louie” is full of vignettes that play like fever dreams about the subtext of gendered interactions, and he often was not afraid to portray himself as the bad guy. But all this says to me is that he knew better. He knew better, and he said so in a thousand different ways over the course of his career. It’s that part of it that stings. Self-awareness is an exacerbating factor, not a mitigating one.</p>
<p>After <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/louis-c-k-apology-sexual-harassment-1202612104/" type="external">reading his statement</a> — which is less an apology than a self-aggrandizing confession — I found myself wondering if that is what drove the desire to get off by humiliating women around him; that tension between knowing he could be the most aware and “woke” guy in the room, and an unquenchable desire within him to satisfy the selfish beast within. It’s a tension that gets played up a lot in his comedy. In 2013’s “Oh My God,” he riffed for several minutes on an “of course… but maybe…” construction, which invited the viewer into both an agreed-upon general principle of how things should be, and then undercut it with a petty frustration that arose out of trying to follow that principle. The most famous example is about kids with peanut allergies: “Of course children who have nut allergies need to be protected…. But, maybe, maybe if touching a nut kills you, you’re supposed to die.”</p>
<p>It’s a hilarious (if controversial) bit, but you can see how it might start muddying the waters quickly. Of course you should recycle, but maybe separating our recyclables is enough of a tedious pain that we can just skip it. Of course we should avoid dropping sexual innuendo in conversation, but maybe comedy is about being honest about whatever weird monster you are on the inside. Of course we aren’t supposed to masturbate on the phone, but maybe if you can get away with it, and it’s fun for you, then it’s justifiable. I always thought C.K. ended up on the side of the “of course.” It turns out he was more than happy to end up on the side of the “but maybe.”</p>
<p>I was taken in. I have written numerous laudatory commentaries on Louis C.K.’s shows and appearances, and they are all out there for the public record, and I’m going to have to live with that. It does not escape my notice that a seal of approval from feminist critics or comedians gave him a shield from accusations of misogyny; I have to live with that, too. The comedian Tig Notaro, a former collaborator, expressed the same fear to the New York Times: “He released my album to cover his tracks.” His apology hit me as false for this reason: I feel used, and at least for right now, I can’t trust his purported self-awareness, his admissions of responsibility. Even if it is in good faith — and I hope it is, for his sake — I don’t know what good faith looks like anymore with C.K., who so skillfully used image to create a cover for his behavior.</p>
<p>In my most charitable reading of C.K.’s story — a reading he doesn’t deserve, and hasn’t earned — I see an artist who knew there was something dangerous in the way he conceptualized sexuality, and in fits and starts tried to approach that difficult topic through his work. I see an artist who became suddenly more relevant after his daughters were born, probably because he did start to understand the female experience a little more clearly. I see a man who needs more therapy. I see a body of work that speaks to the uniquely human tension of trying to be better than you are, and carrying the shame of existence like a yoke over your shoulders. It just so happens that his art was even more aspirational than I realized.</p> | false | 1 | 2015 lifetime ago wrote rave review louies fifth season embarrassing look id known know would written different review louie show hinged comedian louis cks performed selfawareness uncomfortable relationship sex review first one youll see on160 wikipedias entry louie season 5 also clear reading lines review much faith comedy paragraph begins positing ck one tvs greatest comedians went write painfully shortsighted analysis perspective makes louie work time time ck goes hard world around himharder perhaps show suffused takenoprisoners poignancy spares one makes sublime couldnt wrong least right marginal sense thought thats happening certainly louie intended leave viewer takeaway theres nobody hes harder right made louie sublime ck actually went made look like enough get away pattern sexually intimidating female colleagues span least 15 years maybe louis ck able interrogate sometimes quite ruthlessly finest episodes louie sure wasnt interrogating denied misconduct years end cks selfawareness nice convenient threshold feel betrayed strikes singularly useless feeling especially became aware rumors around ck least year new york times exposé think learned writing raves think dont know might selfdelusion us entertainmentmedia complex waiting ck story drop month still didnt feel prepared empty sick feeling gut like left burner remote corner universe whole time knew forgetting something strikes looking back pieces wrote horace pete sublime dramatic turn louie show whose episodes sparked ideas genrecrossing thinkpieces160about even honda civic joke made oscars much trusted even sometimes used word trust trust ck able drop something unconventional like onto internet salesmanship whatsoever land beautifully said horace pete review wrote reaction honda civic oscar speech ended sentimental note knew someone familiar work words documentary filmmakers seemed come sense similarly felt passion art ck many golden statuettes first back 1999 rest writers chris rock show maybe felt exactly way frustrated wanted louis ck good guy thought smart still think hes smart get images come mind see face might even enjoy revisiting louie show fact responsible much halfhour comedys innovation last several years im frustrated ck asked kind trust critics viewers fans standup persona synonymous character put world like woody allen joked lot quite specifically gender sexuality louie full vignettes play like fever dreams subtext gendered interactions often afraid portray bad guy says knew better knew better said thousand different ways course career part stings selfawareness exacerbating factor mitigating one reading statement less apology selfaggrandizing confession found wondering drove desire get humiliating women around tension knowing could aware woke guy room unquenchable desire within satisfy selfish beast within tension gets played lot comedy 2013s oh god riffed several minutes course maybe construction invited viewer agreedupon general principle things undercut petty frustration arose trying follow principle famous example kids peanut allergies course children nut allergies need protected maybe maybe touching nut kills youre supposed die hilarious controversial bit see might start muddying waters quickly course recycle maybe separating recyclables enough tedious pain skip course avoid dropping sexual innuendo conversation maybe comedy honest whatever weird monster inside course arent supposed masturbate phone maybe get away fun justifiable always thought ck ended side course turns happy end side maybe taken written numerous laudatory commentaries louis cks shows appearances public record im going live escape notice seal approval feminist critics comedians gave shield accusations misogyny live comedian tig notaro former collaborator expressed fear new york times released album cover tracks apology hit false reason feel used least right cant trust purported selfawareness admissions responsibility even good faith hope sake dont know good faith looks like anymore ck skillfully used image create cover behavior charitable reading cks story reading doesnt deserve hasnt earned see artist knew something dangerous way conceptualized sexuality fits starts tried approach difficult topic work see artist became suddenly relevant daughters born probably start understand female experience little clearly see man needs therapy see body work speaks uniquely human tension trying better carrying shame existence like yoke shoulders happens art even aspirational realized | 638 |
<p>Guillermo Del Toro’s “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/the-shape-of-water/" type="external">The Shape of Water</a>,” Steven Spielberg’s “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/the-post/" type="external">The Post</a>,” and Martin McDonagh’s “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” were among the big winners as nominations for the 75th Golden Globe Awards were unveiled on Monday.</p>
<p>“Three Billboards,” a revenge drama, “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/steven-spielberg-the-post-review-roundup-1202632140/" type="external">The Post</a>,” a dramatic re-telling of the Pentagon Papers saga, and “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/awards/critics-choice-film-nominations-list-1202631789/" type="external">The Shape of Water</a>,” a sci-fi romance, earned best film and director nods in addition to picking up nominations for the performances of several of its actors. “The Shape of Water” nabbed a leading seven nominations, while “Three Billboards” and “The Post” picked up six a piece. The other best drama nominees were Christopher Nolan’s World War II epic “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/dunkirk/" type="external">Dunkirk</a>” and Luca Guadagnino’s lyrical romance “Call Me by Your Name.”</p>
<p>Unlike other awards shows, the Globes separates its film honors into best drama and best musical or comedy categories. It also hands out hardware to television shows. The Globes are a looser, boozier affair than the more staid Oscars, with A-list stars downing flutes of Moet between victory speeches. They are also the subject of some controversy for their insular voting body of roughly 90 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, which in the past has shown an appetite for accepting lavish junkets and meals from contending films and studios. The group is comprised of international journalists, and has made efforts to clean up its ethical guidelines in recent years.</p>
<p>“The Disaster Artist,” a celebration of the making-of “The Room,” a famously awful exercise in moviemaking, was celebrated for its artistry. The behind-the-scenes film is one of the best comedy or musical nominees, joining “The Greatest Showman” and “I, Tonya,” biopics about P.T. Barnum and Tonya Harding, as well as “Lady Bird,” Greta Gerwig’s semi-autobiographical look at growing up in Sacramento. “Get Out,” a horror hit, some what improbably rounds out the category — it was more notable for its scares than its laughs, but Universal, the studio behind the film opted to run it in the comedy category, raising some eyebrows.</p>
<p>On the television front, HBO’s “Big Little Lies,” a water-cooler hit about a murder in a tony Monterey enclave, was also dominant, picking up six nominations. It finds itself facing off against FX’s “Fargo” and “Feud: Bette and Joan,” as well as USA’s “The Sinner” and IFC’s “Top of the Lake: China Girl” in the best TV limited series or movie category.</p>
<p>Netflix’s “The Crown” and “Stranger Things” will duke it out with Hulu’s “The Handmaid’s Tale,” HBO”s “Game of Thrones,” and NBC’s “This is Us” for the best TV drama Golden Globe. In the best comedy category, ABC’s “Black-ish,” Showtime’s “SMILF,” and NBC’s “Will &amp; Grace” will square off against two buzzy programs from the world of streaming — Amazon’s “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel” and Netflix’s “Master of None.”</p>
<p>This year’s awards are being unveiled at a tumultuous time in Hollywood history. Bombshell reports about Harvey Weinstein’s decades of alleged sexual harassment and abuse have widened to ensnare other industry figures. Kevin Spacey, Brett Ratner, Dustin Hoffman, and Matt Lauer are just a few of the major media and entertainment personalities who are now facing accusations of misconduct. The Weinstein Company, which used to dominate awards shows with its stable of tony dramas and comedies, was completely shut out, with “Wind River,” its well-received crime drama, failing to pick up any nominations. Jeffrey Tambor, who previously was honored for his work as a transgender professor in “Transparent,” also failed to pick up a nomination after he was accused of harassment. Tambor’s future with the series is unclear.</p>
<p>Globes voters didn’t entirely shut out industry figures who have become embroiled in the ever widening scandal. Despite facing sexual harassment allegations, Rush picked up a nomination for best actor in a TV limited series for “Genius.” He has denied the claims.</p>
<p>Christopher Plummer wasn’t accused of any misdeeds, but the celebrated thespian owes his nod to the harassment scandal. Plummer was a last-minute stand-in for Kevin Spacey, re-shooting his scenes as J. Paul Getty in “All the Money in the World.” He earned a best supporting actor nod.</p>
<p>Ridley Scott, who made the decision to scrub Spacey from the film after allegations accusing the actor of unwanted groping of several men surfaced, was honored with a best director nomination. His competition includes Spielberg, Del Toro, Nolan, and McDonagh. Guadagnino was snubbed for his work on “Call Me By Your Name.” It was also a bad morning for female directors with Gerwig and Dee Rees (“Mudbound”) failing to make the cut despite earning sterling reviews for their latest films.</p>
<p>Other notable omissions include Amazon’s “The Big Sick,” a surprise indie hit, and HBO’s “Veep,” the scathing political satire. Both were shut out by Globes voters.</p>
<p>Daniel Day-Lewis made headlines last summer by announcing his retirement from acting. Globes voters were able to honor the mercurial performer for his last star turn, handing him a best actor in a drama nomination for his work as a brooding designer in “The Phantom Thread.” Day-Lewis’ competition includes veterans Tom Hanks (“The Post”), Gary Oldman (“Darkest Hour”), and Denzel Washington (“Roman J. Israel, Esq.”), as well as Timothée Chalamet, a 21-year old newcomer who earned raves as a love-sick teen in “Call Me by Your Name.”</p>
<p>Meryl Streep picked up her 31st nomination playing Katharine Graham, the Washington Post publisher who staked the future of her company on the decision to publish classified documents. Last year, Streep was honored with a lifetime achievement statue by the Globes, and used her speech to issue a blistering condemnation of President Trump and a call to arms for a free press. This year, she is nominated alongside Jessica Chastain (“Molly’s Game”), Sally Hawkins, (“The Shape of Water”), Frances McDormand (“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”), and Michelle Williams (“All the Money in the World”).</p>
<p>Reese Witherspoon and Nicole Kidman, who starred in “Big Little Lies,” picked up best actress in a TV limited series or movie nominations, along with Jessica Biel (“The Sinner”),Jessica Lange, (“Feud: Bette and Joan”), and Susan Sarandon (“Feud: Bette and Joan”). It’s a sign of the blurring of boundaries between the big and small screen. All five actresses are best known for the work in movies, but television has been offering meatier parts of late.</p>
<p>The same kind of prestige was evident in the best actor in a TV limited series or movie category. Two time Oscar winner Robert De Niro scored a nod for playing disgraced financier Bernie Madoff in HBO’s “The Wizard of Lies,” Academy Award winner Geoffrey Rush was recognized for playing Albert Einstein in the Discovery Channel’s “Genius,” and two-time Oscar nominee Jude Law picked up a nomination for playing a radical pontiff in HBO’s “The Young Pope.”Kyle MacLachlan (“Twin Peaks”) and Ewan McGregor (“Fargo”) rounded out the category.</p>
<p>Hugh Jackman scored a best actor in a musical or comedy nod for his singing and dancing work as circus impresario P.T. Barnum in “The Greatest Showman.” He faces off against tween heartthrob Ansel Elgort as a getaway driver in “Baby Driver,” Steve Carell’s turn as sexist tennis champ Bobby Riggs in “Battle of the Sexes,” James Franco’s work as a delusional director in “The Disaster Artist,” and Daniel Kaluuya’s performance as a houseguest in for a world of hurt in “Get Out.”</p>
<p>The actress in a movie comedy awards will be a battle between Judi Dench (“Victoria &amp; Abdul”), Margot Robbie (“I, Tonya”), Saoirse Ronan (“Lady Bird”), Emma Stone (“Battle of the Sexes”), and Helen Mirren (“The Leisure Seeker”).</p>
<p>Family film hits “The Boss Baby” and “Coco” scored best animated film <a href="http://variety.com/t/golden-globes/" type="external">Golden Globes</a> nominations. They will face off against “Ferdinand,” a yet-to-be released animated film, and two adult skewing films “The Breadwinner” and “Loving Vincent.” “The LEGO Batman Movie” and “Despicable Me 3,” two of the year’s biggest animated hits, were shut out.</p>
<p>Plummer will face off in the supporting actor category against Willem Dafoe (“The Florida Project”), Armie Hammer (“Call Me by Your Name”), Richard Jenkins (“The Shape of Water”), and Sam Rockwell (“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”). The supporting actress category consists of Mary J. Blige (“Mudbound”), Hong Chau (“Downsizing”), Allison Janney (“I, Tonya”), Laurie Metcalf (“Lady Bird”), and Octavia Spencer (“The Shape of Water”).</p>
<p>With Tambor sitting this edition out, the best TV comedy acting contenders consist of Aziz Ansari (“Master of None”), Anthony Anderson (“Blackish”), Eric McCormack (“Will &amp; Grace”), Kevin Bacon (“I Love Dick”), and William H. Macy (“Shameless”). The actress in a best TV comedy category leaned in on newcomers. Alison Brie (“Glow”), Rachel Brosnahan (“The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel”), and Frankie Shaw (“SMILF”) were all recognized for their work in their shows’ inaugural seasons. Issa Rae (“Insecure”) and Pamela Adlon (“Better Things”) are the relative veterans with two seasons of their programs under their belts.</p>
<p>Globe winners aren’t always predictive of future Oscars glory. Last year, the organization gave its top musical/comedy prize to “La La Land” and its best drama statue to “Moonlight,” which went on to pick up the Academy Award for Best Picture. However, it failed to recognize the two previous Best Picture Oscar winners, “Spotlight” and “Birdman.”</p>
<p>The Globes will be televised by NBC on&#160;Sunday, January 7, 2018. Seth Meyers will host the broadcast, taking the reins from his fellow late night TV staple Jimmy Fallon, who emceed last year.</p>
<p>More to come…</p> | false | 1 | guillermo del toros shape water steven spielbergs post martin mcdonaghs three billboards outside ebbing missouri among big winners nominations 75th golden globe awards unveiled monday three billboards revenge drama post dramatic retelling pentagon papers saga shape water scifi romance earned best film director nods addition picking nominations performances several actors shape water nabbed leading seven nominations three billboards post picked six piece best drama nominees christopher nolans world war ii epic dunkirk luca guadagninos lyrical romance call name unlike awards shows globes separates film honors best drama best musical comedy categories also hands hardware television shows globes looser boozier affair staid oscars alist stars downing flutes moet victory speeches also subject controversy insular voting body roughly 90 members hollywood foreign press association past shown appetite accepting lavish junkets meals contending films studios group comprised international journalists made efforts clean ethical guidelines recent years disaster artist celebration makingof room famously awful exercise moviemaking celebrated artistry behindthescenes film one best comedy musical nominees joining greatest showman tonya biopics pt barnum tonya harding well lady bird greta gerwigs semiautobiographical look growing sacramento get horror hit improbably rounds category notable scares laughs universal studio behind film opted run comedy category raising eyebrows television front hbos big little lies watercooler hit murder tony monterey enclave also dominant picking six nominations finds facing fxs fargo feud bette joan well usas sinner ifcs top lake china girl best tv limited series movie category netflixs crown stranger things duke hulus handmaids tale hbos game thrones nbcs us best tv drama golden globe best comedy category abcs blackish showtimes smilf nbcs amp grace square two buzzy programs world streaming amazons marvelous mrs maisel netflixs master none years awards unveiled tumultuous time hollywood history bombshell reports harvey weinsteins decades alleged sexual harassment abuse widened ensnare industry figures kevin spacey brett ratner dustin hoffman matt lauer major media entertainment personalities facing accusations misconduct weinstein company used dominate awards shows stable tony dramas comedies completely shut wind river wellreceived crime drama failing pick nominations jeffrey tambor previously honored work transgender professor transparent also failed pick nomination accused harassment tambors future series unclear globes voters didnt entirely shut industry figures become embroiled ever widening scandal despite facing sexual harassment allegations rush picked nomination best actor tv limited series genius denied claims christopher plummer wasnt accused misdeeds celebrated thespian owes nod harassment scandal plummer lastminute standin kevin spacey reshooting scenes j paul getty money world earned best supporting actor nod ridley scott made decision scrub spacey film allegations accusing actor unwanted groping several men surfaced honored best director nomination competition includes spielberg del toro nolan mcdonagh guadagnino snubbed work call name also bad morning female directors gerwig dee rees mudbound failing make cut despite earning sterling reviews latest films notable omissions include amazons big sick surprise indie hit hbos veep scathing political satire shut globes voters daniel daylewis made headlines last summer announcing retirement acting globes voters able honor mercurial performer last star turn handing best actor drama nomination work brooding designer phantom thread daylewis competition includes veterans tom hanks post gary oldman darkest hour denzel washington roman j israel esq well timothée chalamet 21year old newcomer earned raves lovesick teen call name meryl streep picked 31st nomination playing katharine graham washington post publisher staked future company decision publish classified documents last year streep honored lifetime achievement statue globes used speech issue blistering condemnation president trump call arms free press year nominated alongside jessica chastain mollys game sally hawkins shape water frances mcdormand three billboards outside ebbing missouri michelle williams money world reese witherspoon nicole kidman starred big little lies picked best actress tv limited series movie nominations along jessica biel sinnerjessica lange feud bette joan susan sarandon feud bette joan sign blurring boundaries big small screen five actresses best known work movies television offering meatier parts late kind prestige evident best actor tv limited series movie category two time oscar winner robert de niro scored nod playing disgraced financier bernie madoff hbos wizard lies academy award winner geoffrey rush recognized playing albert einstein discovery channels genius twotime oscar nominee jude law picked nomination playing radical pontiff hbos young popekyle maclachlan twin peaks ewan mcgregor fargo rounded category hugh jackman scored best actor musical comedy nod singing dancing work circus impresario pt barnum greatest showman faces tween heartthrob ansel elgort getaway driver baby driver steve carells turn sexist tennis champ bobby riggs battle sexes james francos work delusional director disaster artist daniel kaluuyas performance houseguest world hurt get actress movie comedy awards battle judi dench victoria amp abdul margot robbie tonya saoirse ronan lady bird emma stone battle sexes helen mirren leisure seeker family film hits boss baby coco scored best animated film golden globes nominations face ferdinand yettobe released animated film two adult skewing films breadwinner loving vincent lego batman movie despicable 3 two years biggest animated hits shut plummer face supporting actor category willem dafoe florida project armie hammer call name richard jenkins shape water sam rockwell three billboards outside ebbing missouri supporting actress category consists mary j blige mudbound hong chau downsizing allison janney tonya laurie metcalf lady bird octavia spencer shape water tambor sitting edition best tv comedy acting contenders consist aziz ansari master none anthony anderson blackish eric mccormack amp grace kevin bacon love dick william h macy shameless actress best tv comedy category leaned newcomers alison brie glow rachel brosnahan marvelous mrs maisel frankie shaw smilf recognized work shows inaugural seasons issa rae insecure pamela adlon better things relative veterans two seasons programs belts globe winners arent always predictive future oscars glory last year organization gave top musicalcomedy prize la la land best drama statue moonlight went pick academy award best picture however failed recognize two previous best picture oscar winners spotlight birdman globes televised nbc on160sunday january 7 2018 seth meyers host broadcast taking reins fellow late night tv staple jimmy fallon emceed last year come | 979 |
<p>In a series of posts on National Review Online's Bench Memos blog, EPPC President Ed Whelan is addressing the record of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Here is an outline of various of Mr. Whelan's posts, followed by the full text of the posts.</p>
<p>What's at Stake</p>
<p>Sotomayor's Approach to Judging</p>
<p>Racial Discrimination and Quotas</p>
<p>Abortion</p>
<p>Criminal Procedure</p>
<p>First Amendment speech</p>
<p>Death Penalty</p>
<p>Support for Puerto Rican Independence</p>
<p />
<p>Some initial thoughts on President Obama's opportunity to appoint a successor to Justice Souter:</p>
<p>1. Obama's own record and rhetoric make clear that he will seek left-wing judicial activists who will indulge their passions, not justices who will make their rulings with dispassion. As I discussed more fully in this essay:</p>
<p>In explaining his vote against [the confirmation of Chief Justice] Roberts, Obama opined that deciding the “truly difficult” cases requires resort to “one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy.” In short, “the critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart.” No clearer prescription for lawless judicial activism is possible.</p>
<p>Indeed, in setting forth the sort of judges he would appoint, Obama has explicitly declared: “We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom, the empathy to understand what it's like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old–and that's the criterion by which I'll be selecting my judges.” So much for the judicial virtue of dispassion. So much for a craft of judging that is distinct from politics.</p>
<p>2. Souter has been a terrible justice, but you can expect Obama's nominee to be even worse. The Left is clamoring for “liberal lions” who will redefine the Constitution as a left-wing goodies bag. Consider some of their leading contenders, like Harold Koh (champion of judicial transnationalism and transgenderism), Massaschusetts governor Deval Patrick (a racialist extremist and judicial supremacist), and Cass Sunstein (advocate of judicial invention of a “second Bill of Rights” on welfare, employment, and other Nanny State mandates). Or Second Circuit judge Sonia Sotomayor, whose shenanigans in trying to bury the firefighters' claims in Ricci v. DeStefano triggered an extraordinary dissent by fellow Clinton appointee José Cabranes (and the Supreme Court's pending review of the ruling). Or Elena Kagan, who led the law schools' opposition to military recruitment on their campuses, who used remarkably extreme rhetoric–“a profound wrong” and “a moral injustice of the first order”–to condemn the federal law on gays in the military that was approved in 1993 by a Democratic-controlled Congress and signed into law by President Clinton, and who received 31 votes against her confirmation as Solicitor General. Or Seventh Circuit judge Diane Wood, a fervent activist whose extreme opinions in an abortion case managed to elicit successive 8-1 and 9-0 slapdowns by the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>3. Don't be fooled by the false claims that we have a conservative Supreme Court. The Court has a working majority of five living-constitutionalists. Four of them–Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer–consistently engage in liberal judicial activism, and a fifth, Kennedy, frequently does. As a result, the Court is markedly to the left of the American public on a broad range of issues. Indeed, in coming years, Souter's replacement may well provide the fifth vote for:</p>
<p>— the imposition of a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage;— stripping “under God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance and completely secularizing the public square; — the continued abolition of the death penalty on the installment plan; — selectively importing into the Court's interpretation of the American Constitution the favored policies of Europe's leftist elites;— further judicial micromanagement of the government's war powers; and — the invention of a constitutional right to human cloning.</p>
<p>American citizens have various policy positions on all these issues, but everyone ought to agree that they are to be addressed and decided through the processes of representative government, not by judicial usurpation. And President Obama, who often talks a moderate game, should be made to pay a high price for appointing a liberal judicial activist who will do his dirty work for him.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Justice Souter and His Replacement</p>
<p>It's been a busy day of media interviews, but I've worked in some writing. This New York Times <a href="http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/the-judgment-on-justice-souter/#more-638" type="external">symposium</a> on Justice Souter's legacy includes my contribution, “The Souter Mistake.” An excerpt:</p>
<p>What will Justice Souter be remembered for? No opinion of his comes to my mind except the joint opinion that he, Justice O'Connor and Justice Kennedy co-authored in 1992 in <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-744.ZS.html" type="external">Planned Parenthood v. Casey</a>. That joint opinion is significant not for its coherence or elegance (it has neither quality) but because it perpetuated Roe v. Wade's removal of the issue of abortion policy from the ordinary democratic processes — and it resorted to what Justice Scalia aptly called a “Nietzschean vision” of the judicial role in order to do so.</p>
<p>The end result was not, as Souter and company contended, a resolution of the bitter national controversy over abortion, but the continued poisoning of American politics by the Court's power grab on that issue.</p>
<p>Sunday's Washington Post will also present, in its <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/01/AR2009050102116_pf.html" type="external">Topic A feature</a> on what President Obama should do with his first Supreme Court nomination, my advice, including:</p>
<p>Alas, the once-dominant species of liberal proponents of judicial restraint has relatively few surviving members. Obama should find them — why not Jose Cabranes, the excellent judge whom President Clinton appointed to the 2nd Circuit? — and help revive the species.</p>
<p>As for the interviews: Here's the <a href="http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/24800/" type="external">transcript</a> (with a few minor garbled passages) of my discussion with Glenn Beck. Believe it or not, I couldn't bring myself to support Harold Koh's candidacy for the Court.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's Repudiation of Objective Judging</p>
<p>Jennifer Rubin's excellent cover article in the new issue of the Weekly Standard explores Judge Sotomayor's “wise Latina woman” speech more fully. Two key excerpts:</p>
<p>Sotomayor's speech is in many ways a distillation of the most extreme views of the liberal civil rights establishment. They have dispensed with Martin Luther King Jr.'s vision of a “colorblind” society, in which people “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” The notion of a shared American tradition is considered a dodge for maintaining white, male domination of society. Instead, they aim to secure the levers of power, to empower disadvantaged groups to pursue their distinct ideology, culture, and language. It is not enough to eliminate barriers to entry in business, universities, government, or the bench; numerical quotas are essential to securing each group's “fair share.” And most critically, group identity and goals supplant individual identity and professional obligations. Each of these elements, the core of the most extreme variety of contemporary multiculturalism, is prominently featured in Sotomayor's speech and law review article.</p>
<p>She also denigrates the notion of a neutral, objective judiciary which treats all citizens alike and removes personal bias from the judicial branch. The goal here is not to remove racial or ethnic bias from judging, but to make sure the right bias is given voice–secured by increased numbers of minority judges. And her qualms about intellectual rigor and impartiality extend to virtually all that judges do (“I wonder whether achieving that goal is possible in all or even in most cases”). This is legal relativism, if not nihilism. No objective truth, no objective judging, only power politics.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's “Unscripted” Law-Review Article?</p>
<p>According to <a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/67751" type="external">Jen Rubin</a>, Sotomayor defender Lanny Davis contends that Judge Sotomayor “misspoke” when she said, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.” That reminds me of this excerpt from a Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/27/AR2009052703713.html?hpid=topnews" type="external">article</a> today:</p>
<p>Meanwhile, conservatives have seized upon Sotomayor's unscripted moments to make the case that she is outside the mainstream. The two most often quoted are a statement she made about how appellate judges make policy and her observation about how being a Latina affects her role as a judge: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.”</p>
<p>The trusting reader wouldn't understand that Sotomayor's “observation about how being a Latina affects her role as a judge,” far from being “unscripted,” was from the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html?_r=1&amp;pagewanted=all" type="external">prepared text</a> of a speech that Soto mayor then published as a law-review article. (For more on Sotomayor's comments in that speech, see my post <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWI2ZjM2MmRiODlhMmY1NDgxYjBjZjNjOWRmMmE1NjQ=" type="external">“Sonia Sotomayor's Selective Empathy,”</a> which discusses and links to Stuart Taylor's critique.) It's entirely fair to hold Sotomayor to what she said.</p>
<p>Of course, unscripted comments like Sotomayor's <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfC99LrrM2Q" type="external">quip</a> about how the courts of appeals are where “policy is made” can themselves be especially revealing precisely because they're unscripted.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />More on Sotomayor's “Unscripted” Law-Review Article</p>
<p>I've already discussed the silly efforts of Judge Sotomayor's defenders to claim that she “misspoke” and was “unscripted” when she said in 2001, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.” As I've pointed out, that comment was from the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15judge.text.html?_r=1&amp;pagewanted=all" type="external">prepared text</a> of a speech that Sotomayor then published as a law-review article.</p>
<p>Now it turns out that Sotomayor made <a href="http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/senate-republicans/exclusive-sotomayor-made-same-wise-latina-comment-in-1990s-and-no-one-objected/" type="external">substantially similar comments</a> in a 1994 speech, a speech that was part of the Senate record on her Second Circuit confirmation in 1998. Somehow the blogger who reports this news thinks it's significant not because it further refutes the White House's defense of Sotomayor's comment but because it supposedly raises the question why Republicans didn't object to this comment in 1998.</p>
<p>Applying Occam's razor, I'd speculate that the answer to that question is that the staffer who reviewed Sotomayor's speeches at the time missed the comment. While unfortunate, that would hardly be surprising, especially in light of the much lower level of resources devoted to an appellate confirmation.</p>
<p>(I'll also note that the sentence at issue in the 1994 speech–“I would hope that a wise woman with the richness of her experiences would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion”–doesn't itself state “better” than whom. The reader has to look four sentences earlier to understand that Sotomayor is comparing a “wise woman” to a “wise man.” Someone skimming the speech might easily miss that.)</p>
<p>In any event, the strong reaction that Sotomayor's 2001 comment has elicited renders desperate any suggestion that Republicans are somehow estopped from objecting to it because of their failure in 1998 to object to a similar comment she made in 1994.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Still More on Sotomayor's “Unscripted” Law-Review Article</p>
<p>At CQ's “Legal Beat” blog, Seth Stern documents more instances of Judge Sotomayor's sentiment that “a wise Latina woman”–or a wise woman, regardless of her ethnicity–“with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.” (My previous posts on the topic are here and here.) As Stern delicately puts it, Sotomayor's “repeated use of the phrases ‘wise Latina woman' and ‘wise woman' [in substantially similar remarks] would appear to undermine the Obama administration's assertions that the statement was simply a poor choice of words.”</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Her Majesty Sonia Sotomayor vs. the Rule of Law</p>
<p>In 1996, Judge Sonia Sotomayor delivered a speech to law students that she then turned into a law-review article (which she co-authored with Nicole A. Gordon), “Returning Majesty to the Law and Politics: A Modern Approach” (30 Suffolk U.L. Rev. 35 (1996)). The article is muddled and mediocre–it's certainly not something that those struggling to portray Sotomayor as brilliant would want to highlight–but I will focus less on its overall quality than on some of Sotomayor's arguments:</p>
<p>1. Sotomayor argues, “It is our responsibility”–the responsibility of lawyers and judges–“to explain to the public how an often unpredictable system of justice is one that serves a productive, civilized, but always evolving, society.” She identifies–and treats as equally legitimate–four “reasons for the law's unpredictability”: (a) “laws are written generally and then applied to different factual situations”; (b) “many laws as written give rise to more than one interpretation”; (c) “a given judge (or judges) may develop a novel approach to a specific set of facts or legal framework that pushes the law in a new direction”; and (d) the purpose of a trial is not simply to search for the truth but to do so in a way that protects constitutional rights.</p>
<p>Somehow Sotomayor doesn't see fit even to question whether, and under what circumstances, it's proper or desirable for a judge to “develop a novel approach” that “pushes the law in a new direction.” Instead, she complains about “recurring public criticism about the judicial process,” and she laments that lawyers “have also unfortunately joined the public outcry over excessive verdicts and seemingly ridiculous results reached in some cases” (as though lawyers have some special responsibility to indulge judicial excess). The fact that Sotomayor cites as her lead example of unwelcome “public criticism” an article “describing Senator Dole's criticism of liberal ideology of Clinton judicial appointments and American Bar Association” lends credence to the suspicion that Sotomayor is less interested in the majesty of the law than in the majesty of liberal activist judges.</p>
<p>2. Sotomayor discusses “the law” without distinguishing meaningfully between the legislature's role in making law and the judiciary's role in applying it. For example, she asserts:</p>
<p>The public expects the law to be static and predictable. The law, however, is uncertain and responds to changing circumstances.</p>
<p>What the public is entitled to expect is that judges will apply the law neutrally, according to established principles. That's a large part of what the “rule of law” means. It's the province of legislatures to change the law (prospectively, of course) to “respond[] to changing circumstances.”</p>
<p>3. Sotomayor complains that “the public fails to appreciate the importance of indefiniteness in the law.” But beyond pointing out the uncontroversial fact that some indefiniteness is inevitable (for reasons (a), (b), and (d) in point 1), she nowhere makes the case that indefiniteness is somehow a positive good. She relies heavily on Jerome Frank's legal realist views about the development of law, but nowhere explains why legislatures aren't the proper forum for (to use Frank's phrase) “adapting [law] to the realities of ever-changing social, industrial, and political conditions.”</p>
<p>4. As if Sotomayor's unwarranted celebration of “indefiniteness” weren't enough to alarm anyone who cares about the rule of law, anyone interested in civil-justice reform ought to take note of Sotomayor's criticism that “legislators have introduced bills that place arbitrary limits on jury verdicts in personal injury cases. But to do this is inconsistent with the premise of the jury system.” Oh, really? How can it be that legislation can determine when juries should rule for plaintiffs but not limit the amounts they can award?</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Judge Sotomayor's Misreliance on Foreign and International Law</p>
<p>I've just watched the 22-minute video of an April 2009 speech that Judge Sotomayor delivered to the ACLU of Puerto Rico on the topic of American judges' use of foreign and intern ational law. It's a terribly muddled speech in which Sotomayor explicitly embraces Justice Ginsburg's <a href="" type="internal">misguided</a> position and asserts that Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas misunderstand the issue even as she misconceives the basis of their objections. (She also posits an unintelligible, but supposedly fundamental, distinction between “us[ing]” foreign and international legal materials and “consider[ing] the ideas that are suggested by” foreign and international legal materials.)</p>
<p>A week ago, Senator Cornyn launched an impressive <a href="http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=IssueStatements.View&amp;Issue_id=e9c277d7-802a-23ad-48fd-0a9b92876b62" type="external">series</a> of daily questions for Judge Sotomayor. His first question in the series–“ <a href="http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ForPress.NewsReleases&amp;ContentRecord_id=d58448d7-802a-23ad-4d13-c106ed0a540a" type="external">What is the proper role of foreign and international law in interpreting the United States Constitution?</a>“– draws on Sotomayor's speech. I haven't yet located a transcript of the speech (and haven't transcribed the relevant portions myself), so I copy here Senator Cornyn's account:</p>
<p>Judge Sotomayor argued that foreign and international law can be “very important” to American judges as a source of “good ideas” that “set our creative juices flowing.” In response to those who oppose judicial consideration of foreign law to determine the limits of democratic decisionmaking, she stated at the 1:08 mark: How can you ask a person to close their ears? Ideas have no boundaries. Ideas are what set our creative juices flowing. They permit us to think, and to suggest to anyone that you can outlaw the use of foreign or international law is a sentiment that is based on a fundamental misunderstanding. What you would be asking American judges to do is to close their minds to good ideas.</p>
<p>Judge Sotomayor also stated at the 20:48 mark that considering foreign and international law is part of a judge's “freedom of ideas”:</p>
<p>To the extent that we as a country remain committed to the concept that we have freedom of speech, we must have freedom of ideas. And to the extent that we have freedom of ideas, international law and foreign law will be very important in the discussion of how to think about the unsettled issues in our legal system. It is my hope that judges everywhere will continue to do this.</p>
<p>As Cornyn points out, Sotomayor's confused invocation of a judge's “freedom of ideas” provides no warrant for use of foreign and international legal materials. The unconstrained judicial role that Sotomayor's comments reflect, and her apparent willingness to make freewheeling resort to foreign and international legal materials to define the meaning of provisions of our Constitution and statutes, are very troubling. In my judgment, Sotomayor's views on this matter provide a compelling basis for senators to vote against her confirmation.</p>
<p>(My July 2005 House of Representatives testimony on the general subject is <a href="" type="internal">here</a>.)</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />“I Don't Know What Liberal Means”</p>
<p>According to the account that Judge Sotomayor provided of a speech that she gave in January 2001, Sotomayor offered this explanation of her problems getting confirmed to the Second Circuit:</p>
<p>Senate Republican leaders believed that I was a potential for the Supreme Court one day. They also believed that I am a liberal, and therefore did not want the nomination to go through. I don't know what liberal means….</p>
<p>Hmmm. Evidently Sotomayor knew what “liberal” meant when a New York Times article quoted her in 1983, when she was working as an assistant district attorney:</p>
<p>“I had more problems during my first year in the office with the low-grade crimes–the shoplifting, the prostitution, the minor assault cases,” [Sotomayor] says. “In large measure, in those cases you were dealing with socioeconomic crimes, crimes that could be the product of the environment and of poverty.</p>
<p>“Once I started doing felonies, it became less hard. No matter how liberal I am, I'm still outraged by crimes of violence. Regardless of whether I can sympathize with the causes that lead these individuals to do these crimes, the effects are outrageous.”</p>
<p>In stating “No matter how liberal I am,” Sotomayor is describing herself as very liberal. The clause is the semantic equivalent of “Even though I'm very liberal ….” Among other things, Sotomayor understood back then that a liberal “sympathize[s] with the causes that [supposedly] lead these individuals to do these crimes” and is inclined to explain crimes as “the product of the environment and of poverty.”</p>
<p>But I think that I can offer Sotomayor even more help on what “liberal” means, at least in the context of judging.</p>
<p>A liberal judge thinks that it's proper to indulge her own identity in deciding cases.</p>
<p>A liberal judge celebrates “the importance of indefiniteness in the law” and the “unpredictability” that results when a judge “develop[s] a novel approach” that “pushes the law in a new direction.”</p>
<p>A liberal judge resorts to shenanigans to bury the claims of white firefighters that they've been discriminated against on the basis of their race.</p>
<p>A liberal judge favors campaign-finance restrictions over the First Amendment.</p>
<p>A liberal judge embraces novel equal-protection theories that would compromise public safety.</p>
<p>A liberal judge publicly cheerleads liberal politicians.</p>
<p>A liberal judge excuses her own acts of discrimination.</p>
<p>A liberal judge thinks that Supreme Court justices are entitled to make policy.</p>
<p>A liberal judge hides her support for racial quotas behind gauzy euphemisms.</p>
<p>A liberal judge commends lawsuits that promote abortion and illegal immigration and that undermine welfare reform.</p>
<p>Hope these examples help. Happy to flesh out more fully.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's Public Cheerleading for Obama</p>
<p>In a speech that she delivered to the Black, Latino, Asian Pacific American Law Alumni Assocation on April 17, 2009–two weeks before news of the Souter vacancy broke–Judge Sotomayor made a number of references to President Obama that seem surprisingly and disturbingly partisan coming from a sitting federal judge:</p>
<p>“The power of working together was, this past November, resoundingly proven.” (p. 6)</p>
<p>“The wide coalition of groups that joined forces to elect America's first Afro-American President was awe inspiring in both the passion the members of the coalition exhibited in their efforts and the discipline they showed in the execution of their goals.” (p. 7)</p>
<p>“On November 4, we saw past our ethnic, religious and gender differences.” (p. 10)</p>
<p>“What is our challenge today: Our challenge as lawyers and court related professionals and staff, as citizens of the world is to keep the spirit of the common joy we shared on November 4 alive in our everyday existence.” (p. 11)</p>
<p>“It is the message of service that President Obama is trying to trumpet and it is a clarion call we are obligated to heed.” (p. 13)</p>
<p>Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges provides that a judge “should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.” Sotomayor's public cheerleading for Obama seems clearly to violate that ethical obligation.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Re: Sotomayor's Public Cheerleading for Obama</p>
<p>Just a couple of follow-up commen ts to my post yesterday about Judge Sotomayor's disturbingly partisan pro-Obama remarks in her April 17, 2009, speech:</p>
<p>1. Both supporters and opponents of President Obama properly take note of the historic achievement that his election marks, and I would not see remarks along that line as partisan. For that reason, I did not include among the remarks that I found objectionable Sotomayor's reference to “a grand historical event like the Presidential election of a person of color.” (p. 10) (One of the passages that I do find objectionable includes a reference to the election of “America's first Afro-American President,” but it is other parts of that passage–e.g., the “wide coalition of groups that joined forces … was awe inspiring”–that render it partisan.)</p>
<p>2. A hypothetical might enable supporters of Sotomayor to exercise dispassionate judgment on this matter. Imagine that then-D.C. Circuit judge John Roberts, in the aftermath of President Bush's re-election victory in 2004, had made public statements like these:</p>
<p>“The power of working together was, this past November, resoundingly proven.”</p>
<p>“The wide coalition of groups that joined forces to re-elect President Bush was awe inspiring in both the passion the members of the coalition exhibited in their efforts and the discipline they showed in the execution of their goals.”</p>
<p>“On Election Day, we saw past our ethnic, religious and gender differences.”</p>
<p>“What is our challenge today: Our challenge as lawyers and court related professionals and staff, as citizens of the world is to keep the spirit of the common joy we shared on Election Day alive in our everyday existence.”</p>
<p>“It is the message of promoting democracy worldwide [or, if you prefer, of ‘promoting compassionate conservatism'] that President Bush is trying to trumpet and it is a clarion call we are obligated to heed.”</p>
<p>Would anyone imagine that any sitting federal judge–much less someone who has since been nominated to the Supreme Court–could appropriately have made such comments?</p>
<p>Sotomayor's remarks provide further evidence that she doesn't practice the judicial obligation of impartiality.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Missing the Point on Sotomayor's Public Cheerleading for Obama</p>
<p>At the Huffington Post, Sam Stein imagines that he's rebutting my criticism of Judge Sotomayor's disturbingly partisan public cheerleading for President Obama as he <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/08/attack-on-sotomayors-poli_n_212582.html" type="external">points out</a> that Chief Justice Roberts had various Republican ties in 2000 and earlier–before he became a federal judge.</p>
<p>My criticism rests entirely on the fact that Sotomayor was a sitting federal judge when she engaged in her public cheerleading (just two months ago). Stein quotes the relevant portion of my post–“surprisingly and disturbingly partisan coming from a sitting federal judge”–but somehow manages to miss the point.</p>
<p>The Washington Monthly's Steve Benen also <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_06/018499.php" type="external">gets confused</a>. Benen thinks that my objection is akin to complaining about Sotomayor's “expressing some ideological predispositions” and that her public cheerleading for Obama is the equivalent of taking part in “a Federalist Society gathering, or a conference hosted by the American Constitution Society.” He also thinks it's meaningful to note that Justice Scalia and Vice President Cheney were “hunting buddies”–as though that situation has some meaningful bearing on assessing Sotomayor's public remarks.</p>
<p>Finally, Benen resorts to contending that “Sotomayor's remarks seemed to address a sense of cultural and civic pride more than obvious partisanship.” Oh, sure, there's nothing obviously partisan about stating, to cite just two of my five examples, that “we are obligated to heed” the “message of service that President Obama is trying to trumpet” and that “[o]ur challenge as lawyers and court related professionals and staff, as citizens of the world is to keep the spirit of the common joy we shared on November 4 alive in our everyday existence.” You see, promoting the cult of Obama is just a matter of “cultural and civic pride.”</p>
<p>Just wondering: Has any sitting judge since the adoption of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges ever engaged in such public cheerleading for a president?</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's Revealing Joke About Supreme Court Justices Making Policy</p>
<p>In a May 2006 <a href="http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/SupremeCourt/Sotomayor/upload/Question-12-d-No-67-5-21-06-Hofstra-speech.pdf" type="external">speech</a>, Judge Sotomayor tells “a joke that [she thinks] aptly describes the difference between supreme court, circuit court, and district court judging”:</p>
<p>It involves three judges who go duck hunting. A duck flies overhead and the supreme court justice, before he picks up his shotgun, ponders about the policy implications of shooting the duck–how will the environment be affected, how will the duck hunting business be affected if he doesn't shoot the duck, well by the time he finishes, the duck got away.</p>
<p>Another duck flies overhead, and the circuit judge goes through his five part test before pulling the trigger–1) he lifts the shotgun to his shoulder, 3) [sic] he sights the duck, 3) he measures the velocity of the duck's flight, 4) he aims, and 5) he shoots–and, he misses.</p>
<p>Finally, another duck flies by, the district judge picks up the shotgun and shoots. The duck lands and the district judge picks it up, swings it over his shoulder and decides that he will let the other two judges explain what he did over dinner.</p>
<p>So Sotomayor thinks an unobjectionable and apt description of what is most distinctive about the role of Supreme Court justices in making decisions involves is “ponder[ing] about … policy implications.” [Update: Eugene Volokh offers a characteristically thoughtful <a href="http://volokh.com/posts/1244220709.shtml" type="external">critique</a> of the original version of this post. In response, I have tweaked my language in this paragraph; the italicized words are new.]</p>
<p>(The excerpt above is from the prepared text on pages 10-12 of the speech (emphasis added). Sotomayor handwrote some trivial changes.) <a type="external" href="" />Biden on Sotomayor's Supposed Empathy for Police</p>
<p>Politico reports that, at a White House event yesterday in support of Judge Sotomayor's nomination, Vice President Biden assured police, “As you do your job, know that Judge Sotomayor has your back as well.” His assurance drew sound criticism. For example: &lt; blockquote&gt;”I think what Biden said was foolish,” said Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University who is a prominent legal ethicist. “She's not there to ‘have their back.' She's there to interpret the law as she sees fit…. “It'll be embarrassing to her when she learns of it,” Gillers said. “Biden crosses the line when he starts representing to interest groups that she would be voting in their favor.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately, when President Obama commits to use his misguided and lawless <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTc3ZDJiNjMxNGNkMmRkM2MzN2ExMjUyMWFjMWIzNjI=" type="external">“empathy” standard</a> as his criterion for picking Supreme Court justices, it's only natural that some folks will want assurances that they will be beneficiaries of his nominee's <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWI2ZjM2MmRiODlhMmY1NDgxYjBjZjNjOWRmMmE1NjQ=" type="external">selective empathy</a>–especially when that nominee's <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZWQwMTVjNDQ4MGNkMDk1NDIwMmY4ZjgxNGNhNmIyNGM=" type="external">actual</a> <a href="" type="external">record</a> raises serious questions whether she has a sound understanding of how the law ought actually to apply to police and others who risk their lives to protect the public.</p>
<p>More generally, I suspect that there is growing bipartisan agreement that the proposition “I think what Biden said was foolish” always has a high probability of being accurate.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />David Brooks's Wishful Thinking on Sotomayor?</p>
<p>David Brooks acknowledges that someone who reads Judge Sotomayor's speeches might “come away with the impression that she was a racial activist who is just using the judicial system as a vehicle for her social crusade.” But although he concludes from her “whole record” that she is “quite liberal,” he sees “little evidence that she is motivated by racialist thinking or an activist attitude” and he labels her a “liberal incrementalist.”</p>
<p>Just a few observations:</p>
<p>1. Sotomayor's speeches offer the clearest window into her thinking about the role of a judge. In those speeches, she is not constrained by Supreme Court precedent, circuit precedent, the risk of being overturned, or the facts and procedural posture of any case. And she's generally speaking before friendly audiences, with whom she would be more comfortable in being candid. Her speeches display more than a racial activism. As Jennifer Rubin discusses in her Weekly Standard cover article:</p>
<p>[Sotomayor] also denigrates the notion of a neutral, objective judiciary which treats all citizens alike and removes personal bias from the judicial branch. The goal here is not to remove racial or ethnic bias from judging, but to make sure the right bias is given voice–secured by increased numbers of minority judges. And her qualms about intellectual rigor and impartiality extend to virtually all that judges do (“I wonder whether achieving that goal is possible in all or even in most cases”). This is legal relativism, if not nihilism. No objective truth, no objective judging, only power politics.</p>
<p>2. Brooks credits Tom Goldstein's “much-cited study of the 96 race-related cases that have come before” Sotomayor. But as I've noted, that study offers dubious insights, especially since Goldstein has for some odd reason omitted en banc proceedings entirely from his review. Thus, his review doesn't include Sotomayor's dissent in Hayden v. Pataki, in which the en banc majority rejected a Voting Rights Act challenge to New York's felon-disenfranchisement law. Nor does it include the important case of Brown v. City of Oneonta, in which Judge Sotomayor joined an opinion dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc that set forth what Chief Judge Walker called a “novel equal protection theor[y] that … would severely impact police protection.”</p>
<p>3. The phrase “liberal incrementalist” invites the question, “incrementalist towards what end?” Brooks thinks that Sotomayor's opinions “embody the sort of judicial minimalism that Obama and his aide Cass Sunstein admire most.” But as I address more fully in my review of Sunstein's Radicals in Robes, Sunstein's “minimalism” is his “tactically prudent, gradualist path to a liberal ‘perfectionist' rewriting of the Constitution”:</p>
<p>Sunstein's minimalism … is better described as boil-the-frog gradualism. We American citizens are like the frog in the pot of water on the stove. If the Court turns up the heat–that is, imposes the Left's agenda–too suddenly, we'll jump out. But if it does so gradually, we'll sit there in blissful ignorance until it's too late.</p>
<p>I'll bet that Brooks's wishful thinking will prove to be naïve thinking.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Jeffrey Rosen's Reassessment of Sotomayor</p>
<p>The New Republic's Jeffrey Rosen offers what he clearly intends as a very approving <a href="http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=0492d15c-69bc-4b2a-9d25-c6a641ee6485" type="external">portrait</a> of Judge Sotomayor's record–a portrait that differs dramatically from his initial <a href="http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085" type="external">take</a> as well as from the White House's efforts to market Sotomayor as a “nonideological and restrained judge.” Whether Americans should find cause to welcome what Rosen approves of is a different matter.</p>
<p>Rosen's piece focuses heavily on Sotomayor's dissents, since it's “often in dissents that appellate judges can express their true selves–their passions, judicial philosophies, and unique views of the law.” According to Rosen (emphasis added):</p>
<p>Unlike her majority opinions, her dissents sometimes show flashes of civil-libertarian passion or indignation, even as they remain closely grounded in facts and precedents. Most important, they are substantively bold, staking out unequivocal liberal positions–from a broad reading of the Americans with Disabilities Act to sympathy for the due-process rights of a mentally ill defendant….</p>
<p>It's in these dissents that a different view of Sotomayor emerges: a judge who can be both crusading and open-minded….</p>
<p>Her most impressive dissents reveal her to be a true civil libertarian.</p>
<p>Rosen finds Sotomayor's dissents “methodologically as well as ideologically eclectic”:</p>
<p>She samples from different judicial philosophies in different cases. Sometimes Sotomayor sounds like a textualist in the Scalia style, and sometimes she sounds as enthusiastic as Justices Ginsburg and Breyer in her devotion to international law and the living constitution.</p>
<p>A few comments:</p>
<p>1. An important part of the job of a Supreme Court justice is the often difficult work of objectively determining the meaning of the civil liberties enshrined in the Constitution and embodied in statutory law. If that were all that Rosen signaled by labeling Sotomayor a “true civil libertarian,” there would be no cause for concern. But his references to her “flashes of civil-libertarian passion or indignation,” her “crusading” spirit, and the “unequivocal liberal positions” that she has staked out in “substantively bold” dissents are strong warning signs of a liberal judicial activist who will redefine the Constitution to comport with her policy preferences.</p>
<p>2. What Rosen euphemistically labels Sotomayor's “methodological eclecticism” is another strong warning sign. It's tempting for justices to pick and choose different methodologies in different cases in order to reach the results that seem right to them or that they want to reach. A justice who doesn't commit to a constraining interpretive methodology has no barrier against indulging that temptation.</p>
<p>3. Curiously, Rosen (a) approvingly cites a study that concludes that Justice Souter “can be objectively described as a judicial activist,” (b) says that Sotomayor will adopt “more liberal positions on civil liberties and business issues” than Souter, but (c) relying entirely on her appellate opinions rather than his own prediction of how she will be as a justice, opines that “the charge that she is a judicial activist” (emphasis added) will be “hard to sustain.” Perhaps that depends on the meaning of “is.” If the concern is that Sotomayor will be a liberal judicial activist, Rosen himself has provided ample cause for that concern.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Grant of Certiorari in Ricci v. DeStefano</p>
<p>I'm delighted to see that the Supreme Court granted review today of the Second Circuit's panel decision in Ricci v. DeStefano. In that decision, the Second Circuit panel rejected the claim by New Haven firefighters that city officials violated their Title VII and equal-protection rights by throwing out the results of two promotional exams.</p>
<p>As I've previously detailed (and will in large part repeat here), the Second Circuit's narrow 7-6 denial of en banc rehearing in Ricci was accompanied by a remarkable dissent, written by Clinton appointee José Cabranes and joined by his five dissenting colleagues, that exposed some apparent shenanigans by the three panel members and the district judge. (Cabranes's opinion begins on the ninth page of this Second Circuit order.) One of those panel members was Sonia Sotomayor, who has been thought by many to be a leading contender for a Supreme Court appointment in the Obama administration.</p>
<p>Judge Cabranes's account indicates that Sotomayor and her colleagues engaged in an extraordinary effort to bury the firefighters' claims: In a case in which the parties “submitted briefs of eighty-six pages each and a six-volume joint appendix of over 1,800 pages,” in which two amicus briefs were filed, and in which oral argument “lasted over an hour (an unusually long argument in the practice of our Circuit),” the panel “affirmed the District Court's ruling in a summary order containing a single substantive paragraph”–which gives the reader virtually no sense of what the case is about. Four months later, just three days before Cabranes issued his opinion (and in an apparent attempt to preempt it), “the panel withdrew its summary order and published a per curiam opinion that contained the same operative text as the summary order, with the addition of a citation to the District Court's opinion in the Westlaw and LexisNexis databases.” As Cabranes sums it up:</p>
<p>This per curiam opinion adopted in toto the reasoning of the District Court, without further elaboration or substantive comment, and thereby converted a lengthy, unpublished district court opinion, grappling with significant constitutional and statutory claims of first impression, into the law of this Circuit. It did so, moreover, in an opinion that lacks a clear statement of either the claims raised by the plaintiffs or the issues on appeal. Indeed, the opinion contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case, and a casual reader of the opinion could be excused for wondering whether a learning disability played at least as much a role in this case as the alleged racial discrimination.</p>
<p>And then this killer understatement:</p>
<p>This perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal.</p>
<p>That's quite an indictment–by a fellow Clinton appointee, no less–of Sotomayor's unwillingness to give a fair shake to parties whose claims she evidently dislikes. And, whatever the Supreme Court's ultimate disposition, its decision to grant review of a case that Sotomayor treated in such a perfunctory manner ratifies Cabranes's indictment. Hardly the mark of a jurist worth serious consideration for the nation's highest court.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />White House's Misleading Spin on New Haven Firefighters Case</p>
<p>In a press conference yesterday, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs tried to defend Judge Sonia Sotomayor's outrageous shenanigans in the New Haven firefighters case (Ricci v. DeStefano):</p>
<p>You can't criticize somebody for ruling based on adhering strictly and strongly to the precedent of Second Circuit, in the case of — in this case, of Hayden v. The County of Nassau, and Bushey v. The New York State Civil Service Commission.</p>
<p>Gibbs's brazen defense (which I'm told that White House lawyers are providing in an even bolder form on background) is quite a stretch and is at war with both highly respected Clinton appointee José Cabranes and Obama's own Justice Department.</p>
<p>In his dissent from denial of rehearing en banc in Ricci, Judge Cabranes (joined by five other judges) states that the case “raises important questions of first impression in our Circuit–and indeed, in the nation–regarding the application of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause and Title VII's prohibition on discriminatory employment practices.” He calls the district court's opinion (which Sotomayor and her panel colleagues adopted wholesale) “path-breaking” and the questions on appeal “indisputably complex and far from well-settled.” He declares that the “core issue presented by this case–the scope of a municipal employer's authority to disregard examination results based solely on the race of the successful applicants–is not addressed by any precedent of the Supreme Court or our Circuit.”</p>
<p>Further, in its brief in the pending Supreme Court case, President Obama's Department of Justice argues that the unsigned per curiam opinion that Sotomayor joined–and, given her aggressive lead role at oral argument, probably authored–did not “adequately consider whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff firefighters], a genuine issue of fact remained whether [the City's] claimed purpose to comply with Title VII was a pretext for intentional racial discrimination in violation of Title VII or the Equal Protection Clause.” On that ground, the Department of Justice argues that the Supreme Court “should vacate the judgment below and remand for further consideration.”</p>
<p>It's true that the unpublished district-court opinion that Sotomayor and her panel colleagues adopted relies heavily on Hayden and Bushey and rejects plaintiffs' various grounds for distinguishing those cases. It's also true that Sotomayor and several of her colleagues, in an opinion concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc, maintain (contrary to Judge Cabranes and the five judges who joined his opinion) that Hayden and Bushey were “controlling authority.” But apart from the fact that neither Hayden and Bushey involved a government entity's discarding the results of promotional exams, the position of Sotomayor and her colleagues depends on their assertion that “there was no evidence of a discriminatory purpose” in the City of New Haven's discarding the results–the very assertion that the Obama Justice Department disputes.</p>
<p>(The en banc opinions and the district court's opinion are available together here.)</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />The New Haven Firefighters Case and Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint</p>
<p>Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson argues that Judge Sotomayor's “action [in Ricci v. DeStefano] is more properly seen as an example of judicial restraint” than of judicial activism. I think that he mistakes what's at issue. A few comments:</p>
<p>1. My core complaint, and the complaint of Judge José Cabranes (a Clinton appointee), about the perfunctory per curiam opinion that Sotomayor and her panel colleagues is not that the result she reached was necessarily the wrong one. I believe that I have been agnostic on that question (though I will point out that even President Obama's Department of Justice has argued to the Supreme Court that Sotomayor did not “adequately consider whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to [the plaintiff firefighters], a genuine issue of fact remained whether [the City's] claimed purpose to comply with Title VII was a pretext for intentional racial discrimination in violation of Title VII or the Equal Protection Clause.”)</p>
<p>My complaint is instead that Sotomayor engaged in shenanigans designed to bury the claims of the plaintiff firefighters, shenanigans that Judge Cabranes exposed in his blistering dissent from denial of rehearing en banc. Simply put, she didn't give the firefighters a fair shake, and she seemed to be trying to prevent further review of their claims.</p>
<p>2. Whether you call Sotomayor's malfeasance “judicial activism” or not depends on how you define that term. If you use it to refer to a judge's indulgence of her own policy preferences, then you might reasonably allege that Sotomayo r engaged in judicial activism (though proving her subjective motivation is difficult or impossible). In any event, there are plenty of categories of judicial wrongdoing beyond “judicial activism,” and the term “judicial restraint” certainly doesn't capture the behavior that Judge Cabranes complained of.</p>
<p>3. Repeating the White House spin, Robinson contends that there was “ample precedent” for the unsigned per curiam opinion that Sotomayor joined (and, I suspect, wrote). As I've explained, the White House's account is at war with both Judge Cabranes and the Obama Justice Department.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Second Circuit Oral Argument in the New Haven Firefighters Case</p>
<p>At the Weekly Standard blog, John McCormack has an interesting post on the oral argument in Ricci v. DeStefano (the audio of which is available here). Here are excerpts from the argument by the counsel for plaintiff firefighters:</p>
<p>I think a fundamental failure is the application of these concepts to this job as if these men were garbage collectors. This is a command position of a First Responder agency. The books you see piled on my desk are fire science books. These men face life threatening circumstances every time they go out. … Please look at the examinations. … You need to know: this is not an aptitude test. This is a high-level command position in a post-9/11 era no less. They are tested for their knowledge of fire, behavior, combustion principles, building collapse, truss roofs, building construction, confined space rescue, dirty bomb response, anthrax, metallurgy, and I opened my district court brief with a plea to the court to not treat these men in this profession as if it were unskilled labor. We don't do this to lawyers or doctors or nurses or captains or even real estate brokers. But somehow they treat firefighters as if it doesn't require any knowledge to do the job….</p>
<p>Firefighters die every week in this country. … [There was a case ] a few miles away where a young father and firefighter Eddie Ramos died after a truss roof collapsed in a warehouse fire because the person who commanded the scene decided to send men into an unoccupied house, with no people to save on Thanksgiving Day, with a truss roof known to collapse early in the fire because of the nature of the pins that hold the trusses together would have collapsed. And for 20 minutes he couldn't find any air and he he suffocated to death. And the fire chief had to go tell a 6 year-old that her father wasn't coming home.</p>
<p>Here's a comment/question by Judge Sotomayor:</p>
<p>JUDGE SOTOMAYOR: Counsel … we're not suggesting that unqualified people be hired. The city's not suggesting that. All right? But there is a difference between where you score on the test and how many openings you have. And to the extent that there's an adverse impact on one group over the other, so that the first seven who are going to be hired only because of the vagrancies [sic] of the vacancies at that moment, not because you're unqualified–the pass rate is the pass rate–all right? But if your test is always going to put a certain group at the bottom of the pass rate so they're never ever going to be promoted, and there is a fair test that could be devised that measures knowledge in a more substantive way, then why shouldn't the city have an opportunity to try and look and see if it can develop that?</p>
<p>As McCormack writes: “Sotomayor may have not wanted unqualified firefighters to be elevated to the position of captain and lieutenant–she simply wanted less qualified firefighters to be placed in charge of the lives of other men in the interests of racial diversity. I wonder what Eddie Ramos would say about that if he were alive today.”</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />NYT Background on New Haven Firefighters Case–Part 1 of 2</p>
<p>Two recent New York Times articles shed some interesting light on Judge Sotomayor's role in Ricci v. DeStefano, the <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzI4ODU1MjIxMThiNGQzODUwYTFlYzNlNWNlOWMzOTc=" type="external">controversial</a> summary-order-later-converted-into-per-curiam-opinion that buried the claims of New Haven firefighters–19 whites and one Hispanic–that New Haven discriminated against them on the basis of race when it discarded the results of promotional exams because it didn't like the racial composition of those who did well. (The Supreme Court's decision in the case is expected over the next two weeks or so.) I'll address one article in this post and the second in a second post.</p>
<p>This <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/us/politics/06ricci.html?_r=1&amp;th=&amp;emc=th&amp;pagewanted=print" type="external">article</a> from last Saturday by Adam Liptak explores how the Second Circuit panel handled Ricci and offers some unusual behind-the-scenes insights. Some excerpts (emphasis added):</p>
<p>Almost everything about the case of Ricci v. DeStefano — from the number and length of the briefs to the size of the appellate record to the exceptionally long oral argument — suggested that it would produce an important appeals court decision about how the government may use race in decisions concerning hiring and promotion.</p>
<p>But in the end the decision from Judge Sotomayor and two other judges was an unsigned summary order that contained a single paragraph of reasoning that simply affirmed a lower court's decision dismissing the race discrimination claim brought by Frank Ricci and 17 other white firefighters, one of them Hispanic, who had done well on the test….</p>
<p>There is evidence that the three judges in the case agreed to use a summary order rather than a full decision in an effort to find common ground….</p>
<p>In the end, according to court personnel familiar with some of the internal discussions of the case, the three judges had difficulty finding consensus, with Judge Sack the most reluctant to join a decision affirming the district court. Judge Pooler, as the presiding judge, took the leading role in fashioning the compromise. The use of a summary order, which ordinarily cannot be cited as precedent, was part of that compromise.</p>
<p>A summary order may well be an expedient way for judges to resolve their “difficulty finding consensus,” but I don't see how it's an appropriate one. Nor, given that the summary order affirmed the district court, do I see what Judge Sack obtained by the supposed “compromise.” In any event, there's still a lot more that could be learned about Sotomayor's role in the matter. (I will note that Liptak's account cuts against my <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDM0YWM4ZDI1NGIxNTc2MzhiMmRmZDcyNDFiZWI0YmE=" type="external">speculative</a> aside that Sotomayor probably authored the summary order and per curiam opinion.)</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />NYT Background on New Haven Firefighters Case–Part 2 of 2</p>
<p>A second recent New York Times article that provides an interesting backdrop to Judge Sotomayor's role in Ricci v. DeStefano explores Sotomayor's work as a member of the board of directors of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund in the 1980s, including in PRLDEF's successful suit forcing the New York City police department to institute racial quotas for the hiring and promotion of police officers. Some excerpts:</p>
<p>In the 1980s, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund sued the New York City Police Department, claiming that its promotion exams discriminated against Latinos and African-Americans….</p>
<p>[This and other] efforts were backed by the defense fund's board of directors, an active and passionate group that included a young lawyer named Sonia Sotomayor….</p>
<p>The board monitored all litigation undertaken by the fund's lawyers, and a number of those lawyers said Ms. Sot omayor was an involved and ardent supporter of their various legal efforts during her time with the group….</p>
<p>One of the legal defense fund's most important suits charged that a Police Department promotional exam discriminated against minority candidates. It was filed on behalf of the Hispanic Society of the New York police. The exams, the group charged, did not really measure the ability to perform in a more senior position, and were yielding unfair results: Too many whites were doing well, and too many Hispanics and African-Americans were not….</p>
<p>The suit resulted in a settlement with the city that produced greater numbers of promotions to sergeant for Latino and African-American officers.</p>
<p>Some white officers, however, felt that the settlement was unfair. They said that many white officers had outscored their Hispanic and African-American counterparts, yet were not allowed to fill the spots because of quotas. They sued, and their case, Marino v. Ortiz, reached the Supreme Court, where it failed by a 4-to-4 vote in 1988….</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />“What Really Happened” in the New Haven Firefighters Case</p>
<p>Stuart Taylor's <a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/print_friendly.php?ID=or_20090613_4064" type="external">close study</a> of the New Haven firefighters case (Ricci v. DeStefano) deepens his concern that Judge Sotomayor's decisionmaking “may be biased by the grievance-focused mind-set and the ‘wise Latina woman' superiority complex displayed in some of her speeches.” Some excerpts:</p>
<p>The [Second Circuit] panel's decision to adopt as its own U.S. District Judge Janet Arterton's opinion in the case looks much less defensible up close than it does in most media accounts. One reason is that the detailed factual record strongly suggests that — contrary to Sotomayor's position — the Connecticut city's decision to kill the promotions was driven less by its purported legal concerns than by raw racial politics….</p>
<p>But the unmistakable logic of Sotomayor's position would encourage employers to discriminate against high-scoring groups based on race — no matter how valid and lawful the qualifying test — in any case in which disproportionate numbers of protected minorities have low scores, as is the norm.</p>
<p>Such logic would convert disparate-impact law into an engine of overt discrimination against high-scoring groups across the country and allow racial politics and racial quotas to masquerade as voluntary compliance with the law.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Richard Thompson Ford's Confused Irony About Ricci</p>
<p>On Slate, Stanford law professor Richard Thompson Ford <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2220600/pagenum/all/" type="external">argues</a> that “conservatives” (like Second Circuit judge, and Clinton appointee, José Cabranes?) who complain about Judge Sotomayor's treatment of the employment-discrimination claims presented by the New Haven firefighters in Ricci v. DeStefano should instead blame Justice Scalia and other conservative justices for making it too hard for plaintiffs to win employment-discrimination claims. But the grand irony that Ford posits rests on his distorted account of Supreme Court precedent and on his misunderstanding of the procedural posture of the proceedings in Ricci.</p>
<p>Ford contends that Frank Ricci has “been treated just like any other plaintiff suing for employment discrimination,” and that “the reason that people who sue for employment discrimination … rarely win their cases is that conservative judges have spent decades making sure they usually lose.” According to Ford, “as Justice Scalia made clear in [ <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-602.ZO.html" type="external">St. Mary's Honor Center v.] Hicks</a>, the employer doesn't have to prove that there was a good reason for its decision; it needs only to claim that there was one.” “At this point, to keep his case alive, the plaintiff has to prove that the employer's [claimed] reason is just a pretext.” Even if the plaintiff does prove that the employer's claimed reason is a pretext, “the plaintiff will still lose if the judge or jury decides that the employer acted for a different nondiscriminatory reason from the one that was given.” Ricci's “best argument” might have been to argue that the city acted from “mixed motives”–partly legitimate and partly discriminatory–but Ricci “didn't argue it at trial,” and Sotomayor and her panel colleagues therefore couldn't consider that argument.</p>
<p>Ford's argument is a jumble that fails to distinguish between summary judgment and trial and that misstates the Supreme Court's ruling in Hicks. Let's examine Ford's confusion:</p>
<p>1. Ford claims that Scalia's majority opinion in Hicks establishes that “the employer doesn't have to prove that there was a good reason for its decision; it needs only to claim that there was one.” That's not accurate. What Scalia explains in Hicks concerns the so-called shifting burdens of production (as distinct from burden of proof) in the trial of employment-discrimination cases. Specifically: The plaintiff must first establish, by a preponderance of evidence, a “prima facie” case of discrimination. Once he has done so, the defendant has the burden of producing an explanation to rebut the prima facie case. It's not enough for the defendant “only to claim that there was” a “good reason for its decision.” Rather, the “‘defendant must clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence,' reasons for its actions which, if believed by the trier of fact, would support a finding that unlawful discrimination was not the cause of the employment action.” (Emphasis omitted.) If the defendant does so, the plaintiff then has the full opportunity to demonstrate that the proffered reason was not the true reason and that unlawful discrimination was a cause.</p>
<p>2. Ford's asserts that “at this point”–i.e., once the employer has merely claimed that it had a good reason for its employment decision–“to keep his case alive, the plaintiff has to prove that the employer's [claimed] reason is just a pretext.” Any reader who knows that the district court granted summary judgment in favor of the City of New Haven would be justified in thinking that Ford, in referring to what a plaintiff must do “to keep his case alive,” is explaining what a plaintiff has to do in order to avoid having summary judgment granted against him.</p>
<p>But, of course, a plaintiff need not “prove” that the employer's claimed reason is pretextual in order to survive summary judgment. The defendant employer, as the moving party, would instead have to persuade the judge that no reasonable jury, construing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, could determine that the employer had discriminated. In other words, a plaintiff would defeat the employer's motion for summary judgment by offering evidence that, construed most favorably to the plaintiff, would enable a jury to find that the employer's claimed reason was pretextual and that the employer engaged in discrimination. Ford himself acknowledges that the New Haven firefighters offered such evidence–namely, evidence that “New Haven refused to certify the exam results because of political pressure to promote blacks.”</p>
<p>3. Ford himself seems not to understand that the district court granted the City of New Haven's motion for summary judgment. Why else would he contend that Ricci “didn't argue [mixed motives] at trial“? Ricci and his fellow firefighters didn't argue anything at trial because the district court's grant of summary judgment prevented them from proceeding to trial.</p>
<p>Even President Obama's Justice Department has <a href="" type="external">argued</a> to the Supreme Court that the district court was wrong to grant summary judgment against the firefighters–and that Judge Sotomayor and her panel colleagues were wrong to affirm the district court. Depending on how the issues of law now before the Supreme Court are decided, it is certainly possible that the New Haven firefighters will proceed to trial on their claims and, under the sensible framework that the Supreme Court has established, fail to persuade the jury of the merits of their claims. But that possibility should not distract attention from the fact that there is ample reason, as Judge Cabranes's <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NzI4ODU1MjIxMThiNGQzODUwYTFlYzNlNWNlOWMzOTc=" type="external">blistering dissent</a> from denial of rehearing en banc illustrates, to blame Judge Sotomayor for not giving fair treatment to the firefighters' claims.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's “Novel Equal Protection Theor[y]”</p>
<p>In Brown v. City of Oneonta, 235 F.3d 769 (2d Cir. 2000), Judge Sotomayor joined an opinion dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc that, along with another dissent, set forth what Chief Judge Walker called “novel equal protection theories that … would severely impact police protection.” Let's take a fuller look at this case.</p>
<p>As the panel opinion in Brown (221 F.3d 329) put it, “This case bears on the question of the extent to which law enforcement officials may utilize race in their investigation of a crime.” The case arose from the following facts: A woman who had been attacked in her home told police that her attacker was a young black man who, in the course of the struggle, had cut himself on his hand with his knife. Police dogs tracked the attacker's scent in the direction of a nearby college. The police obtained from the college a list of its black male students and attempted to locate and question them. Over several days, the police then conducted a sweep of Oneonta in which they stopped and questioned non-white persons on the streets and inspected their hands for cuts.</p>
<p>Many of the individuals subjected to the police investigation then sued the police for alleged violations of the Equal Protection Clause and the Fourth Amendment (among other claims). The district court granted summary judgment for the police.</p>
<p>On appeal, the panel affirmed the district court on the Equal Protection claim but reversed it on the Fourth Amendment claim:</p>
<p>We hold that under the circumstances of this case, where law enforcement officials possessed a description of a criminal suspect, even though that description consisted primarily of the suspect's race and gender, absent other evidence of discriminatory racial animus, they could act on the basis of that description without violating the Equal Protection Clause….</p>
<p>Police action is still subject to the constraints of the Fourth Amendment, however, and a description of race and gender alone will rarely provide reasonable suspicion justifying a police search or seizure. In this case, certain individual plaintiffs were subjected to seizures by defendant law enforcement officials, and those individuals may proceed with their claims under the Fourth Amendment.</p>
<p>The Second Circuit denied rehearing en banc, with five judges, including Sotomayor, dissenting. In his dissent (which Sotomayor joined, except for one part), Judge Calabresi argued that “when state officers (like the police) ignore essentially everything but the racial part of a victim's description, and, acting solely on that racial element, stop and question all members of that race they can get hold of, even those who grossly fail to fit the victim's description,” the state is “creating an express racial classification that can only be approved if it survives strict scrutiny.” Judge Straub also wrote a separate dissent.</p>
<p>In his opinion concurring in the denial of en banc rehearing, Chief Judge Walker, who authored the panel opinion, responds at length to the dissenting opinions of Judges Calabresi and Straub. Here are some excerpts from Walker's opinion that apply fully to the parts of the Calabresi opinion that Sotomayor embraced:</p>
<p>Some of the judges dissenting from denial of rehearing in banc … have chosen this occasion to advance, for the first time, novel equal protection theories that, in my view, would severely impact police protection…. The dissenters propose that when the police have been given a description of a criminal perpetrator by the victim that includes the perpetrator's race, their subsequent investigation to find that perpetrator may constitute a suspect racial classification under the equal protection clause….</p>
<p>The fact that no legal opinion, concurrence, dissent (or other judicial pronouncement) has ever intimated, much less proposed, any such rules of equal protection confirms a strong intuition of their non-viability. But, for the benefit of anyone who in the future may be undeterred by the inability of these theories to attract judicial recognition, their practical difficulties and analytical defects should be recognized….</p>
<p>The theories suggested by the dissenters would require a police officer, before acting on a physical description that contains a racial element, to balance myriad competing considerations, one of which would be the risk of being subject to strict scrutiny in an equal protection lawsuit. Moreover, the officer frequently would have to engage in such balancing while under the pressure of a time-sensitive pursuit of a potentially dangerous criminal. Police work, as we know it, would be impaired and the safety of all citizens compromised. The most vulnerable and isolated would be harmed the most and, if police effectiveness is hobbled by special racial rules, residents of inner cities would be harmed most of all….</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's Fervent Hope for a “Completely Integrated Society”</p>
<p>In that same May 2006 <a href="http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/SupremeCourt/Sotomayor/upload/Question-12-d-No-67-5-21-06-Hofstra-speech.pdf" type="external">speech</a> in which Judge Sotomayor <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmJkYzA2NDZkNjNiN2FiYWI0NjU4ZGVhYzhlNzY0YTE=" type="external">quacks</a> like a liberal judicial activist, she states that Brown v. Board of Education “struck down the separate but equal doctrine and held out a hope–still not realized, unfortunately, but still fervently aspired to[–]that we would someday be a completely integrated society.” (p. 7)</p>
<p>It's unclear to me what Sotomayor means by a “completely integrated society.” As Roger Clegg's <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTU0ZjQyNzAyZmUyNTgxNjA0NjU3MmYzYzQ5NjRhZjI=" type="external">post</a> earlier today discusses, Sotomayor thinks it's “deeply confused” for Americans both to “take[] pride in our ethnic diversity” and to “simultaneously insist that we can and must function and live in a race- and color-blind way.” So insofar as one vision of a “completely integrated society” would involve equal opportunity for all in a legal regime that does not discriminate on the basis of race, Sotomayor appears to reject that vision.</p>
<p>An alternative vision of a “completely integrated society” would look to equal results as the measure and use racial quotas and other racial preferences to achieve those results. Is that what Sotomayor means? Is there any good reason to believe that she doesn't?</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor on Good Discrimination vs. Invidious Discrimination</p>
<p>Judge Sotomayor's response to the Senate questionnaire (question 11.a) reveals that she belongs to the Belizean Grove, “a private organization of female professionals.” From this Politico article, it's clear that the Belizean Grove is an exclusive and elite group that provides networking opportunities that many men would be ea ger to avail themselves of. Sotomayor concedes, in her response to question 11.b, that the Belizean Grove discriminates on the basis of sex, but she maintains that its discrimination isn't invidious.</p>
<p>Perhaps Sotomayor can try explaining that to the men who can't take part in the Belizean Grove and who don't have comparable opportunities– and who would be accused of invidious discrimination if they were able to join an all-male group that provided comparable opportunities.</p>
<p>Of course, Sotomayor first ought to explain to the New Haven firefighters who were denied promotions on the basis of their race why that denial wasn't invidious discrimination.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Judge Sotomayor and the Belizean Grove</p>
<p>As the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/us/politics/16judge.html?_r=1&amp;th&amp;emc=th" type="external">reported</a> yesterday, Judge Sotomayor has informed the Senate that (in NYT's phrasing) the Belizean Grove, the “all-female networking club” she <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjVlNjljOTE0NmNiZDBlN2IzYTE1NGVmN2Q1M2YzNGU=" type="external">belongs to</a>, “did not discriminate in an inappropriate way.”</p>
<p>I don't have a settled position on what rules ought to govern a judge's membership in a men-only or women-only club (or on the broader question of what public policy towards such clubs ought to be). On the one hand, I'm generally inclined to favor a genuine diversity in which men and women would have choices among single-sex and men-and-women clubs. On the other hand, I recognize that, deliberately or otherwise, some men-only clubs may operate to deprive women of unique or important opportunities for networking and advancement in the business world. My impression is that that problem is far less common than it was 25 or 30 years ago, largely because so many business-related clubs that were previously men-only have chosen to open, or been forced to open, to women.</p>
<p>Whatever debate there might be over what the rules ought to be, there should be little dispute that judges ought to comply with the rules that are actually in effect. Let's consider whether Judge Sotomayor has complied with Canon 2C of the <a href="http://www.uscourts.gov/guide/vol2/ch1.cfm" type="external">Code of Conduct</a> for United States Judges. Canon 2C states: “A judge should not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin.” The commentary to Canon 2C provides this additional guidance:</p>
<p>Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is often a complex question to which judges should be sensitive. The answer cannot be determined from a mere examination of an organization's current membership rolls but rather depends on how the organization selects members and other relevant factors, such as that the organization is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic or cultural values of legitimate common interest to its members, or that it is in fact and effect an intimate, purely private organization whose membership limitations could not be constitutionally prohibited. See New York State Club Ass'n. Inc. v. City of New York, 487 U.S. 1, 108 S. Ct. 2225, 101 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1988); Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 107 S. Ct. 1940, 95 L. Ed. 2d 474 (1987); Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 104 S. Ct. 3244, 82 L. Ed. 2d 462 (1984). Other relevant factors include the size and nature of the organization and the diversity of persons in the locale who might reasonably be considered potential members. Thus the mere absence of diverse membership does not by itself demonstrate a violation unless reasonable persons with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances would expect that the membership would be diverse in the absence of invidious discrimination. Absent such factors, an organization is generally said to discriminate invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes from membership on the basis of race, religion, sex, or national origin persons who would otherwise be admitted to membership.</p>
<p>I'm certainly not going to contend that this guidance is crystal-clear. But my initial take is that none of the factors that would tend to excuse discrimination on the basis of sex are present in the case of the Belizean Grove. Judge Sotomayor contends only:</p>
<p>Men are involved in its [the Belizean Grove's] activities–they participate in trips, host events, and speak at functions–but to the best of my knowledge, a man has never asked to be considered for membership. It is also my understanding that all interested individuals are duly considered by the membership committee.</p>
<p>As Jennifer Rubin <a href="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/69952" type="external">points out</a>, the “we let the guys come to party” defense “is reminiscent of the ‘we let women be social members' excuses that exclusive men's clubs routinely gave for decades–and which were scorned by women's groups.” Further:</p>
<p>[T]he line about “no one ever asking to join” is rich. Certainly if one declares the organization to be “all men” or “all white” or “all anything” those not in the “all” group are going to be dissuaded from seeking membership. Isn't the mere statement of exclusivity enough to raise concerns?</p>
<p>It would therefore seem that the default rule set forth in the last sentence of the commentary to Canon 2C (which I have italicized) presumptively applies. It's also worth noting that Judge Sotomayor, before becoming a member of the Belizean Grove, could have requested that the Committee on Codes of Conduct provide her a confidential advisory opinion about the propriety of membership.</p>
<p>I won't claim that Sotomayor's membership in the Belizean Grove is itself a matter of any concern to me. But her apparent violation of Canon 2C and her readiness to rationalize her own participation in reverse discrimination tie into broader concerns about her impartiality.</p>
<p>Further, what's sauce for the goose ought to be sauce for the gander. In that regard, I'll highlight Jeffrey Lord's essay on Judge Brooks Smith's confirmation travails (“ <a href="http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/16/pat-leahys-fish-story" type="external">Pat Leahy's Fish Story</a>“), which discusses how Senate Democrats in 2002 went into conniptions over Smith's former membership in an all-male fishing club.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor Resigns Membership in Belizean Grove</p>
<p>Judge Sotomayor informed the Senate Judiciary Committee today that she has resigned from the Belizean Grove. Her <a href="http://judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/SupremeCourt/Sotomayor/upload/061909SotomayorToLeahy-Sessions.pdf" type="external">letter</a> states that “I believe that the Belizean Grove does not practice invidious discrimination and my membership did not violate the Judicial Code of Ethics, but I do not want questions about this to distract anyone from my qualifications and record.”</p>
<p>As I've <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWU2NjJkZWZmYTliZjY2MzhjZmQxMmUxYTliMjg5MDk=" type="external">spelled out</a>, although I'm disinclined to think that the Code of Conduct for United States Judges should forbid Sotomayor's membership in the Belizean Grove, I believe that it appears to do so. I also don't see why she supposes that her resignation should eliminate questions about her previous membership or about her reasoning on the issue of “invidious” discrimination.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Re: She Doesn't Impose Her Own Quotas</p>
<p>Kathryn: Your <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGU4NmM1Y2I5Y2I5Njc4OGQwZGMzNGY0ZWU4NzAxYTQ=" type="external">post</a> about Judge Sotomayor's hiring of law clerks reminds me of the tension between Justice Ginsburg's employment practices (as of the time she was nominated to the Supreme Court) and her own aggressive support for disparate-impact statistics as evidence of intentional discrimination. In her 1993 Supreme Court confirmation hearing, it was learned, much to Ginsburg's visible embarrassment, that in her 13 years on the D.C. Circuit she had never had a single black law clerk, intern, or secretary. Out of 57 employees, zero blacks.</p>
<p>Sotomayor's own hiring practices <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWI2YmZiNzhmZWUwNTY0MmQ3ZTI2M2VkOWVjZTY4MTQ=" type="external">reinforce</a> the concerns of counsel for the plaintiff firefighters in Ricci v. DeStefano that Sotomayor regarded their own highly skilled work, in which they put their lives at risk to protect the public safety, as the equivalent of garbage collection.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Goldstein on Judge Sotomayor and Race</p>
<p>At SCOTUSblog, Tom Goldstein, an early and ardent supporter of Judge Sotomayor's nomination, has <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayor-and-race/" type="external">two</a> <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/judge-sotomayor-and-race-results-from-the-full-data-set/" type="external">posts</a> in which he undertakes to “review[] every single race-related case on which she sat on the Second Circuit.” Goldstein's review has gotten a lot of attention, but as Jonathan Adler <a href="http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_05_31-2009_06_06.shtml#1243909272" type="external">points out</a>, the sort of statistical review that Goldstein provides, even if done accurately and transparently, can go only so far in providing reliable insights.</p>
<p>Further, I'll note that (from what I can tell) Goldstein's review omits the important case of Brown v. City of Oneonta, 235 F.3d 769 (2d Cir. 2000), in which Judge Sotomayor joined an opinion dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc that set forth what Chief Judge Walker called “novel equal protection theories that … would severely impact police protection.”</p>
<p>It may be that Goldstein has for some odd reason omitted en banc proceedings entirely from his review. Jonathan notes that Goldstein's review doesn't include Sotomayor's dissent in Hayden v. Pataki, in which the en banc majority rejected a Voting Rights Act challenge to New York's felon-disenfranchisement law.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor and Abortion</p>
<p>Some conservatives and pro-lifers evidently continue to harbor the hope that Judge Sotomayor will not be hostile on the issue of abortion. This Washington Times <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jun/10/sotomayors-abortion-ties/print/" type="external">editorial</a> ought to force them to examine carefully whether they have any plausible basis for their hope. Here's some information from the editorial that was new to me:</p>
<p>Consider that from 1980 until October 1992, Judge Sotomayor served on the board — at times as vice president and at times as chairman of the litigation committee — of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund. The New York Times in 1992 described her as “a top policy maker on the board.” During that time period, the fund filed briefs in not one, not two, but at least six prominent court cases in strong support of “abortion rights.”</p>
<p>The cases began with an abortion-funding case, Williams v. Zbaraz, just as she joined the board, and they continued through the landmark cases of Rust v. Sullivan, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Especially in the Webster case, in which all nine justices joined at least part of the decision saying that states need not provide public funds for abortions, the fund supported positions far more pro-abortion than the court itself did. Also, in the case Ohio v. Akron Center, the fund wrote that it “opposes any efforts to overturn or in any way restrict the rights recognized in Roe v. Wade.”</p>
<p>No statement could be more categorical. The Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund thus presumably would oppose any restriction, including those on late-term abortions, partial-birth abortions, abortions for minors and the like.</p>
<p>It is possible to serve on the board of a group while not being responsible for a single random legal brief. However, Judge Sotomayor's group filed such suits at least six times – and as the New York Times reported on May 28 (while discussing a different case), “The board monitored all litigation undertaken by the fund's lawyers, and a number of those lawyers said Ms. Sotomayor was an involved and ardent supporter of their various legal efforts.”</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />The Abortion-Assurance Mysteries</p>
<p>Judge Sotomayor's <a href="http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/nominations/SupremeCourt/Sotomayor/SoniaSotomayor-Questionnaire.cfm" type="external">response</a> to the Senate questionnaire presents some puzzles.</p>
<p>Question 26.b asks whether anyone involved in the selection process “ever discussed with you any currently pending or specific case, legal issue, or question in a manner that could reasonably be interpreted as seeking any express or implied assurances concerning your position on such case, issue, or question.” It also asks that Sotomayor identify each communication with anyone in the White House “referring or relating to your views on any case, issue, or subject that could come before the Supreme Court.”</p>
<p>Sotomayor's answer to question 26.b is “No.” But if, as <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/28/AR2009052803937_pf.html" type="external">reported</a> , President Obama sought and received assurances that Sotomayor is pro-Roe, it would seem that the answer should be yes. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Briefing-by-White-House-Press-Secretary-Robert-Gibbs-5-28-09/" type="external">says</a> that Obama “was careful not to … ask specifically how one might rule … in a case that could come before the Supreme Court,” but the scope of question 26.b is far broader than specific inquiries.</p>
<p>Perhaps Obama and Sotomayor did a very clever wink-wink routine. But I'll <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDEwMDQzNmM4NDAzZDNmYWY4ZGNjZjFjOGJjY2IxOTU=" type="external">again</a> suggest that, consistent with Obama's stated commitment to transparency, the White House ought to make publicly available any record (including any audio recording) of Obama's interview with Sotomayor so that the American people can know just what commitments and assurances he extracted or received.</p>
<p>Question 26.c asks Sotomayor to describe “any representations” “made by the White House or individuals acting on behalf of the White House” “to any individuals or interest groups as to how you might rule as a Justice.” Sotomayor's response indicates that she is not aware of any such representations. But it's been <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/28/AR2009052803937_pf.html" type="external">reported</a> that the White House has “deliver[ed] strong but vague assurances” to abortion groups that Sotomayor is pro-Roe. Does Sotomayor really not know of those reports? Or does she somehow regard them as beyond the scope of the question?</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor Commends Liberal Lawsuits on Abortion, Illegal Immigration, and Welfare Reform</p>
<p>From a speech (p. 9) by Judge Sotomayor in June 2001:</p>
<p>In 1996, Congress prohibited lawyers receiving federal legal-services monies from taking on class-action lawsuits or lawsuits involving abortion, illegal immigration and welfare reform. Commendably, I know Brooklyn Law School's clinical programs … have redoubled their efforts to help address the need created by this legislation. These efforts, and the volunteer efforts of other law schools, bar groups and lawyers in private law firms, are not enough. The need is very great.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor as Trailblazer of Good-Faith Exception to Exclusionary Rule?</p>
<p>More misleading White House spin: The backgrounder that the White House is circulating on Judge Sotomayor hypes “her sensible practicality in evaluating the actions of law enforcement officers”:</p>
<p>[I]n United States v. Santa, Judge Sotomayor ruled that when police search a suspect based on a mistaken belief that there is a valid arrest warrant out on him, evidence found during the search should not be suppressed. Ten years later, in Herring v. United States, the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion.</p>
<p>That's a wild misreading of the relationship between the two cases.</p>
<p>In United States v. Santa, 180 F.3d 20 (1999), Judge Sotomayor merely applied already-existing Supreme Court precedent–namely, United States v. Leon (1984), which recognized a good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule, and Arizona v. Evans (1995), which extended that good-faith exception to situations where police rely on police records that contain erroneous information resulting from clerical errors of court employees. The specific question in Santa was whether the Evans exception applied to the facts of that case, and Judge Sotomayor and her panel colleagues ruled that it did: the arresting officers' reliance on the erroneous record was objectively reasonable, and court employees were responsible for the error.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court's ruling in January 2009 in Herring v. United States concerned, as the Court stated it, an issue that “Evans left unresolved” and that Santa did not involve: “‘whether the evidence should be suppressed if police personnel [rather than court employees] were responsible for the error'” in the records on which the police relied. The Court divided 5-4 on this question, with President Obama's favorite justices in dissent. Nothing in Santa provides any reason to believe that a Justice Sotomayor wouldn't be with the dissenters.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Hook, Line, and Sinker</p>
<p>I see from Jonathan Adler's post on the Volokh Conspiracy that Wall Street Journal reporters Jess Bravin and Nathan Koppel, in their article yesterday titled “Nominees's Criminal Rulings Tilt to Right of Souter,” fell for the White House's wild misrepresentation of Judge Sotomayor's 1999 ruling in United States v. Santa, which merely applied existing Supreme Court precedent on the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule. Their misrepresentation of Santa, and of its relationship to the Supreme Court's January 2009 ruling in Herring v. United States, is their lead example of how Sotomayor might be to Justice Souter's right on issues of criminal law. But as Jonathan points out, Souter in fact joined the 1995 precedent that Sotomayor applied in Santa.</p>
<p>Memo to reporters: Trust the White House at your peril.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor on Campaign Finance Reform and the First Amendment</p>
<p>Here's an interesting Politico <a href="http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=898A7692-18FE-70B2-A8E76D7CB8F120AE" type="external">article</a> by Kenneth P. Vogel on Judge Sotomayor's support for limits on fundraising by political campaigns.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Re: Sotomayor Questionnaire Omits Death Penalty-Racism Memo</p>
<p><a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDhkYTNlYzljM2EzYzI0Mjc3ZGFlZDBkOGU5YzViNWM=" type="external">Wendy</a>: Great letter. If a Republican judicial nominee had failed to provide something of this nature, Democrats would be screaming “cover-up” and calling on the nominee to withdraw. What else, one must wonder, hasn't been provided? When will it be?</p>
<p>(I noted yesterday, in The Abortion-Assurance Mysteries, other apparent deficiencies in Sotomayor's response.)</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Former (?) Puerto Rican Nationalist Nominated to North American Supreme Court</p>
<p>On National Journal's new “Ninth Justice” blog, Stuart Taylor <a href="http://ninthjustice.nationaljournal.com/2009/06/grading-sotomayors-senior-thes.php#more" type="external">passes along</a> history professor K.C. Johnson's very favorable assessment of Sonia Sotomayor's senior thesis at Princeton, as well as the “few jarring elements” that Johnson finds, including:</p>
<p>First, I'm curious as to when Sotomayor ceased being a Puerto Rican nationalist who favors independence — as she says she does in the preface. (The position, as she points out in the thesis, had received 0.6 percent in a 1967 referendum, the most recent such vote before she wrote the thesis.) I don't know that I've seen it reported anywhere that she favored Puerto Rican independence, which has always been very much a fringe position….</p>
<p>Second, her unwillingness to call the Congress the U.S. Congress is bizarre — in the thesis, it's always referred to as either the 'North American Congress' or the 'mainland Congress.' I guess by the language of her thesis, it should be said that she's seeking an appointment to the North American Supreme Court, subject to advice and consent of the North American Senate. This kind of rhetoric was very trendy, and not uncommon, among the Latin Americanist fringe of the academy.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />Sotomayor's “Affirmative Action Plan for Puerto Rico”</p>
<p>The apparent answer to history professor K.C. Johnson's question (see “Former (?) Puerto Rican Nationalist Nominated to North American Supreme Court”) about “when Sotomayor ceased being a Puerto Rican nationalist who favors independence”: By the time she was in law school and was instead advocating what law professor Roger Alford (on the Opinio Juris blog) calls an “affirmative action plan for Puerto Rico” statehood. Excerpts from Alford's post about Sotomayor's law-review piece:</p>
<p>Judge Sonia Sotomayor's student note in the 1979 Yale Law Journal is a piece of work. It makes an extravagant case for Puerto Rican statehood based on terms of accession that are more favorable to Puerto Rico than any other state in the Union. Her proposal is a sort of affirmative action plan for what she describes as a “small, economically poor dependency” acquired as a result of the “American experience with colonialism.”</p>
<p>While her legal arguments are complex, her economic and political conclusions are simple: Puerto Rico should become a state and accede to the Union in a manner that grants her ownership rights over the offshore oil, gas and mineral deposits within a two-hundred mile radius of Puerto Rico. It should do so despite the fact that no other state enjoys similar rights and despite over two centuries of federal practice that provide for states to enter the Union “on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever.” …</p>
<p>In short, in proposing preferential treatment for Puerto Rican statehood, Sotomayor manages to provide justifiable grounds to (1) upset environmentalists; (2) upset those sensitive to the equality of states; (3) upset those opposed to affirmative action and preferential treatment; and (4) upset those who do not take kindly to assertions that the United States is a colonial power. I would think almost every United States Senator falls into at least one of those four categories.</p> | false | 1 | series posts national review onlines bench memos blog eppc president ed whelan addressing record supreme court nominee sonia sotomayor outline various mr whelans posts followed full text posts whats stake sotomayors approach judging racial discrimination quotas abortion criminal procedure first amendment speech death penalty support puerto rican independence initial thoughts president obamas opportunity appoint successor justice souter 1 obamas record rhetoric make clear seek leftwing judicial activists indulge passions justices make rulings dispassion discussed fully essay explaining vote confirmation chief justice roberts obama opined deciding truly difficult cases requires resort ones deepest values ones core concerns ones broader perspectives world works depth breadth ones empathy short critical ingredient supplied judges heart clearer prescription lawless judicial activism possible indeed setting forth sort judges would appoint obama explicitly declared need somebody whos got heart empathy recognize like young teenage mom empathy understand like poor africanamerican gay disabled oldand thats criterion ill selecting judges much judicial virtue dispassion much craft judging distinct politics 2 souter terrible justice expect obamas nominee even worse left clamoring liberal lions redefine constitution leftwing goodies bag consider leading contenders like harold koh champion judicial transnationalism transgenderism massaschusetts governor deval patrick racialist extremist judicial supremacist cass sunstein advocate judicial invention second bill rights welfare employment nanny state mandates second circuit judge sonia sotomayor whose shenanigans trying bury firefighters claims ricci v destefano triggered extraordinary dissent fellow clinton appointee josé cabranes supreme courts pending review ruling elena kagan led law schools opposition military recruitment campuses used remarkably extreme rhetorica profound wrong moral injustice first orderto condemn federal law gays military approved 1993 democraticcontrolled congress signed law president clinton received 31 votes confirmation solicitor general seventh circuit judge diane wood fervent activist whose extreme opinions abortion case managed elicit successive 81 90 slapdowns supreme court 3 dont fooled false claims conservative supreme court court working majority five livingconstitutionalists four themstevens souter ginsburg breyerconsistently engage liberal judicial activism fifth kennedy frequently result court markedly left american public broad range issues indeed coming years souters replacement may well provide fifth vote imposition federal constitutional right samesex marriage stripping god pledge allegiance completely secularizing public square continued abolition death penalty installment plan selectively importing courts interpretation american constitution favored policies europes leftist elites judicial micromanagement governments war powers invention constitutional right human cloning american citizens various policy positions issues everyone ought agree addressed decided processes representative government judicial usurpation president obama often talks moderate game made pay high price appointing liberal judicial activist dirty work justice souter replacement busy day media interviews ive worked writing new york times symposium justice souters legacy includes contribution souter mistake excerpt justice souter remembered opinion comes mind except joint opinion justice oconnor justice kennedy coauthored 1992 planned parenthood v casey joint opinion significant coherence elegance neither quality perpetuated roe v wades removal issue abortion policy ordinary democratic processes resorted justice scalia aptly called nietzschean vision judicial role order end result souter company contended resolution bitter national controversy abortion continued poisoning american politics courts power grab issue sundays washington post also present topic feature president obama first supreme court nomination advice including alas oncedominant species liberal proponents judicial restraint relatively surviving members obama find jose cabranes excellent judge president clinton appointed 2nd circuit help revive species interviews heres transcript minor garbled passages discussion glenn beck believe couldnt bring support harold kohs candidacy court sotomayors repudiation objective judging jennifer rubins excellent cover article new issue weekly standard explores judge sotomayors wise latina woman speech fully two key excerpts sotomayors speech many ways distillation extreme views liberal civil rights establishment dispensed martin luther king jrs vision colorblind society people judged color skin content character notion shared american tradition considered dodge maintaining white male domination society instead aim secure levers power empower disadvantaged groups pursue distinct ideology culture language enough eliminate barriers entry business universities government bench numerical quotas essential securing groups fair share critically group identity goals supplant individual identity professional obligations elements core extreme variety contemporary multiculturalism prominently featured sotomayors speech law review article also denigrates notion neutral objective judiciary treats citizens alike removes personal bias judicial branch goal remove racial ethnic bias judging make sure right bias given voicesecured increased numbers minority judges qualms intellectual rigor impartiality extend virtually judges wonder whether achieving goal possible even cases legal relativism nihilism objective truth objective judging power politics sotomayors unscripted lawreview article according jen rubin sotomayor defender lanny davis contends judge sotomayor misspoke said would hope wise latina woman richness experience would often reach better conclusion white male hasnt lived life reminds excerpt washington post article today meanwhile conservatives seized upon sotomayors unscripted moments make case outside mainstream two often quoted statement made appellate judges make policy observation latina affects role judge would hope wise latina woman richness experience would often reach better conclusion white male hasnt lived life trusting reader wouldnt understand sotomayors observation latina affects role judge far unscripted prepared text speech soto mayor published lawreview article sotomayors comments speech see post sonia sotomayors selective empathy discusses links stuart taylors critique entirely fair hold sotomayor said course unscripted comments like sotomayors quip courts appeals policy made especially revealing precisely theyre unscripted sotomayors unscripted lawreview article ive already discussed silly efforts judge sotomayors defenders claim misspoke unscripted said 2001 would hope wise latina woman richness experience would often reach better conclusion white male hasnt lived life ive pointed comment prepared text speech sotomayor published lawreview article turns sotomayor made substantially similar comments 1994 speech speech part senate record second circuit confirmation 1998 somehow blogger reports news thinks significant refutes white houses defense sotomayors comment supposedly raises question republicans didnt object comment 1998 applying occams razor id speculate answer question staffer reviewed sotomayors speeches time missed comment unfortunate would hardly surprising especially light much lower level resources devoted appellate confirmation ill also note sentence issue 1994 speechi would hope wise woman richness experiences would often reach better conclusiondoesnt state better reader look four sentences earlier understand sotomayor comparing wise woman wise man someone skimming speech might easily miss event strong reaction sotomayors 2001 comment elicited renders desperate suggestion republicans somehow estopped objecting failure 1998 object similar comment made 1994 still sotomayors unscripted lawreview article cqs legal beat blog seth stern documents instances judge sotomayors sentiment wise latina womanor wise woman regardless ethnicitywith richness experience would often reach better conclusion white male hasnt lived life previous posts topic stern delicately puts sotomayors repeated use phrases wise latina woman wise woman substantially similar remarks would appear undermine obama administrations assertions statement simply poor choice words majesty sonia sotomayor vs rule law 1996 judge sonia sotomayor delivered speech law students turned lawreview article coauthored nicole gordon returning majesty law politics modern approach 30 suffolk ul rev 35 1996 article muddled mediocreits certainly something struggling portray sotomayor brilliant would want highlightbut focus less overall quality sotomayors arguments 1 sotomayor argues responsibilitythe responsibility lawyers judgesto explain public often unpredictable system justice one serves productive civilized always evolving society identifiesand treats equally legitimatefour reasons laws unpredictability laws written generally applied different factual situations b many laws written give rise one interpretation c given judge judges may develop novel approach specific set facts legal framework pushes law new direction purpose trial simply search truth way protects constitutional rights somehow sotomayor doesnt see fit even question whether circumstances proper desirable judge develop novel approach pushes law new direction instead complains recurring public criticism judicial process laments lawyers also unfortunately joined public outcry excessive verdicts seemingly ridiculous results reached cases though lawyers special responsibility indulge judicial excess fact sotomayor cites lead example unwelcome public criticism article describing senator doles criticism liberal ideology clinton judicial appointments american bar association lends credence suspicion sotomayor less interested majesty law majesty liberal activist judges 2 sotomayor discusses law without distinguishing meaningfully legislatures role making law judiciarys role applying example asserts public expects law static predictable law however uncertain responds changing circumstances public entitled expect judges apply law neutrally according established principles thats large part rule law means province legislatures change law prospectively course respond changing circumstances 3 sotomayor complains public fails appreciate importance indefiniteness law beyond pointing uncontroversial fact indefiniteness inevitable reasons b point 1 nowhere makes case indefiniteness somehow positive good relies heavily jerome franks legal realist views development law nowhere explains legislatures arent proper forum use franks phrase adapting law realities everchanging social industrial political conditions 4 sotomayors unwarranted celebration indefiniteness werent enough alarm anyone cares rule law anyone interested civiljustice reform ought take note sotomayors criticism legislators introduced bills place arbitrary limits jury verdicts personal injury cases inconsistent premise jury system oh really legislation determine juries rule plaintiffs limit amounts award judge sotomayors misreliance foreign international law ive watched 22minute video april 2009 speech judge sotomayor delivered aclu puerto rico topic american judges use foreign intern ational law terribly muddled speech sotomayor explicitly embraces justice ginsburgs misguided position asserts justice scalia justice thomas misunderstand issue even misconceives basis objections also posits unintelligible supposedly fundamental distinction using foreign international legal materials considering ideas suggested foreign international legal materials week ago senator cornyn launched impressive series daily questions judge sotomayor first question series proper role foreign international law interpreting united states constitution draws sotomayors speech havent yet located transcript speech havent transcribed relevant portions copy senator cornyns account judge sotomayor argued foreign international law important american judges source good ideas set creative juices flowing response oppose judicial consideration foreign law determine limits democratic decisionmaking stated 108 mark ask person close ears ideas boundaries ideas set creative juices flowing permit us think suggest anyone outlaw use foreign international law sentiment based fundamental misunderstanding would asking american judges close minds good ideas judge sotomayor also stated 2048 mark considering foreign international law part judges freedom ideas extent country remain committed concept freedom speech must freedom ideas extent freedom ideas international law foreign law important discussion think unsettled issues legal system hope judges everywhere continue cornyn points sotomayors confused invocation judges freedom ideas provides warrant use foreign international legal materials unconstrained judicial role sotomayors comments reflect apparent willingness make freewheeling resort foreign international legal materials define meaning provisions constitution statutes troubling judgment sotomayors views matter provide compelling basis senators vote confirmation july 2005 house representatives testimony general subject dont know liberal means according account judge sotomayor provided speech gave january 2001 sotomayor offered explanation problems getting confirmed second circuit senate republican leaders believed potential supreme court one day also believed liberal therefore want nomination go dont know liberal means hmmm evidently sotomayor knew liberal meant new york times article quoted 1983 working assistant district attorney problems first year office lowgrade crimesthe shoplifting prostitution minor assault cases sotomayor says large measure cases dealing socioeconomic crimes crimes could product environment poverty started felonies became less hard matter liberal im still outraged crimes violence regardless whether sympathize causes lead individuals crimes effects outrageous stating matter liberal sotomayor describing liberal clause semantic equivalent even though im liberal among things sotomayor understood back liberal sympathizes causes supposedly lead individuals crimes inclined explain crimes product environment poverty think offer sotomayor even help liberal means least context judging liberal judge thinks proper indulge identity deciding cases liberal judge celebrates importance indefiniteness law unpredictability results judge develops novel approach pushes law new direction liberal judge resorts shenanigans bury claims white firefighters theyve discriminated basis race liberal judge favors campaignfinance restrictions first amendment liberal judge embraces novel equalprotection theories would compromise public safety liberal judge publicly cheerleads liberal politicians liberal judge excuses acts discrimination liberal judge thinks supreme court justices entitled make policy liberal judge hides support racial quotas behind gauzy euphemisms liberal judge commends lawsuits promote abortion illegal immigration undermine welfare reform hope examples help happy flesh fully sotomayors public cheerleading obama speech delivered black latino asian pacific american law alumni assocation april 17 2009two weeks news souter vacancy brokejudge sotomayor made number references president obama seem surprisingly disturbingly partisan coming sitting federal judge power working together past november resoundingly proven p 6 wide coalition groups joined forces elect americas first afroamerican president awe inspiring passion members coalition exhibited efforts discipline showed execution goals p 7 november 4 saw past ethnic religious gender differences p 10 challenge today challenge lawyers court related professionals staff citizens world keep spirit common joy shared november 4 alive everyday existence p 11 message service president obama trying trumpet clarion call obligated heed p 13 canon 2 code conduct united states judges provides judge act times manner promotes public confidence integrity impartiality judiciary sotomayors public cheerleading obama seems clearly violate ethical obligation sotomayors public cheerleading obama couple followup commen ts post yesterday judge sotomayors disturbingly partisan proobama remarks april 17 2009 speech 1 supporters opponents president obama properly take note historic achievement election marks would see remarks along line partisan reason include among remarks found objectionable sotomayors reference grand historical event like presidential election person color p 10 one passages find objectionable includes reference election americas first afroamerican president parts passageeg wide coalition groups joined forces awe inspiringthat render partisan 2 hypothetical might enable supporters sotomayor exercise dispassionate judgment matter imagine thendc circuit judge john roberts aftermath president bushs reelection victory 2004 made public statements like power working together past november resoundingly proven wide coalition groups joined forces reelect president bush awe inspiring passion members coalition exhibited efforts discipline showed execution goals election day saw past ethnic religious gender differences challenge today challenge lawyers court related professionals staff citizens world keep spirit common joy shared election day alive everyday existence message promoting democracy worldwide prefer promoting compassionate conservatism president bush trying trumpet clarion call obligated heed would anyone imagine sitting federal judgemuch less someone since nominated supreme courtcould appropriately made comments sotomayors remarks provide evidence doesnt practice judicial obligation impartiality missing point sotomayors public cheerleading obama huffington post sam stein imagines hes rebutting criticism judge sotomayors disturbingly partisan public cheerleading president obama points chief justice roberts various republican ties 2000 earlierbefore became federal judge criticism rests entirely fact sotomayor sitting federal judge engaged public cheerleading two months ago stein quotes relevant portion postsurprisingly disturbingly partisan coming sitting federal judgebut somehow manages miss point washington monthlys steve benen also gets confused benen thinks objection akin complaining sotomayors expressing ideological predispositions public cheerleading obama equivalent taking part federalist society gathering conference hosted american constitution society also thinks meaningful note justice scalia vice president cheney hunting buddiesas though situation meaningful bearing assessing sotomayors public remarks finally benen resorts contending sotomayors remarks seemed address sense cultural civic pride obvious partisanship oh sure theres nothing obviously partisan stating cite two five examples obligated heed message service president obama trying trumpet challenge lawyers court related professionals staff citizens world keep spirit common joy shared november 4 alive everyday existence see promoting cult obama matter cultural civic pride wondering sitting judge since adoption code conduct united states judges ever engaged public cheerleading president sotomayors revealing joke supreme court justices making policy may 2006 speech judge sotomayor tells joke thinks aptly describes difference supreme court circuit court district court judging involves three judges go duck hunting duck flies overhead supreme court justice picks shotgun ponders policy implications shooting duckhow environment affected duck hunting business affected doesnt shoot duck well time finishes duck got away another duck flies overhead circuit judge goes five part test pulling trigger1 lifts shotgun shoulder 3 sic sights duck 3 measures velocity ducks flight 4 aims 5 shootsand misses finally another duck flies district judge picks shotgun shoots duck lands district judge picks swings shoulder decides let two judges explain dinner sotomayor thinks unobjectionable apt description distinctive role supreme court justices making decisions involves pondering policy implications update eugene volokh offers characteristically thoughtful critique original version post response tweaked language paragraph italicized words new excerpt prepared text pages 1012 speech emphasis added sotomayor handwrote trivial changes biden sotomayors supposed empathy police politico reports white house event yesterday support judge sotomayors nomination vice president biden assured police job know judge sotomayor back well assurance drew sound criticism example lt blockquotegti think biden said foolish said stephen gillers law professor new york university prominent legal ethicist shes back shes interpret law sees fit itll embarrassing learns gillers said biden crosses line starts representing interest groups would voting favor unfortunately president obama commits use misguided lawless empathy standard criterion picking supreme court justices natural folks want assurances beneficiaries nominees selective empathyespecially nominees actual record raises serious questions whether sound understanding law ought actually apply police others risk lives protect public generally suspect growing bipartisan agreement proposition think biden said foolish always high probability accurate david brookss wishful thinking sotomayor david brooks acknowledges someone reads judge sotomayors speeches might come away impression racial activist using judicial system vehicle social crusade although concludes whole record quite liberal sees little evidence motivated racialist thinking activist attitude labels liberal incrementalist observations 1 sotomayors speeches offer clearest window thinking role judge speeches constrained supreme court precedent circuit precedent risk overturned facts procedural posture case shes generally speaking friendly audiences would comfortable candid speeches display racial activism jennifer rubin discusses weekly standard cover article sotomayor also denigrates notion neutral objective judiciary treats citizens alike removes personal bias judicial branch goal remove racial ethnic bias judging make sure right bias given voicesecured increased numbers minority judges qualms intellectual rigor impartiality extend virtually judges wonder whether achieving goal possible even cases legal relativism nihilism objective truth objective judging power politics 2 brooks credits tom goldsteins muchcited study 96 racerelated cases come sotomayor ive noted study offers dubious insights especially since goldstein odd reason omitted en banc proceedings entirely review thus review doesnt include sotomayors dissent hayden v pataki en banc majority rejected voting rights act challenge new yorks felondisenfranchisement law include important case brown v city oneonta judge sotomayor joined opinion dissenting denial rehearing en banc set forth chief judge walker called novel equal protection theory would severely impact police protection 3 phrase liberal incrementalist invites question incrementalist towards end brooks thinks sotomayors opinions embody sort judicial minimalism obama aide cass sunstein admire address fully review sunsteins radicals robes sunsteins minimalism tactically prudent gradualist path liberal perfectionist rewriting constitution sunsteins minimalism better described boilthefrog gradualism american citizens like frog pot water stove court turns heatthat imposes lefts agendatoo suddenly well jump gradually well sit blissful ignorance late ill bet brookss wishful thinking prove naïve thinking jeffrey rosens reassessment sotomayor new republics jeffrey rosen offers clearly intends approving portrait judge sotomayors recorda portrait differs dramatically initial take well white houses efforts market sotomayor nonideological restrained judge whether americans find cause welcome rosen approves different matter rosens piece focuses heavily sotomayors dissents since often dissents appellate judges express true selvestheir passions judicial philosophies unique views law according rosen emphasis added unlike majority opinions dissents sometimes show flashes civillibertarian passion indignation even remain closely grounded facts precedents important substantively bold staking unequivocal liberal positionsfrom broad reading americans disabilities act sympathy dueprocess rights mentally ill defendant dissents different view sotomayor emerges judge crusading openminded impressive dissents reveal true civil libertarian rosen finds sotomayors dissents methodologically well ideologically eclectic samples different judicial philosophies different cases sometimes sotomayor sounds like textualist scalia style sometimes sounds enthusiastic justices ginsburg breyer devotion international law living constitution comments 1 important part job supreme court justice often difficult work objectively determining meaning civil liberties enshrined constitution embodied statutory law rosen signaled labeling sotomayor true civil libertarian would cause concern references flashes civillibertarian passion indignation crusading spirit unequivocal liberal positions staked substantively bold dissents strong warning signs liberal judicial activist redefine constitution comport policy preferences 2 rosen euphemistically labels sotomayors methodological eclecticism another strong warning sign tempting justices pick choose different methodologies different cases order reach results seem right want reach justice doesnt commit constraining interpretive methodology barrier indulging temptation 3 curiously rosen approvingly cites study concludes justice souter objectively described judicial activist b says sotomayor adopt liberal positions civil liberties business issues souter c relying entirely appellate opinions rather prediction justice opines charge judicial activist emphasis added hard sustain perhaps depends meaning concern sotomayor liberal judicial activist rosen provided ample cause concern grant certiorari ricci v destefano im delighted see supreme court granted review today second circuits panel decision ricci v destefano decision second circuit panel rejected claim new firefighters city officials violated title vii equalprotection rights throwing results two promotional exams ive previously detailed large part repeat second circuits narrow 76 denial en banc rehearing ricci accompanied remarkable dissent written clinton appointee josé cabranes joined five dissenting colleagues exposed apparent shenanigans three panel members district judge cabraness opinion begins ninth page second circuit order one panel members sonia sotomayor thought many leading contender supreme court appointment obama administration judge cabraness account indicates sotomayor colleagues engaged extraordinary effort bury firefighters claims case parties submitted briefs eightysix pages sixvolume joint appendix 1800 pages two amicus briefs filed oral argument lasted hour unusually long argument practice circuit panel affirmed district courts ruling summary order containing single substantive paragraphwhich gives reader virtually sense case four months later three days cabranes issued opinion apparent attempt preempt panel withdrew summary order published per curiam opinion contained operative text summary order addition citation district courts opinion westlaw lexisnexis databases cabranes sums per curiam opinion adopted toto reasoning district court without elaboration substantive comment thereby converted lengthy unpublished district court opinion grappling significant constitutional statutory claims first impression law circuit moreover opinion lacks clear statement either claims raised plaintiffs issues appeal indeed opinion contains reference whatsoever constitutional claims core case casual reader opinion could excused wondering whether learning disability played least much role case alleged racial discrimination killer understatement perfunctory disposition rests uneasily weighty issues presented appeal thats quite indictmentby fellow clinton appointee lessof sotomayors unwillingness give fair shake parties whose claims evidently dislikes whatever supreme courts ultimate disposition decision grant review case sotomayor treated perfunctory manner ratifies cabraness indictment hardly mark jurist worth serious consideration nations highest court white houses misleading spin new firefighters case press conference yesterday white house press secretary robert gibbs tried defend judge sonia sotomayors outrageous shenanigans new firefighters case ricci v destefano cant criticize somebody ruling based adhering strictly strongly precedent second circuit case case hayden v county nassau bushey v new york state civil service commission gibbss brazen defense im told white house lawyers providing even bolder form background quite stretch war highly respected clinton appointee josé cabranes obamas justice department dissent denial rehearing en banc ricci judge cabranes joined five judges states case raises important questions first impression circuitand indeed nationregarding application fourteenth amendments equal protection clause title viis prohibition discriminatory employment practices calls district courts opinion sotomayor panel colleagues adopted wholesale pathbreaking questions appeal indisputably complex far wellsettled declares core issue presented casethe scope municipal employers authority disregard examination results based solely race successful applicantsis addressed precedent supreme court circuit brief pending supreme court case president obamas department justice argues unsigned per curiam opinion sotomayor joinedand given aggressive lead role oral argument probably authoreddid adequately consider whether viewing evidence light favorable plaintiff firefighters genuine issue fact remained whether citys claimed purpose comply title vii pretext intentional racial discrimination violation title vii equal protection clause ground department justice argues supreme court vacate judgment remand consideration true unpublished districtcourt opinion sotomayor panel colleagues adopted relies heavily hayden bushey rejects plaintiffs various grounds distinguishing cases also true sotomayor several colleagues opinion concurring denial rehearing en banc maintain contrary judge cabranes five judges joined opinion hayden bushey controlling authority apart fact neither hayden bushey involved government entitys discarding results promotional exams position sotomayor colleagues depends assertion evidence discriminatory purpose city new havens discarding resultsthe assertion obama justice department disputes en banc opinions district courts opinion available together new firefighters case judicial activism vs judicial restraint washington post columnist eugene robinson argues judge sotomayors action ricci v destefano properly seen example judicial restraint judicial activism think mistakes whats issue comments 1 core complaint complaint judge josé cabranes clinton appointee perfunctory per curiam opinion sotomayor panel colleagues result reached necessarily wrong one believe agnostic question though point even president obamas department justice argued supreme court sotomayor adequately consider whether viewing evidence light favorable plaintiff firefighters genuine issue fact remained whether citys claimed purpose comply title vii pretext intentional racial discrimination violation title vii equal protection clause complaint instead sotomayor engaged shenanigans designed bury claims plaintiff firefighters shenanigans judge cabranes exposed blistering dissent denial rehearing en banc simply put didnt give firefighters fair shake seemed trying prevent review claims 2 whether call sotomayors malfeasance judicial activism depends define term use refer judges indulgence policy preferences might reasonably allege sotomayo r engaged judicial activism though proving subjective motivation difficult impossible event plenty categories judicial wrongdoing beyond judicial activism term judicial restraint certainly doesnt capture behavior judge cabranes complained 3 repeating white house spin robinson contends ample precedent unsigned per curiam opinion sotomayor joined suspect wrote ive explained white houses account war judge cabranes obama justice department second circuit oral argument new firefighters case weekly standard blog john mccormack interesting post oral argument ricci v destefano audio available excerpts argument counsel plaintiff firefighters think fundamental failure application concepts job men garbage collectors command position first responder agency books see piled desk fire science books men face life threatening circumstances every time go please look examinations need know aptitude test highlevel command position post911 era less tested knowledge fire behavior combustion principles building collapse truss roofs building construction confined space rescue dirty bomb response anthrax metallurgy opened district court brief plea court treat men profession unskilled labor dont lawyers doctors nurses captains even real estate brokers somehow treat firefighters doesnt require knowledge job firefighters die every week country case miles away young father firefighter eddie ramos died truss roof collapsed warehouse fire person commanded scene decided send men unoccupied house people save thanksgiving day truss roof known collapse early fire nature pins hold trusses together would collapsed 20 minutes couldnt find air suffocated death fire chief go tell 6 yearold father wasnt coming home heres commentquestion judge sotomayor judge sotomayor counsel suggesting unqualified people hired citys suggesting right difference score test many openings extent theres adverse impact one group first seven going hired vagrancies sic vacancies moment youre unqualifiedthe pass rate pass rateall right test always going put certain group bottom pass rate theyre never ever going promoted fair test could devised measures knowledge substantive way shouldnt city opportunity try look see develop mccormack writes sotomayor may wanted unqualified firefighters elevated position captain lieutenantshe simply wanted less qualified firefighters placed charge lives men interests racial diversity wonder eddie ramos would say alive today nyt background new firefighters casepart 1 2 two recent new york times articles shed interesting light judge sotomayors role ricci v destefano controversial summaryorderlaterconvertedintopercuriamopinion buried claims new firefighters19 whites one hispanicthat new discriminated basis race discarded results promotional exams didnt like racial composition well supreme courts decision case expected next two weeks ill address one article post second second post article last saturday adam liptak explores second circuit panel handled ricci offers unusual behindthescenes insights excerpts emphasis added almost everything case ricci v destefano number length briefs size appellate record exceptionally long oral argument suggested would produce important appeals court decision government may use race decisions concerning hiring promotion end decision judge sotomayor two judges unsigned summary order contained single paragraph reasoning simply affirmed lower courts decision dismissing race discrimination claim brought frank ricci 17 white firefighters one hispanic done well test evidence three judges case agreed use summary order rather full decision effort find common ground end according court personnel familiar internal discussions case three judges difficulty finding consensus judge sack reluctant join decision affirming district court judge pooler presiding judge took leading role fashioning compromise use summary order ordinarily cited precedent part compromise summary order may well expedient way judges resolve difficulty finding consensus dont see appropriate one given summary order affirmed district court see judge sack obtained supposed compromise event theres still lot could learned sotomayors role matter note liptaks account cuts speculative aside sotomayor probably authored summary order per curiam opinion nyt background new firefighters casepart 2 2 second recent new york times article provides interesting backdrop judge sotomayors role ricci v destefano explores sotomayors work member board directors puerto rican legal defense education fund 1980s including prldefs successful suit forcing new york city police department institute racial quotas hiring promotion police officers excerpts 1980s puerto rican legal defense education fund sued new york city police department claiming promotion exams discriminated latinos africanamericans efforts backed defense funds board directors active passionate group included young lawyer named sonia sotomayor board monitored litigation undertaken funds lawyers number lawyers said ms sot omayor involved ardent supporter various legal efforts time group one legal defense funds important suits charged police department promotional exam discriminated minority candidates filed behalf hispanic society new york police exams group charged really measure ability perform senior position yielding unfair results many whites well many hispanics africanamericans suit resulted settlement city produced greater numbers promotions sergeant latino africanamerican officers white officers however felt settlement unfair said many white officers outscored hispanic africanamerican counterparts yet allowed fill spots quotas sued case marino v ortiz reached supreme court failed 4to4 vote 1988 really happened new firefighters case stuart taylors close study new firefighters case ricci v destefano deepens concern judge sotomayors decisionmaking may biased grievancefocused mindset wise latina woman superiority complex displayed speeches excerpts second circuit panels decision adopt us district judge janet artertons opinion case looks much less defensible close media accounts one reason detailed factual record strongly suggests contrary sotomayors position connecticut citys decision kill promotions driven less purported legal concerns raw racial politics unmistakable logic sotomayors position would encourage employers discriminate highscoring groups based race matter valid lawful qualifying test case disproportionate numbers protected minorities low scores norm logic would convert disparateimpact law engine overt discrimination highscoring groups across country allow racial politics racial quotas masquerade voluntary compliance law richard thompson fords confused irony ricci slate stanford law professor richard thompson ford argues conservatives like second circuit judge clinton appointee josé cabranes complain judge sotomayors treatment employmentdiscrimination claims presented new firefighters ricci v destefano instead blame justice scalia conservative justices making hard plaintiffs win employmentdiscrimination claims grand irony ford posits rests distorted account supreme court precedent misunderstanding procedural posture proceedings ricci ford contends frank ricci treated like plaintiff suing employment discrimination reason people sue employment discrimination rarely win cases conservative judges spent decades making sure usually lose according ford justice scalia made clear st marys honor center v hicks employer doesnt prove good reason decision needs claim one point keep case alive plaintiff prove employers claimed reason pretext even plaintiff prove employers claimed reason pretext plaintiff still lose judge jury decides employer acted different nondiscriminatory reason one given riccis best argument might argue city acted mixed motivespartly legitimate partly discriminatorybut ricci didnt argue trial sotomayor panel colleagues therefore couldnt consider argument fords argument jumble fails distinguish summary judgment trial misstates supreme courts ruling hicks lets examine fords confusion 1 ford claims scalias majority opinion hicks establishes employer doesnt prove good reason decision needs claim one thats accurate scalia explains hicks concerns socalled shifting burdens production distinct burden proof trial employmentdiscrimination cases specifically plaintiff must first establish preponderance evidence prima facie case discrimination done defendant burden producing explanation rebut prima facie case enough defendant claim good reason decision rather defendant must clearly set forth introduction admissible evidence reasons actions believed trier fact would support finding unlawful discrimination cause employment action emphasis omitted defendant plaintiff full opportunity demonstrate proffered reason true reason unlawful discrimination cause 2 fords asserts pointie employer merely claimed good reason employment decisionto keep case alive plaintiff prove employers claimed reason pretext reader knows district court granted summary judgment favor city new would justified thinking ford referring plaintiff must keep case alive explaining plaintiff order avoid summary judgment granted course plaintiff need prove employers claimed reason pretextual order survive summary judgment defendant employer moving party would instead persuade judge reasonable jury construing facts light favorable plaintiff could determine employer discriminated words plaintiff would defeat employers motion summary judgment offering evidence construed favorably plaintiff would enable jury find employers claimed reason pretextual employer engaged discrimination ford acknowledges new firefighters offered evidencenamely evidence new refused certify exam results political pressure promote blacks 3 ford seems understand district court granted city new havens motion summary judgment else would contend ricci didnt argue mixed motives trial ricci fellow firefighters didnt argue anything trial district courts grant summary judgment prevented proceeding trial even president obamas justice department argued supreme court district court wrong grant summary judgment firefightersand judge sotomayor panel colleagues wrong affirm district court depending issues law supreme court decided certainly possible new firefighters proceed trial claims sensible framework supreme court established fail persuade jury merits claims possibility distract attention fact ample reason judge cabraness blistering dissent denial rehearing en banc illustrates blame judge sotomayor giving fair treatment firefighters claims sotomayors novel equal protection theory brown v city oneonta 235 f3d 769 2d cir 2000 judge sotomayor joined opinion dissenting denial rehearing en banc along another dissent set forth chief judge walker called novel equal protection theories would severely impact police protection lets take fuller look case panel opinion brown 221 f3d 329 put case bears question extent law enforcement officials may utilize race investigation crime case arose following facts woman attacked home told police attacker young black man course struggle cut hand knife police dogs tracked attackers scent direction nearby college police obtained college list black male students attempted locate question several days police conducted sweep oneonta stopped questioned nonwhite persons streets inspected hands cuts many individuals subjected police investigation sued police alleged violations equal protection clause fourth amendment among claims district court granted summary judgment police appeal panel affirmed district court equal protection claim reversed fourth amendment claim hold circumstances case law enforcement officials possessed description criminal suspect even though description consisted primarily suspects race gender absent evidence discriminatory racial animus could act basis description without violating equal protection clause police action still subject constraints fourth amendment however description race gender alone rarely provide reasonable suspicion justifying police search seizure case certain individual plaintiffs subjected seizures defendant law enforcement officials individuals may proceed claims fourth amendment second circuit denied rehearing en banc five judges including sotomayor dissenting dissent sotomayor joined except one part judge calabresi argued state officers like police ignore essentially everything racial part victims description acting solely racial element stop question members race get hold even grossly fail fit victims description state creating express racial classification approved survives strict scrutiny judge straub also wrote separate dissent opinion concurring denial en banc rehearing chief judge walker authored panel opinion responds length dissenting opinions judges calabresi straub excerpts walkers opinion apply fully parts calabresi opinion sotomayor embraced judges dissenting denial rehearing banc chosen occasion advance first time novel equal protection theories view would severely impact police protection dissenters propose police given description criminal perpetrator victim includes perpetrators race subsequent investigation find perpetrator may constitute suspect racial classification equal protection clause fact legal opinion concurrence dissent judicial pronouncement ever intimated much less proposed rules equal protection confirms strong intuition nonviability benefit anyone future may undeterred inability theories attract judicial recognition practical difficulties analytical defects recognized theories suggested dissenters would require police officer acting physical description contains racial element balance myriad competing considerations one would risk subject strict scrutiny equal protection lawsuit moreover officer frequently would engage balancing pressure timesensitive pursuit potentially dangerous criminal police work know would impaired safety citizens compromised vulnerable isolated would harmed police effectiveness hobbled special racial rules residents inner cities would harmed sotomayors fervent hope completely integrated society may 2006 speech judge sotomayor quacks like liberal judicial activist states brown v board education struck separate equal doctrine held hopestill realized unfortunately still fervently aspired tothat would someday completely integrated society p 7 unclear sotomayor means completely integrated society roger cleggs post earlier today discusses sotomayor thinks deeply confused americans take pride ethnic diversity simultaneously insist must function live race colorblind way insofar one vision completely integrated society would involve equal opportunity legal regime discriminate basis race sotomayor appears reject vision alternative vision completely integrated society would look equal results measure use racial quotas racial preferences achieve results sotomayor means good reason believe doesnt sotomayor good discrimination vs invidious discrimination judge sotomayors response senate questionnaire question 11a reveals belongs belizean grove private organization female professionals politico article clear belizean grove exclusive elite group provides networking opportunities many men would ea ger avail sotomayor concedes response question 11b belizean grove discriminates basis sex maintains discrimination isnt invidious perhaps sotomayor try explaining men cant take part belizean grove dont comparable opportunities would accused invidious discrimination able join allmale group provided comparable opportunities course sotomayor first ought explain new firefighters denied promotions basis race denial wasnt invidious discrimination judge sotomayor belizean grove new york times reported yesterday judge sotomayor informed senate nyts phrasing belizean grove allfemale networking club belongs discriminate inappropriate way dont settled position rules ought govern judges membership menonly womenonly club broader question public policy towards clubs ought one hand im generally inclined favor genuine diversity men women would choices among singlesex menandwomen clubs hand recognize deliberately otherwise menonly clubs may operate deprive women unique important opportunities networking advancement business world impression problem far less common 25 30 years ago largely many businessrelated clubs previously menonly chosen open forced open women whatever debate might rules ought little dispute judges ought comply rules actually effect lets consider whether judge sotomayor complied canon 2c code conduct united states judges canon 2c states judge hold membership organization practices invidious discrimination basis race sex religion national origin commentary canon 2c provides additional guidance whether organization practices invidious discrimination often complex question judges sensitive answer determined mere examination organizations current membership rolls rather depends organization selects members relevant factors organization dedicated preservation religious ethnic cultural values legitimate common interest members fact effect intimate purely private organization whose membership limitations could constitutionally prohibited see new york state club assn inc v city new york 487 us 1 108 ct 2225 101 l ed 2d 1 1988 board directors rotary international v rotary club duarte 481 us 537 107 ct 1940 95 l ed 2d 474 1987 roberts v united states jaycees 468 us 609 104 ct 3244 82 l ed 2d 462 1984 relevant factors include size nature organization diversity persons locale might reasonably considered potential members thus mere absence diverse membership demonstrate violation unless reasonable persons knowledge relevant circumstances would expect membership would diverse absence invidious discrimination absent factors organization generally said discriminate invidiously arbitrarily excludes membership basis race religion sex national origin persons would otherwise admitted membership im certainly going contend guidance crystalclear initial take none factors would tend excuse discrimination basis sex present case belizean grove judge sotomayor contends men involved belizean groves activitiesthey participate trips host events speak functionsbut best knowledge man never asked considered membership also understanding interested individuals duly considered membership committee jennifer rubin points let guys come party defense reminiscent let women social members excuses exclusive mens clubs routinely gave decadesand scorned womens groups line one ever asking join rich certainly one declares organization men white anything group going dissuaded seeking membership isnt mere statement exclusivity enough raise concerns would therefore seem default rule set forth last sentence commentary canon 2c italicized presumptively applies also worth noting judge sotomayor becoming member belizean grove could requested committee codes conduct provide confidential advisory opinion propriety membership wont claim sotomayors membership belizean grove matter concern apparent violation canon 2c readiness rationalize participation reverse discrimination tie broader concerns impartiality whats sauce goose ought sauce gander regard ill highlight jeffrey lords essay judge brooks smiths confirmation travails pat leahys fish story discusses senate democrats 2002 went conniptions smiths former membership allmale fishing club sotomayor resigns membership belizean grove judge sotomayor informed senate judiciary committee today resigned belizean grove letter states believe belizean grove practice invidious discrimination membership violate judicial code ethics want questions distract anyone qualifications record ive spelled although im disinclined think code conduct united states judges forbid sotomayors membership belizean grove believe appears also dont see supposes resignation eliminate questions previous membership reasoning issue invidious discrimination doesnt impose quotas kathryn post judge sotomayors hiring law clerks reminds tension justice ginsburgs employment practices time nominated supreme court aggressive support disparateimpact statistics evidence intentional discrimination 1993 supreme court confirmation hearing learned much ginsburgs visible embarrassment 13 years dc circuit never single black law clerk intern secretary 57 employees zero blacks sotomayors hiring practices reinforce concerns counsel plaintiff firefighters ricci v destefano sotomayor regarded highly skilled work put lives risk protect public safety equivalent garbage collection goldstein judge sotomayor race scotusblog tom goldstein early ardent supporter judge sotomayors nomination two posts undertakes review every single racerelated case sat second circuit goldsteins review gotten lot attention jonathan adler points sort statistical review goldstein provides even done accurately transparently go far providing reliable insights ill note tell goldsteins review omits important case brown v city oneonta 235 f3d 769 2d cir 2000 judge sotomayor joined opinion dissenting denial rehearing en banc set forth chief judge walker called novel equal protection theories would severely impact police protection may goldstein odd reason omitted en banc proceedings entirely review jonathan notes goldsteins review doesnt include sotomayors dissent hayden v pataki en banc majority rejected voting rights act challenge new yorks felondisenfranchisement law sotomayor abortion conservatives prolifers evidently continue harbor hope judge sotomayor hostile issue abortion washington times editorial ought force examine carefully whether plausible basis hope heres information editorial new consider 1980 october 1992 judge sotomayor served board times vice president times chairman litigation committee puerto rican legal defense education fund new york times 1992 described top policy maker board time period fund filed briefs one two least six prominent court cases strong support abortion rights cases began abortionfunding case williams v zbaraz joined board continued landmark cases rust v sullivan webster v reproductive health services planned parenthood v casey especially webster case nine justices joined least part decision saying states need provide public funds abortions fund supported positions far proabortion court also case ohio v akron center fund wrote opposes efforts overturn way restrict rights recognized roe v wade statement could categorical puerto rican legal defense education fund thus presumably would oppose restriction including lateterm abortions partialbirth abortions abortions minors like possible serve board group responsible single random legal brief however judge sotomayors group filed suits least six times new york times reported may 28 discussing different case board monitored litigation undertaken funds lawyers number lawyers said ms sotomayor involved ardent supporter various legal efforts abortionassurance mysteries judge sotomayors response senate questionnaire presents puzzles question 26b asks whether anyone involved selection process ever discussed currently pending specific case legal issue question manner could reasonably interpreted seeking express implied assurances concerning position case issue question also asks sotomayor identify communication anyone white house referring relating views case issue subject could come supreme court sotomayors answer question 26b reported president obama sought received assurances sotomayor proroe would seem answer yes white house spokesman robert gibbs says obama careful ask specifically one might rule case could come supreme court scope question 26b far broader specific inquiries perhaps obama sotomayor clever winkwink routine ill suggest consistent obamas stated commitment transparency white house ought make publicly available record including audio recording obamas interview sotomayor american people know commitments assurances extracted received question 26c asks sotomayor describe representations made white house individuals acting behalf white house individuals interest groups might rule justice sotomayors response indicates aware representations reported white house delivered strong vague assurances abortion groups sotomayor proroe sotomayor really know reports somehow regard beyond scope question sotomayor commends liberal lawsuits abortion illegal immigration welfare reform speech p 9 judge sotomayor june 2001 1996 congress prohibited lawyers receiving federal legalservices monies taking classaction lawsuits lawsuits involving abortion illegal immigration welfare reform commendably know brooklyn law schools clinical programs redoubled efforts help address need created legislation efforts volunteer efforts law schools bar groups lawyers private law firms enough need great sotomayor trailblazer goodfaith exception exclusionary rule misleading white house spin backgrounder white house circulating judge sotomayor hypes sensible practicality evaluating actions law enforcement officers united states v santa judge sotomayor ruled police search suspect based mistaken belief valid arrest warrant evidence found search suppressed ten years later herring v united states supreme court reached conclusion thats wild misreading relationship two cases united states v santa 180 f3d 20 1999 judge sotomayor merely applied alreadyexisting supreme court precedentnamely united states v leon 1984 recognized goodfaith exception exclusionary rule arizona v evans 1995 extended goodfaith exception situations police rely police records contain erroneous information resulting clerical errors court employees specific question santa whether evans exception applied facts case judge sotomayor panel colleagues ruled arresting officers reliance erroneous record objectively reasonable court employees responsible error supreme courts ruling january 2009 herring v united states concerned court stated issue evans left unresolved santa involve whether evidence suppressed police personnel rather court employees responsible error records police relied court divided 54 question president obamas favorite justices dissent nothing santa provides reason believe justice sotomayor wouldnt dissenters hook line sinker see jonathan adlers post volokh conspiracy wall street journal reporters jess bravin nathan koppel article yesterday titled nomineess criminal rulings tilt right souter fell white houses wild misrepresentation judge sotomayors 1999 ruling united states v santa merely applied existing supreme court precedent goodfaith exception exclusionary rule misrepresentation santa relationship supreme courts january 2009 ruling herring v united states lead example sotomayor might justice souters right issues criminal law jonathan points souter fact joined 1995 precedent sotomayor applied santa memo reporters trust white house peril sotomayor campaign finance reform first amendment heres interesting politico article kenneth p vogel judge sotomayors support limits fundraising political campaigns sotomayor questionnaire omits death penaltyracism memo wendy great letter republican judicial nominee failed provide something nature democrats would screaming coverup calling nominee withdraw else one must wonder hasnt provided noted yesterday abortionassurance mysteries apparent deficiencies sotomayors response former puerto rican nationalist nominated north american supreme court national journals new ninth justice blog stuart taylor passes along history professor kc johnsons favorable assessment sonia sotomayors senior thesis princeton well jarring elements johnson finds including first im curious sotomayor ceased puerto rican nationalist favors independence says preface position points thesis received 06 percent 1967 referendum recent vote wrote thesis dont know ive seen reported anywhere favored puerto rican independence always much fringe position second unwillingness call congress us congress bizarre thesis always referred either north american congress mainland congress guess language thesis said shes seeking appointment north american supreme court subject advice consent north american senate kind rhetoric trendy uncommon among latin americanist fringe academy sotomayors affirmative action plan puerto rico apparent answer history professor kc johnsons question see former puerto rican nationalist nominated north american supreme court sotomayor ceased puerto rican nationalist favors independence time law school instead advocating law professor roger alford opinio juris blog calls affirmative action plan puerto rico statehood excerpts alfords post sotomayors lawreview piece judge sonia sotomayors student note 1979 yale law journal piece work makes extravagant case puerto rican statehood based terms accession favorable puerto rico state union proposal sort affirmative action plan describes small economically poor dependency acquired result american experience colonialism legal arguments complex economic political conclusions simple puerto rico become state accede union manner grants ownership rights offshore oil gas mineral deposits within twohundred mile radius puerto rico despite fact state enjoys similar rights despite two centuries federal practice provide states enter union equal footing original states respects whatever short proposing preferential treatment puerto rican statehood sotomayor manages provide justifiable grounds 1 upset environmentalists 2 upset sensitive equality states 3 upset opposed affirmative action preferential treatment 4 upset take kindly assertions united states colonial power would think almost every united states senator falls least one four categories | 7,923 |
<p>By Francesco Canepa</p>
<p>FRANKFURT (Reuters) – Central bankers say the success of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is just a bubble.</p>
<p>But it keeps them awake at night because these private currencies threaten their control of the banking system and money supply, which could undermine the monetary policies they use to manage inflation.</p>
<p>With bitcoin smashing through the $8,000 level for the first time this week after a 50 percent climb in eight days, they are also worried they will be blamed if the market crashes.</p>
<p>This is why several central banks are advocating regulations to impose control. Others are even looking at whether to introduce their own digital currency and are testing payment platforms.</p>
<p>“The problem with bitcoin is that it could easily blow up and central banks could then be accused of not doing anything,” European Central Bank policymaker Ewald Nowotny told Reuters.</p>
<p>“So we’re trying to understand whether bank activity in relation to cryptocurrency trading needs to be better regulated.”</p>
<p>The global cryptocurrency market is worth $245 billion which is tiny compared to the trillion dollar plus balance sheets of the Bank of Japan, the U.S. Federal Reserve or the ECB.</p>
<p>These institutions issue yen, U.S. dollars and euros, both by creating physical cash or by crediting banks’ accounts, as is the case with their bond-buying programs.</p>
<p>Cryptocurrencies, however, are not centralized. They do not pass through regulated banks and traditional payment systems. Instead, they often use blockchain, an online ledger of transactions that is maintained by a network of anonymous computers on the internet.</p>
<p>This has raised concerns about their vulnerability to hackers, as underlined by a score of incidents in recent months, and their use to finance crime.</p>
<p>Cryptocurrencies holders also have a claim on a private, rather than a public entity, which could go bust or stop functioning.</p>
<p>For these reasons, and given their low adoption by retailers, central banks have dismissed cryptocurrencies as risky commodities with no bearing on the real economy.</p>
<p>“Bitcoin is a sort of tulip,” ECB Vice President Vitor Constancio said in September, comparing it to the Dutch 17th century trading bubble. “It’s an instrument of speculation.”</p>
<p>LEGAL TENDER</p>
<p>China and South Korea, where cryptocurrency speculation is popular, banned fundraising through token launches, whereby a newly cryptocurrency is sold to finance a product development.</p>
<p>Russia’s central bank said it would block websites selling bitcoin and its rivals while the ECB told European Union lawmakers last year “they should not seek… to promote the use of virtual currencies” because these could “in principle affect the central banks’ control over the supply of money” and inflation.</p>
<p>Yet Japan in April recognized bitcoin as legal tender and approved several companies as operators of cryptocurrency exchanges but required them register with the government.</p>
<p>The ECB, the Bank of Japan and Germany’s Bundesbank are already testing blockchain, admitting it may have a future use for the settling of payments.</p>
<p>The BOJ last year set up a section in charge of fintech to offer guidance to banks seeking new business opportunities, and</p>
<p>joined up with the ECB to study distributed ledger technology(DLT) like blockchain. They concluded that blockchain was not mature enough to power the world’s biggest payment systems.</p>
<p>LUKEWARM</p>
<p>Commercial banks have so far been lukewarm to existing digital currencies.</p>
<p>But with electronic payments already supplanting cash, they’re alert to the danger that they would lose business if their clients decided to switch to them.</p>
<p>For this reason, Swiss banking giant UBS is leading a consortium of six banks trying to create its own digital cash equivalent of each of the major currencies backed by central banks.</p>
<p>This would allow financial markets to make payments and settle transactions more quickly.</p>
<p>This poses risks for central bankers, as the guardian of the banking and payment system.</p>
<p>“(We could) wake up one day and most of the big banks have been eviscerated and most of that activity has moved elsewhere,” St. Louis Fed President James Bullard told Reuters in a recent interview.</p>
<p>This could lead to a financial crisis if regulators lost sight of the activity, he said.</p>
<p>Some central banks such as Sweden’s Riksbank and the Bank of England are also looking at the merits of introducing their own digital currency.</p>
<p>Holders would have a direct claim on the central bank – just like with banknotes but without the inconvenience of storing large amounts of cash.</p>
<p>In Sweden, where most retail payments are electronic, the Riksbank said it was looking into an e-krona for small payments between consumers, companies and authorities.</p>
<p>“An e-krona would give the general public access to digital complement to cash guaranteed by the state and several payment services suppliers could connect to the e-krona system,” the Riksbank said.</p>
<p>A central bank digital currency (CBDC) could also change the way monetary policy is carried out by allowing central banks to inject liquidity directly into the real economy, bypassing the financial sector, if they want to boost inflation.</p>
<p>This could help make monetary policy more effective, according to a study by economists at the Bank of England.</p>
<p>But it could also be risky if depositors were tempted to convert their bank deposits into central bank money during a banking crisis, accelerating any run on commercial banks.</p>
<p>A senior Bank of Japan (BOJ) official said on Wednesday that although technology is revolutionizing banking, digital currencies will not replace physical money any time soon.</p>
<p>“It’s too far off,” Hiromi Yamaoka, head of the BOJ’s payment and settlement systems department, said on the sidelines of a forum on financial innovation hosted by Thomson Reuters.</p>
<p>“It would change the banking system too drastically.”&#160; &#160;</p> | false | 1 | francesco canepa frankfurt reuters central bankers say success bitcoin cryptocurrencies bubble keeps awake night private currencies threaten control banking system money supply could undermine monetary policies use manage inflation bitcoin smashing 8000 level first time week 50 percent climb eight days also worried blamed market crashes several central banks advocating regulations impose control others even looking whether introduce digital currency testing payment platforms problem bitcoin could easily blow central banks could accused anything european central bank policymaker ewald nowotny told reuters trying understand whether bank activity relation cryptocurrency trading needs better regulated global cryptocurrency market worth 245 billion tiny compared trillion dollar plus balance sheets bank japan us federal reserve ecb institutions issue yen us dollars euros creating physical cash crediting banks accounts case bondbuying programs cryptocurrencies however centralized pass regulated banks traditional payment systems instead often use blockchain online ledger transactions maintained network anonymous computers internet raised concerns vulnerability hackers underlined score incidents recent months use finance crime cryptocurrencies holders also claim private rather public entity could go bust stop functioning reasons given low adoption retailers central banks dismissed cryptocurrencies risky commodities bearing real economy bitcoin sort tulip ecb vice president vitor constancio said september comparing dutch 17th century trading bubble instrument speculation legal tender china south korea cryptocurrency speculation popular banned fundraising token launches whereby newly cryptocurrency sold finance product development russias central bank said would block websites selling bitcoin rivals ecb told european union lawmakers last year seek promote use virtual currencies could principle affect central banks control supply money inflation yet japan april recognized bitcoin legal tender approved several companies operators cryptocurrency exchanges required register government ecb bank japan germanys bundesbank already testing blockchain admitting may future use settling payments boj last year set section charge fintech offer guidance banks seeking new business opportunities joined ecb study distributed ledger technologydlt like blockchain concluded blockchain mature enough power worlds biggest payment systems lukewarm commercial banks far lukewarm existing digital currencies electronic payments already supplanting cash theyre alert danger would lose business clients decided switch reason swiss banking giant ubs leading consortium six banks trying create digital cash equivalent major currencies backed central banks would allow financial markets make payments settle transactions quickly poses risks central bankers guardian banking payment system could wake one day big banks eviscerated activity moved elsewhere st louis fed president james bullard told reuters recent interview could lead financial crisis regulators lost sight activity said central banks swedens riksbank bank england also looking merits introducing digital currency holders would direct claim central bank like banknotes without inconvenience storing large amounts cash sweden retail payments electronic riksbank said looking ekrona small payments consumers companies authorities ekrona would give general public access digital complement cash guaranteed state several payment services suppliers could connect ekrona system riksbank said central bank digital currency cbdc could also change way monetary policy carried allowing central banks inject liquidity directly real economy bypassing financial sector want boost inflation could help make monetary policy effective according study economists bank england could also risky depositors tempted convert bank deposits central bank money banking crisis accelerating run commercial banks senior bank japan boj official said wednesday although technology revolutionizing banking digital currencies replace physical money time soon far hiromi yamaoka head bojs payment settlement systems department said sidelines forum financial innovation hosted thomson reuters would change banking system drastically160 160 | 557 |
<p>On the evening of October 12, at a gala held in the Mieczysław Karłowicz Philharmonic Hall in the Baltic port city of Szczecin, NRO contributor George Weigel was awarded the 2016 Peace Prize of the Universal Peace Project, a foundation established by the sculptor Wojciech Siudmak to strengthen Polish-German reconciliation, international cooperation, and interreligious dialogue.</p>
<p>Mr. Weigel’s remarks follow.&#160;&#160;</p>
<p>Thank you for honoring my work with the 2016 Peace Prize.</p>
<p>The name of the prize and the noble intentions that gave birth to the Universal Peace Project invite us to spend a few moments reflecting on the meaning of “peace.” There is no better guide to that reflection than the great Augustine of Hippo.</p>
<p>In The City of God, one of the seminal works of Western political philosophy, St. Augustine defined “peace” as tranquillitas ordinis — “the tranquility of order.” This was not any “order,” of course. Rather, what Augustine sought was an “order” rooted in justice: an “order” in which men and women could live out their responsibility to promote the common good; an “order” that made possible virtue in public life. Today, we might translate Augustine’s definition of peace by thinking of tranquillitas ordinis as dynamic, rightly ordered political community, within and among states.</p>
<p>The “tranquility of order” has taken different forms in the 1,600 years since Augustine wrote De Civitate Dei. In this 21st century, “dynamic, rightly ordered political community” means an “order” in which human rights are respected and individuals have the opportunity to participate in public life — an “order” in which consent, not coercion, is the basis of governance. Such an “order” — such a “peace” — does not just happen. It is an ongoing work of moral responsibility. It is a journey. And the journey toward the peace of a just public order requires a proper orientation, a sense of direction, if we are not to go round in circles or get lost along the way. Thus the task of building such an “order” can be sustained over time only if the work of peace-making — the work of “order-building” — is conducted against a horizon of moral truths that provides orientation for the journey, truths that shape civic culture and guide the judgments of men and women as they wrestle with the question, “How ought we live together?”</p>
<p>As a theoretical or abstract matter, one might imagine any number of systems capable of building the peace of rightly ordered political community. In practical terms, however, Augustine’s tranquillitas ordinis is found today in democracies. And that leads us to the question of the relationship between moral truth and the democratic project.</p>
<p>Despite the claims of some, democracy is not a machine that can run by itself. It takes a certain kind of people, living certain habits of the heart and mind, to sustain the machinery of democratic self-governance so that there is genuine human flourishing in public life. Absent those habits of heart and mind — those virtues — democracy can decay into anarchy or authoritarianism. And neither anarchy nor authoritarianism satisfy Augustine’s definition of peace as the tranquility of order. Democracy, in other words, is never something “given.” Democracy — the “peace” of rightly ordered political community — must constantly be achieved.</p>
<p>The work of peace-building in this sense of democracy-building requires clarity on two key words: “pluralism” and “tolerance.” Pluralism is not mere difference — the fact that men and women have different opinions. Genuine pluralism means an orderly public conversation about those differences, conducted against that horizon of moral truths I mentioned a moment ago. Such a conversation, in turn, requires tolerance. And tolerance does not mean avoiding differences or denying differences, but engaging and exploring differences within a bond of civility and respect. That bond can only be built on the foundation of convictions about the dignity of every human being, convictions so strong that they can withstand the ever-present temptation to substitute coercion for persuasion in public life.</p>
<p>Where do we learn the truths that make tolerance, pluralism, civility, and the peace of democratic political community possible? Some of us learn those truths from revelation; others learn those truths from reason; still others learn those truths from both revelation and reason. In parts of the democratic world, fears about the relationship between religious conviction and democracy are a prominent feature of public life. Yet surely the lesson of the Revolution of 1989, here in Poland and elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe, is that Biblical religion can be a liberating force, inspiring men and women to take the risk of freedom and to live freedom nobly. “1989” — the self-liberation of Central and Eastern Europe — was the work of a coalition of conscience that included believers and nonbelievers, men and women whose bond was living in the truth. That fact, sadly forgotten by some today, bears considerable reflection.</p>
<p>Poland is in a unique position to show the world how vibrant religious faith — in this case, Catholic faith — can shape the peace of rightly ordered political community. Poland will do that if it drinks deeply from the wisdom and teaching of its eminent son, Pope Saint John Paul II, on the relationship of the Church to public life: not looking back with nostalgic affection at John Paul the Great, but learning to look clearly into the present and forward into the future through his eyes.</p>
<p>John Paul II proclaimed a public Church that is not a partisan Church. John Paul II’s Church of the 21st century is a Church that teaches the truths that make democracy possible in a language that can be understood by those who have not been given the gift of faith. John Paul II’s Church is allied to civil society, rather than to any political party, because it is by forming citizens of character and conviction, and thereby sustaining a virtuous civil society, that religious communities have their deepest impact on public life. John Paul II’s Church is a Church that helps purify national pride into a mature patriotism that avoids the harshness of many modern forms of nationalism. John Paul II’s Church is a Church that empowers its members to be the kind of citizens who make genuine pluralism possible by living true tolerance.</p>
<p>Augustine wrote about tranquillitas ordinis — peace as the tranquility of order — at a moment when the civilization he knew and cherished was crumbling around him. We face similar challenges today. Various barbarisms now threaten the peace of democratic public life: the siren song of freedom misunderstood as radical individual autonomy; the false promise of new authoritarianisms appealing to the kinds of national hubris and xenophobia that almost destroyed Europe between 1914 and 1945; the grave threat of a distorted monotheism that claims a divine warrant for murder. These challenges cannot be avoided. But neither can these challenges be met by a West that has lost touch with the truths of its cultural heritage: the convictions that first made the “peace” of democratic order possible.</p>
<p>So, as I thank you again for this award, permit me to suggest that the challenge of peace-making in these middle years of the 21st century, both within and among the democracies, will be to reclaim, and then live out, the truths that were at the root of freedom’s victory over totalitarianism at the end of the 20th century: the truth of the inalienable dignity and value of every human person, at all stages of life and in all conditions of life; the truth that our public life, like our individual lives, is judged by moral norms we can know by both revelation and reason; the truth that the state exists to serve society; the truth that only a virtuous people can be free.</p>
<p>In 1920, the heroic Nuncio to Poland, Archbishop Achille Ratti, was the only ambassador who did not flee Warsaw in the days before the “Miracle on the Vistula,” the decisive battle that secured Poland’s freedom and prevented the Red Army from slaughtering its way across Europe to the English Channel. A decade later, Achille Ratti, now Pope Pius XI, faced a darkening world scene similar to our own. And yet he could say, in those challenging days, “Let us thank God that He makes us live among the present problems. It is no longer permitted to anyone to be mediocre.” As we remember all those who have sacrificed so much for liberty and justice in our time, let us recommit ourselves to the great adventure of peace-making through democracy-building, living out the truths that make us free in the deepest meaning of freedom. Let us not feel the pressures of our historical moment as a burden, but as a summons to responsibility. For in the exercise of that responsibility, we may come to feel a different weight, the “weight of glory” (2 Cor. 4.17) promised to those who are true peacemakers.</p>
<p>— George Weigel is the Distinguished Senior Fellow of Washington’s Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | evening october 12 gala held mieczysław karłowicz philharmonic hall baltic port city szczecin nro contributor george weigel awarded 2016 peace prize universal peace project foundation established sculptor wojciech siudmak strengthen polishgerman reconciliation international cooperation interreligious dialogue mr weigels remarks follow160160 thank honoring work 2016 peace prize name prize noble intentions gave birth universal peace project invite us spend moments reflecting meaning peace better guide reflection great augustine hippo city god one seminal works western political philosophy st augustine defined peace tranquillitas ordinis tranquility order order course rather augustine sought order rooted justice order men women could live responsibility promote common good order made possible virtue public life today might translate augustines definition peace thinking tranquillitas ordinis dynamic rightly ordered political community within among states tranquility order taken different forms 1600 years since augustine wrote de civitate dei 21st century dynamic rightly ordered political community means order human rights respected individuals opportunity participate public life order consent coercion basis governance order peace happen ongoing work moral responsibility journey journey toward peace public order requires proper orientation sense direction go round circles get lost along way thus task building order sustained time work peacemaking work orderbuilding conducted horizon moral truths provides orientation journey truths shape civic culture guide judgments men women wrestle question ought live together theoretical abstract matter one might imagine number systems capable building peace rightly ordered political community practical terms however augustines tranquillitas ordinis found today democracies leads us question relationship moral truth democratic project despite claims democracy machine run takes certain kind people living certain habits heart mind sustain machinery democratic selfgovernance genuine human flourishing public life absent habits heart mind virtues democracy decay anarchy authoritarianism neither anarchy authoritarianism satisfy augustines definition peace tranquility order democracy words never something given democracy peace rightly ordered political community must constantly achieved work peacebuilding sense democracybuilding requires clarity two key words pluralism tolerance pluralism mere difference fact men women different opinions genuine pluralism means orderly public conversation differences conducted horizon moral truths mentioned moment ago conversation turn requires tolerance tolerance mean avoiding differences denying differences engaging exploring differences within bond civility respect bond built foundation convictions dignity every human convictions strong withstand everpresent temptation substitute coercion persuasion public life learn truths make tolerance pluralism civility peace democratic political community possible us learn truths revelation others learn truths reason still others learn truths revelation reason parts democratic world fears relationship religious conviction democracy prominent feature public life yet surely lesson revolution 1989 poland elsewhere central eastern europe biblical religion liberating force inspiring men women take risk freedom live freedom nobly 1989 selfliberation central eastern europe work coalition conscience included believers nonbelievers men women whose bond living truth fact sadly forgotten today bears considerable reflection poland unique position show world vibrant religious faith case catholic faith shape peace rightly ordered political community poland drinks deeply wisdom teaching eminent son pope saint john paul ii relationship church public life looking back nostalgic affection john paul great learning look clearly present forward future eyes john paul ii proclaimed public church partisan church john paul iis church 21st century church teaches truths make democracy possible language understood given gift faith john paul iis church allied civil society rather political party forming citizens character conviction thereby sustaining virtuous civil society religious communities deepest impact public life john paul iis church church helps purify national pride mature patriotism avoids harshness many modern forms nationalism john paul iis church church empowers members kind citizens make genuine pluralism possible living true tolerance augustine wrote tranquillitas ordinis peace tranquility order moment civilization knew cherished crumbling around face similar challenges today various barbarisms threaten peace democratic public life siren song freedom misunderstood radical individual autonomy false promise new authoritarianisms appealing kinds national hubris xenophobia almost destroyed europe 1914 1945 grave threat distorted monotheism claims divine warrant murder challenges avoided neither challenges met west lost touch truths cultural heritage convictions first made peace democratic order possible thank award permit suggest challenge peacemaking middle years 21st century within among democracies reclaim live truths root freedoms victory totalitarianism end 20th century truth inalienable dignity value every human person stages life conditions life truth public life like individual lives judged moral norms know revelation reason truth state exists serve society truth virtuous people free 1920 heroic nuncio poland archbishop achille ratti ambassador flee warsaw days miracle vistula decisive battle secured polands freedom prevented red army slaughtering way across europe english channel decade later achille ratti pope pius xi faced darkening world scene similar yet could say challenging days let us thank god makes us live among present problems longer permitted anyone mediocre remember sacrificed much liberty justice time let us recommit great adventure peacemaking democracybuilding living truths make us free deepest meaning freedom let us feel pressures historical moment burden summons responsibility exercise responsibility may come feel different weight weight glory 2 cor 417 promised true peacemakers george weigel distinguished senior fellow washingtons ethics public policy center holds william e simon chair catholic studies | 828 |
<p>By Drazen Jorgic</p>
<p>ISLAMABAD (Reuters) – Neighbors say when three men kicked down the doors and burgled the home of a North Korean diplomat in Islamabad last month, it took them more than three hours to lug out their booty: thousands of bottles of Scotch whisky, beer and French wine.</p>
<p>The robbers came prepared. Police and witnesses said they brought three cars and a small truck to plunder Hyon Ki Yong’s trove of alcoholic drinks, which is worth more than $150,000 on the black market in a country where it is illegal for Muslims to consume alcohol.</p>
<p>The police, who recovered much of the stash soon after the Oct. 3 burglary, say that the three robbers were police officers and have issued arrest warrants for them and for a member of a well-known bootlegging family. They have also arrested Hyon’s housekeeper.</p>
<p>Senior police and customs officials say the discovery of such a large amount of liquor has led them to conclude that some North Korean diplomats are involved in selling alcohol either to make money for themselves or to provide funds for the cash-starved regime in Pyongyang.</p>
<p>The North Korean government is facing increasingly tough United Nations-backed economic sanctions because of its nuclear weapons and missile development programs.</p>
<p>“This North Korean was involved in liquor selling,” said a senior police official in Islamabad who is familiar with the investigation, in reference to Hyon.</p>
<p>The officer said North Korean diplomats in Pakistan had been doing this for years, though he didn’t provide direct evidence of such sales.</p>
<p>Reuters could not independently verify that Hyon had been selling alcohol.</p>
<p>A diplomat from the North Korean embassy declined to comment on Hyon’s case, or the wider allegations about alcohol sales.</p>
<p>“It has been discussed between the embassy and MOFA (Pakistan’s ministry of foreign affairs),” said the diplomat, who put the phone down before identifying himself. He did not respond to subsequent calls.</p>
<p>Reuters was unable to reach Hyon for comment.</p>
<p>The investigating police officer, Ishtiaq Hussain, said that the housekeeper, Boota Masih, had “confessed” to his role in the crime and had provided all the details.</p>
<p>Masih is in custody and he could not be reached for comment. Reuters couldn’t determine if he has a lawyer.</p>
<p>One of the officers being sought by police, Malik Asif, told Reuters when contacted by phone that he denies being involved in the burglary. He said he is currently in hiding. &#160;</p>
<p>He said he had no doubt that North Koreans were involved in the alcohol smuggling business.</p>
<p>“They have been doing this business for a long time,” he added.</p>
<p>PRESSURE FROM EMBASSIES</p>
<p>Some foreign diplomats in Islamabad have long-held suspicions that North Korean diplomats in Pakistan are involved in bootlegging.</p>
<p>They say they believe Pakistan has turned a blind eye to bootlegging by North Koreans, perhaps out of courtesy to the historic ties between the two countries. Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani scientist lionized as the father of Pakistan’s atomic bomb, in 2004 said he had sold nuclear secrets to North Korea.</p>
<p>Pakistan denies being lax in policing such behavior by North Korean diplomats. “No such activity has ever been, or shall ever be tolerated,” foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Faisal told Reuters.</p>
<p>When asked about this particular case, Faisal said: “Pakistan is actively investigating the case and any indiscretion, if proven, will be punished as per national and international laws.”</p>
<p>Pakistan has also always denied helping North Korea with its nuclear program.</p>
<p>This summer, the U.S. embassy in Islamabad along with South Korean and Japanese counterparts lodged a complaint with Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs about the size of the North Korean mission in Pakistan, because they wanted to reduce its ability to raise funds for Pyongyang by reselling imported alcohol, according to diplomatic sources in Islamabad and Seoul.</p>
<p>The Japanese and South Koreans had been making such requests for more than a year, according to a source in Seoul. A Japanese foreign ministry source has denied knowledge of the demarche.</p>
<p>The source in Seoul estimates North Korea has 12-14 diplomats in Pakistan, split between Islamabad and Karachi, prompting some diplomats to wonder why Pyongyang needs so many representatives when – according to Pakistan central bank data – its official trade with Pakistan has ceased since August 2016.</p>
<p>Washington has been tightening the diplomatic and economic noose around North Korea, seeking to cut its foreign sources of funding amid fears the world’s most isolated regime is on the cusp of developing intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads to American shores.</p>
<p>The U.S. Embassy in Pakistan declined to comment.</p>
<p>Japan’s foreign ministry declined to comment.</p>
<p>The South Korean foreign ministry said: “Our government is closely monitoring any movement concerning illegal activities of North Korea but we cannot officially confirm this case.”</p>
<p>Pakistan’s foreign ministry didn’t respond to questions about the pressure it faced from other nations over the size of North Korea’s mission.</p>
<p>“ANGRY AND UPSET”</p>
<p>When Hyon discovered the robbery on Oct. 4 after returning to Islamabad from a trip to China,&#160; the diplomat rushed to the nearby police station to report the crime.</p>
<p>“He was angry and upset,” said Hussain, the police officer who interviewed Hyon in Islamabad’s Kohsar police station. “And very worried.”</p>
<p>Hyon told the police the robbers had fled with 1,200 bottles of Johnnie Walker Black Label whisky, 200 cases of wine, 60 cartons of beer, dozens of bottles of tequila, two diamonds and $3,000 in cash, according to a police document reviewed by Reuters. On the black market, the whisky alone is worth $80 per bottle, or a total $96,000.</p>
<p>Hyon and the North Korean embassy told police the alcohol was imported legally and presented documents to back up its case. Police declined to make the documents available.</p>
<p>A week after the robbery, North Korea’s ambassador to Pakistan met the foreign ministry’s chief of protocol and requested Hyon’s missing items be returned, according to a Pakistani foreign ministry document seen by Reuters.</p>
<p>It is unclear whether Hyon, who would have diplomatic immunity, is himself under investigation.</p>
<p>Documents reviewed by Reuters showing four separate alcohol import orders by North Korea’s embassy between March-December 2016 paint a picture of a mission importing alcoholic drinks that would be far above any reasonable personal needs of its diplomats.</p>
<p>During the nine-month period, the embassy imported 10,542 bottles of French Bordeaux wine through Truebell, a United Arab Emirates-based company. The four orders, billed by Truebell at $72,867, also included a total of 17,322 cans of Heineken and Carlsberg (CO:) beer, as well as 646 bottles of champagne.</p>
<p>A person who answered the phone on Truebell’s Sharjah, UAE number told Reuters that the company no longer has any dealing with North Korea, but did not elaborate, and would not answer any more questions.</p>
<p>ALCOHOL QUOTAS</p>
<p>Alcohol is a sensitive issue in Pakistan.</p>
<p>Muslims, by law, are not allowed to consume alcohol but many among the Westernized elite drink.</p>
<p>Non-Muslims such as Christians, Hindus and Sikhs, accounting for about 3 percent of the population between them, are allowed to drink alcohol but obtaining high-quality imported liquor and wine is almost impossible through legal means.</p>
<p>This has spawned a lucrative black market. Alcohol is smuggled across borders and through sea ports, while several diplomats from poorer countries told Reuters they had been offered thousands of dollars by bootleggers to buy their quarterly “alcohol quotas.”</p>
<p>“I’ve been approached five times, usually at diplomatic receptions,” said one non-Western diplomat.</p>
<p>Under Pakistan’s rules, Hyon, who has the first secretary rank at the North Korean embassy, would every three months be allowed to import a consignment of alcohol. Under one of the allowed formulas that would mean 120 liters of various spirits, 18 liters of wine and 240 liters of beer – only a fraction of the amount he reported missing.</p> | false | 1 | drazen jorgic islamabad reuters neighbors say three men kicked doors burgled home north korean diplomat islamabad last month took three hours lug booty thousands bottles scotch whisky beer french wine robbers came prepared police witnesses said brought three cars small truck plunder hyon ki yongs trove alcoholic drinks worth 150000 black market country illegal muslims consume alcohol police recovered much stash soon oct 3 burglary say three robbers police officers issued arrest warrants member wellknown bootlegging family also arrested hyons housekeeper senior police customs officials say discovery large amount liquor led conclude north korean diplomats involved selling alcohol either make money provide funds cashstarved regime pyongyang north korean government facing increasingly tough united nationsbacked economic sanctions nuclear weapons missile development programs north korean involved liquor selling said senior police official islamabad familiar investigation reference hyon officer said north korean diplomats pakistan years though didnt provide direct evidence sales reuters could independently verify hyon selling alcohol diplomat north korean embassy declined comment hyons case wider allegations alcohol sales discussed embassy mofa pakistans ministry foreign affairs said diplomat put phone identifying respond subsequent calls reuters unable reach hyon comment investigating police officer ishtiaq hussain said housekeeper boota masih confessed role crime provided details masih custody could reached comment reuters couldnt determine lawyer one officers sought police malik asif told reuters contacted phone denies involved burglary said currently hiding 160 said doubt north koreans involved alcohol smuggling business business long time added pressure embassies foreign diplomats islamabad longheld suspicions north korean diplomats pakistan involved bootlegging say believe pakistan turned blind eye bootlegging north koreans perhaps courtesy historic ties two countries abdul qadeer khan pakistani scientist lionized father pakistans atomic bomb 2004 said sold nuclear secrets north korea pakistan denies lax policing behavior north korean diplomats activity ever shall ever tolerated foreign ministry spokesman mohammad faisal told reuters asked particular case faisal said pakistan actively investigating case indiscretion proven punished per national international laws pakistan also always denied helping north korea nuclear program summer us embassy islamabad along south korean japanese counterparts lodged complaint pakistans ministry foreign affairs size north korean mission pakistan wanted reduce ability raise funds pyongyang reselling imported alcohol according diplomatic sources islamabad seoul japanese south koreans making requests year according source seoul japanese foreign ministry source denied knowledge demarche source seoul estimates north korea 1214 diplomats pakistan split islamabad karachi prompting diplomats wonder pyongyang needs many representatives according pakistan central bank data official trade pakistan ceased since august 2016 washington tightening diplomatic economic noose around north korea seeking cut foreign sources funding amid fears worlds isolated regime cusp developing intercontinental ballistic missiles capable carrying nuclear warheads american shores us embassy pakistan declined comment japans foreign ministry declined comment south korean foreign ministry said government closely monitoring movement concerning illegal activities north korea officially confirm case pakistans foreign ministry didnt respond questions pressure faced nations size north koreas mission angry upset hyon discovered robbery oct 4 returning islamabad trip china160 diplomat rushed nearby police station report crime angry upset said hussain police officer interviewed hyon islamabads kohsar police station worried hyon told police robbers fled 1200 bottles johnnie walker black label whisky 200 cases wine 60 cartons beer dozens bottles tequila two diamonds 3000 cash according police document reviewed reuters black market whisky alone worth 80 per bottle total 96000 hyon north korean embassy told police alcohol imported legally presented documents back case police declined make documents available week robbery north koreas ambassador pakistan met foreign ministrys chief protocol requested hyons missing items returned according pakistani foreign ministry document seen reuters unclear whether hyon would diplomatic immunity investigation documents reviewed reuters showing four separate alcohol import orders north koreas embassy marchdecember 2016 paint picture mission importing alcoholic drinks would far reasonable personal needs diplomats ninemonth period embassy imported 10542 bottles french bordeaux wine truebell united arab emiratesbased company four orders billed truebell 72867 also included total 17322 cans heineken carlsberg co beer well 646 bottles champagne person answered phone truebells sharjah uae number told reuters company longer dealing north korea elaborate would answer questions alcohol quotas alcohol sensitive issue pakistan muslims law allowed consume alcohol many among westernized elite drink nonmuslims christians hindus sikhs accounting 3 percent population allowed drink alcohol obtaining highquality imported liquor wine almost impossible legal means spawned lucrative black market alcohol smuggled across borders sea ports several diplomats poorer countries told reuters offered thousands dollars bootleggers buy quarterly alcohol quotas ive approached five times usually diplomatic receptions said one nonwestern diplomat pakistans rules hyon first secretary rank north korean embassy would every three months allowed import consignment alcohol one allowed formulas would mean 120 liters various spirits 18 liters wine 240 liters beer fraction amount reported missing | 780 |
<p>The Trump administration has rejected a coal industry push to win a rarely used emergency order protecting coal-fired power plants, a decision one executive said breaks a personal promise from President Donald Trump to take the extraordinary step to benefit the industry.</p>
<p>The Energy Department says it considered issuing the order sought by companies seeking relief for plants it says are overburdened by environmental regulations and market stresses. But the department ultimately ruled it was unnecessary, and the White House agreed, a spokeswoman said.</p>
<p>The decision is a rare example of friction between the beleaguered coal industry and the president who has vowed to save it. It also highlights a pattern emerging as the Trump administration crafts policy: The president’s bold declarations — both public and private — are not always carried through to implementation.</p>
<p>Trump committed to the measure in private conversations with executives from Murray Energy Corp. and FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. after public events in July and early August, according to letters to the White House from Murray Energy and its chief executive, Robert Murray. In the letters, obtained by The Associated Press, Murray said failing to act would cause thousands of coal miners to be laid off and put the pensions of thousands more in jeopardy. One of Murray’s letters said Trump agreed and told Energy Secretary Rick Perry, “I want this done” in Murray’s presence.</p>
<p>The White House declined to comment on Murray’s assertion. A spokesman for Murray Energy, Gary Broadbent, also declined to comment on the letters.</p>
<p>Energy Department spokeswoman Shaylyn Hynes said the agency was sympathetic to the coal industry’s plight.</p>
<p>“We look at the facts of each issue and consider the authorities we have to address them, but with respect to this particular case at this particular time, the White House and the Department of Energy are in agreement that the evidence does not warrant the use of this emergency authority,” Hynes said in a statement Monday.</p>
<p>The aid Murray sought from Trump involves invoking a little-known section of the U.S. Federal Power Act that allows the Energy Department to temporarily intervene when the nation’s electricity supply is threatened by an emergency, such as war or natural disaster. Among other measures, it temporarily exempts power plants from obeying environmental laws. In the past, the authority has been used sparingly, such as during the California energy crisis in 2000 and following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The Obama administration never used it. The Trump administration has used it twice in seven months in narrow instances.</p>
<p>Murray’s company is seeking a two-year moratorium on closures of coal-fired power plants, which would be an unprecedented federal intervention in the nation’s energy markets. The company said invoking the provision under the Power Act was “the only viable mechanism” to protect the reliability of the nation’s power supply.</p>
<p>Murray told the White House that his key customer, Ohio-based electricity company FirstEnergy Solutions, was at immediate risk of bankruptcy. Without FirstEnergy’s plants burning his coal, Murray said his own company would be forced into “immediate bankruptcy,” triggering the layoffs of more than 6,500 miners. FirstEnergy acknowledged to the AP that bankruptcy of its power-generation business was a possibility.</p>
<p>Murray urged Trump to use the provision in the Federal Power Act to halt further coal plant closures by declaring an emergency in the electric power grid.</p>
<p>After a conversation with Trump at a July 25 political rally in Youngstown, Ohio, Murray wrote, the president told Perry three times, “I want this done.” Trump also directed the emergency order be given during an Aug. 3 conversation in Huntington, West Virginia, he said.</p>
<p>“As stated, disastrous consequences for President Trump, our electric power grid reliability, and tens of thousands of coal miners will result if this is not immediately done,” he wrote.</p>
<p>Murray’s claims raise the possibility that Trump was warned against the move by his advisers — some of whom are known to be more cautious — or that he simply made assurances to Murray to avoid immediate confrontation. The people who worked on the decision most directly were Perry, Michael Catanzaro, who works under National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn as the top White House energy adviser, and Perry’s chief of staff, Brian McCormack, U.S. officials told the AP. They spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal policy considerations by name.</p>
<p>Murray and his company have been impassioned supporters of Trump, donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaign and inauguration, hosting fundraisers and embracing him as the rescuer of the Appalachian coal industry. The friendliness has been mutual: When Trump repealed an Obama administration regulation barring coal companies from dumping mine waste in streams, Murray and his sons were invited for the signing.</p>
<p>The Energy Department has already informed Murray it will not invoke the law, an official with knowledge of the decision told the AP.</p>
<p>Coal has become an increasingly unattractive fuel for U.S. electricity companies, which have been retiring old boilers at a record pace. At least two dozen big coal-fired plants are scheduled to shut down in coming months as utilities transition to new steam turbines fueled by cleaner-burning natural gas made more abundant in recent years by new drilling technologies.</p>
<p>Trump, who rejects the consensus of scientists that burning fossil fuels is causing global warming, has made reversing the coal industry’s decline a cornerstone of his administration’s energy and environmental policies. Since taking office, he announced that the U.S. will withdraw from the Paris climate accord, and he has moved to block or delay Obama-era regulations seeking to limit carbon emissions.</p>
<p>Other coal executives have urged similar government intervention to save their businesses. In a speech last week, the CEO of Peabody Energy Corp., the nation’s largest coal producer, also said a two-year moratorium on coal-plant closures was needed.</p>
<p>Perry has already twice invoked the Federal Power Act in narrow ways at the request of utilities seeking to keep old coal-burning plants online past their planned retirement dates. In both cases, the utilities were allowed to continue operations at plants amid concerns that shutting them down could lead to regional shortages in electricity.</p> | false | 1 | trump administration rejected coal industry push win rarely used emergency order protecting coalfired power plants decision one executive said breaks personal promise president donald trump take extraordinary step benefit industry energy department says considered issuing order sought companies seeking relief plants says overburdened environmental regulations market stresses department ultimately ruled unnecessary white house agreed spokeswoman said decision rare example friction beleaguered coal industry president vowed save also highlights pattern emerging trump administration crafts policy presidents bold declarations public private always carried implementation trump committed measure private conversations executives murray energy corp firstenergy solutions corp public events july early august according letters white house murray energy chief executive robert murray letters obtained associated press murray said failing act would cause thousands coal miners laid put pensions thousands jeopardy one murrays letters said trump agreed told energy secretary rick perry want done murrays presence white house declined comment murrays assertion spokesman murray energy gary broadbent also declined comment letters energy department spokeswoman shaylyn hynes said agency sympathetic coal industrys plight look facts issue consider authorities address respect particular case particular time white house department energy agreement evidence warrant use emergency authority hynes said statement monday aid murray sought trump involves invoking littleknown section us federal power act allows energy department temporarily intervene nations electricity supply threatened emergency war natural disaster among measures temporarily exempts power plants obeying environmental laws past authority used sparingly california energy crisis 2000 following hurricane katrina 2005 obama administration never used trump administration used twice seven months narrow instances murrays company seeking twoyear moratorium closures coalfired power plants would unprecedented federal intervention nations energy markets company said invoking provision power act viable mechanism protect reliability nations power supply murray told white house key customer ohiobased electricity company firstenergy solutions immediate risk bankruptcy without firstenergys plants burning coal murray said company would forced immediate bankruptcy triggering layoffs 6500 miners firstenergy acknowledged ap bankruptcy powergeneration business possibility murray urged trump use provision federal power act halt coal plant closures declaring emergency electric power grid conversation trump july 25 political rally youngstown ohio murray wrote president told perry three times want done trump also directed emergency order given aug 3 conversation huntington west virginia said stated disastrous consequences president trump electric power grid reliability tens thousands coal miners result immediately done wrote murrays claims raise possibility trump warned move advisers known cautious simply made assurances murray avoid immediate confrontation people worked decision directly perry michael catanzaro works national economic council director gary cohn top white house energy adviser perrys chief staff brian mccormack us officials told ap spoke condition anonymity authorized discuss internal policy considerations name murray company impassioned supporters trump donating hundreds thousands dollars campaign inauguration hosting fundraisers embracing rescuer appalachian coal industry friendliness mutual trump repealed obama administration regulation barring coal companies dumping mine waste streams murray sons invited signing energy department already informed murray invoke law official knowledge decision told ap coal become increasingly unattractive fuel us electricity companies retiring old boilers record pace least two dozen big coalfired plants scheduled shut coming months utilities transition new steam turbines fueled cleanerburning natural gas made abundant recent years new drilling technologies trump rejects consensus scientists burning fossil fuels causing global warming made reversing coal industrys decline cornerstone administrations energy environmental policies since taking office announced us withdraw paris climate accord moved block delay obamaera regulations seeking limit carbon emissions coal executives urged similar government intervention save businesses speech last week ceo peabody energy corp nations largest coal producer also said twoyear moratorium coalplant closures needed perry already twice invoked federal power act narrow ways request utilities seeking keep old coalburning plants online past planned retirement dates cases utilities allowed continue operations plants amid concerns shutting could lead regional shortages electricity | 621 |
<p />
<p><a href="https://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?lt1=_blank&amp;bc1=000000&amp;IS2=1&amp;bg1=FFFFFF&amp;fc1=000000&amp;lc1=0000FF&amp;t=forepolijour-20&amp;o=1&amp;p=8&amp;l=as1&amp;m=amazon&amp;f=ifr&amp;md=10FE9736YVPPT7A0FBG2&amp;asins=074532830X" type="external">Hidden Histories – Palestine and the Eastern Mediterranean</a>. Basem L. Ra’ad.Pluto Press, New York London, 2010.</p>
<p>The clear majority of the modern works that examine the Palestine/Israel conflict do so with a strong emphasis on the ‘nakba’ of 1948, with subsequent arguments based on covering events that led up to it, and then arguments based on events that have followed from it. For the former it is usually a discussion of the early Zionist writings merging into early Christian Zionist beliefs in the U.S. and Britain, and then gaining huge momentum from the Balfour Declaration, a statement of policy and not international law or international agreement. For the latter, the post nakba events, much of the focus is appropriately placed on the mechanisms of control established by the newly declared Israeli state up to the 1967 war, and after that critical juncture, a discussion of the settlements and their expropriation/annexation of occupied Palestinian land. The formation of valued international norms of law and human rights since the Second World War, established through various international means (the Nuremburg trials, the UN, the Geneva Conventions and other accepted norms of customary law), plays in important role in these discussions.</p>
<p>Basem L. Ra’ad’s new book Hidden Histories – Palestine and the Eastern Mediterranean adds a relatively new component to the discussion of Palestinian and regional history. It is impossible to not include the above elements in a discussion of Palestine, yet they receive minimal treatment, almost as an already understood if understated context. Instead, Hidden Histories explores two perspectives that are not completely ignored but not fully well developed, in part because the dominant media discourse of the U.S., Europe, and Israel do not particularly want them to be heard.</p>
<p>The first perspective is to examine the ancient histories of the region through current knowledge of archaeology and linguistics, a duality that highlights not the uniqueness of a chosen people and its exile and return, but the commonality of a stable indigenous population that underwent various permutations and adaptations as different forces controlled to the region to varying degrees.</p>
<p>The second perspective looks at the modern implementation of the Israeli narrative – normally looked at in the manner in which the ethnic history is used to justify the appropriation and annexation of the physical landscape, of the declared intent to settle all of Eretz Israel, as a divine right of the Jewish people. Ra’ad turns this appropriation and annexation perspective and focuses on the appropriation of the cultural artifacts, the cultural heritage, the language, and the cultural beliefs of the indigenous Palestinians, to the extent, as he argues, that the Palestinians themselves are becoming unaware of their own true patrimony and unknowingly reflect Israeli mythology into their own background. This is a very important construct to recognize as it is one of the strongest ways in which a dominant society can not only control but emotionally and culturally delete another culture and its history. The people become others, wanderers in the desert, true “Arabs” who arrived with the Islamic conquests of the seventh century, whose true home is beyond the borders of Israel.</p>
<p>A large part of the work then is a call to awareness for the Palestinian people to be aware of the loss of their patrimony, to re-educate themselves as to what is truly theirs in a cultural sense as well as the with the loss of the land. It has been noted more than once in both revisionist and ‘traditional’ historical writings on Zionism that “early Zionists did not shy away from seeing the Palestinians as rooted in the land from prehistoric times….Up to the 1930s, many Zionist theorists saw the Palestinian farmers or ‘fellahin’ as descendants of Judean peasantry, as Jews who converted to Islam to avoid taxation.” Afterwards, following upon the more violent nature of the conflict, the holocaust, and the nakba, the “affinity early Zionists felt toward the local Palestinians, for utilitarian reasons, has now disappeared overall and been replaced by antagonism or dismissal.” Even more effectively Ra’ad argues the “Israelis have appropriated a semblance of nativity and have relegated the Palestinians to cultural invisibility or active demonization within the Zionist system.” By appropriating the nativity of the Palestinians, the Zionists attempt to claim or as they would put it to reclaim their divinely ordained land, their own nativity.</p>
<p>The arguments and presentations cover the historical and archaeological evidence from the early existence of a Canaanite culture with a widespread geography that is a precursor to many of the myths and traditions of the region as a whole. By looking at the linguistic patterns and developments throughout the region, Ra’ad argues that “Hebrew is merely a script style that is known in Aramaic as square Aramaic,” and is not the ancient language of the land. Nor can the earlier languages, much more similar to the Arabic language, be considered “paleo-Hebrew” this or “ancient-Hebrew” that. The Arabic language is shown to be “a native regional language,” not imported with the Arab Muslim conquest of the seventh century, and it is the “live continuation and natural extension of the earlier languages as they were submerged.” In other words it is not a foreign language to the region, but a natural evolvement under organic adaptations to the trade, commerce, and warfare so prevalent in the region. In sum “whether it is in this totality of artifice of changing the map or in relation to the ancient names on the ground, or theories about ancient languages, there is a great deal of invention, guile, backdating, and fabricated justification.”</p>
<p>For the Israelis, if the god-covenanted land narrative falls apart, their whole universe disappears and they become just another group attempting to survive by way of dominance over a weaker group. To prevent that from happening, the narrative needs to be constructed both forward and backwards: forwards from the given biblical time lines to create a lineage representing the ‘true’ heritage of the Jews; backwards from current times as linguistic and archaeological evidence is phrased and manipulated towards the same heritage. Ra’ad’s work creates a discussion that poses huge problems for the overall narrative.</p>
<p>The future for Palestine involves education to decolonize the mind – their own minds, to reclaim their heritage from appropriation as Jewish heritage. Education is paramount in this, and this work serves as an excellent starting point in re-educating not only the world but Palestinians as to the nature of their patrimony and the manner in which it is being appropriated. With five million Palestinians already deprived of any land as their heritage, it is incumbent upon them to retain, to regain, their cultural voice, their cultural history as a bulwark against further denial and invisibleness under the domination of the Israeli occupation. Beyond that it suggests a way forward for research, to accumulate and record what can be retained and discovered of the Palestinian heritage, to not allow it to be subsumed by the Zionist project of Eretz Israel.</p>
<p>Given the media dominance of the U.S., Europe, and Israel, it will remain a struggle to retain and open up the broader perspective of awareness. Basem Ra’ads Hidden Histories is an intriguing and challenging work, a positive study leading toward a more honest fundamental understanding of the Eastern Mediterranean, and it also serves as a warning as to how historical narratives can be manipulated and created by the dominant part of society to fully disown both physically and culturally the weaker part.</p> | false | 1 | hidden histories palestine eastern mediterranean basem l raadpluto press new york london 2010 clear majority modern works examine palestineisrael conflict strong emphasis nakba 1948 subsequent arguments based covering events led arguments based events followed former usually discussion early zionist writings merging early christian zionist beliefs us britain gaining huge momentum balfour declaration statement policy international law international agreement latter post nakba events much focus appropriately placed mechanisms control established newly declared israeli state 1967 war critical juncture discussion settlements expropriationannexation occupied palestinian land formation valued international norms law human rights since second world war established various international means nuremburg trials un geneva conventions accepted norms customary law plays important role discussions basem l raads new book hidden histories palestine eastern mediterranean adds relatively new component discussion palestinian regional history impossible include elements discussion palestine yet receive minimal treatment almost already understood understated context instead hidden histories explores two perspectives completely ignored fully well developed part dominant media discourse us europe israel particularly want heard first perspective examine ancient histories region current knowledge archaeology linguistics duality highlights uniqueness chosen people exile return commonality stable indigenous population underwent various permutations adaptations different forces controlled region varying degrees second perspective looks modern implementation israeli narrative normally looked manner ethnic history used justify appropriation annexation physical landscape declared intent settle eretz israel divine right jewish people raad turns appropriation annexation perspective focuses appropriation cultural artifacts cultural heritage language cultural beliefs indigenous palestinians extent argues palestinians becoming unaware true patrimony unknowingly reflect israeli mythology background important construct recognize one strongest ways dominant society control emotionally culturally delete another culture history people become others wanderers desert true arabs arrived islamic conquests seventh century whose true home beyond borders israel large part work call awareness palestinian people aware loss patrimony reeducate truly cultural sense well loss land noted revisionist traditional historical writings zionism early zionists shy away seeing palestinians rooted land prehistoric timesup 1930s many zionist theorists saw palestinian farmers fellahin descendants judean peasantry jews converted islam avoid taxation afterwards following upon violent nature conflict holocaust nakba affinity early zionists felt toward local palestinians utilitarian reasons disappeared overall replaced antagonism dismissal even effectively raad argues israelis appropriated semblance nativity relegated palestinians cultural invisibility active demonization within zionist system appropriating nativity palestinians zionists attempt claim would put reclaim divinely ordained land nativity arguments presentations cover historical archaeological evidence early existence canaanite culture widespread geography precursor many myths traditions region whole looking linguistic patterns developments throughout region raad argues hebrew merely script style known aramaic square aramaic ancient language land earlier languages much similar arabic language considered paleohebrew ancienthebrew arabic language shown native regional language imported arab muslim conquest seventh century live continuation natural extension earlier languages submerged words foreign language region natural evolvement organic adaptations trade commerce warfare prevalent region sum whether totality artifice changing map relation ancient names ground theories ancient languages great deal invention guile backdating fabricated justification israelis godcovenanted land narrative falls apart whole universe disappears become another group attempting survive way dominance weaker group prevent happening narrative needs constructed forward backwards forwards given biblical time lines create lineage representing true heritage jews backwards current times linguistic archaeological evidence phrased manipulated towards heritage raads work creates discussion poses huge problems overall narrative future palestine involves education decolonize mind minds reclaim heritage appropriation jewish heritage education paramount work serves excellent starting point reeducating world palestinians nature patrimony manner appropriated five million palestinians already deprived land heritage incumbent upon retain regain cultural voice cultural history bulwark denial invisibleness domination israeli occupation beyond suggests way forward research accumulate record retained discovered palestinian heritage allow subsumed zionist project eretz israel given media dominance us europe israel remain struggle retain open broader perspective awareness basem raads hidden histories intriguing challenging work positive study leading toward honest fundamental understanding eastern mediterranean also serves warning historical narratives manipulated created dominant part society fully disown physically culturally weaker part | 646 |
<p>Neil LaBute’s adaptation of A.S. Byatt’s novel, Possession, is a real disappointment. LaBute has the enviable quality in a director of being interesting even when he is bad, and you would think that the novel, a highbrow version of a Harlequin romance, could only be improved by the sort of emotional astringencies we associate with LaButism. For a start, he gets rid of Ms Byatt’s acres of Victorian pastiche, allegedly the writings of her two 19th century lovers, the poets Randolph Henry Ash (Jeremy Northam) and Christabel LaMotte (Jennifer Ehle) — which most readers will have skipped anyway.</p>
<p>Yet, surprisingly, in telling the story of the discovery of this affair by two young academics of our own time, and their claim to it as a scholarly “possession,” LaBute has allowed something even worse, if less tedious, to survive in lines like “I have known incandescence and must decline to sample it further,” or “I cannot let you burn me up, nor can I resist you. . .No mere human can stand in a fire and not be consumed.” These stand out in all their awfulness and without a hint of irony.</p>
<p>Nor are they the worst of the writing, a collaborative effort by David Henry Hwang, Laura Jones and Mr LaBute. Although their Victorians don’t look or talk very much like Victorians, the modern Britons are even less plausible. The ludicrous caricature of Fergus Wolff (Toby Stephens), one of the bad guys, in talking to the American hero, Roland Michell (Aaron Eckhart) says things like: “What is it that you Americans say? How’s it hanging?” or “She thicks men’s blood with cold — or, if you prefer the American vernacular, she’s a real ball-breaker?” Then, in mouthing to Roland the platitude about “publish or perish” (which is much more an American phenomenon than a British one) he adds mischievously: “Or in your case, perish or perish.”</p>
<p>It’s not that the Brits wouldn’t be this rude to someone they didn’t like, but they would be rude in more creative, more ironic ways. Fergus is really an American stereotype of the la-di-dah, oh-so-superior Englishman who looks down his nose at all Americans — as do virtually all the English in the film. Roland’s academic superior, Professor Blackadder (Tom Hickey), says of him at one point: “He’s an American, for heaven’s sake; he’s probably out selling drugs.” Even Maude Bailey (Gwyneth Paltrow), Roland’s love interest, begins her acquaintance with him by insulting the land of his birth: “I’ve seen that take-what-you-want attitude in other Americans.”</p>
<p>“What is it with you people and Americans?” he understandably replies, though the question that is more likely to occur is what is it with Neil LaBute and the British — who are great admirers of his work?</p>
<p>It’s not as if one cannot understand the artistic and commercial reasons why Ms Byatt’s Roland has been made into an American, but the bickering about national stereotypes just doesn’t add anything to this story of love among the stacks. More seriously, Mr Eckhart doesn’t look anything like the Roland of the novel, an impecunious scholar and academic hanger-on who has the weedy, apologetic, downtrodden personality that such a person actually would have in real life. LaBute seems to recognize the incongruence of putting this strapping young American in the role and so gives him a rich friend who can lend him a Porsche, in which he looks much more at home.</p>
<p>Gwyneth Paltrow, doing her by-now patented British accent, is also about 50 times more glamorous than she should be in the role of Maude Bailey and so looks even less like a British academic feminist than Eckhart looks like an academic male. You can forgive her a lot because she is so gorgeous, however, and she has to be fairly soignée in order to symbolize, as she does, the academic promised land. But. LaBute should have got Jeremy Davies, the coward from Saving Private Ryan, to play Roland, so that the audience could sense vicariously something of the miraculousness (from the hero’s point of view) of winning the heart of such a paragon. As it is, the two look like any golden couple you might meet on a beach in California, and they get into bed together with American haste and not only at the end, as in the novel.</p>
<p>Nor is my list of complaints about this film exhausted even yet. When Roland and Maude, like Randolph and Christabel before them, sneak away for a naughty weekend in Whitby, North Yorkshire, we see them in a lush forest glen beside a waterfall that is decidedly not a Yorkshire landscape. Thereabouts is actually all desolate moorland, rocks and seacoast. Moreover, LaBute’s idea of the glamor and the money in academic life is absurd. He imagines (admittedly, with more than a hint from Ms Byatt) a whole academic industry devoted to Randolph Henry Ash with the money to employ people to catalogue such things as “how many jars of gooseberry jam did Ash’s wife make in 1850?”</p>
<p>And then there is the importance that Ash is supposed to occupy in the popular imagination.”Can you imagine what would happen if Mr Perfect Husband had this Shakespearean type dark lady thing going?” says Roland to Maude, sounding even less than usual like a scholar — and more than usual like a dunderhead. The fact is that nothing would happen. Victorian specialists, if any could be found today who believed in the existence of Mr Perfect Husbands, would be more inclined to be shocked if there weren’t a mistress than if there were one.</p>
<p>Like LaBute himself, they cherish a common contemporary belief in the secret sexual foundation of Victorian culture. All that “repression” has to be a mask for something else, and this turns out to be what the film is about.Ms Byatt at least gives herself up to the Harlequin romance and plays down the public scandal, a century and a half later, of the affair. But LaBute positively hypes it, as if we were still living in the days of Lytton Strachey’s Eminent Victorians and delighting (as he, perhaps, does delight) in discovering that our idols have feet of clay.</p>
<p>Interestingly, for the director of In the Company of Men, the men in this film have been rather prettied up: Roland’s girlfriend has been cut, so he is not seen as cheating on her with Maude. Rather, he tells us that he’s “off women” (the lawyer leers in LaButian style: “That’s no reason to be OFF women”) on account of having hurt someone badly, while Ash’s adultery with Christabel is excused with the none-too-delicate hint that Mrs Ash (Holly Aird) is not up to the sexual demands of her husband — or, indeed, of anyone else.</p>
<p>And the women are correspondingly darkened. In the novel, Maude’s affair with Fergus Wolff was just a fling, now all but forgotten, whereas in the movie it is still on-going, or just breaking up as Roland comes on the scene. Likewise, the lesbian relationship between Christabel and Blanche (Lena Headey) is much more stressed here, and the suicide of the latter laid much more thumpingly at the door of Christabel, who becomes the Anne Heche of her day.</p>
<p>Perhaps the film should have been called “In the Company of Women.” At any rate, even those who rather guiltily enjoyed the contemporary romance of the novel will (I think) find little to like in the film version.</p> | false | 1 | neil labutes adaptation byatts novel possession real disappointment labute enviable quality director interesting even bad would think novel highbrow version harlequin romance could improved sort emotional astringencies associate labutism start gets rid ms byatts acres victorian pastiche allegedly writings two 19th century lovers poets randolph henry ash jeremy northam christabel lamotte jennifer ehle readers skipped anyway yet surprisingly telling story discovery affair two young academics time claim scholarly possession labute allowed something even worse less tedious survive lines like known incandescence must decline sample let burn resist mere human stand fire consumed stand awfulness without hint irony worst writing collaborative effort david henry hwang laura jones mr labute although victorians dont look talk much like victorians modern britons even less plausible ludicrous caricature fergus wolff toby stephens one bad guys talking american hero roland michell aaron eckhart says things like americans say hows hanging thicks mens blood cold prefer american vernacular shes real ballbreaker mouthing roland platitude publish perish much american phenomenon british one adds mischievously case perish perish brits wouldnt rude someone didnt like would rude creative ironic ways fergus really american stereotype ladidah ohsosuperior englishman looks nose americans virtually english film rolands academic superior professor blackadder tom hickey says one point hes american heavens sake hes probably selling drugs even maude bailey gwyneth paltrow rolands love interest begins acquaintance insulting land birth ive seen takewhatyouwant attitude americans people americans understandably replies though question likely occur neil labute british great admirers work one understand artistic commercial reasons ms byatts roland made american bickering national stereotypes doesnt add anything story love among stacks seriously mr eckhart doesnt look anything like roland novel impecunious scholar academic hangeron weedy apologetic downtrodden personality person actually would real life labute seems recognize incongruence putting strapping young american role gives rich friend lend porsche looks much home gwyneth paltrow bynow patented british accent also 50 times glamorous role maude bailey looks even less like british academic feminist eckhart looks like academic male forgive lot gorgeous however fairly soignée order symbolize academic promised land labute got jeremy davies coward saving private ryan play roland audience could sense vicariously something miraculousness heros point view winning heart paragon two look like golden couple might meet beach california get bed together american haste end novel list complaints film exhausted even yet roland maude like randolph christabel sneak away naughty weekend whitby north yorkshire see lush forest glen beside waterfall decidedly yorkshire landscape thereabouts actually desolate moorland rocks seacoast moreover labutes idea glamor money academic life absurd imagines admittedly hint ms byatt whole academic industry devoted randolph henry ash money employ people catalogue things many jars gooseberry jam ashs wife make 1850 importance ash supposed occupy popular imaginationcan imagine would happen mr perfect husband shakespearean type dark lady thing going says roland maude sounding even less usual like scholar usual like dunderhead fact nothing would happen victorian specialists could found today believed existence mr perfect husbands would inclined shocked werent mistress one like labute cherish common contemporary belief secret sexual foundation victorian culture repression mask something else turns film aboutms byatt least gives harlequin romance plays public scandal century half later affair labute positively hypes still living days lytton stracheys eminent victorians delighting perhaps delight discovering idols feet clay interestingly director company men men film rather prettied rolands girlfriend cut seen cheating maude rather tells us hes women lawyer leers labutian style thats reason women account hurt someone badly ashs adultery christabel excused nonetoodelicate hint mrs ash holly aird sexual demands husband indeed anyone else women correspondingly darkened novel maudes affair fergus wolff fling forgotten whereas movie still ongoing breaking roland comes scene likewise lesbian relationship christabel blanche lena headey much stressed suicide latter laid much thumpingly door christabel becomes anne heche day perhaps film called company women rate even rather guiltily enjoyed contemporary romance novel think find little like film version | 642 |
<p>FRISCO, Tex. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dallas-Cowboys/" type="external">Dallas Cowboys</a> owner <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerry_Jones/" type="external">Jerry Jones</a> emerged from the locker room following Thursday’s 28-6 loss to the Los Angeles Chargers and expressed support and confidence in head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jason_Garrett/" type="external">Jason Garrett</a> and his staff.</p>
<p>It was the slumping Cowboys’ third consecutive loss in blowout fashion by a combined score of 92-22, including previous losses to the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Atlanta-Falcons/" type="external">Atlanta Falcons</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Philadelphia-Eagles/" type="external">Philadelphia Eagles</a> by scores of 27-7 and 37-9.</p>
<p>It marked the first time in franchise history that the Cowboys have scored 10 or fewer points in three consecutive games and the first time since 2004 that the Cowboys have lost three consecutive games by 20 or more points.</p>
<p>At 5-6, the Cowboys are a long shot to make the playoffs. It’s questionable whether they will even finish with a winning record.</p>
<p>It was Jones who felt the need to talk to the team after the game in hopes of lifting their spirits.</p>
<p>Yet, he said he remains supportive of Garrett and the job his staff is doing.</p>
<p>Garrett signed a five-year, $30 million contract extension after going 12-4 in 2014. The contract expires after the 2019 season.</p>
<p>“No. Just no. Again, I don’t step out of the dressing room and evaluate the coaching position at all,” said Jones, when asked about the job security of Garrett and the staff. “Candidly and I don’t even want to say it so that somebody might repeat it. Absolutely not. We’ve got some things that we’re not playing good. We’re not a good team right now. We can be a good team.”</p>
<p>Running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ezekiel-Elliott/" type="external">Ezekiel Elliott</a>‘s absence is a factor in the Cowboys’ struggles. The three losses have come in the first three games of a six-game suspension he is serving for violating the league’s personal conduct policy.</p>
<p>Jones is admittedly shocked the Cowboys haven’t done better without Elliott. But he doesn’t blame the staff.</p>
<p>“Well, I think that again, I’ve got a lot of optimism for our talent,” Jones said. “I do. Now we all know that it has to get better, has to get together. I really think this coaching staff is tops. I think Jason is able to use everything that he’s learned, as coordinator, as coach over these last years, and we’ve just got to get it together.”</p>
<p>Garrett is 63-52 since taking over for <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Wade_Phillips/" type="external">Wade Phillips</a> midway through the 2010 season. He has two winning seasons during his first six full seasons.</p>
<p>–Head coach Jason Garrett isn’t going to make any drastic changes to try and spark a Cowboys’ offense that has hit a level of ineptness never seen before in franchise history.</p>
<p>Garrett shot down the notion of taking control of play-calling duties from offensive coordinator <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Scott_Linehan/" type="external">Scott Linehan</a>, and vowed to remain true to his coaching convictions even though the offense has scored fewer than 10 points in three consecutive games.</p>
<p>“Certainly, we’re always looking at ourselves and things that we can do better, but our convictions as a coaching staff, or as a football team, really won’t change,” Garrett said on a conference call Friday.</p>
<p>“You’re looking for different ways to implement things. You self-scout. You do a lot of different things week by week to give your team the best chance possible. But the core convictions about how you win ball games? They remain intact.”</p>
<p>Scoring more points is the No. 1 way to get the Cowboys to a more respectable place. Thursday’s 28-6 loss to the Los Angeles Chargers extended a level of futility that has never happened in this organization before.</p>
<p>Not even the 2001 team had that sort of drought when the Cowboys averaged 15.4 points game (30th in the league) and rolled through a quartet of quarterbacks – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ryan_Leaf/" type="external">Ryan Leaf</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Anthony_Wright/" type="external">Anthony Wright</a>, Quincy Carter and Clint Stoerner.</p>
<p>Or the 2002 team that averaged 13.6 points a game (31st in the league) with Carter and Chad Hutchinson at quarterback.</p>
<p>Or just two years ago when the Cowboys averaged 17.2 points a game (31st in the league) with backup quarterbacks <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brandon-Weeden/" type="external">Brandon Weeden</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Matt_Cassel/" type="external">Matt Cassel</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kellen_Moore/" type="external">Kellen Moore</a> combining to go 1-11 in place of an injured <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tony_Romo/" type="external">Tony Romo</a>.</p>
<p>“We’re not a good team right now,” owner Jerry Jones said on his 105.3 The Fan radio show Friday. “I really will tell you – and this is some hopeful but it’s also some factual – we can really salvage this thing.</p>
<p>“I look at our schedule, I look at where we are with our talent. I’ve seen it before – I’ve seen these guys play at levels, each one of them individually, that allows me to think this way. If I’ve never seen it, then that would be different on an individual basis or as a team.”</p>
<p>Sure, the suspension of Ezekiel Elliott – the reigning rushing champ – has been a blow to the Cowboys, as well as playing without All-Pro left tackle <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tyron-Smith/" type="external">Tyron Smith</a> for two games.</p>
<p>But the drop-off in production without Elliott has been stunning. This is a team that was averaging the fourth-most points in the league (28.3 points per game) going into the Atlanta Falcons game earlier this month.</p>
<p>How fast things can turn in the NFL. The Cowboys have dropped to being the 15th-ranked scoring offense in a matter of three games.</p>
<p>REPORT CARD VS. CHARGERS</p>
<p>–PASSING OFFENSE: F — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dak-Prescott/" type="external">Dak Prescott</a> was horrendous, completing 20 of 27 passes for 179 yards with two interceptions and a pick-six. The receivers are not getting open and making no plays to help Prescott out. Tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jason_Witten/" type="external">Jason Witten</a> led the Cowboys with seven catches for 44 yards. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dez_Bryant/" type="external">Dez Bryant</a> has been reduced to being a non-factor with three catches for 37 yards.</p>
<p>–RUSHING OFFENSE: D — The Cowboys rushed for 79 yards on 20 carries. Don’t mind the 4.0 average. It wasn’t good enough to threaten the end zone or make a difference for the offense. The best run play was a 36-yard touchdown by Dak Prescott and it was called back for holding.</p>
<p>–PASS DEFENSE: F — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Philip_Rivers/" type="external">Philip Rivers</a> looked he was playing against air against the suspect Cowboys pass defense. The rush couldn’t get to him and the defenders didn’t cover. Rivers completed 27 of 33 passes for 434 yards with three touchdowns. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Keenan-Allen/" type="external">Keenan Allen</a> had 11 catches for 172 yards.</p>
<p>–RUSH DEFENSE: C –The Chargers rushed 33 times for 81 yards. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Melvin-Gordon/" type="external">Melvin Gordon</a> had 65 yards on 21 carries as the Cowboys did a decent job against the run for the first time without Sean Lee on the field. Jaylen Smith led the defense with eight tackles. Anthony Hitchens had seven.</p>
<p>–SPECIAL TEAMS: B — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris-Jones/" type="external">Chris Jones</a> is the most consistent Cowboy. He had five punts with an average of 41.6 yards per attempt. Ryan Switzer had a couple nice kickoff returns, but he still remains a mystery on returns. The Cowboys did a good job in coverage on kicks and punts.</p>
<p>–COACHING: F – There are no excuses for the coaching staff following the Cowboys’ third consecutive loss in blowout fashion by a combined score of 92-22, including previous losses to the Atlanta Falcons and Philadelphia Eagles by scores of 27-7 and 37-9. The Cowboys have been outscored 72-6 in the second halves of the three games.</p> | false | 1 | frisco tex dallas cowboys owner jerry jones emerged locker room following thursdays 286 loss los angeles chargers expressed support confidence head coach jason garrett staff slumping cowboys third consecutive loss blowout fashion combined score 9222 including previous losses atlanta falcons philadelphia eagles scores 277 379 marked first time franchise history cowboys scored 10 fewer points three consecutive games first time since 2004 cowboys lost three consecutive games 20 points 56 cowboys long shot make playoffs questionable whether even finish winning record jones felt need talk team game hopes lifting spirits yet said remains supportive garrett job staff garrett signed fiveyear 30 million contract extension going 124 2014 contract expires 2019 season dont step dressing room evaluate coaching position said jones asked job security garrett staff candidly dont even want say somebody might repeat absolutely weve got things playing good good team right good team running back ezekiel elliotts absence factor cowboys struggles three losses come first three games sixgame suspension serving violating leagues personal conduct policy jones admittedly shocked cowboys havent done better without elliott doesnt blame staff well think ive got lot optimism talent jones said know get better get together really think coaching staff tops think jason able use everything hes learned coordinator coach last years weve got get together garrett 6352 since taking wade phillips midway 2010 season two winning seasons first six full seasons head coach jason garrett isnt going make drastic changes try spark cowboys offense hit level ineptness never seen franchise history garrett shot notion taking control playcalling duties offensive coordinator scott linehan vowed remain true coaching convictions even though offense scored fewer 10 points three consecutive games certainly always looking things better convictions coaching staff football team really wont change garrett said conference call friday youre looking different ways implement things selfscout lot different things week week give team best chance possible core convictions win ball games remain intact scoring points 1 way get cowboys respectable place thursdays 286 loss los angeles chargers extended level futility never happened organization even 2001 team sort drought cowboys averaged 154 points game 30th league rolled quartet quarterbacks ryan leaf anthony wright quincy carter clint stoerner 2002 team averaged 136 points game 31st league carter chad hutchinson quarterback two years ago cowboys averaged 172 points game 31st league backup quarterbacks brandon weeden matt cassel kellen moore combining go 111 place injured tony romo good team right owner jerry jones said 1053 fan radio show friday really tell hopeful also factual really salvage thing look schedule look talent ive seen ive seen guys play levels one individually allows think way ive never seen would different individual basis team sure suspension ezekiel elliott reigning rushing champ blow cowboys well playing without allpro left tackle tyron smith two games dropoff production without elliott stunning team averaging fourthmost points league 283 points per game going atlanta falcons game earlier month fast things turn nfl cowboys dropped 15thranked scoring offense matter three games report card vs chargers passing offense f dak prescott horrendous completing 20 27 passes 179 yards two interceptions picksix receivers getting open making plays help prescott tight end jason witten led cowboys seven catches 44 yards dez bryant reduced nonfactor three catches 37 yards rushing offense cowboys rushed 79 yards 20 carries dont mind 40 average wasnt good enough threaten end zone make difference offense best run play 36yard touchdown dak prescott called back holding pass defense f philip rivers looked playing air suspect cowboys pass defense rush couldnt get defenders didnt cover rivers completed 27 33 passes 434 yards three touchdowns keenan allen 11 catches 172 yards rush defense c chargers rushed 33 times 81 yards melvin gordon 65 yards 21 carries cowboys decent job run first time without sean lee field jaylen smith led defense eight tackles anthony hitchens seven special teams b chris jones consistent cowboy five punts average 416 yards per attempt ryan switzer couple nice kickoff returns still remains mystery returns cowboys good job coverage kicks punts coaching f excuses coaching staff following cowboys third consecutive loss blowout fashion combined score 9222 including previous losses atlanta falcons philadelphia eagles scores 277 379 cowboys outscored 726 second halves three games | 695 |
<p>The federal government’s finances were dismal even before the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was enacted. That is why lawmakers who pushed for its passage felt compelled to try to calm worried Americans by claiming that the law would cut projected federal budget deficits in addition to covering the uninsured. <a href="#Note1" type="external">[1]</a></p>
<p>And, in fact, the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) official estimate shows that PPACA’s health care provisions <a href="#Note2" type="external">[2]</a> would cut projected deficits by $124 billion over the period from 2010 to 2019. <a href="#Note3" type="external">[3]</a> But that cost estimate is not the whole story — not by a long shot. A close examination of what CBO said, as well as other evidence, makes it clear that the deficit reduction associated with PPACA is based on budget gimmicks, sleights of hand, accounting tricks, and completely implausible assumptions. A more honest accounting reveals the new law as a trillion-dollar budget buster.</p>
<p>Summary</p>
<p>CBO must assume that current law will be enacted as written, even in cases where this is improbable. For instance, PPACA makes $575 billion in projected cuts to Medicare, threatening seniors’ access to care. <a href="#Note4" type="external">[4]</a> Regarding these and the existing planned cuts in payments to physicians under what is known as the “sustainable growth rate” formula, CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf wrote:</p>
<p>[C]urrent law now includes a number of policies that might be difficult to sustain over a long period of time. For example, PPACA and the Reconciliation Act reduced payments to many Medicare providers relative to what the government would have paid under prior law. On the basis of those cuts in payment rates and the existing “sustainable growth rate” [SGR] mechanism that governs Medicare’s payments to physicians, CBO projects that Medicare spending (per beneficiary, adjusted for overall inflation) will increase significantly more slowly during the next two decades than it has increased during the past two decades. If those provisions would have subsequently been modified or implemented incompletely, then the budgetary effects of repealing PPACA and the relevant provisions of the Reconciliation Act could be quite different — but CBO cannot forecast future changes in law or assume such changes in its estimates. <a href="#Note5" type="external">[5]</a></p>
<p>Medicare’s Chief Actuary echoed this concern in his own analysis. <a href="#Note6" type="external">[6]</a> If Medicare savings do not materialize, new spending under PPACA will be added to the deficit.</p>
<p>As noted by Elmendorf, Medicare’s payments to physicians are scheduled to be cut as well under the SGR formula. There is bipartisan agreement to stop this from happening. But the “doc fix” costs billions, requiring Congress to scramble to find an offset. Without it, physicians would face a 25 percent (and growing) Medicare payment reduction, restricting seniors’ access to care as more doctors become unable to serve Medicare patients. Congress has never allowed this to happen, even as it has insisted on paying for the “fix” with offsets.</p>
<p>While pushing PPACA through Congress, President Obama took the position that it was no longer necessary to pay for the “doc fix.” He proposed to add its costs to the national debt, but he did not want those costs to count against PPACA, because they would explode the myth of deficit reduction. So his solution was to pass the “doc fix” in separate legislation. But it does not matter to taxpayers if the President’s ideas are passed in one bill or many. All that matters is the total cost. And the President’s total bill for health care — with an unfinanced “doc fix” — shows massive deficits, not deficit reduction.</p>
<p>CBO further assumes that all cuts to existing programs and new revenues created by PPACA are used to pay for new spending. In reality, this will not be the case. PPACA increases Medicare taxes and imposes cuts in Medicare that are double-counted as offsets for new programs, but are also pledged to extend Medicare’s solvency. <a href="#Note7" type="external">[7]</a> They cannot do both.</p>
<p>Another source of double-counted savings is the CLASS Act, which creates a new, federally run long-term care insurance program. Beneficiaries will begin paying premiums in 2011 but will not receive benefits for five years. This frontloads revenue and creates the illusion of $70 billion to pay for new spending under PPACA. In reality, premium payments from CLASS will be used to pay out benefits in later years. <a href="#Note8" type="external">[8]</a> Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) called this “a Ponzi scheme of the first order, the kind of thing that Bernie Madoff would have been proud of.” <a href="#Note9" type="external">[9]</a></p>
<p>Savings within Medicare and CLASS revenues can be spent only once. If they are used to increase Medicare’s solvency and pay for the CLASS program, new spending in PPACA will be added to the deficit.</p>
<p>PPACA also creates a new subsidy program for low- and middle-income Americans to purchase insurance in the new health exchanges. CBO predicts that 19 million Americans will benefit from this generous new entitlement program at a cost of $460 billion by 2019. But the new law includes substantial incentives for employers to drop existing coverage and allow employees to instead purchase taxpayer-subsidized coverage. <a href="#Note10" type="external">[10]</a> Former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin points out that many businesses could drop their employee health plan, raise wages to make up for the lost benefit, pay the employer penalty for not offering insurance, and still come out ahead. <a href="#Note11" type="external">[11]</a> These incentives, exacerbated by the various new insurance rules that will cause a faster rate of growth in employer plan premiums, will cause the cost of the subsidy program to greatly exceed initial projections.</p>
<p>Finally, the CBO scoring of PPACA looks only at the first 10 years of the law’s enactment. This, however, includes just six years of full spending, as the costliest provisions do not go into effect until 2014. This also allows PPACA to meet the requirements of the pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rule, which requires legislation to exhibit deficit neutrality over a 10-year window. In theory, PAYGO should maintain levels of deficit spending. In actuality, it has had little success at halting the addition of new spending to the deficit, since new programs can create savings in one decade but run trillions in deficits the next and still meet PAYGO requirements.</p>
<p>The CLASS program alone is an excellent example of how easy it is to create a new and completely insolvent program without violating PAYGO. Experts — including the CBO Director, Medicare’s Chief Actuary, and the American Academy of Actuaries — have all concluded that CLASS is unsustainable and will go bankrupt. Despite this, Heritage budget expert Brian Riedl writes that, perversely, “repealing CLASS would violate the ‘pay as you go’ law against expanding budget deficits. This is because ‘pay-go’ focuses only on the 10-year $70 billion ‘cost’ of repeal and ignores the trillions of dollars that would be saved thereafter.” <a href="#Note12" type="external">[12]</a></p>
<p>The reality is that the new health care law will result in trillions in unaffordable deficit spending.</p>
<p>Impact</p>
<p>It Will Increase the Federal Deficit. In 2010, the federal deficit was $1.3 trillion. While the average historical deficit is 2.9 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), by 2050, the budget gap is projected to exceed 20 percent of GDP. <a href="#Note13" type="external">[13]</a> This trend is set to continue as the population ages and the baby boomer generation retires, causing the cost of programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security to soar.</p>
<p>Rising health care costs further add to growth in entitlement spending. Creating a new entitlement program and expanding an existing one will hasten the arrival of inevitable financial collapse. <a href="#Note14" type="external">[14]</a> The deficit-reducing provisions of PPACA are either unrealistic or unsustainable.</p>
<p>It Delays Progress to Repair Existing Unsustainable Entitlement Programs. Claims that the new health care law will reduce the deficit are irresponsible and delay meaningful action. To truly reduce deficit spending, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security must be reformed. The sooner a solution is adopted, the better: current beneficiaries would experience greater stability and future beneficiaries would have more time to adjust to change.</p>
<p>PPACA made significant cuts to Medicare, but these can either increase the program’s solvency or pay for new spending — not both. Moreover, the new law increased Medicare payroll taxes and extended them to apply to investment income, but it will use the additional revenue to pay for non-Medicare spending. This sets a dangerous precedent that could further increase the insolvency of the program. The provisions create the illusion of Medicare reform, but the changes are the wrong ones and will only give lawmakers another excuse to further avoid addressing the long-term health of entitlement programs.</p>
<p>It Promises Future Increases in Taxes and Penalties. As mentioned earlier, PPACA creates enormous incentives for certain employers to drop their employer-sponsored coverage. The employer penalty included in the law ($2,000 per employee) is low enough to allow employers to drop coverage, pay the penalty, and come out ahead. John C. Goodman, President of the National Center for Policy Analysis, writes, “As more employers dump their employees onto the exchange and as the cost to taxpayers rises, the potential pressure to increase the fine will become inexorable.” <a href="#Note15" type="external">[15]</a> Larger penalties would harm businesses’ ability to create jobs, raise wages, or keep their current workers.</p>
<p>It Puts Future Generations on the Hook. Once Americans rely on the new subsidies in order to afford coverage, Congress will have a hard time walking back the generous program. To pay for it, Congress can either raise taxes or add to the deficit. Of course, deficit spending is not free; it merely delays paying for programs, requiring tomorrow’s taxpayers — currently unable to vote — to pay for current citizens’ benefits. <a href="#Note16" type="external">[16]</a></p>
<p>A New Direction</p>
<p>If Congress is serious about reducing the deficit and controlling spending, lawmakers should set aside easily manipulated rules like PAYGO and require scoring that reveals the true long-term impact of legislation. This would make it more difficult for legislation like PPACA, which increases the size of government and creates unsustainable new spending, to become law. To reduce the deficit, PPACA must be repealed.</p>
<p>Budget process reform should enforce policy changes that reduce the size of the federal government, reduce out-of-control federal spending, and prohibit any tax increase on the American people. <a href="#Note17" type="external">[17]</a> Congress should prominently disclose long-term entitlement program obligations in the budget resolution to provide a more accurate picture of the federal government’s commitments. Scoring of policy changes should also look at long-term effects on the government’s total unfunded obligations to give lawmakers a more accurate understanding of the true cost of any piece of legislation. In so doing, the reality of PPACA’s 10-year scoring would have been revealed.</p>
<p>Congress should also establish mechanisms to equitably assess and enforce changes in spending and revenues. CBO’s current spending baseline assumes that laws that authorize spending will continue despite scheduled expiration dates. However, CBO assumes that laws relating to taxes will expire as scheduled. A new enforcement strategy must consider both spending and revenue on the same baseline in order to be effective.</p>
<p>Finally, mandatory spending on entitlements should be put on a long-term budget. Entitlement spending is currently on autopilot, allowing open-ended growth. Left unchecked, entitlement spending will eventually crowd-out other priorities. Instead, these programs should be put on a limited budget, and Congress should regularly examine their spending and take steps to keep the programs within their limits. Automatic adjustments or triggers should be put in place to reduce spending if Congress fails to act. This will force lawmakers to put these programs on stable financial footing. Medicare should be transformed to a limited, defined-contribution system that allows seniors to seek better value by purchasing a health care plan that suits their needs in the private market. <a href="#Note18" type="external">[18]</a> Medicaid reform should limit taxpayer funding but give states greater flexibility to administer their respective programs while also creating the opportunity for beneficiaries to receive better quality coverage in the private market.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a Visiting Fellow at The Heritage Foundation and Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Kathryn Nix is a Research Assistant in the Center for Health Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[1]Congress cannot build sound market-based health care reform on the foundation of a flawed health care law. Therefore, the health care law must be repealed in its entirety.</p>
<p>The House of Representatives has taken a major step towards full repeal of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA-otherwise known as “Obamacare”). Until full repeal occurs, Congress must continue to focus on the core failures and consequences of PPACA and block its implementation to allow time to achieve repeal and lay the groundwork for a new market-based direction for health care reform.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[2]Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Public Law 111-148, and Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, Public Law 111-152.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[3]Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director, Congressional Budget Office, letter to Nancy Pelosi, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, March 20, 2010, at <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/AmendReconProp.pdf" type="external">http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/AmendReconProp.pdf</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[4]Robert E. Moffit, “Obamacare and Medicare Provider Cuts: Jeopardizing Seniors’ Access,” Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 3105, January 19, 2011, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/01/Obamacare-and-Medicare-Provider-Cuts-Jeopardizing-Seniors-Access" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/01/Obamacare-and-Medicare-Provider-Cuts-Jeopardizing-Seniors-Access</a>.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[5]Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director, Congressional Budget Office, letter to John Boehner, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, January 6, 2011, at <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-PPACA_Repeal.pdf" type="external">http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-PPACA_Repeal.pdf</a> (January 10, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[6]See Richard S. Foster, Chief Actuary, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Estimated Financial Effects of the ‘Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,’ As Amended,” April 22, 2010, p. 9, at <a href="http://www.politico.com/static/PPM130_oact_memorandum_on_financial_impact_of_ppaca_as_enacted.html" type="external">http://www.politico.com/static/PPM130_oact_memorandum_on_financial_impact_of_ppaca_as_enacted.html</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[7]See U.S. Senate Budget Committee Republicans, “Budget Perspective: The Real Deficit Effect of the Democrats’ Health Package,” March 23, 2010, at <a href="http://budget.senate.gov/republican/pressarchive/2010-03-23BudgetPerspective.pdf" type="external">http://budget.senate.gov/republican/pressarchive/2010-03-23BudgetPerspective.pdf</a> (January 13, 2011); Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “2010 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and Federal Supplemental Medical Insurance Trust Funds,” August 5, 2010, at <a href="https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2010.pdf" type="external">https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2010.pdf</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[8]See Brian Blase, “No CLASS: How Congress Saddled Taxpayers with Another Costly Entitlement,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2444, July 29, 2010, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/07/No-CLASS-How-Congress-Saddled-Taxpayers-with-Another-Costly-Entitlement" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/07/No-CLASS-How-Congress-Saddled-Taxpayers-with-Another-Costly-Entitlement</a>.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[9]Lori Montgomery, “Proposed Long-Term Insurance Program Raises Questions,” The Washington Post, October 27, 2009, at <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/27/AR2009102701417.html" type="external">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/27/AR2009102701417.html</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[10]See Brian Blase and Paul Winfree, “Obamacare and Health Subsidies: Expanding Perverse Incentives for Employers and Employees,” Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 3112, January 20, 2011, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/01/Obamacare-and-Health-Subsidies-Expanding-Perverse-Incentives-for-Employers-and-Employees" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/01/Obamacare-and-Health-Subsidies-Expanding-Perverse-Incentives-for-Employers-and-Employees</a>.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[11]Douglas Holtz-Eakin and Cameron Smith, “Labor Markets and Health Care Reform: New Results,” American Action Forum, May 2010, at <a href="http://americanactionforum.org/files/LaborMktsHCRAAF5-27-10.pdf" type="external">http://americanactionforum.org/files/LaborMktsHCRAAF5-27-10.pdf</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[12]Brian Riedl, “CLASS Is the Next Huge Taxpayer Bailout,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, July 26, 2010, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Commentary/2010/07/CLASS-is-the-Next-Huge-Taxpayer-Bailout" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Commentary/2010/07/CLASS-is-the-Next-Huge-Taxpayer-Bailout</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[13]The Heritage Foundation, “Federal Budget Deficits Will Reach Levels Never Seen Before in the U.S.,” 2010 Budget Chart Book, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/federal-budget-deficits" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/federal-budget-deficits</a>.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[14]PPACA adds a total of 16 million Americans to Medicaid by 2019. See Elmendorf, letter to Pelosi, March 20, 2010.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[15]John C. Goodman, “The $6-an-Hour Minimum Wage,” John Goodman’s Health Policy Blog, October 18, 2010, at <a href="http://healthblog.ncpa.org/the-6-an-hour-min-wage/?utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=HA#more-13959" type="external">http://healthblog.ncpa.org/the-6-an-hour-min-wage/?utm_source=newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=HA#more-13959</a> (January 13, 2011).</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[16]See James C. Capretta, “Obamacare: Impact on Future Generations,” Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 2921, June 1, 2010, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/06/ObamaCare-Impact-on-Future-Generations" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/06/ObamaCare-Impact-on-Future-Generations</a>.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[17]See Alison Acosta Fraser, “Any Stimulus Legislation Must Include Budget Reforms to Address Long-Term Challenges,” Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 2199, January 9, 2009, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/01/Any-Stimulus-Legislation-Must-Include-Budget-Reforms-to-Address-Long-Term-Challenges" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/01/Any-Stimulus-Legislation-Must-Include-Budget-Reforms-to-Address-Long-Term-Challenges</a>.</p>
<p><a type="external" href="" />[18]See Robert Moffit and James C. Capretta, “Medicare Reform: A New Vision for a Better Program,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 2500, December 13, 2010, at <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/12/How-to-Fix-Medicare-A-New-Vision-for-a-Better-Program" type="external">http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/12/How-to-Fix-Medicare-A-New-Vision-for-a-Better-Program</a>.</p> | false | 1 | federal governments finances dismal even patient protection affordable care act ppaca enacted lawmakers pushed passage felt compelled try calm worried americans claiming law would cut projected federal budget deficits addition covering uninsured 1 fact congressional budget offices cbo official estimate shows ppacas health care provisions 2 would cut projected deficits 124 billion period 2010 2019 3 cost estimate whole story long shot close examination cbo said well evidence makes clear deficit reduction associated ppaca based budget gimmicks sleights hand accounting tricks completely implausible assumptions honest accounting reveals new law trilliondollar budget buster summary cbo must assume current law enacted written even cases improbable instance ppaca makes 575 billion projected cuts medicare threatening seniors access care 4 regarding existing planned cuts payments physicians known sustainable growth rate formula cbo director douglas elmendorf wrote current law includes number policies might difficult sustain long period time example ppaca reconciliation act reduced payments many medicare providers relative government would paid prior law basis cuts payment rates existing sustainable growth rate sgr mechanism governs medicares payments physicians cbo projects medicare spending per beneficiary adjusted overall inflation increase significantly slowly next two decades increased past two decades provisions would subsequently modified implemented incompletely budgetary effects repealing ppaca relevant provisions reconciliation act could quite different cbo forecast future changes law assume changes estimates 5 medicares chief actuary echoed concern analysis 6 medicare savings materialize new spending ppaca added deficit noted elmendorf medicares payments physicians scheduled cut well sgr formula bipartisan agreement stop happening doc fix costs billions requiring congress scramble find offset without physicians would face 25 percent growing medicare payment reduction restricting seniors access care doctors become unable serve medicare patients congress never allowed happen even insisted paying fix offsets pushing ppaca congress president obama took position longer necessary pay doc fix proposed add costs national debt want costs count ppaca would explode myth deficit reduction solution pass doc fix separate legislation matter taxpayers presidents ideas passed one bill many matters total cost presidents total bill health care unfinanced doc fix shows massive deficits deficit reduction cbo assumes cuts existing programs new revenues created ppaca used pay new spending reality case ppaca increases medicare taxes imposes cuts medicare doublecounted offsets new programs also pledged extend medicares solvency 7 another source doublecounted savings class act creates new federally run longterm care insurance program beneficiaries begin paying premiums 2011 receive benefits five years frontloads revenue creates illusion 70 billion pay new spending ppaca reality premium payments class used pay benefits later years 8 senator kent conrad dnd called ponzi scheme first order kind thing bernie madoff would proud 9 savings within medicare class revenues spent used increase medicares solvency pay class program new spending ppaca added deficit ppaca also creates new subsidy program low middleincome americans purchase insurance new health exchanges cbo predicts 19 million americans benefit generous new entitlement program cost 460 billion 2019 new law includes substantial incentives employers drop existing coverage allow employees instead purchase taxpayersubsidized coverage 10 former cbo director douglas holtzeakin points many businesses could drop employee health plan raise wages make lost benefit pay employer penalty offering insurance still come ahead 11 incentives exacerbated various new insurance rules cause faster rate growth employer plan premiums cause cost subsidy program greatly exceed initial projections finally cbo scoring ppaca looks first 10 years laws enactment however includes six years full spending costliest provisions go effect 2014 also allows ppaca meet requirements payasyougo paygo rule requires legislation exhibit deficit neutrality 10year window theory paygo maintain levels deficit spending actuality little success halting addition new spending deficit since new programs create savings one decade run trillions deficits next still meet paygo requirements class program alone excellent example easy create new completely insolvent program without violating paygo experts including cbo director medicares chief actuary american academy actuaries concluded class unsustainable go bankrupt despite heritage budget expert brian riedl writes perversely repealing class would violate pay go law expanding budget deficits paygo focuses 10year 70 billion cost repeal ignores trillions dollars would saved thereafter 12 reality new health care law result trillions unaffordable deficit spending impact increase federal deficit 2010 federal deficit 13 trillion average historical deficit 29 percent gross domestic product gdp 2050 budget gap projected exceed 20 percent gdp 13 trend set continue population ages baby boomer generation retires causing cost programs medicare medicaid social security soar rising health care costs add growth entitlement spending creating new entitlement program expanding existing one hasten arrival inevitable financial collapse 14 deficitreducing provisions ppaca either unrealistic unsustainable delays progress repair existing unsustainable entitlement programs claims new health care law reduce deficit irresponsible delay meaningful action truly reduce deficit spending medicare medicaid social security must reformed sooner solution adopted better current beneficiaries would experience greater stability future beneficiaries would time adjust change ppaca made significant cuts medicare either increase programs solvency pay new spending moreover new law increased medicare payroll taxes extended apply investment income use additional revenue pay nonmedicare spending sets dangerous precedent could increase insolvency program provisions create illusion medicare reform changes wrong ones give lawmakers another excuse avoid addressing longterm health entitlement programs promises future increases taxes penalties mentioned earlier ppaca creates enormous incentives certain employers drop employersponsored coverage employer penalty included law 2000 per employee low enough allow employers drop coverage pay penalty come ahead john c goodman president national center policy analysis writes employers dump employees onto exchange cost taxpayers rises potential pressure increase fine become inexorable 15 larger penalties would harm businesses ability create jobs raise wages keep current workers puts future generations hook americans rely new subsidies order afford coverage congress hard time walking back generous program pay congress either raise taxes add deficit course deficit spending free merely delays paying programs requiring tomorrows taxpayers currently unable vote pay current citizens benefits 16 new direction congress serious reducing deficit controlling spending lawmakers set aside easily manipulated rules like paygo require scoring reveals true longterm impact legislation would make difficult legislation like ppaca increases size government creates unsustainable new spending become law reduce deficit ppaca must repealed budget process reform enforce policy changes reduce size federal government reduce outofcontrol federal spending prohibit tax increase american people 17 congress prominently disclose longterm entitlement program obligations budget resolution provide accurate picture federal governments commitments scoring policy changes also look longterm effects governments total unfunded obligations give lawmakers accurate understanding true cost piece legislation reality ppacas 10year scoring would revealed congress also establish mechanisms equitably assess enforce changes spending revenues cbos current spending baseline assumes laws authorize spending continue despite scheduled expiration dates however cbo assumes laws relating taxes expire scheduled new enforcement strategy must consider spending revenue baseline order effective finally mandatory spending entitlements put longterm budget entitlement spending currently autopilot allowing openended growth left unchecked entitlement spending eventually crowdout priorities instead programs put limited budget congress regularly examine spending take steps keep programs within limits automatic adjustments triggers put place reduce spending congress fails act force lawmakers put programs stable financial footing medicare transformed limited definedcontribution system allows seniors seek better value purchasing health care plan suits needs private market 18 medicaid reform limit taxpayer funding give states greater flexibility administer respective programs also creating opportunity beneficiaries receive better quality coverage private market james c capretta visiting fellow heritage foundation fellow ethics public policy center kathryn nix research assistant center health policy studies heritage foundation 160 1congress build sound marketbased health care reform foundation flawed health care law therefore health care law must repealed entirety house representatives taken major step towards full repeal patient protection affordable care act ppacaotherwise known obamacare full repeal occurs congress must continue focus core failures consequences ppaca block implementation allow time achieve repeal lay groundwork new marketbased direction health care reform 2patient protection affordable care act 2010 public law 111148 health care education reconciliation act 2010 public law 111152 3douglas w elmendorf director congressional budget office letter nancy pelosi speaker us house representatives march 20 2010 httpwwwcbogovftpdocs113xxdoc11379amendreconproppdf january 13 2011 4robert e moffit obamacare medicare provider cuts jeopardizing seniors access heritage foundation webmemo 3105 january 19 2011 httpwwwheritageorgresearchreports201101obamacareandmedicareprovidercutsjeopardizingseniorsaccess 5douglas w elmendorf director congressional budget office letter john boehner speaker us house representatives january 6 2011 httpwwwcbogovftpdocs120xxdoc120400106ppaca_repealpdf january 10 2011 6see richard foster chief actuary centers medicare medicaid services estimated financial effects patient protection affordable care act amended april 22 2010 p 9 httpwwwpoliticocomstaticppm130_oact_memorandum_on_financial_impact_of_ppaca_as_enactedhtml january 13 2011 7see us senate budget committee republicans budget perspective real deficit effect democrats health package march 23 2010 httpbudgetsenategovrepublicanpressarchive20100323budgetperspectivepdf january 13 2011 centers medicare medicaid services 2010 annual report boards trustees federal hospital insurance federal supplemental medical insurance trust funds august 5 2010 httpswwwcmsgovreportstrustfundsdownloadstr2010pdf january 13 2011 8see brian blase class congress saddled taxpayers another costly entitlement heritage foundation backgrounder 2444 july 29 2010 httpwwwheritageorgresearchreports201007noclasshowcongresssaddledtaxpayerswithanothercostlyentitlement 9lori montgomery proposed longterm insurance program raises questions washington post october 27 2009 httpwwwwashingtonpostcomwpdyncontentarticle20091027ar2009102701417html january 13 2011 10see brian blase paul winfree obamacare health subsidies expanding perverse incentives employers employees heritage foundation webmemo 3112 january 20 2011 httpwwwheritageorgresearchreports201101obamacareandhealthsubsidiesexpandingperverseincentivesforemployersandemployees 11douglas holtzeakin cameron smith labor markets health care reform new results american action forum may 2010 httpamericanactionforumorgfileslabormktshcraaf52710pdf january 13 2011 12brian riedl class next huge taxpayer bailout heritage foundation commentary july 26 2010 httpwwwheritageorgresearchcommentary201007classisthenexthugetaxpayerbailout january 13 2011 13the heritage foundation federal budget deficits reach levels never seen us 2010 budget chart book httpwwwheritageorgbudgetchartbookfederalbudgetdeficits 14ppaca adds total 16 million americans medicaid 2019 see elmendorf letter pelosi march 20 2010 15john c goodman 6anhour minimum wage john goodmans health policy blog october 18 2010 httphealthblogncpaorgthe6anhourminwageutm_sourcenewsletteramputm_mediumemailamputm_campaignhamore13959 january 13 2011 16see james c capretta obamacare impact future generations heritage foundation webmemo 2921 june 1 2010 httpwwwheritageorgresearchreports201006obamacareimpactonfuturegenerations 17see alison acosta fraser stimulus legislation must include budget reforms address longterm challenges heritage foundation webmemo 2199 january 9 2009 httpwwwheritageorgresearchreports200901anystimuluslegislationmustincludebudgetreformstoaddresslongtermchallenges 18see robert moffit james c capretta medicare reform new vision better program heritage foundation backgrounder 2500 december 13 2010 httpwwwheritageorgresearchreports201012howtofixmedicareanewvisionforabetterprogram | 1,631 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Two acting directors of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau started work Monday morning — one chosen by President Donald Trump, the other named by the departing director who was appointed by President Barack Obama.</p>
<p>It was another battle in the ongoing war between the Trump White House and the permanent class of Washington bureaucrats who generally oppose the administration. And it belied the notion that two heads are better than one.</p>
<p>Budget director Mick Mulvaney, Trump’s pick to head the bureau pending appointment of a permanent replacement, showed up at 7:30 a.m. Monday. He promptly occupied the former office of Richard Cordray, who resigned as director at midnight Friday, and sent out an email inviting staff to come by to say hello and grab a donut.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Leandra English, Cordray’s choice to replace him in the interim, met with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., on Capitol Hill.</p>
<p>English apparently did not show up for work at the bureau, but she did send a memo to staff in which she wrote, “It is an honor to work with all of you.”</p>
<p>Both Mulvaney and English signed their memos “Acting Director.”</p>
<p>Both would-be acting directors cited legal language that bolstered their case as the legitimate, if temporary, heir to Cordray.</p>
<p>Dodd-Frank Act</p>
<p>On Friday, hours before Cordray resigned, the bureau announced that English would replace David Silberman, who had been acting deputy director. English pointed out that the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 specified that the bureau’s deputy director “serves as the acting director in the absence or unavailability of the director.”</p>
<p>On Sunday, English submitted a brief with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that requested a temporary restraining order to keep Mulvaney from heading the consumer bureau. The brief was drafted by a private Washington-based law firm, Gupta Wessler.</p>
<p>On Tuesday, English plans to show up at the CFPB with Warren, who advocated for the bureau’s creation, to demand that Mulvaney step aside.</p>
<p>As the president met with World War II heroes, two Navajo Code Talkers, Monday afternoon, he <a href="" type="internal">pointedly referred to Warren as Pocahontas</a>— the Twitter name he uses to needle the Massachusetts senator, who has claimed Native American ancestry.</p>
<p>On MSNBC, Warren responded that it was “deeply unfortunate that the president of the United States cannot even make it through a ceremony honoring these heroes without having to throw out a racial slur.”</p>
<p>Asked about Warren’s reaction at Monday’s White House briefing, Press Secretary Sarah Sanders responded, “I think what most people find offensive is Sen. Warren lying about her heritage to advance her career.”</p>
<p>Sanders also said that the CFPB general counsel whom Cordray hired, Mary McLeod, agreed with the administration that the Federal Vacancies Reform Act gave the president authority to put Mulvaney at the helm temporarily.</p>
<p>“I advise all Bureau personnel to act consistently with the understanding that Director Mulvaney is the Acting Director of the CFPB,” McLeod wrote in a memo.</p>
<p>Mulvaney’s two jobs</p>
<p>Mulvaney will continue as director of the Office of Management and Budget while he also steers the CFPB, an agency he dismissed in a 2014 interview as a “joke.” Mulvaney also told the Credit Union Times, “some of us would like to get rid of it.”</p>
<p>As he addressed reporters at the bureau, Mulvaney refused to pull back those remarks. He said he considered the consumer agency to be “an awful example of a bureaucracy that has gone wrong.” He later added, “They would frighten most of you.”</p>
<p>Mulvaney also announced a 30-day hiring freeze, as well as a 30-day freeze on discretionary payouts from the civil penalty fund. He said he expects to work both jobs about three days per week.</p>
<p>From the Senate floor, Schumer explained his opposition to Mulvaney: “The only reason the Trump administration would put Mr. Mulvaney forward for this position would be so that he can rot the agency from the inside.”</p>
<p>Schumer also dismissed Mulvaney as “the latest in a long line of Trojan-horse candidates selected by this White House to undermine federal agencies from within.”</p>
<p>Indeed, during a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in February, then White House chief strategist Steve Bannon revealed that a major goal of the Trump administration was “the deconstruction of the administrative state.”</p>
<p>Sanders said she expected the bureau to do a better job of protecting consumers under Mulvaney. Asked where the CFPB failed, the press office later sent out tweets in which Sanders criticized the agency for not protecting community banks from frivolous lawsuits and making it difficult for auto dealers to customize loans.</p>
<p>In a statement, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., asserted her office will recognize English as acting director. “If President Trump wishes to have an alternate person run the bureau, he should nominate that individual and provide them with a chance to be considered before the Senate.”</p>
<p>Contact Debra J. Saunders at <a href="" type="internal">[email protected]</a> or 202-662-7391. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/DebraJSaunders" type="external">@DebraJSaunders</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>More details</p>
<p>A federal judge held an emergency hearing but declined to rule immediately Monday on a request to bar President Donald Trump from installing an acting director at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in place of the agency’s No. 2 leader, an Obama administration holdover.</p>
<p>U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly of Washington, D.C., heard arguments by the bureau deputy director Leandra English, who filed a lawsuit Sunday calling herself the “rightful acting director” according to a 2010 Dodd-Frank act, which established the influential watchdog agency.</p>
<p>Kelly said he would wait until government attorneys supplemented their arguments in a 40-minute hearing by filing a formal, written response Monday night defending Trump’s choice, White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, whose appointment they said was authorized under an earlier, 1988 law governing presidential vacancies in general.</p>
<p>–The Washington Post</p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington two acting directors consumer financial protection bureau started work monday morning one chosen president donald trump named departing director appointed president barack obama another battle ongoing war trump white house permanent class washington bureaucrats generally oppose administration belied notion two heads better one budget director mick mulvaney trumps pick head bureau pending appointment permanent replacement showed 730 monday promptly occupied former office richard cordray resigned director midnight friday sent email inviting staff come say hello grab donut meanwhile leandra english cordrays choice replace interim met senate minority leader chuck schumer sen elizabeth warren dmass capitol hill english apparently show work bureau send memo staff wrote honor work mulvaney english signed memos acting director wouldbe acting directors cited legal language bolstered case legitimate temporary heir cordray doddfrank act friday hours cordray resigned bureau announced english would replace david silberman acting deputy director english pointed doddfrank act 2010 specified bureaus deputy director serves acting director absence unavailability director sunday english submitted brief us district court district columbia requested temporary restraining order keep mulvaney heading consumer bureau brief drafted private washingtonbased law firm gupta wessler tuesday english plans show cfpb warren advocated bureaus creation demand mulvaney step aside president met world war ii heroes two navajo code talkers monday afternoon pointedly referred warren pocahontas twitter name uses needle massachusetts senator claimed native american ancestry msnbc warren responded deeply unfortunate president united states even make ceremony honoring heroes without throw racial slur asked warrens reaction mondays white house briefing press secretary sarah sanders responded think people find offensive sen warren lying heritage advance career sanders also said cfpb general counsel cordray hired mary mcleod agreed administration federal vacancies reform act gave president authority put mulvaney helm temporarily advise bureau personnel act consistently understanding director mulvaney acting director cfpb mcleod wrote memo mulvaneys two jobs mulvaney continue director office management budget also steers cfpb agency dismissed 2014 interview joke mulvaney also told credit union times us would like get rid addressed reporters bureau mulvaney refused pull back remarks said considered consumer agency awful example bureaucracy gone wrong later added would frighten mulvaney also announced 30day hiring freeze well 30day freeze discretionary payouts civil penalty fund said expects work jobs three days per week senate floor schumer explained opposition mulvaney reason trump administration would put mr mulvaney forward position would rot agency inside schumer also dismissed mulvaney latest long line trojanhorse candidates selected white house undermine federal agencies within indeed speech conservative political action conference february white house chief strategist steve bannon revealed major goal trump administration deconstruction administrative state sanders said expected bureau better job protecting consumers mulvaney asked cfpb failed press office later sent tweets sanders criticized agency protecting community banks frivolous lawsuits making difficult auto dealers customize loans statement sen catherine cortez masto dnev asserted office recognize english acting director president trump wishes alternate person run bureau nominate individual provide chance considered senate contact debra j saunders dsaundersreviewjournalcom 2026627391 follow debrajsaunders twitter details federal judge held emergency hearing declined rule immediately monday request bar president donald trump installing acting director consumer financial protection bureau place agencys 2 leader obama administration holdover us district judge timothy kelly washington dc heard arguments bureau deputy director leandra english filed lawsuit sunday calling rightful acting director according 2010 doddfrank act established influential watchdog agency kelly said would wait government attorneys supplemented arguments 40minute hearing filing formal written response monday night defending trumps choice white house office management budget director mick mulvaney whose appointment said authorized earlier 1988 law governing presidential vacancies general washington post | 588 |
<p>When “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/vikings/" type="external">Vikings</a>” creator Michael Hirst set about telling the saga of the famed farmer-turned-king Ragnar Lothbrok and his equally (if not more) famous sons, he always knew his leading man would reach an endpoint. That moment came in the fourth season of the History series when Ragnar (Travis Fimmel) met his end in a poisonous pit of snakes, unleashing a bloody chain of events that included his first wife Lagertha (Katheryn Winnick) killing his current wife Aslaug (Alyssa Sutherland) and taking over Kattegat, while his sons banded together in The Great Army to exact revenge on the Saxons responsible for their father’s death.</p>
<p>“I knew that in some ways killing Ragnar was taking a chance; I was told that to kill off a major character might be problematic, but I didn’t worry about it,” Hirst tells Variety. “The other sons all have some aspect of Ragnar in their characters, for good and bad. It’s a bit like the Beatles: they were four individuals who were in some ways one. Season 5 is all about shifting allegiances and The Great Army falling apart and the brothers fighting against one another. This season we see them often at each other’s throats.”</p>
<p>Those themes of conquest, revenge and redemption pick up in the fifth season’s two-hour premiere, “The Departed,” as Ivar the Boneless (Alex Hogh Andersen) leads the army on yet another top-secret raid, Bjorn (Alexander Ludwig) separates from his clan to raid the Mediterranean and Harald (Peter Franzen) makes his move on Kattegat. Meanwhile Jonathan Rhys Meyers, who joined the cast late last season as the mysterious Bishop Heahmund, begins plotting ways in which to finally take the great Viking army down in the wake of King Ecbert’s (Linus Roache) death.</p>
<p>Ahead of the premiere Variety caught up with Hirst to explore what a Ragnar-free season looks like, to delve into the show’s ongoing reinvention through the addition of Jonathan Rhys Meyers as the new feared Christian, and to preview the ultimate battle for the <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/vikings-season-4-finale-deaths-jonathan-rhys-meyers-1201975435/" type="external">Vikings</a>’ home base, Kattegat.</p>
<p>Was it important to bring in an established name to replace Travis Fimmel on the call sheet?</p>
<p>Johnny was the one and only person we thought of because we know him very well. I described what kind of a character we needed and everyone agreed. He’d just been in “Roots” for History and they’d really liked working with him. He’s dangerous as an actor, maybe even as a person, I don’t know. He’s an unpredictable player, and that’s what we needed.</p>
<p>What kind of adversary will Jonathan Rhys Meyers be to Ivar?</p>
<p>I’ve heard about some protests from Christian clergies in the States that my Christians were too feeble when fighting against the Vikings, and that their best dude was the monk Athelstan [George Blagden], so no wonder they got beat up. I thought that was slightly unfair criticism, but at the end of four with Aethelwulf [Moe Dunford] in retreat and the Saxons beaten I knew I needed a Saxon leader or warrior who could potentially stand up to Ivar and the Vikings. My historical research told me about these warrior bishops who were real people. Bishop Heahmund was a real bishop and warrior who died in battle and I knew as soon as I was on the trail of this character who was a forerunner of the Knights Templar I knew I had someone who could stand up to Ivar. You can tell when the characters are fighting each other in York that they recognize something about each other and their stories become more interlinked as the season goes on. It was evening up the playing field to introduce someone who was as formidable as anyone on the Vikings side.</p>
<p>What kinds of challenges does having a character like Ivar the Boneless, who can’t walk, pose when it comes to crafting these battle scenes?</p>
<p>I probably couldn’t have written that character earlier on in my career. I couldn’t have made this poor crippled guy a Viking hero and one of the most famous men in the Viking world. It’s a creative challenge and as a writer and creator you need those challenges. We came up with some amazing solutions. Ivar doesn’t think of himself as crippled unless he wants sympathy. He thinks of himself as a strong warrior and he proves that. He’s a very complicated young man. It’s incredibly ironic that the most famous Viking of all time and by reputation the cruelest Viking of all time should turn out to be a cripple. Writing the character was a challenge as he’s a great warrior at the same time as being unable to walk. As we get into Season 5 you see how he deals with that and the various ways he finds of moving about — some of which are ingenious and all of which point out his disabilities. So however cruel he is you always remember he had the most terrible childhood and he’s got the most terrible disability so you don’t actually ever really lose sympathy with him.</p>
<p>These Vikings men and women lived short lives; what was it about Floki (Gustaf Skarsgard) and Lagertha that gave them longevity now that the rest of the original cast is gone?</p>
<p>There’s a constant negotiation going on in my mind about who will live and who will die. There are certain things I knew [like] Ragnar had to die more or less at a certain point. I know when others have to die because it’s appropriate to historic circumstances and the bits we know about them. But there are other characters that are more free spirits. To kill characters like that at a certain point would be ridiculous or self-defeating because I need them for something further down the line. Sending Floki to Iceland was not an entirely difficult idea, as he got tired of the world he was living in. He’d lost all the people he loved. He was tired of the battle between Christians and pagans. He wanted to find a purer world where the gods were so he just cut himself adrift in a boat and ended up in Iceland.</p>
<p>Lagertha existed but we don’t know how she died. She’s had a hell of a life, and had everything thrown at her. I’m constantly fascinated how as a woman she deals with all of these issues. I do believe it’s more difficult for a woman to deal with these many, many personal political power issues than for a man. So I root for her a lot and want to know how she’s going to deal with the next issue. I don’t want to kill her arbitrarily. I need her around. Unless I have really good reason to kill her, I’m not going to.</p>
<p>Given that you write everything yourself, do you have any females in your life that you bounce ideas off of when writing that kind of female character?</p>
<p>I just hope my daughters watch it and are pleased by the depiction of Lagertha and not that they necessarily learn something, but are thrilled that their father has managed to depict this wonderful female character who is anything but a token character. All of the women characters are different on the show and I’m proud of that. From “Elizabeth” onwards I’m interested in female characters. I did my PhD on Henry James and he loved writing about women. The great thing about the freestanding characters like Lagertha is that they can surprise you, which may sound weird, but someone like that can deal with a situation in a way that initially I hadn’t thought of. That’s how real she is to me.</p>
<p>How does Rollo (Clive Standen) factor into this season?</p>
<p>Who wants to lose Rollo completely? It was always in the back of my mind to bring him back and I do bring him back, and in a totally unexpected way with some unexpected revelations. Fans should be pleased to see him again and we had to work with Clive’s other commitments, but he was very, very keen to come back. These early pilgrims, the first cast that I had, I obviously love them and they were with me for season after season. I love their characters and it’s always painful to lose them, so I will always grasp the opportunity to bring them back if it’s realistic and it works. It was great to bring Clive back.</p>
<p>This season is very much about raiding and exploring, but by the end of it the biggest battle is back at Kattegat. Why will that always be your base?</p>
<p>Shows have to have a center. The first thing we built back in the first season was the great hall at Kattegat. It is like the spiritual center of the show. Of course you go back to that because it also represents the center of power for Ragnar’s family. So even though the show takes us to Morocco and to Iceland and previously they’ve gone to Frankia, they’ll always come back to their power base. And their powerbase is their spiritual home as well. The actual location, Kattegat started as one, maybe two buildings on the stage and four on the back lot. It’s now like two acres on the back lot and four stages for the buildings. It’s huge now. It is a huge trading station instead of a small Viking village. The battle for Kattegat is always going to be intense between the sons because that’s where their father ruled. Ragnar didn’t like to be king particularly but he was and now they want to be. It’s a father-son thing. You wait until you see episode 510. That battle for Kattegat is the most extraordinary thing we’ve shot so far.</p>
<p>In your head does this show still end with the Vikings reaching North America or have you since rethought that?</p>
<p>It is still in my mind to finish or to get where I always said I wanted to get to with this show, which is North America.</p>
<p>“Vikings” premieres its fifth season Wednesday, Nov. 29 at 9 p.m. on History.</p> | false | 1 | vikings creator michael hirst set telling saga famed farmerturnedking ragnar lothbrok equally famous sons always knew leading man would reach endpoint moment came fourth season history series ragnar travis fimmel met end poisonous pit snakes unleashing bloody chain events included first wife lagertha katheryn winnick killing current wife aslaug alyssa sutherland taking kattegat sons banded together great army exact revenge saxons responsible fathers death knew ways killing ragnar taking chance told kill major character might problematic didnt worry hirst tells variety sons aspect ragnar characters good bad bit like beatles four individuals ways one season 5 shifting allegiances great army falling apart brothers fighting one another season see often others throats themes conquest revenge redemption pick fifth seasons twohour premiere departed ivar boneless alex hogh andersen leads army yet another topsecret raid bjorn alexander ludwig separates clan raid mediterranean harald peter franzen makes move kattegat meanwhile jonathan rhys meyers joined cast late last season mysterious bishop heahmund begins plotting ways finally take great viking army wake king ecberts linus roache death ahead premiere variety caught hirst explore ragnarfree season looks like delve shows ongoing reinvention addition jonathan rhys meyers new feared christian preview ultimate battle vikings home base kattegat important bring established name replace travis fimmel call sheet johnny one person thought know well described kind character needed everyone agreed hed roots history theyd really liked working hes dangerous actor maybe even person dont know hes unpredictable player thats needed kind adversary jonathan rhys meyers ivar ive heard protests christian clergies states christians feeble fighting vikings best dude monk athelstan george blagden wonder got beat thought slightly unfair criticism end four aethelwulf moe dunford retreat saxons beaten knew needed saxon leader warrior could potentially stand ivar vikings historical research told warrior bishops real people bishop heahmund real bishop warrior died battle knew soon trail character forerunner knights templar knew someone could stand ivar tell characters fighting york recognize something stories become interlinked season goes evening playing field introduce someone formidable anyone vikings side kinds challenges character like ivar boneless cant walk pose comes crafting battle scenes probably couldnt written character earlier career couldnt made poor crippled guy viking hero one famous men viking world creative challenge writer creator need challenges came amazing solutions ivar doesnt think crippled unless wants sympathy thinks strong warrior proves hes complicated young man incredibly ironic famous viking time reputation cruelest viking time turn cripple writing character challenge hes great warrior time unable walk get season 5 see deals various ways finds moving ingenious point disabilities however cruel always remember terrible childhood hes got terrible disability dont actually ever really lose sympathy vikings men women lived short lives floki gustaf skarsgard lagertha gave longevity rest original cast gone theres constant negotiation going mind live die certain things knew like ragnar die less certain point know others die appropriate historic circumstances bits know characters free spirits kill characters like certain point would ridiculous selfdefeating need something line sending floki iceland entirely difficult idea got tired world living hed lost people loved tired battle christians pagans wanted find purer world gods cut adrift boat ended iceland lagertha existed dont know died shes hell life everything thrown im constantly fascinated woman deals issues believe difficult woman deal many many personal political power issues man root lot want know shes going deal next issue dont want kill arbitrarily need around unless really good reason kill im going given write everything females life bounce ideas writing kind female character hope daughters watch pleased depiction lagertha necessarily learn something thrilled father managed depict wonderful female character anything token character women characters different show im proud elizabeth onwards im interested female characters phd henry james loved writing women great thing freestanding characters like lagertha surprise may sound weird someone like deal situation way initially hadnt thought thats real rollo clive standen factor season wants lose rollo completely always back mind bring back bring back totally unexpected way unexpected revelations fans pleased see work clives commitments keen come back early pilgrims first cast obviously love season season love characters always painful lose always grasp opportunity bring back realistic works great bring clive back season much raiding exploring end biggest battle back kattegat always base shows center first thing built back first season great hall kattegat like spiritual center show course go back also represents center power ragnars family even though show takes us morocco iceland previously theyve gone frankia theyll always come back power base powerbase spiritual home well actual location kattegat started one maybe two buildings stage four back lot like two acres back lot four stages buildings huge huge trading station instead small viking village battle kattegat always going intense sons thats father ruled ragnar didnt like king particularly want fatherson thing wait see episode 510 battle kattegat extraordinary thing weve shot far head show still end vikings reaching north america since rethought still mind finish get always said wanted get show north america vikings premieres fifth season wednesday nov 29 9 pm history | 832 |
<p>George Packer of The New Yorker, himself a fine writer, was <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2008/03/31/080331taco_talk_packer" type="external">deeply impressed</a> (to say the least) with Barack Obama's speech on race. According to Packer, what we witnessed in Philadelphia a week ago was an “intimate lecture,” the “greatest speech on race by an American politician in many decades,” one that seemed to have been composed in “intense solitude.” It has the “personal drama, the encompassing structure, the moral and intellectual intricacy, of a great essay.” In the “high-mindedness and subtlety on glorious display in Philadelphia last week,” Obama paid “the electorate the supreme compliment of assuming that it, too, can appreciate complexity.” Obama's “character and candidacy offer a way out of the divisive identity politics that has, in part, cost the Democratic Party its majority status since the nineteen-sixties.”</p>
<p>But not all is well. Whatever ugly things said by the Clinton and Obama camps against one another, “far worse lies ahead for the eventual nominee.” Packer added this:</p>
<p>You can already hear the sound of Republican operatives disassembling Obama's speech and constructing a booby trap from its parts. Peter Wehner, a former Bush aide who has said nice things about Obama, is now comparing him to “Slick Willie” Clinton.</p>
<p>As Packer's comments relate to me, it's true; I have said nice things about Obama in the past, and I hope and trust Obama will give me more opportunities to praise him down the road. I have found him to be an impressive, intellectually formidable, and in many ways an appealing figure. From what I have heard about him from people who have known him over the years, he is an essentially decent man. He's clearly a gifted writer. And sections of the speech that dealt with race were in some respect insightful — though not nearly the masterpiece Packer believes.</p>
<p>At the same time, Obama's speech was troublesome for reasons Packer does not even acknowledge: When it comes to Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.'s bigoted and anti-American views, what did Obama hear and when did he hear it? These are perfectly legitimate, proper, and even urgent questions — and you can be sure that if we were dealing with right-wing hate speech and a GOP candidate, Packer and his magazine would be pressing very hard to find out the answers.</p>
<p>Here's what we know: In early March Obama said, “I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial.” What could be considered controversial was part of the Wright's “social gospel”; the specific stand of Wright's that Obama mentioned was divestment from South Africa “and some other issues like that.” After the tapes of Wright's sermons hit prime-time on TV and the Internet, Obama indicated that Wright's comments and the mindset from which they arose were more or less news to him (“I did not hear such incendiary language myself personally, either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew,” Obama told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann. “[Wright] always preached a social gospel and was sometimes controversial in the same way that many people who speak out on social issues are controversial.”). The man Obama knew, he assured us, was a former Marine who served his country, a biblical scholar, somebody who's spoken at theological schools all across the country and is widely regarded as an excellent preacher. “That's the man I know,” Obama said. “That's the person who was pastor of this church. I did not hear such incendiary language.”</p>
<p>But in his Philadelphia speech, Obama clearly wanted to make sure he had an escape hatch. Obama told us that Wright was an “occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy” and that Obama did hear Wright make remarks that “could be considered controversial” while he sat in church and with which Obama “strongly disagree[d].” But Obama never told us what those comments might be.</p>
<p>And so I wrote <a href="http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTU2N2ViMGFkN2VmMzdmMTk1YzVlMDc0NzUyODQyMmQ=" type="external">this</a>:</p>
<p>[Obama's] story, which seemingly changes in every re-telling, is beginning to resemble nothing so much as Bill Clinton's evolving explanation about his draft notice. It was then that most of America was introduced to “Slick Willie.”</p>
<p>I don't believe Obama's character is as corrupt as Bill Clinton's (an admittedly low standard). In fact, I don't believe Obama is corrupt, period. But the shifting Obama version of events does bother me, and in my estimation it ought to bother Packer as well. This is not a hard call. It turns out that one of the most significant and influential figures in the life of Barack Obama, a candidate who promises that he alone among political figures can help us transcend race and divisions in America, is an anti-American bigot and a hate-spewing minister. Are those who raise questions and seek more answers about this somehow at fault?</p>
<p>And to assert that a “booby trap” is being constructed by Republicans isn't really quite right. The trap has been laid and set by Obama himself. He is the one who considers Wright like family; who drew close to Wright, probably in an effort to strengthen his credibility in Chicago's south side; and who, as best as we can tell, never confronted Wright on a single thing Wright has said.</p>
<p>In addition, when the New York Times reported last April that “Mr. Wright's assertions of widespread white racism and his scorching remarks about American government have drawn criticism, and prompted the senator to cancel [Wright's] delivery of the invocation when [Obama] formally announced his candidacy in February,” presumably Obama was aware, and somewhere along the line had been exposed to, Wright's worldviews. Why else would Obama cancel Wright's invocation? It's simply not plausible to think that Wright's views, which appear to be central to who he is, came as a surprise to Obama.</p>
<p>The Times story on Obama and Wright included this prescient comment by Trinity United's senior pastor:</p>
<p>“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”</p>
<p>And happen it did. Christopher Hitchens <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2187277/" type="external">characterized</a> this comment by Wright in his inimitable way:</p>
<p>Pause just for a moment, if only to admire the sheer calculating self-confidence of this. Sen. Obama has long known perfectly well, in other words, that he'd one day have to put some daylight between himself and a bigmouth Farrakhan fan. But he felt he needed his South Side Chicago “base” in the meantime. So he coldly decided to double-cross that bridge when he came to it. And now we are all supposed to marvel at the silky success of the maneuver.</p>
<p>What seems to be occurring in some quarters is that people who have become enchanted with Obama and his appeal, which is considerable, are suspending their critical faculties. They are even attempting to portray Obama as the victim.</p>
<p>This is silly. Barack Obama merely needs to come clean on the important aspects of his relationship with Reverend Wright. He has not done so — and that's why despite all the rave reviews this speech has gotten from various commentators, this issue is not going to go away.&#160;</p>
<p>&#160;— Peter Wehner, former deputy assistant to the president, is a senior fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center.</a></p> | false | 1 | george packer new yorker fine writer deeply impressed say least barack obamas speech race according packer witnessed philadelphia week ago intimate lecture greatest speech race american politician many decades one seemed composed intense solitude personal drama encompassing structure moral intellectual intricacy great essay highmindedness subtlety glorious display philadelphia last week obama paid electorate supreme compliment assuming appreciate complexity obamas character candidacy offer way divisive identity politics part cost democratic party majority status since nineteensixties well whatever ugly things said clinton obama camps one another far worse lies ahead eventual nominee packer added already hear sound republican operatives disassembling obamas speech constructing booby trap parts peter wehner former bush aide said nice things obama comparing slick willie clinton packers comments relate true said nice things obama past hope trust obama give opportunities praise road found impressive intellectually formidable many ways appealing figure heard people known years essentially decent man hes clearly gifted writer sections speech dealt race respect insightful though nearly masterpiece packer believes time obamas speech troublesome reasons packer even acknowledge comes jeremiah wright jrs bigoted antiamerican views obama hear hear perfectly legitimate proper even urgent questions sure dealing rightwing hate speech gop candidate packer magazine would pressing hard find answers heres know early march obama said dont think church actually particularly controversial could considered controversial part wrights social gospel specific stand wrights obama mentioned divestment south africa issues like tapes wrights sermons hit primetime tv internet obama indicated wrights comments mindset arose less news hear incendiary language personally either conversations pew obama told msnbcs keith olbermann wright always preached social gospel sometimes controversial way many people speak social issues controversial man obama knew assured us former marine served country biblical scholar somebody whos spoken theological schools across country widely regarded excellent preacher thats man know obama said thats person pastor church hear incendiary language philadelphia speech obama clearly wanted make sure escape hatch obama told us wright occasionally fierce critic american domestic foreign policy obama hear wright make remarks could considered controversial sat church obama strongly disagreed obama never told us comments might wrote obamas story seemingly changes every retelling beginning resemble nothing much bill clintons evolving explanation draft notice america introduced slick willie dont believe obamas character corrupt bill clintons admittedly low standard fact dont believe obama corrupt period shifting obama version events bother estimation ought bother packer well hard call turns one significant influential figures life barack obama candidate promises alone among political figures help us transcend race divisions america antiamerican bigot hatespewing minister raise questions seek answers somehow fault assert booby trap constructed republicans isnt really quite right trap laid set obama one considers wright like family drew close wright probably effort strengthen credibility chicagos south side best tell never confronted wright single thing wright said addition new york times reported last april mr wrights assertions widespread white racism scorching remarks american government drawn criticism prompted senator cancel wrights delivery invocation obama formally announced candidacy february presumably obama aware somewhere along line exposed wrights worldviews else would obama cancel wrights invocation simply plausible think wrights views appear central came surprise obama times story obama wright included prescient comment trinity uniteds senior pastor barack gets past primary might publicly distance mr wright said shrug said barack personally said yeah might happen happen christopher hitchens characterized comment wright inimitable way pause moment admire sheer calculating selfconfidence sen obama long known perfectly well words hed one day put daylight bigmouth farrakhan fan felt needed south side chicago base meantime coldly decided doublecross bridge came supposed marvel silky success maneuver seems occurring quarters people become enchanted obama appeal considerable suspending critical faculties even attempting portray obama victim silly barack obama merely needs come clean important aspects relationship reverend wright done thats despite rave reviews speech gotten various commentators issue going go away160 160 peter wehner former deputy assistant president senior fellow ethics public policy center | 645 |
<p>Els van der Heijden, who has cystic fibrosis, was finding it ever harder to breathe as her lungs filled with thick, sticky mucus. Despite taking more than a dozen pills and inhalers a day, the 53-year-old had to stop working and scale back doing the thing she loved best, horseback riding.</p>
<p>Doctors saw no sense in trying an expensive new drug because it hasn’t been proven to work in people with the rare type of cystic fibrosis that van der Heijden had.</p>
<p>Instead, they scraped a few cells from van der Heijden and used them to grow a mini version of her large intestine in a petri dish. When van der Heijden’s “mini gut” responded to treatment, doctors knew it would help her too.</p>
<p>“I really felt, physically, like a different person,” van der Heijden said after taking a drug – and getting back in the saddle.</p>
<p>This experiment to help people with rare forms of cystic fibrosis in the Netherlands aims to grow mini intestines for every Dutch patient with the disease to figure out, in part, what treatment might work for them. It’s an early application of a technique now being worked on in labs all over the world, as researchers learn to grow organs outside of the body for treatment – and maybe someday for transplants.</p>
<p>So far, doctors have grown mini guts – just the size of a pencil point – for 450 of the Netherlands’ roughly 1,500 cystic fibrosis patients.</p>
<p>“The mini guts are small, but they are complete,” said Dr. Hans Clevers of the Hubrecht Institute, who pioneered the technique. Except for muscles and blood vessels, the tiny organs “have everything you would expect to see in a real gut, only on a really small scale.”</p>
<p>These so-called organoids mimic features of full-size organs, but don’t function the same way. Although many of the tiny replicas are closer to undeveloped organs found in an embryo than adult ones, they are helping scientists unravel how organs mature and providing clues on how certain diseases might be treated.</p>
<p>In Australia, mini kidneys are being grown that could be used to test drugs. Researchers in the U.S. are experimenting with tiny bits of livers that might be used to boost failing organs. At Cambridge University in England, scientists have created hundreds of mini brains to study how neurons form and better understand disorders like autism. During the height of the Zika epidemic last year, mini brains were used to show the virus causes malformed brains in babies.</p>
<p>In the Netherlands, the mini guts are used as a stand-in for cystic fibrosis patients to see if those with rare mutations might benefit from a number of pricey drugs, including Orkambi. Made by Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Orkambi costs about 100,000 euros per patient every year in some parts of Europe, and it’s more than double that in the U.S., which approved the drug in 2015. Despite being initially rejected by the Dutch government for being too expensive, negotiations with Vertex were reopened in July.</p>
<p>Making a single mini gut and testing whether the patient would benefit from certain drugs costs a couple of thousand euros. The program is paid for by groups including health insurance companies, patient foundations and the government. The idea is to find a possible treatment for patients, and avoid putting them on expensive drugs that wouldn’t work for them.</p>
<p>About 50 to 60 patients across the Netherlands have been treated after drugs were tested on organoids using their cells, said Dr. Kors van der Ent, a cystic fibrosis specialist at the Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital, who leads the research.</p>
<p>Clevers made a discovery about a decade ago that got researchers on their way. They found pockets of stem cells, which can turn into many types of other cells, in the gut. They then homed in a growing environment in the lab that spurred these cells to reproduce rapidly and develop.</p>
<p>“To our surprise, the stem cells started building a mini version of the gut,” Clevers recalled.</p>
<p>Cystic fibrosis is caused by mutations in a single gene that produces a protein called CFTR, responsible for balancing the salt content of cells lining the lungs and other organs.</p>
<p>To see if certain drugs might help cystic fibrosis patients, the medicines are given to their custom-made organoids in the lab. If the mini organs puff up, it’s a sign the cells are now correctly balancing salt and water. That means the drugs are working, and could help the patient from whom the mini-gut was made.</p>
<p>Researchers are also using the mini guts to try another approach they hope will someday work in people – using a gene editing technique to repair the faulty cystic fibrosis gene in the organoid cells.</p>
<p>Other experiments are underway in the Netherlands and the U.S. to test whether organoids might help pinpoint treatments for cancers involving lungs, ovaries and pancreas.</p>
<p>While the idea sounds promising, some scientists said there are obstacles to using mini organs to study cancer.</p>
<p>Growing a mini cancer tumor, for example, would be far more challenging because scientists have found it difficult to make tumors in the lab that behave like in real life, said Mathew Garnett of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, who has studied cancer in mini organs but is not connected to Clevers’ research.</p>
<p>Also, growing the cells and testing them must happen faster for cancer patients who might not have much time to live, he said.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Clevers wants to one day make organs that are not so mini.</p>
<p>“My dream would be to be able to custom-make organs,” he said, imagining a future where doctors might have a “freezer full of livers” to choose from when sick patients arrive.</p>
<p>Others said while such a vision is theoretically possible, huge hurdles remain.</p>
<p>“There are still enormous challenges in tissue engineering with regards to the size of the structure we’re able to grow,” said Jim Wells, a pediatrics professor at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. He said the mini organs are far smaller than what would be needed to transplant into people and it’s unclear if scientists can make a working, life-sized organ in the lab.</p>
<p>There are other limitations to growing miniature organs in a dish, said Madeline Lancaster at Cambridge University.</p>
<p>“We can study physical changes and try to generate drugs that could prevent detrimental effects of disease, but we can’t look at the complex interplay between organs and the body,” she said.</p>
<p>For patients like van der Heijden, who was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis as a toddler, the research has helped her regain her strength. Vertex agreed to supply her with the drug.</p>
<p>“It was like somebody opened the curtains and said, ‘Sunshine, here I am, please come out and play.'” she said. “It’s strange to think this is all linked to some of my cells in a lab.”</p> | false | 1 | els van der heijden cystic fibrosis finding ever harder breathe lungs filled thick sticky mucus despite taking dozen pills inhalers day 53yearold stop working scale back thing loved best horseback riding doctors saw sense trying expensive new drug hasnt proven work people rare type cystic fibrosis van der heijden instead scraped cells van der heijden used grow mini version large intestine petri dish van der heijdens mini gut responded treatment doctors knew would help really felt physically like different person van der heijden said taking drug getting back saddle experiment help people rare forms cystic fibrosis netherlands aims grow mini intestines every dutch patient disease figure part treatment might work early application technique worked labs world researchers learn grow organs outside body treatment maybe someday transplants far doctors grown mini guts size pencil point 450 netherlands roughly 1500 cystic fibrosis patients mini guts small complete said dr hans clevers hubrecht institute pioneered technique except muscles blood vessels tiny organs everything would expect see real gut really small scale socalled organoids mimic features fullsize organs dont function way although many tiny replicas closer undeveloped organs found embryo adult ones helping scientists unravel organs mature providing clues certain diseases might treated australia mini kidneys grown could used test drugs researchers us experimenting tiny bits livers might used boost failing organs cambridge university england scientists created hundreds mini brains study neurons form better understand disorders like autism height zika epidemic last year mini brains used show virus causes malformed brains babies netherlands mini guts used standin cystic fibrosis patients see rare mutations might benefit number pricey drugs including orkambi made vertex pharmaceuticals orkambi costs 100000 euros per patient every year parts europe double us approved drug 2015 despite initially rejected dutch government expensive negotiations vertex reopened july making single mini gut testing whether patient would benefit certain drugs costs couple thousand euros program paid groups including health insurance companies patient foundations government idea find possible treatment patients avoid putting expensive drugs wouldnt work 50 60 patients across netherlands treated drugs tested organoids using cells said dr kors van der ent cystic fibrosis specialist wilhelmina childrens hospital leads research clevers made discovery decade ago got researchers way found pockets stem cells turn many types cells gut homed growing environment lab spurred cells reproduce rapidly develop surprise stem cells started building mini version gut clevers recalled cystic fibrosis caused mutations single gene produces protein called cftr responsible balancing salt content cells lining lungs organs see certain drugs might help cystic fibrosis patients medicines given custommade organoids lab mini organs puff sign cells correctly balancing salt water means drugs working could help patient minigut made researchers also using mini guts try another approach hope someday work people using gene editing technique repair faulty cystic fibrosis gene organoid cells experiments underway netherlands us test whether organoids might help pinpoint treatments cancers involving lungs ovaries pancreas idea sounds promising scientists said obstacles using mini organs study cancer growing mini cancer tumor example would far challenging scientists found difficult make tumors lab behave like real life said mathew garnett wellcome trust sanger institute studied cancer mini organs connected clevers research also growing cells testing must happen faster cancer patients might much time live said meanwhile clevers wants one day make organs mini dream would able custommake organs said imagining future doctors might freezer full livers choose sick patients arrive others said vision theoretically possible huge hurdles remain still enormous challenges tissue engineering regards size structure able grow said jim wells pediatrics professor cincinnati childrens hospital medical center said mini organs far smaller would needed transplant people unclear scientists make working lifesized organ lab limitations growing miniature organs dish said madeline lancaster cambridge university study physical changes try generate drugs could prevent detrimental effects disease cant look complex interplay organs body said patients like van der heijden diagnosed cystic fibrosis toddler research helped regain strength vertex agreed supply drug like somebody opened curtains said sunshine please come play said strange think linked cells lab | 664 |
<p>CANTON, OH — A new era begins this year at the Pro Football Hall of Fame as the induction ceremony of the Class of 2017 will be the featured event in the unveiling of the $800 million Johnson Controls HOF Village.</p>
<p>That includes the spectacular new <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tom_Benson/" type="external">Tom Benson</a> Hall of Fame Stadium and a National Youth Football and Sports Complex.</p>
<p>But still at the heart of all this are the great players who will be inducted Saturday (7 p.m. ET, NFL Network TV).</p>
<p>Here is a closer look at those seven players, their accomplishments and some quotes by or about them:</p>
<p>Facts, quotes on the PFHOF Class of 2017:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Morten_Andersen/" type="external">MORTEN ANDERSEN</a></p>
<p>Kicker — 6-foot-2, 218 pounds. Michigan State alum. 1982-1994 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-Orleans-Saints/" type="external">New Orleans Saints</a>, 1995-2000, 2006-07 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Atlanta-Falcons/" type="external">Atlanta Falcons</a>, 2001 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New_York_Giants/" type="external">New York Giants</a>, 2002-03 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kansas-City-Chiefs/" type="external">Kansas City Chiefs</a>, 2004 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Minnesota-Vikings/" type="external">Minnesota Vikings</a>. 25 seasons, 382 games. Selected by Saints in fourth round (86th player overall) of 1982 draft. Began career in strike-shortened 1982 season. Scored more than 90 points in 22 seasons. Topped 100-point total 14 times in career. First 100-plus season, 1985, connected on 31 of 35 field goals, 27 extra point conversions, for 120 points, earning first of seven Pro Bowl selections. Also named All-Pro five times. After 13 years with Saints and ranking as team’s all-time leading scorer, joined the Falcons in 1995. Became Falcons career scoring leader. Spectacular 1995 season, scored a career-high 122 points, including then NFL-record for most 50-yard field goals in season (eight). Dec. 10, 1995, became first kicker to convert three field goals of 50 yards or longer in single game. Set NFL records for career points (2,544), most field goals (565), games played (382). His 40 field goals of 50-plus yards most in NFL history at retirement. Named to two NFL All-Decade Teams (1980s and 1990s). Converted 565 of 709 field goal attempts, 849 of 859 point-after-attempts. Led NFL in field goals, 1987. Led NFC in scoring, 1992 and topped all conference kickers in most field goals in 1985, 1987, and 1995. Born August 19, 1960 in Copenhagen, Denmark.</p>
<p>–Kickers in the Hall of Fame: (2) — Morten Anderson, Jan Stenerud; Also — George Blanda, QB/K; Lou Groza, T/K).</p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“I remember watching him for many years growing up thinking that, ‘This guy’s the best.’ Then finally getting to play against him or be on the same field, I was like, ‘Wow this is awesome.'” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adam_Vinatieri/" type="external">Adam Vinatieri</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Indianapolis-Colts/" type="external">Indianapolis Colts</a> kicker</p>
<p>–“Sports has a beautiful way of allowing you into a group of guys and just being accepted because that’s the common denominator that we’re doing something together here, we’re a part of a team. I think football really helped me that way, and kicking helped me that way.” –Morten Andersen, Class of 2017</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Terrell_Davis/" type="external">TERRELL DAVIS</a></p>
<p>Running Back — 5-foot-11, 206 pounds. Long Beach State, Georgia, alum. 1995-2001 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Denver_Broncos/" type="external">Denver Broncos</a> seven seasons, 78 games. Selected by Broncos in the sixth round, (196th player overall) of 1995 NFL Draft. Made big splash when he earned starting tailback position as rookie. Despite missing final two games of rookie campaign with hamstring tear, eclipsed 1,000-yard mark and added career-high 49 receptions for 367 yards. In second year, gained 1,538 yards rushing, named Offensive Player of the Year. Rushed for 1,750 yards and league-high 15 TDs in 1997. In 1998 became fourth runner in NFL history to rush for 2,000 yards in season (2,008) and led NFL with 21 rushing TDs en route to Denver’s second straight Super Bowl title. Set NFL playoff record seven straight 100-yard performances spanning 1997-98 postseasons. Earned MVP honors in Super Bowl XXXII after rushing 157 yards, three TDs in victory over Packers. Scored eight rushing touchdowns in ’97 playoff run. In 1998 playoffs, rushed for franchise postseason-record 199 yards against Dolphins in divisional playoff, 167 yards vs. Jets in the championship and 102 yards in Super Bowl XXXIII victory over Falcons. Devastating knee injury limited him to just 17 games over his final three seasons. Three-time All-Pro selection. Rushed for 7,607 yards, 60 TDs in just 78 career games. Added additional 1,280 yards on 169 career catches and five TD receptions. Selected to three Pro Bowls and named to the NFL’s All-Decade Team of the 1990s. Born October 28,</p>
<p>1972 in San Diego California.</p>
<p>–Running Backs in the Hall of Fame: (32) — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marcus_Allen/" type="external">Marcus Allen</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerome_Bettis/" type="external">Jerome Bettis</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jim_Brown/" type="external">Jim Brown</a>, Earl Campbell, Larry Csonka, TERRELL DAVIS, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Eric_Dickerson/" type="external">Eric Dickerson</a>, Tony Dorsett, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marshall_Faulk/" type="external">Marshall Faulk</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Frank_Gifford/" type="external">Frank Gifford</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Franco_Harris/" type="external">Franco Harris</a>, Paul Hornung, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Henry/" type="external">John Henry</a> Johnson, Leroy Kelly, Floyd Little, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Curtis_Martin/" type="external">Curtis Martin</a>, Ollie Matson, Hugh McElhenny, Lenny Moore, Marion Motley, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Walter_Payton/" type="external">Walter Payton</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Perry/" type="external">Joe Perry</a>, John Riggins, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Barry_Sanders/" type="external">Barry Sanders</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Gale_Sayers/" type="external">Gale Sayers</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/O.J._Simpson/" type="external">O.J. Simpson</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Emmitt_Smith/" type="external">Emmitt Smith</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jim_Taylor/" type="external">Jim Taylor</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Thurman_Thomas/" type="external">Thurman Thomas</a>, LaDAINIAN TOMLINSON, Charley Trippi, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Doak_Walker/" type="external">Doak Walker</a>.</p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“The more you put into football, you train, you prepare, the harder you play, then the better the results are going to be and that is true in life … you can’t think you’re going to be great at anything without putting work into it.” –Terrell Davis,</p>
<p>KENNY EASLEY</p>
<p>Safety — 6-foot-3, 206 pounds. UCLA alum. 1981-87 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Seattle-Seahawks/" type="external">Seattle Seahawks</a> seven seasons, 89 games. Drafted as fourth player overall by Seahawks in 1981 NFL Draft. Three-time consensus All-America at UCLA. Made immediate impact in Seattle with his intimidating style on defense. Developed reputation as punishing tackler. Picked as Defensive Rookie of the Year after sensational first season in which he recorded three interceptions for 155 yards and one TD (82-yarder vs. Browns), 1981. Defensive leader of Seahawks’ team that advanced to franchise’s first-ever AFC championship game, 1983. Registered seven interceptions for 106 yards to earn AFC Defensive Player of the Year honors, 1983. Named Defensive Player of the Year in 1984 after recording league-high and career-best 10 interceptions including pair of pick-sixes (25 yards vs. Patriots; 58 yards vs. Chiefs). All-Pro four straight seasons, 1982-85. Named to five Pro Bowls (1983-86, 1988). Member of NFL’s All-Decade Team of 1980s. Intercepted multiple passes in each of seven NFL seasons. Led team in interceptions four times (1982, 1983, 1984, 1987). Career stats: 32 interceptions, 538 yards and three TDs. Also had eight career sacks and returned 26 punts for 302 yards. Born January 15, 1959 in Chesapeake, Virginia.</p>
<p>–Safeties in the Hall of Fame: (12) — Jack Christiansen, KENNY EASLEY, Ken Houston, Paul Krause, Yale Lary, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ronnie_Lott/" type="external">Ronnie Lott</a> (also CB), Mel Renfro (also CB), Emlen Tunnell, Aeneas Williams (also CB), Larry Wilson, Willie Wood, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Rod_Woodson/" type="external">Rod Woodson</a> (also CB).</p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“In my pursuit at trying to be the best, I always felt like I was shooting up to his level because he was the standard. … Kenny’s skills transcended the game…He was a good as there ever was and I mean that right to this day.” –Ronnie Lott, Pro Football Hall of Fame, Class of 2000</p>
<p>–“He was an outstanding three-time All American player. … Big, fast, physical, athletic. When you saw him play for Seattle you knew you were watching a Hall of Fame player, without doubt.” -Ron Wolf, Pro Football Hall of Fame, Class of 2015</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerry_Jones/" type="external">JERRY JONES</a></p>
<p>Owner, president and general manager. Arkansas alum. 1989-Present <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dallas-Cowboys/" type="external">Dallas Cowboys</a>. Purchased Cowboys in 1989 and quickly restored winning tradition to franchise. Has led Cowboys to unprecedented success on and off the field. Leadership in sports marketing and promotion has influenced landscape of NFL and America’s sports culture. Became first owner in league history to win three Super Bowls in first seven years of ownership. Cowboys made seven playoff appearances, six division titles and wins in Super Bowls XXVII, XVIII and XXX in Jones’ first decade of owning team. Dallas has advanced to postseason 13 times under Jones. Cowboys have posted 10 wins in a season 12 times during Jones era. Led franchise to NFC Eastern Division titles five straight seasons, 1992-96. Also won NFC East crowns in 1998, 2007, 2009, 2014 and 2016. Vision was driving influence in the creation and development of AT&amp;T stadium, “crown jewel” of all sports venues. Continues to provide leadership for NFL in areas of marketing, sponsorship, television, stadium management, labor negotiations and television. Leadership has shaped and enhanced NFL’s standing as world’s premiere sports league.</p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“My most important thing is that I don’t think I’ve worked a day since I bought the Dallas Cowboys. It has absolutely been a labor of love every morning and I am more excited about the future, the future about the league, the future of the Cowboys, my future. I’m more excited today than in ’89 when I became involved.” –Jerry Jones, Class of 2017</p>
<p>–“He’s meant a lot to our game. The prosperity of our league in large part, if you had to single one person, you would single Jerry Jones as the guy who’s responsible.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Troy_Aikman/" type="external">Troy Aikman</a>, Pro Football Hall of Fame, Class of 2006</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jason_Taylor/" type="external">JASON TAYLOR</a></p>
<p>Defensive End — 6-foot06, 260 pounds. Akron alum. 1997-2007, 2009, 2011 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Miami-Dolphins/" type="external">Miami Dolphins</a>, 2008 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Washington-Redskins/" type="external">Washington Redskins</a>, 2010 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Jets/" type="external">New York Jets</a>. 15 seasons, 233 games. Drafted in third round (73rd overall) by Dolphins in 1997 NFL Draft. Registered double-digit sack total in a season six times over an eight-year span (2000-07). Earned NFL Defensive Player of the Year in Honors in 2006 after recording 13.5 sacks, two interceptions returned for TDs (20 yards vs. Bears and 51 yards vs. Vikings), 11 passes defensed, 10 forced fumbles, two fumble recoveries and 62 tackles. Returned fumble career-long and team-record 85 yards for TD vs. Broncos, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sept._11/" type="external">Sept. 11</a>, 2005. Led NFL with career-high 18.5 sacks, 2002. Recorded more sacks than any player in NFL from 2000-2011. Career statistics: 139.5 sacks; eight interceptions for 110 yards and three TDs; league record-tying 29 opponents’ fumbles recovered; NFL record six TDs on fumble recoveries; and three safeties (two with Dolphins, one as a member of Jets). Voted to six Pro Bowls. Named first-team All-Pro in 2000, 2002 and 2006. All-AFC four times (2000, 2002, 2004, 2006). Picked as Dolphins’ Most Valuable Player four times. Named to NFL’s All-Decade Team of the 2000s. Born September 1, 1974 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.</p>
<p>–Defensive Ends in the Hall of Fame: (21) — Doug Atkins, Elvin Bethea, Willie Davis, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Fred_Dean/" type="external">Fred Dean</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Richard_Dent/" type="external">Richard Dent</a>, Chris Doleman (also LB), <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carl_Eller/" type="external">Carl Eller</a>, Len Ford, Charles Haley (also LB), Dan Hampton (also DT), <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Claude_Humphrey/" type="external">Claude Humphrey</a>, Deacon Jones, Howie Long, Gino Marchetti, Andy Robustelli, Lee Roy Selmon, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bruce_Smith/" type="external">Bruce Smith</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael_Strahan/" type="external">Michael Strahan</a>, JASON TAYLOR, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Reggie_White/" type="external">Reggie White</a>, Jack Youngblood.</p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“Jason caught my eye when he was outstanding in the Senior Bowl. A lot of teams thought he was undersized and that’s why we were able to get him in the third round … little did any of us realize just how great a player he would become.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jimmy_Johnson/" type="external">Jimmy Johnson</a>, Taylor’s enshrinement presenter and Miami Dolphins head coach from 1996-99</p>
<p>–“The games against Jason are some of my most (well, maybe least) memorable. He is one of the greatest opponents I’ve ever faced, having had the ‘pleasure’ of looking across the line and seeing him on the opposite side of the ball, not once, but twice each season for a decade. While I entered the league with a healthy respect for Jason and the incredibly talented Miami defense he led, my admiration for him as a player and a person only continued to grow with each play; each game; each season.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tom_Brady/" type="external">Tom Brady</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New_England_Patriots/" type="external">New England Patriots</a> quarterback</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/LaDainian_Tomlinson/" type="external">LADAINIAN TOMLINSON</a></p>
<p>Running Back — 5-foot-10, 221 pounds. Texas Christian alum. 2001-09 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/San-Diego-Chargers/" type="external">San Diego Chargers</a>, 2010-11 New York Jets. 11 seasons, 170 games. Selected by Chargers in first round (fifth player overall) of 2001 NFL Draft. Sensational rookie season with 1,236 yards and 10 TD rushing plus 59 receptions for 367 yards. Eclipsed 1,600-yard mark in back-to-back seasons, 2002-03. Rushed for 1,000 yards in each of first eight NFL seasons. Scored 10 or more rushing TDs each of nine seasons with Chargers. Captured back-to-back rushing titles, 2006-07. Named NFL’s 2006 Most Valuable Player with leading-leading and career-high 1,815 yards and 28 touchdowns rushing in addition to 56 catches for 508 yards and three TDs to set NFL record with 31 touchdowns and 186 points in a season. Hauled in 100 receptions in 2003. Set NFL record with rushing touchdown in 18 straight games (2004-05). All-Pro four straight seasons (2004-07). Named Chargers Most Valuable Player five times. Voted to five Pro Bowls over six-season span. Rushed for 13,684 career yards on 3,174 carries and scored 145 rushing touchdowns. Added 4,772 yards on 624 catches and 17 TD receptions. Also threw seven TD passes. Named to NFL’s All-Decade Team of 2000s. Born June 23, 1979 in Rosebud, Texas.</p>
<p>–Running Backs in the Hall of Fame: (32) — Marcus Allen, Jerome Bettis, Jim Brown, Earl Campbell, Larry Csonka, TERRELL DAVIS, Eric Dickerson, Tony Dorsett, Marshall Faulk, Frank Gifford, Franco Harris, Paul Hornung, John Henry Johnson, Leroy Kelly, Floyd Little, Curtis Martin, Ollie Matson, Hugh McElhenny, Lenny Moore, Marion Motley, Walter Payton, Joe Perry, John Riggins, Barry Sanders, Gale Sayers, O.J. Simpson, Emmitt Smith, Jim Taylor, Thurman Thomas, LaDAINIAN TOMLINSON, Charley Trippi, Doak Walker</p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“It was almost impossible to defend him. … Because he had hands like a receiver, he had feet like a ballet dancer and had a heart like a lion — any time that you have all of those things, you just never know what you are going to get. … What made him the hardest thing to deal with was that he always kept a calm demeanor. You never could rattle him. He always stayed true to himself.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ray_Lewis/" type="external">Ray Lewis</a>, former <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Baltimore-Ravens/" type="external">Baltimore Ravens</a> linebacker</p>
<p>–“He made everyone around him better. He was a phenomenal leader. When LT spoke, everybody listened. And he backed it up with his actions, more so than anything he could ever say.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Drew_Brees/" type="external">Drew Brees</a>, Tomlinson’s teammate with the San Diego Chargers from 2001-05</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kurt_Warner/" type="external">KURT WARNER</a></p>
<p>Quarterback — 6-foot-2, 220 pounds. Northern Iowa alum. 1998-2003 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/St-Louis-Rams/" type="external">St. Louis Rams</a>, 2004 New York Giants, 2005-09 <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Arizona-Cardinals/" type="external">Arizona Cardinals</a>. 12 seasons, 124 games. Not drafted in the NFL. Originally signed by and then released by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Green_Bay_Packers/" type="external">Green Bay Packers</a> in 1994. Went on to play in Arena Football League with Iowa Barnstormers (1995-97). Returned to NFL with Rams as free agent and allocated to NFL Europe’s Amsterdam Admirals. Returned to Rams in 1998. Went on to become a two-time NFL MVP (1999 and 2001) and named Super Bowl XXXIV MVP after leading Rams to victory 23-16 victory over <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tennessee-Titans/" type="external">Tennessee Titans</a>. Set Super Bowl record with 414 passing yards. He recorded another MVP season two years later when he guided Rams back to the Super Bowl. His season totals included a league-leading and career-high 4,830 yards and 36 touchdowns to post a 101.4 passer rating. Warner made a third trek to the Super Bowl in 2008 season when he led Arizona Cardinals to franchise’s first division title since 1975 and first-ever Super Bowl appearance. First quarterback to throw for 300 or more yards in three Super Bowls. A four-time Pro Bowl choice, led NFL in average gain per attempt, three times. Had highest passer rating and led NFL in TD passes twice. Born June 22, 1971 in Burlington, Iowa.</p>
<p>–Quarterbacks in the Hall of Fame: (26) — Troy Aikman, George Blanda (also PK), <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Terry_Bradshaw/" type="external">Terry Bradshaw</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Len_Dawson/" type="external">Len Dawson</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Elway/" type="external">John Elway</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brett_Favre/" type="external">Brett Favre</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dan_Fouts/" type="external">Dan Fouts</a>, Otto Graham, Bob Griese, Sonny Jurgensen, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jim_Kelly/" type="external">Jim Kelly</a>, Bobby Layne, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dan_Marino/" type="external">Dan Marino</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Montana/" type="external">Joe Montana</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Warren_Moon/" type="external">Warren Moon</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Namath/" type="external">Joe Namath</a>, Ken Stabler, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bart_Starr/" type="external">Bart Starr</a>, Roger Staubach, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Fran_Tarkenton/" type="external">Fran Tarkenton</a>, Y.A. Tittle, Johnny Unitas, Norm Van Brocklin, KURT WARNER, Bob Waterfield, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steve_Young/" type="external">Steve Young</a></p>
<p>Quotes</p>
<p>–“Some people think that a guy like Kurt came out of nowhere … but when you really start to peel back the veil and start to peel the orange, you kind of see the work that he put in, his willingness to not give up on his dream.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Isaac_Bruce/" type="external">Isaac Bruce</a>, Warner’s teammate with the St. Louis Rams from 1998-2003</p>
<p>–“I’ve never seen him nervous. Not on the football field. He might have been, but it never came across to me that he was. I guess, when you’re preaching something that could change the outcome of people’s lives, it’s not like throwing football passes. Kurt takes it as a privilege that he has that opportunity.” — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Larry_Fitzgerald/" type="external">Larry Fitzgerald</a>, Warner’s teammate with the Arizona Cardinals from 2005-09.</p> | false | 1 | canton oh new era begins year pro football hall fame induction ceremony class 2017 featured event unveiling 800 million johnson controls hof village includes spectacular new tom benson hall fame stadium national youth football sports complex still heart great players inducted saturday 7 pm et nfl network tv closer look seven players accomplishments quotes facts quotes pfhof class 2017 morten andersen kicker 6foot2 218 pounds michigan state alum 19821994 new orleans saints 19952000 200607 atlanta falcons 2001 new york giants 200203 kansas city chiefs 2004 minnesota vikings 25 seasons 382 games selected saints fourth round 86th player overall 1982 draft began career strikeshortened 1982 season scored 90 points 22 seasons topped 100point total 14 times career first 100plus season 1985 connected 31 35 field goals 27 extra point conversions 120 points earning first seven pro bowl selections also named allpro five times 13 years saints ranking teams alltime leading scorer joined falcons 1995 became falcons career scoring leader spectacular 1995 season scored careerhigh 122 points including nflrecord 50yard field goals season eight dec 10 1995 became first kicker convert three field goals 50 yards longer single game set nfl records career points 2544 field goals 565 games played 382 40 field goals 50plus yards nfl history retirement named two nfl alldecade teams 1980s 1990s converted 565 709 field goal attempts 849 859 pointafterattempts led nfl field goals 1987 led nfc scoring 1992 topped conference kickers field goals 1985 1987 1995 born august 19 1960 copenhagen denmark kickers hall fame 2 morten anderson jan stenerud also george blanda qbk lou groza tk quotes remember watching many years growing thinking guys best finally getting play field like wow awesome adam vinatieri indianapolis colts kicker sports beautiful way allowing group guys accepted thats common denominator something together part team think football really helped way kicking helped way morten andersen class 2017 terrell davis running back 5foot11 206 pounds long beach state georgia alum 19952001 denver broncos seven seasons 78 games selected broncos sixth round 196th player overall 1995 nfl draft made big splash earned starting tailback position rookie despite missing final two games rookie campaign hamstring tear eclipsed 1000yard mark added careerhigh 49 receptions 367 yards second year gained 1538 yards rushing named offensive player year rushed 1750 yards leaguehigh 15 tds 1997 1998 became fourth runner nfl history rush 2000 yards season 2008 led nfl 21 rushing tds en route denvers second straight super bowl title set nfl playoff record seven straight 100yard performances spanning 199798 postseasons earned mvp honors super bowl xxxii rushing 157 yards three tds victory packers scored eight rushing touchdowns 97 playoff run 1998 playoffs rushed franchise postseasonrecord 199 yards dolphins divisional playoff 167 yards vs jets championship 102 yards super bowl xxxiii victory falcons devastating knee injury limited 17 games final three seasons threetime allpro selection rushed 7607 yards 60 tds 78 career games added additional 1280 yards 169 career catches five td receptions selected three pro bowls named nfls alldecade team 1990s born october 28 1972 san diego california running backs hall fame 32 marcus allen jerome bettis jim brown earl campbell larry csonka terrell davis eric dickerson tony dorsett marshall faulk frank gifford franco harris paul hornung john henry johnson leroy kelly floyd little curtis martin ollie matson hugh mcelhenny lenny moore marion motley walter payton joe perry john riggins barry sanders gale sayers oj simpson emmitt smith jim taylor thurman thomas ladainian tomlinson charley trippi doak walker quotes put football train prepare harder play better results going true life cant think youre going great anything without putting work terrell davis kenny easley safety 6foot3 206 pounds ucla alum 198187 seattle seahawks seven seasons 89 games drafted fourth player overall seahawks 1981 nfl draft threetime consensus allamerica ucla made immediate impact seattle intimidating style defense developed reputation punishing tackler picked defensive rookie year sensational first season recorded three interceptions 155 yards one td 82yarder vs browns 1981 defensive leader seahawks team advanced franchises firstever afc championship game 1983 registered seven interceptions 106 yards earn afc defensive player year honors 1983 named defensive player year 1984 recording leaguehigh careerbest 10 interceptions including pair picksixes 25 yards vs patriots 58 yards vs chiefs allpro four straight seasons 198285 named five pro bowls 198386 1988 member nfls alldecade team 1980s intercepted multiple passes seven nfl seasons led team interceptions four times 1982 1983 1984 1987 career stats 32 interceptions 538 yards three tds also eight career sacks returned 26 punts 302 yards born january 15 1959 chesapeake virginia safeties hall fame 12 jack christiansen kenny easley ken houston paul krause yale lary ronnie lott also cb mel renfro also cb emlen tunnell aeneas williams also cb larry wilson willie wood rod woodson also cb quotes pursuit trying best always felt like shooting level standard kennys skills transcended gamehe good ever mean right day ronnie lott pro football hall fame class 2000 outstanding threetime american player big fast physical athletic saw play seattle knew watching hall fame player without doubt ron wolf pro football hall fame class 2015 jerry jones owner president general manager arkansas alum 1989present dallas cowboys purchased cowboys 1989 quickly restored winning tradition franchise led cowboys unprecedented success field leadership sports marketing promotion influenced landscape nfl americas sports culture became first owner league history win three super bowls first seven years ownership cowboys made seven playoff appearances six division titles wins super bowls xxvii xviii xxx jones first decade owning team dallas advanced postseason 13 times jones cowboys posted 10 wins season 12 times jones era led franchise nfc eastern division titles five straight seasons 199296 also nfc east crowns 1998 2007 2009 2014 2016 vision driving influence creation development atampt stadium crown jewel sports venues continues provide leadership nfl areas marketing sponsorship television stadium management labor negotiations television leadership shaped enhanced nfls standing worlds premiere sports league quotes important thing dont think ive worked day since bought dallas cowboys absolutely labor love every morning excited future future league future cowboys future im excited today 89 became involved jerry jones class 2017 hes meant lot game prosperity league large part single one person would single jerry jones guy whos responsible troy aikman pro football hall fame class 2006 jason taylor defensive end 6foot06 260 pounds akron alum 19972007 2009 2011 miami dolphins 2008 washington redskins 2010 new york jets 15 seasons 233 games drafted third round 73rd overall dolphins 1997 nfl draft registered doubledigit sack total season six times eightyear span 200007 earned nfl defensive player year honors 2006 recording 135 sacks two interceptions returned tds 20 yards vs bears 51 yards vs vikings 11 passes defensed 10 forced fumbles two fumble recoveries 62 tackles returned fumble careerlong teamrecord 85 yards td vs broncos sept 11 2005 led nfl careerhigh 185 sacks 2002 recorded sacks player nfl 20002011 career statistics 1395 sacks eight interceptions 110 yards three tds league recordtying 29 opponents fumbles recovered nfl record six tds fumble recoveries three safeties two dolphins one member jets voted six pro bowls named firstteam allpro 2000 2002 2006 allafc four times 2000 2002 2004 2006 picked dolphins valuable player four times named nfls alldecade team 2000s born september 1 1974 pittsburgh pennsylvania defensive ends hall fame 21 doug atkins elvin bethea willie davis fred dean richard dent chris doleman also lb carl eller len ford charles haley also lb dan hampton also dt claude humphrey deacon jones howie long gino marchetti andy robustelli lee roy selmon bruce smith michael strahan jason taylor reggie white jack youngblood quotes jason caught eye outstanding senior bowl lot teams thought undersized thats able get third round little us realize great player would become jimmy johnson taylors enshrinement presenter miami dolphins head coach 199699 games jason well maybe least memorable one greatest opponents ive ever faced pleasure looking across line seeing opposite side ball twice season decade entered league healthy respect jason incredibly talented miami defense led admiration player person continued grow play game season tom brady new england patriots quarterback ladainian tomlinson running back 5foot10 221 pounds texas christian alum 200109 san diego chargers 201011 new york jets 11 seasons 170 games selected chargers first round fifth player overall 2001 nfl draft sensational rookie season 1236 yards 10 td rushing plus 59 receptions 367 yards eclipsed 1600yard mark backtoback seasons 200203 rushed 1000 yards first eight nfl seasons scored 10 rushing tds nine seasons chargers captured backtoback rushing titles 200607 named nfls 2006 valuable player leadingleading careerhigh 1815 yards 28 touchdowns rushing addition 56 catches 508 yards three tds set nfl record 31 touchdowns 186 points season hauled 100 receptions 2003 set nfl record rushing touchdown 18 straight games 200405 allpro four straight seasons 200407 named chargers valuable player five times voted five pro bowls sixseason span rushed 13684 career yards 3174 carries scored 145 rushing touchdowns added 4772 yards 624 catches 17 td receptions also threw seven td passes named nfls alldecade team 2000s born june 23 1979 rosebud texas running backs hall fame 32 marcus allen jerome bettis jim brown earl campbell larry csonka terrell davis eric dickerson tony dorsett marshall faulk frank gifford franco harris paul hornung john henry johnson leroy kelly floyd little curtis martin ollie matson hugh mcelhenny lenny moore marion motley walter payton joe perry john riggins barry sanders gale sayers oj simpson emmitt smith jim taylor thurman thomas ladainian tomlinson charley trippi doak walker quotes almost impossible defend hands like receiver feet like ballet dancer heart like lion time things never know going get made hardest thing deal always kept calm demeanor never could rattle always stayed true ray lewis former baltimore ravens linebacker made everyone around better phenomenal leader lt spoke everybody listened backed actions anything could ever say drew brees tomlinsons teammate san diego chargers 200105 kurt warner quarterback 6foot2 220 pounds northern iowa alum 19982003 st louis rams 2004 new york giants 200509 arizona cardinals 12 seasons 124 games drafted nfl originally signed released green bay packers 1994 went play arena football league iowa barnstormers 199597 returned nfl rams free agent allocated nfl europes amsterdam admirals returned rams 1998 went become twotime nfl mvp 1999 2001 named super bowl xxxiv mvp leading rams victory 2316 victory tennessee titans set super bowl record 414 passing yards recorded another mvp season two years later guided rams back super bowl season totals included leagueleading careerhigh 4830 yards 36 touchdowns post 1014 passer rating warner made third trek super bowl 2008 season led arizona cardinals franchises first division title since 1975 firstever super bowl appearance first quarterback throw 300 yards three super bowls fourtime pro bowl choice led nfl average gain per attempt three times highest passer rating led nfl td passes twice born june 22 1971 burlington iowa quarterbacks hall fame 26 troy aikman george blanda also pk terry bradshaw len dawson john elway brett favre dan fouts otto graham bob griese sonny jurgensen jim kelly bobby layne dan marino joe montana warren moon joe namath ken stabler bart starr roger staubach fran tarkenton ya tittle johnny unitas norm van brocklin kurt warner bob waterfield steve young quotes people think guy like kurt came nowhere really start peel back veil start peel orange kind see work put willingness give dream isaac bruce warners teammate st louis rams 19982003 ive never seen nervous football field might never came across guess youre preaching something could change outcome peoples lives like throwing football passes kurt takes privilege opportunity larry fitzgerald warners teammate arizona cardinals 200509 | 1,908 |
<p>Rewriting the rules on health care for the poor, the Trump administration said Thursday it will allow states to require “able-bodied” Medicaid recipients to work, a hotly debated first in the program’s half-century history.</p>
<p>Seema Verma, head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said requiring work or community involvement can make a positive difference in people’s lives and in their health. The goal is to help people move from public assistance into jobs that provide health insurance. “We see people moving off of Medicaid as a good outcome,” she said.</p>
<p>But advocates said work requirements will become one more hoop for low-income people to jump through, and many could be denied needed coverage because of technicalities and challenging new paperwork. Lawsuits are expected as individual states roll out work requirements.</p>
<p>“All of this on paper may sound reasonable, but if you think about the people who are affected, you can see people will fall through the cracks,” said Judy Solomon of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which advocates for the poor.</p>
<p>Created in 1965 for families on welfare and low-income seniors, Medicaid now covers more than 70 million people, or about 1 in 5 Americans. The federal-state collaboration has become the nation’s largest health insurance program.</p>
<p>Beneficiaries range from pregnant women and newborns to elderly nursing home residents. Medicaid was expanded under former President Barack Obama, with an option allowing states to cover millions more low-income adults. Many of them have jobs that don’t provide health insurance.</p>
<p>People are not legally required to hold a job to be on Medicaid, but states traditionally can seek federal waivers to test new ideas for the program.</p>
<p>Verma stressed that the administration is providing an option for states to require work, not making it mandatory across the country. Her agency spelled out safeguards that states should put in place to get federal approval for their waivers.</p>
<p>States can also require alternatives to work, including volunteering, caregiving, education, job training and even treatment for a substance abuse problem.</p>
<p>The administration said 10 states have applied for waivers involving work requirements or community involvement. They are: Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Utah and Wisconsin. Advocates for low-income people say they expect Kentucky’s waiver to be approved shortly.</p>
<p>In Kentucky, which expanded Medicaid, Republican state Sen. Damon Thayer said work requirements could lessen the program’s impact on the state budget. They also hearken back to the program’s original intent, he added, “as temporary assistance to try to help people get back on their feet, not a permanent subsidy for someone’s lifestyle, if they’re capable of working.”</p>
<p>But congressional Democrats said the Trump administration is moving in the wrong direction. “Health care is a right that shouldn’t be contingent on the ideological agendas of politicians,” said Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate committee that oversees Medicaid.</p>
<p>The debate about work requirements doesn’t break neatly along liberal-conservative lines.</p>
<p>A poll last year from the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation found that 70 percent of the public supported allowing states to require Medicaid recipients to work, even as most Americans opposed deep Medicaid cuts sought by congressional Republicans and the Trump administration.</p>
<p>Another Kaiser study found that most working-age adults on Medicaid are already employed. Nearly 60 percent work either full time or part time, mainly for employers that don’t offer health insurance.</p>
<p>Most who are not working report reasons such as illness, caring for a family member or going to school. Some Medicaid recipients say the coverage has enabled them to get healthy enough to return to work.</p>
<p>Thursday’s administration guidance spells out safeguards that states should consider in seeking work requirements. These include:</p>
<p>—Exempting pregnant women, disabled people and the elderly.</p>
<p>—Taking into account hardships for people in areas with high unemployment, or for people caring for children or elderly relatives.</p>
<p>—Allowing people under treatment for substance abuse to have their care counted as “community engagement” for purposes of meeting a requirement.</p>
<p>The administration said states must fully comply with federal disability and civil rights laws to accommodate disabled people and prevent those who are medically frail from being denied coverage. States should try to align their Medicaid work requirements with similar conditions in other programs, such as food stamps and cash assistance.</p>
<p>The National Association of Medicaid Directors, a nonpartisan group representing state officials, said in a statement there’s no consensus on whether work requirements are the right approach.</p>
<p>“This is a very complex issue that will require thoughtful and nuanced approaches,” said the group.</p>
<p>Trump’s new direction can be reversed by a future administration. Although waivers can have lasting impact they don’t amount to a permanent change in the program. They’re considered “demonstration programs” to test ideas. The administration says the impact will be closely evaluated.</p>
<p>“We know that Republicans tend to think of Medicaid more as a welfare program, while Democrats tend to think of it as more of a health insurance program,” said Diane Rowland, the Kaiser foundation’s leading expert on the program. “It will be interesting to see how states are going to make this work for people.”</p>
<p>The Associated Press contributed to this report.</p> | false | 1 | rewriting rules health care poor trump administration said thursday allow states require ablebodied medicaid recipients work hotly debated first programs halfcentury history seema verma head centers medicare medicaid services said requiring work community involvement make positive difference peoples lives health goal help people move public assistance jobs provide health insurance see people moving medicaid good outcome said advocates said work requirements become one hoop lowincome people jump many could denied needed coverage technicalities challenging new paperwork lawsuits expected individual states roll work requirements paper may sound reasonable think people affected see people fall cracks said judy solomon center budget policy priorities advocates poor created 1965 families welfare lowincome seniors medicaid covers 70 million people 1 5 americans federalstate collaboration become nations largest health insurance program beneficiaries range pregnant women newborns elderly nursing home residents medicaid expanded former president barack obama option allowing states cover millions lowincome adults many jobs dont provide health insurance people legally required hold job medicaid states traditionally seek federal waivers test new ideas program verma stressed administration providing option states require work making mandatory across country agency spelled safeguards states put place get federal approval waivers states also require alternatives work including volunteering caregiving education job training even treatment substance abuse problem administration said 10 states applied waivers involving work requirements community involvement arizona arkansas indiana kansas kentucky maine new hampshire north carolina utah wisconsin advocates lowincome people say expect kentuckys waiver approved shortly kentucky expanded medicaid republican state sen damon thayer said work requirements could lessen programs impact state budget also hearken back programs original intent added temporary assistance try help people get back feet permanent subsidy someones lifestyle theyre capable working congressional democrats said trump administration moving wrong direction health care right shouldnt contingent ideological agendas politicians said sen ron wyden oregon top democrat senate committee oversees medicaid debate work requirements doesnt break neatly along liberalconservative lines poll last year nonpartisan kaiser family foundation found 70 percent public supported allowing states require medicaid recipients work even americans opposed deep medicaid cuts sought congressional republicans trump administration another kaiser study found workingage adults medicaid already employed nearly 60 percent work either full time part time mainly employers dont offer health insurance working report reasons illness caring family member going school medicaid recipients say coverage enabled get healthy enough return work thursdays administration guidance spells safeguards states consider seeking work requirements include exempting pregnant women disabled people elderly taking account hardships people areas high unemployment people caring children elderly relatives allowing people treatment substance abuse care counted community engagement purposes meeting requirement administration said states must fully comply federal disability civil rights laws accommodate disabled people prevent medically frail denied coverage states try align medicaid work requirements similar conditions programs food stamps cash assistance national association medicaid directors nonpartisan group representing state officials said statement theres consensus whether work requirements right approach complex issue require thoughtful nuanced approaches said group trumps new direction reversed future administration although waivers lasting impact dont amount permanent change program theyre considered demonstration programs test ideas administration says impact closely evaluated know republicans tend think medicaid welfare program democrats tend think health insurance program said diane rowland kaiser foundations leading expert program interesting see states going make work people associated press contributed report | 542 |
<p />
<p>In the beginning was a "young man". Distraught at how life treated him and desperate at any future prospects, the young man set himself ablaze. The news of self immolation spread, and struck a nerve with lots of Tunisians who have to endure the same daily ordeals. What followed was extraordinary. The act inspired further suicide attempts and sparked an uprising. A wave of protests erupted and swept through Tunisia. The world was mesmerized with the stunning spectacle of crowds surging into the streets. In the outset, reprisal was swift. The protesters were exposed to the brutality of the police and the security forces. Scores were arrested and others were shot. However, the flame of revolt was relentless. Tunisians were far from being deterred by tear gas, live ammunition, curfews and tanks. Images of martyrs galvanized crowds onto the streets. Rallies continued to escalate. Tunisians refused to be intimidated by the repressive state apparatus. Faced with their defiance, the regime started to retreat to stave off the popular uprising. The president's promises were derided as an empty gesture to lull deepening frustrations and to quell fury. The concessions only emboldened the protesters. People streamed into the streets, and protests spread from one city into another. This was culminated by the first Arab leader toppled by his people and chased into exile.</p>
<p>A Domino?</p>
<p>The Arab world watched attentively the scenes from Tunisia. The Arabs watched in solidarity, excitement, and exhilaration at the unprecedented turn of events. The Arab nations were elated that one of their own were able to stand up for itself. The first time in recent memory that popular protests have ousted a leader in this part of the world. The revolution that overturned the regime demolished one of the Arab world pillars: nations tie a knot with the entrenched leaders "till death do us part."</p>
<p>Democracy has supplanted despotism in other areas once plagued by dictators, but the Arab world remains autocratic and authoritarian. This implanted a stereotype that the Arab public is not accustomed to challenge authority. Political lethargy and social apathy is perceived the rule. Today, one of these countries is challenging this common perception. These developments catapulted several questions to the headlines: Could the Arab world be taken by contagion? Is the Arab world teetering on the brink of an awakening? Will the Tunisian precedent act as an inspiration to the Arab people to rise from their slumber?</p>
<p>On one hand, some argue that the ruling clique is on the edge as these decrepit regimes are likely to crumble in a domino fashion. According to this opinion, a historic opportunity beckons in the Arab world. The revolution seemed an antidote to the despair, and gives an unimaginable momentum to the cause for change. Ben Ali presided over the most tightly run ship in the Arab world. No one expected the ship to capsize, but it did. This offers an example of success which boosts the confidence of the opposition, and eliminates the psychological barrier that impedes the people from standing up for themselves. The revolution has punctured the fear factor that has long kept discontent in check. These events have also seared themselves into public political discourse, and forced the Arabs to entertain unsettling questions.</p>
<p>On the other hand, others argue that a domino effect is not likely. According to this opinion, there is always a confusion between what one wishes and what to expect. As much as some wish to see the same scenario in other countries, Ben Ali's fall will not portend a similar fate for other leaders. The proponents of this point of view argue that the unique features of Tunisia are abundant. First, Tunisia enjoys a high level of urbanization compared to other Arab nations. This implies that congregation is more likely, and that aspirations for improved living standards are higher. Second, Tunisia enjoys the highest level of education in the Arab world. This suggests that the level of political maturity and social awareness is also higher. Third, access to the internet and social networks is more widespread than other countries. This facilitated communications during what some referred to as the first Facebook revolution. Fourth, the revolution does not have Islamist tendencies. Islamists waiting in the wings are a usual scarecrow. This bogeyman gives free reign for regimes to suppress any uprising with the total blessings of the West. In this case, there was no place for that kind of concern. Fifth, the Tunisian military commanders and the armed forces did not interfere. Some claim that this could be attributed to the fact that Ben Ali violated the tradition of courting military circles. Others are unlikely to commit the same deadly sin. Finally, the regime iron-fisted rule and ruthless grip on power did not create a vent for fury. This pushes people to have no option but a confrontational approach. Others in the region are bound to learn from the lesson. This implies that they will take steps to fend off possible unrest and absorb discontent. The announced plans to subsidize basic needs and to slash price hikes, in several countries, are an attempt to stanch the public anger.</p>
<p>A Syndrome</p>
<p>A syndrome is a combination of detectable characteristics that are seen in association. It is a concurrence of symptoms. In the case of Tunisia, the syndrome is the association of political, economic, and social phenomena that occurred together, and paved the way to the popular upheaval. The Tunisian syndrome can be detected in any other country if similar symptoms occur concurrently. The only way we can address the question of whether the other Arab countries are susceptible to the social unrest witnessed recently in Tunisia, is by checking whether they also suffer the Tunisian syndrome.</p>
<p>The combustible symptoms in Tunisia are plenty. First, a growing population that is composed largely of young people who are educated and naturally ambitious. The bulging young population is a victim of an educational system that has succeeded in providing them with qualifications that can not be utilized and aspirations that can not be achieved. They are largely unemployed. They find themselves frustrated at the lack of opportunities and the grim future.</p>
<p>Second, a minority monopolized the wealth of the entire country. The president's clan and entourage live lavishly, the cronies are left looting the country, and the lackeys grew to become a controlling elite. The prevalent nepotism precludes all but the well connected from economic opportunity. The obscene corruption by those in the corridors of power, and the excesses of the wealthy, are in stark contrast to the dire situation of the dispossessed and the disenfranchised. The indifference to the plight of the ordinary man, provoked the greatest public ire and indignation. In the meantime, the regime has overdone its trumpeting of Tunisia's progress, as a bastion of prosperity and a beacon of stability. However, the gap between the regime rhetoric and empirical reality widened. The pretence of economic reforms is perceived by the masses as a way to amass wealth by those in the president's milieu, while the overwhelming majority live in grinding and abject poverty. The widening wealth disparities created a rift between the ruling and the ruled.</p>
<p>Third, a minority monopolized political power. The regime created a facade of democracy, where elections are rigged and marred with irregularities. The regime did not tolerate any genuine competition that would challenge the status quo. Daunting hurdles were put in place for the opposition. The morass of restrictions, security scruples, constitutional impediments, and containment policies, all acted to cripple conventional party politics. Parties were not allowed to expand their grass root activities. Accordingly, the opposition was weakened. The ruling elite dictated policies in pursuit of their personal interests. The regime seemed impervious to change, and the president continued to lead without relenting to any of the public demands. They tolerated no advice or criticism, and viewed all dissent as subversion. This sclerotic and stagnant political order became out of touch with their young populaces.</p>
<p />
<p /> | false | 1 | beginning young man distraught life treated desperate future prospects young man set ablaze news self immolation spread struck nerve lots tunisians endure daily ordeals followed extraordinary act inspired suicide attempts sparked uprising wave protests erupted swept tunisia world mesmerized stunning spectacle crowds surging streets outset reprisal swift protesters exposed brutality police security forces scores arrested others shot however flame revolt relentless tunisians far deterred tear gas live ammunition curfews tanks images martyrs galvanized crowds onto streets rallies continued escalate tunisians refused intimidated repressive state apparatus faced defiance regime started retreat stave popular uprising presidents promises derided empty gesture lull deepening frustrations quell fury concessions emboldened protesters people streamed streets protests spread one city another culminated first arab leader toppled people chased exile domino arab world watched attentively scenes tunisia arabs watched solidarity excitement exhilaration unprecedented turn events arab nations elated one able stand first time recent memory popular protests ousted leader part world revolution overturned regime demolished one arab world pillars nations tie knot entrenched leaders till death us part democracy supplanted despotism areas plagued dictators arab world remains autocratic authoritarian implanted stereotype arab public accustomed challenge authority political lethargy social apathy perceived rule today one countries challenging common perception developments catapulted several questions headlines could arab world taken contagion arab world teetering brink awakening tunisian precedent act inspiration arab people rise slumber one hand argue ruling clique edge decrepit regimes likely crumble domino fashion according opinion historic opportunity beckons arab world revolution seemed antidote despair gives unimaginable momentum cause change ben ali presided tightly run ship arab world one expected ship capsize offers example success boosts confidence opposition eliminates psychological barrier impedes people standing revolution punctured fear factor long kept discontent check events also seared public political discourse forced arabs entertain unsettling questions hand others argue domino effect likely according opinion always confusion one wishes expect much wish see scenario countries ben alis fall portend similar fate leaders proponents point view argue unique features tunisia abundant first tunisia enjoys high level urbanization compared arab nations implies congregation likely aspirations improved living standards higher second tunisia enjoys highest level education arab world suggests level political maturity social awareness also higher third access internet social networks widespread countries facilitated communications referred first facebook revolution fourth revolution islamist tendencies islamists waiting wings usual scarecrow bogeyman gives free reign regimes suppress uprising total blessings west case place kind concern fifth tunisian military commanders armed forces interfere claim could attributed fact ben ali violated tradition courting military circles others unlikely commit deadly sin finally regime ironfisted rule ruthless grip power create vent fury pushes people option confrontational approach others region bound learn lesson implies take steps fend possible unrest absorb discontent announced plans subsidize basic needs slash price hikes several countries attempt stanch public anger syndrome syndrome combination detectable characteristics seen association concurrence symptoms case tunisia syndrome association political economic social phenomena occurred together paved way popular upheaval tunisian syndrome detected country similar symptoms occur concurrently way address question whether arab countries susceptible social unrest witnessed recently tunisia checking whether also suffer tunisian syndrome combustible symptoms tunisia plenty first growing population composed largely young people educated naturally ambitious bulging young population victim educational system succeeded providing qualifications utilized aspirations achieved largely unemployed find frustrated lack opportunities grim future second minority monopolized wealth entire country presidents clan entourage live lavishly cronies left looting country lackeys grew become controlling elite prevalent nepotism precludes well connected economic opportunity obscene corruption corridors power excesses wealthy stark contrast dire situation dispossessed disenfranchised indifference plight ordinary man provoked greatest public ire indignation meantime regime overdone trumpeting tunisias progress bastion prosperity beacon stability however gap regime rhetoric empirical reality widened pretence economic reforms perceived masses way amass wealth presidents milieu overwhelming majority live grinding abject poverty widening wealth disparities created rift ruling ruled third minority monopolized political power regime created facade democracy elections rigged marred irregularities regime tolerate genuine competition would challenge status quo daunting hurdles put place opposition morass restrictions security scruples constitutional impediments containment policies acted cripple conventional party politics parties allowed expand grass root activities accordingly opposition weakened ruling elite dictated policies pursuit personal interests regime seemed impervious change president continued lead without relenting public demands tolerated advice criticism viewed dissent subversion sclerotic stagnant political order became touch young populaces | 712 |
<p>Beneath the surface of American public life a great debate is gathering. The great debate is not about the Strategic Defense Initiative, aid to the Nicaraguan resistance, international terrorism, or the viability of “third-force” alternatives to traditional authoritarians—although the great debate, as it evolves, will touch each of these immediate questions on the foreign policy agenda. The great debate is more fundamental: it is an argument over America’s very purpose in the world.</p>
<p>Two generations ago, that argument seemed settled. In the aftermath of the Second World War—”The Unnecessary War,” as Churchill said in reminding the democracies of the costs of appeasement and isolationism—there was broad agreement that the United States should take an active leadership role in creating an international system in which law and politics, not brute force, settled the world’s inevitable conflicts. Those heady days now seem to have been marked by an excessive optimism. But we ought not lose sight of what was right about the intuitions of that confident period.</p>
<p>The world was in fact caught in a profound dilemma: it had become a political arena, but was not yet a political community. America had important contributions to make to a world charting the dangerous path from anarchy to community; our own national experience had demonstrated how pluralism mediated through democratic institutions of law and governance could become an engine of creativity, rather than of chaos. Communism was a basic threat to the evolution of a world safe for free societies, in which conflict was settled without mass violence. Peace and freedom were inseparable.</p>
<p>The problem was not that these ideas were false or unworthy; the problem was that the obstacles to their fulfillment were badly underestimated.</p>
<p>In any event, agreement over America’s necessary and inescapable responsibilities in the world shattered, as did much else, on the hard rock of Vietnam. Isolationism came back into vogue, albeit in new ideological dress. Traditional isolationism had taught that the world would corrupt America. Vietnam-era neo-isolationism, which rapidly became pandemic in the teaching centers of American public life (the universities, the media, the religious community, the popular entertainment industry), taught that a racist, militarist, imperialist America was too dangerous for the world.</p>
<p>Although neo-isolationism remains a powerful force in American political culture, the boat people of Indochina, the genocide of the Cambodians, the Iranian hostage crisis, the relentless military growth of the Soviet Union, the Kremlin’s concurrent geopolitical maneuverings, and international terrorism have served as tragic reminders that America’s withdrawal from the world did not guarantee peace, security, or freedom—for ourselves, or for others. As the 1980s opened, the question for most Americans was not whether the country ought to be active in the world, but how—toward what ends, by what means, guided by what values?</p>
<p>The great debate, in short, has been recast. The important argument today is not whether “the national interest” is a term of opprobrium, but how that interest is construed. The James Madison Foundation, which is an extension of the work of the World Without War Council and an expression of the intention of the American Peace Society, has been founded in the conviction that a marriage between the concepts of national interest and national purpose is essential today. In our name, we have chosen to honor the American Framer who thought best about the ways in which plurality and community could be combined in a society and polity fit for human beings. Because we take pride in, and are committed to, America as a watershed political community in human history, we would have our country serve large ends in its encounter with an often-hostile world. Peace, security, and freedom are, in our judgment, indivisible. American leadership toward a world that is peaceful, secure, and free is a matter of both national interest and national purpose.</p>
<p>The James Madison Foundation has grown out of the complex history of the American peace movement. But we reject as dangerous misconceptions many of the now-regnant ideas guiding what is described as “work for peace” in America today. We reject grossly psychologized concepts of international conflict. We are unapologetically anti-Communist. We seek the advance of human liberty. We know that there is a connection between Soviet brutishness at home and Soviet aggressiveness abroad. We believe that survivalism is morally degrading, and threatens the very peace it claims to serve.</p>
<p>We affirm just law and democratic politics as instruments of peace and freedom. We believe that “interdependence” and “intervention” are two dimensions of the same contemporary reality. We are more interested in democratic forms of political community in and between nations than we are in micromanaging the evolution of American weapons systems. We wish to contribute to a wise understanding of the relationship between moral principles and foreign policy choices.</p>
<p>We believe, in short, that work for peace, freedom, and security can be an expression of the best instincts of the American experiment, rather than an attack on the experiment itself.</p>
<p>The passage from anarchy to community in the world is a task for many generations. Ideas are going to determine whether that passage is made in ways that enlarge the safety of free societies, or that place us in ever-deeper peril. AMERICAN PURPOSE will report and comment on the debate over the national interest and the national purpose in the opinion-shaping and values-teaching centers of American public life. Ten times a year (with double issues in May/June and July/August), we will summarize and comment on key articles, essays, and books that illuminate or obfuscate one or another aspect of America’s role in world affairs. We shall survey the media as they teach Americans about international conflict and the prospects for peace, security, and freedom. We shall pay close attention to the debate over American purpose in the religious community and among scholars of ethics and foreign policy. We shall monitor and report on the activities of that complex array of nongovernmental institutions in the world affairs field that provide the gathering points for the attentive public’s involvement with foreign policy issues.</p>
<p>Almost forty years ago, Reinhold Niebuhr returned from the fourth annual conference of UNESCO and wrote of “the spiritual problem of modern man, who must find a way of engaging in impossible tasks and not be discouraged when he fails to complete any of them.” It is one thing to give up the illusions that have marred work for a world that is peaceful, secure, and free; it is another to abandon responsibility for those values. If AMERICAN PURPOSE can help gather, in this remarkable country, a party of those who would be neither deluded nor irresponsible as they think through the dilemmas and possibilities of peace, security, and freedom in the world; and if that party helps to define, with wisdom, an energetic American role in the pursuit of those goals—then, we believe, our purpose, and America’s purpose and interest, will have been well served.</p>
<p>George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. and holds EPPC’s William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | beneath surface american public life great debate gathering great debate strategic defense initiative aid nicaraguan resistance international terrorism viability thirdforce alternatives traditional authoritariansalthough great debate evolves touch immediate questions foreign policy agenda great debate fundamental argument americas purpose world two generations ago argument seemed settled aftermath second world warthe unnecessary war churchill said reminding democracies costs appeasement isolationismthere broad agreement united states take active leadership role creating international system law politics brute force settled worlds inevitable conflicts heady days seem marked excessive optimism ought lose sight right intuitions confident period world fact caught profound dilemma become political arena yet political community america important contributions make world charting dangerous path anarchy community national experience demonstrated pluralism mediated democratic institutions law governance could become engine creativity rather chaos communism basic threat evolution world safe free societies conflict settled without mass violence peace freedom inseparable problem ideas false unworthy problem obstacles fulfillment badly underestimated event agreement americas necessary inescapable responsibilities world shattered much else hard rock vietnam isolationism came back vogue albeit new ideological dress traditional isolationism taught world would corrupt america vietnamera neoisolationism rapidly became pandemic teaching centers american public life universities media religious community popular entertainment industry taught racist militarist imperialist america dangerous world although neoisolationism remains powerful force american political culture boat people indochina genocide cambodians iranian hostage crisis relentless military growth soviet union kremlins concurrent geopolitical maneuverings international terrorism served tragic reminders americas withdrawal world guarantee peace security freedomfor others 1980s opened question americans whether country ought active world howtoward ends means guided values great debate short recast important argument today whether national interest term opprobrium interest construed james madison foundation extension work world without war council expression intention american peace society founded conviction marriage concepts national interest national purpose essential today name chosen honor american framer thought best ways plurality community could combined society polity fit human beings take pride committed america watershed political community human history would country serve large ends encounter oftenhostile world peace security freedom judgment indivisible american leadership toward world peaceful secure free matter national interest national purpose james madison foundation grown complex history american peace movement reject dangerous misconceptions many nowregnant ideas guiding described work peace america today reject grossly psychologized concepts international conflict unapologetically anticommunist seek advance human liberty know connection soviet brutishness home soviet aggressiveness abroad believe survivalism morally degrading threatens peace claims serve affirm law democratic politics instruments peace freedom believe interdependence intervention two dimensions contemporary reality interested democratic forms political community nations micromanaging evolution american weapons systems wish contribute wise understanding relationship moral principles foreign policy choices believe short work peace freedom security expression best instincts american experiment rather attack experiment passage anarchy community world task many generations ideas going determine whether passage made ways enlarge safety free societies place us everdeeper peril american purpose report comment debate national interest national purpose opinionshaping valuesteaching centers american public life ten times year double issues mayjune julyaugust summarize comment key articles essays books illuminate obfuscate one another aspect americas role world affairs shall survey media teach americans international conflict prospects peace security freedom shall pay close attention debate american purpose religious community among scholars ethics foreign policy shall monitor report activities complex array nongovernmental institutions world affairs field provide gathering points attentive publics involvement foreign policy issues almost forty years ago reinhold niebuhr returned fourth annual conference unesco wrote spiritual problem modern man must find way engaging impossible tasks discouraged fails complete one thing give illusions marred work world peaceful secure free another abandon responsibility values american purpose help gather remarkable country party would neither deluded irresponsible think dilemmas possibilities peace security freedom world party helps define wisdom energetic american role pursuit goalsthen believe purpose americas purpose interest well served george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc holds eppcs william e simon chair catholic studies | 638 |
<p>There is snobbery, and then there is academic snobbery.</p>
<p>Snobbery is often instinctual and inadvertent, and if it's cruel, it's the cruelty of the unthinking. Academic snobbery is deliberately cutting, snarky, intended to wound, and usually clumsy in asserting its own superiority.</p>
<p>Snobbery was the immediate reaction of English historian Christopher Dawson's mother to the news of her son's impending conversion to Catholicism: Mrs. Dawson wasn't bothered so much by questions of doctrine, she told her son, but by the sad fact that he'd “now be going to church with the [Irish] help.” Academic snobbery is the letter from more than 80 Georgetown faculty members delivered to Representative Paul Ryan (R., Wis.), prior to his delivering the university's annual Whittington Lecture on April 26. In that letter, the Hoya pedagogues not-so-subtly suggested that Ryan was a Catholic ignoramus, presumed to instruct the congressman on the meaning of the Catholic social ethical principle of subsidiarity, and concluded on an arch note, redolent of tenured arrogance: “Along with this letter, we have included a copy of the Vatican's Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, commissioned by John Paul II, to help deepen your understanding of Catholic social teaching.”</p>
<p>(And if you're a good boy, Paul, we might let you audit Georgetown courses on Catholic social doctrine; that would help you better understand colleagues on the Hill such as Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, Barbara Mikulski, and Rosa DeLauro.)</p>
<p>The Georgetown letter's substance, to stretch a term, is the same old, same old: a bedraggled catalogue of complaints about the Ryan budget “gutting” various federal programs, with results the Hoyas promise will be “devastating.” Those with memories that reach back into the mid-1990s will remember the same apocalyptic warnings coming from the same intellectual quarters about federal welfare reform; those warnings were accompanied by, indeed based on, the same simplistic understanding of the Catholic “preferential option for the poor” as a preference for more and more government. The welfare apocalypse never happened. Empowerment strategies helped end patterns of welfare dependency. But you will learn none of this from the Hoyas, for one of the other notable features of academic snobbery is its addendum to Love Story moral theology: Moral superiority means never having to say you're sorry (or wrong).</p>
<p>The Georgetown letter also embodied the Catholic Left's unfortunate habit of cherry-picking papal statements. No one risks contradiction by suggesting that the election of Joseph Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI seven years ago caused mass heartburn on the Georgetown faculty. Yet here are seven dozen or so Georgetown faculty members quoting Benedict XVI at Paul Ryan: “Subsidiarity must remain closely linked to the principle of solidarity and vice versa.”</p>
<p>Alas, for the rhetorical force of that presumed pontifical slam dunk on the Ryan budget, that was precisely the point Paul Ryan had made on EWTN's The World Over on April 20. Perhaps on the well-founded assumption that EWTN is not required viewing at Georgetown, Ryan drove the point home again in his Whittington Lecture. Insisting that America needed a better approach to poverty than the Obama spend-a-thon (which, he argued, was accelerating a “debt crisis in which the poor would be hurt the first and the worst”), Ryan proposed that a new approach “should be based on the twin virtues of solidarity and subsidiarity — virtues that, when taken together, revitalize civil society instead of displacing it.”</p>
<p>Thus, Ryan demonstrated that he is entirely familiar with the social doctrine of John Paul II, with its insistence on what the pope called “the subjectivity of society” — what the Anglosphere calls “civil society.” Civil society, Catholic social doctrine insists, is an essential component in shaping free politics, free economics, and the vibrant public moral culture needed to bend the energies of democracy and the market toward empowerment, inclusion, and genuine human flourishing. And that brings us to another facet of recent papal social teaching that the Georgetown faculty might consider more carefully: the warnings John Paul II raised about the corrosive effects of the “Social Assistance State” on the moral sinews of the free society, a process of deterioration the pope saw at work in Europe toward the end of his life.</p>
<p>Adapting themes from John Paul II in the 2003 apostolic letter Ecclesia in Europa [The Church in Europe] and Benedict XVI in his 2011 address to the German Bundestag, Paul Ryan has carefully measured history's verdict in Europe. The massive and increasing space that national governments and Brussels occupy in European public life has further constricted the already-sclerotic associational and philanthropic instincts of Europeans. And the decay of those instincts has helped erode the political culture that makes rational democratic decision-making possible (cf. Greece; Italy; etc.). Ryan, applying history to his reading of the implications of Catholic social doctrine, argues that the United States need not go down that road and can combine compassion with fiscal responsibility and a vibrant civil society. He has also laid out a path toward that end and is quite prepared to debate and modify his proposals when persuaded that there are better ways forward. Have the Georgetown faculty who wrote Ryan forgotten that one of the great achievements of modern Catholic intellectual life is the dialogue between history (Blessed John XXIII's “great teacher of life”) and theology? That's not an unreasonable conclusion to draw from their letter, in which men and women who imagine themselves Ryan's moral and intellectual superiors ignore the evidence of contemporary history and thus have little to add to the debate but a tattered defense of failed public-policy strategies and programs — a defense made even more implausible by its insouciance about the debt crisis and its burdening of the poor.</p>
<p>Paul Ryan knows that Catholic social doctrine is not some sort of doughnut machine that plops out ready-made answers to complex questions of public policy. There is no — repeat, no — direct line from the principles of Catholic social doctrine to judgments on levels of WIC funding, food-stamp funding, or Pell Grant funding, three issues on which the Georgetown faculty claims moral certainty when the relevant mode of moral analysis is prudential judgment. Ryan knows that and is prepared to explain why that's the case. That willingness, plus Ryan's refusal to concede the moral high ground to the Catholic Left in the public-policy debate, plus the intelligence, good humor, and conviction he brings to these arguments, helps explain why he's the Catholic Left's worst nightmare. The Catholic Left recognizes that; and thus, predictably, things have turned chippy, even ugly.</p>
<p>In one of its nastier moments, the Hoya professoriate suggested that Ryan misconstrues the core Catholic social-ethical principle of subsidiarity as “a free pass to dismantle government programs and abandon the poor to their own devices.” Bosh, and arrogant bosh at that. Whatever else you may think of Paul Ryan, he is an uncommonly well-informed congressman and a thoroughly decent man; to suggest that he has so grotesquely distorted (or, in the words of the Georgetown letter, “profoundly misread”) Church teaching for callous ends is snobbery compounded by calumny.</p>
<p>What Ryan has in fact done is to follow Benedict XVI and push the subsidiarity-solidarity debate forward, suggesting that there is a kind of moral and political space where solidarity — the moral imperative to live responsibly with and for others — and subsidiarity — the anti-totalitarian, pro-civil-society principle of Catholic social doctrine — intersect. At that broad intersection, there are no obvious answers to public-policy questions, and e specially to budgetary questions. But there is prudential judgment: the weighing of risks and benefits; the calculus of probable consequences; the fitting of ends to appropriate means.</p>
<p>Prudence, the Catechism of the Catholic Church notes, “is called auriga virtutum (the charioteer of the virtues); it guides the other virtues by setting rule and measure.” Prudence is the cardinal virtue that allows us to live creatively at the intersection of solidarity and subsidiarity. No one lives at that intersection in a creative way by repeating tired shibboleths about abandoning the poor to their own devices and having the federal government “walk away from the most vulnerable.” Indeed, if the Georgetown letter accurately reflects the depth of thought given to these hard questions on the Hilltop, parents pondering a quarter-of-a-million-dollar education for their children there might want to inquire closely into what their sons and daughters are getting into.</p>
<p>Charity requires that one not judge an entire university and its impact on students by the political shenanigans of seven dozen faculty members, and another theological virtue, hope, suggests that no one is quite invincibly ignorant. If those Georgetown faculty members who wrote Paul Ryan would actually engage Ryan and those of his cast of mind, rather than consigning them to the outer darkness of the uncaring, some creative thought that takes into consideration the full richness and subtlety of Catholic social doctrine just might result. I won't hold my breath, especially in an election year when Paul Ryan's Hoya correspondents are very likely to vote for the president who lied to the head of the U.S. bishops' conference and who demanded, with the full force of federal power, that the Church do things the Church teaches are morally wrong.</p>
<p>But once the Health and Human Services mandate and the Obama administration are unhappy memories, one can hope that that conversation at the intersection of subsidiarity and solidarity will be convened. Paul Ryan would be open to it. Perhaps his Hoya correspondents, following Vatican II's injunction to read the signs of the times and recalling the classic Jesuit emphasis on the importance of examining conscience, will then be ready to join.</p>
<p>– George Weigel is a distinguished senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, where he holds the William E. Simon chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | snobbery academic snobbery snobbery often instinctual inadvertent cruel cruelty unthinking academic snobbery deliberately cutting snarky intended wound usually clumsy asserting superiority snobbery immediate reaction english historian christopher dawsons mother news sons impending conversion catholicism mrs dawson wasnt bothered much questions doctrine told son sad fact hed going church irish help academic snobbery letter 80 georgetown faculty members delivered representative paul ryan r wis prior delivering universitys annual whittington lecture april 26 letter hoya pedagogues notsosubtly suggested ryan catholic ignoramus presumed instruct congressman meaning catholic social ethical principle subsidiarity concluded arch note redolent tenured arrogance along letter included copy vaticans compendium social doctrine church commissioned john paul ii help deepen understanding catholic social teaching youre good boy paul might let audit georgetown courses catholic social doctrine would help better understand colleagues hill nancy pelosi dick durbin barbara mikulski rosa delauro georgetown letters substance stretch term old old bedraggled catalogue complaints ryan budget gutting various federal programs results hoyas promise devastating memories reach back mid1990s remember apocalyptic warnings coming intellectual quarters federal welfare reform warnings accompanied indeed based simplistic understanding catholic preferential option poor preference government welfare apocalypse never happened empowerment strategies helped end patterns welfare dependency learn none hoyas one notable features academic snobbery addendum love story moral theology moral superiority means never say youre sorry wrong georgetown letter also embodied catholic lefts unfortunate habit cherrypicking papal statements one risks contradiction suggesting election joseph ratzinger pope benedict xvi seven years ago caused mass heartburn georgetown faculty yet seven dozen georgetown faculty members quoting benedict xvi paul ryan subsidiarity must remain closely linked principle solidarity vice versa alas rhetorical force presumed pontifical slam dunk ryan budget precisely point paul ryan made ewtns world april 20 perhaps wellfounded assumption ewtn required viewing georgetown ryan drove point home whittington lecture insisting america needed better approach poverty obama spendathon argued accelerating debt crisis poor would hurt first worst ryan proposed new approach based twin virtues solidarity subsidiarity virtues taken together revitalize civil society instead displacing thus ryan demonstrated entirely familiar social doctrine john paul ii insistence pope called subjectivity society anglosphere calls civil society civil society catholic social doctrine insists essential component shaping free politics free economics vibrant public moral culture needed bend energies democracy market toward empowerment inclusion genuine human flourishing brings us another facet recent papal social teaching georgetown faculty might consider carefully warnings john paul ii raised corrosive effects social assistance state moral sinews free society process deterioration pope saw work europe toward end life adapting themes john paul ii 2003 apostolic letter ecclesia europa church europe benedict xvi 2011 address german bundestag paul ryan carefully measured historys verdict europe massive increasing space national governments brussels occupy european public life constricted alreadysclerotic associational philanthropic instincts europeans decay instincts helped erode political culture makes rational democratic decisionmaking possible cf greece italy etc ryan applying history reading implications catholic social doctrine argues united states need go road combine compassion fiscal responsibility vibrant civil society also laid path toward end quite prepared debate modify proposals persuaded better ways forward georgetown faculty wrote ryan forgotten one great achievements modern catholic intellectual life dialogue history blessed john xxiiis great teacher life theology thats unreasonable conclusion draw letter men women imagine ryans moral intellectual superiors ignore evidence contemporary history thus little add debate tattered defense failed publicpolicy strategies programs defense made even implausible insouciance debt crisis burdening poor paul ryan knows catholic social doctrine sort doughnut machine plops readymade answers complex questions public policy repeat direct line principles catholic social doctrine judgments levels wic funding foodstamp funding pell grant funding three issues georgetown faculty claims moral certainty relevant mode moral analysis prudential judgment ryan knows prepared explain thats case willingness plus ryans refusal concede moral high ground catholic left publicpolicy debate plus intelligence good humor conviction brings arguments helps explain hes catholic lefts worst nightmare catholic left recognizes thus predictably things turned chippy even ugly one nastier moments hoya professoriate suggested ryan misconstrues core catholic socialethical principle subsidiarity free pass dismantle government programs abandon poor devices bosh arrogant bosh whatever else may think paul ryan uncommonly wellinformed congressman thoroughly decent man suggest grotesquely distorted words georgetown letter profoundly misread church teaching callous ends snobbery compounded calumny ryan fact done follow benedict xvi push subsidiaritysolidarity debate forward suggesting kind moral political space solidarity moral imperative live responsibly others subsidiarity antitotalitarian procivilsociety principle catholic social doctrine intersect broad intersection obvious answers publicpolicy questions e specially budgetary questions prudential judgment weighing risks benefits calculus probable consequences fitting ends appropriate means prudence catechism catholic church notes called auriga virtutum charioteer virtues guides virtues setting rule measure prudence cardinal virtue allows us live creatively intersection solidarity subsidiarity one lives intersection creative way repeating tired shibboleths abandoning poor devices federal government walk away vulnerable indeed georgetown letter accurately reflects depth thought given hard questions hilltop parents pondering quarterofamilliondollar education children might want inquire closely sons daughters getting charity requires one judge entire university impact students political shenanigans seven dozen faculty members another theological virtue hope suggests one quite invincibly ignorant georgetown faculty members wrote paul ryan would actually engage ryan cast mind rather consigning outer darkness uncaring creative thought takes consideration full richness subtlety catholic social doctrine might result wont hold breath especially election year paul ryans hoya correspondents likely vote president lied head us bishops conference demanded full force federal power church things church teaches morally wrong health human services mandate obama administration unhappy memories one hope conversation intersection subsidiarity solidarity convened paul ryan would open perhaps hoya correspondents following vatican iis injunction read signs times recalling classic jesuit emphasis importance examining conscience ready join george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center holds william e simon chair catholic studies | 948 |
<p>Both South Korea and the United States need to exercise flexibility and to conduct engagement with the North to cope with current challenges.</p>
<p />
<p>On March 26, the Cheonan, a South Korean warship, sank near the Northern Limit Line (NLL). The Joint Civilian-Military Group, which included international experts, was formed to investigate the sinking, ultimately concluding, on May 20, that North Korea was the culprit. On May 24, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak delivered his address to the nation at the War Memorial of Korea, definitively blaming the sinking on the North.</p>
<p>The NLL was established to delimit each maritime area in the West Sea within which South and North Korea would control their respective military forces following the end of the Korean War in 1953. The line was unilaterally set by the Commander-in-Chief of the United Nations force, and has never been legally recognized by North Korea.</p>
<p>The line’s viability has been challenged by three naval clashes between the two Koreas. The most recent evidence of its demise has come with the sinking of the Cheonan, allegedly perpetrated by North Korea.</p>
<p>With regard to the NLL, the harsh truth is that its existence has been mired in near total uncertainty for a long time due to legal neglect and political silence.</p>
<p>The Korean Armistice Agreement, which was concluded by the Commander-in-Chief of the UN force, the Supreme Commander of the Korean People’s Army, and the Commander of the Chinese People’s volunteers in 1953, does not specifically refer to the NLL. The same can be said of the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement, signed in 1991 by the two Koreas. The NLL, therefore, is generally recognized as a self-imposed limitation line determined by the military commander of the United States out of strategic considerations, while lacking a legal basis.[1]</p>
<p>On the other hand, the military demarcation line set by the Armistice Agreement remained a nearly de facto border, which was difficult to enforce legally, as North Korea and China withdrew from the Military Armistice Commission one month after South Korea joined the Commission in 1991.</p>
<p>It was set by the “line of contact” that reflects the confrontation line between the adversaries’ military forces. This is the principle of uti possidetis, which reflects the post-war situation, in contrast to the status quo ante bellum principle that recognizes the pre-war reality.[2] The NLL was created because North Korea accepted the line as a necessity for the cease-fire at that time.</p>
<p>The remaining legal instrument is the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement. Article 11 of the agreement prescribes that both South and North Korea respect the demarcation line provided in the Military Armistice Agreement and the jurisdictions over which each has exercised its authority. However, although this agreement was crafted through the two Koreas’ treaty-making powers, it was not the parties’ intention to subject the agreement to the rule of international law.[3] Thus, it is a non-binding treaty.[4]</p>
<p>Because the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement has no compelling legal force and the effectiveness of the Armistice Agreement has been cast into doubt, it follows that the NLL has been sustained only by necessity of a continuous cease-fire, not by any degree of legal obligation.</p>
<p>Under these circumstances, three maritime wars have broken out between the two Koreas before 2010: the first in 1999 and the second in 2002. The first two naval clashes occurred as the South Korean Navy warned and took action against the North’s warships that crossed over the NLL while escorting their fishing boats. The North claimed that it was the South Korean warships that had invaded the North’s territory. The third conflict occurred in 2009 as South Korea opened a warning fire against the North’s warship that had crossed over the NLL.</p>
<p>In an effort to address this situation, former President of South Korea Roh Moo-hyun and Kim Jong-il, leader of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), signed the Declaration on the Advancement of South-North Korean Relations, Peace and Prosperity (10. 4 Declaration) on October 4, 2007. The 10.4 Declaration conceives of creating a “Special Peace and Cooperation Zone” in the West Sea with a view to establishing a “joint fishing zone” and a “maritime peace zone” (Section 5).[5] The declaration would place the NLL under control and would prevent further troubles in the West Sea if each side consistently adhered to the agreement.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the policy of Lee Myung-bak, South Korea’s current president, lies in stark contrast to his predecessor. Lee has persisted with an isolationist approach.</p>
<p>In the event of the sinking of the Cheonan, Lee’s government was quick to move toward internationalizing the inquiry into the case, which traditionally would have been recognized as an inter-Korean matter.[6] This move easily aroused international reaction[7] as &#160;a UN Security Council punishment was sought.</p>
<p>Although this move estranged North Korea, it also backfired due to lack of conclusive evidence, which brought about serious domestic skepticism regarding the credibility of the “international” investigation.</p>
<p>The fundamental difference between Roh and Lee is that Lee does not give full credit to South Korea as the primary responsible actor that conducts peacemaking on the Korean peninsula. Roh, whose engagement policy is superior to Lee’s isolationist approach because it would pave the way to renewing the nonviable regime by a peace proposal, showed the way forward. Roh’s approach also could have reinforced the validity of the Inter-Korean Basic Agreement. These moves would secure certainty, evading unnecessary conflicts between the two Koreas.</p>
<p>The forceful push for denuclearization, on the other hand, will not work. The nuclear non-proliferation regime has not been effective in terms of preventing some countries, such as North Korea and the United States, from threatening the use of nuclear weapons in their international relations. Furthermore, North Korea remains outside the regime following its controversial withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1994. Although it is highly unlikely that the North will renounce its last resort for self-defense, pressing for “irreversible” denuclearization, as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced during her recent visit to South Korea, will gain nothing.</p>
<p>Lee’s isolationist approach is not the right way to manage the uncertainty surrounding the NLL and inter-Korean relations. Irrespective of where the truth lies concerning the real perpetrator of the Cheonan sinking, Lee’s reckless internationalization of the investigation into the case will not do anything more than heighten tensions. This is also an unwelcome outcome for the Korean people.</p>
<p>Lee’s government should play a constructive role in creating peace, for instance, by building a special peace zone in the West Sea or establishing an inter-Korean commission to settle issues with the North. Then, both Koreas should focus their efforts on opening the third summit meeting and, renewing their partnership for peacemaking.</p>
<p>The US may be skeptical regarding the six-party negotiations, and it may be tempted to push the North further into denuclearizing. The US has just begun its joint military exercises with South Korea as a warning signal to the North regarding the Cheonan sinking. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the US plan to add new sanctions on North Korea, targeting the North’s arms and luxury goods business, which it hopes will coerce denuclearization.</p>
<p>The United States, rather than joining Lee in his imprudent isolationist action, should secure the room necessary for the two Koreas to exercise bilateral flexibility and restrain the rising tension. This will allow the six-party framework to function continuously toward its aim of denuclearization while helping the two Koreas work out their disputes.</p>
<p>Military incidents or crises do not always require a retaliatory response. And it is worth considering what should have been done in order to begin repairing the situation. This should not be a heavy burden for South Korea and the United States, who should pursue peace over destruction.</p>
<p>__________</p>
<p>[1] Ryeo Hae Institute, Consideration of the Northern Limit Line, (February, 2009)</p>
<p>[2] Ibid.</p>
<p>[3] Ibid.</p>
<p>[4] Ibid.</p>
<p>[5] Ibid.</p>
<p>[6]Scott Snyder, The Cheonan Reckoning: Implications for Northeast Asian Stability, (June, 2010), <a href="http://sitrep.globalsecurity.org/articles/100605582-the-cheonan-reckoning-implicat.htm" type="external">http://sitrep.globalsecurity.org/articles/100605582-the-cheonan-reckoning-implicat.htm</a>.</p>
<p>[7] Ibid.</p> | false | 1 | south korea united states need exercise flexibility conduct engagement north cope current challenges march 26 cheonan south korean warship sank near northern limit line nll joint civilianmilitary group included international experts formed investigate sinking ultimately concluding may 20 north korea culprit may 24 south korean president lee myungbak delivered address nation war memorial korea definitively blaming sinking north nll established delimit maritime area west sea within south north korea would control respective military forces following end korean war 1953 line unilaterally set commanderinchief united nations force never legally recognized north korea lines viability challenged three naval clashes two koreas recent evidence demise come sinking cheonan allegedly perpetrated north korea regard nll harsh truth existence mired near total uncertainty long time due legal neglect political silence korean armistice agreement concluded commanderinchief un force supreme commander korean peoples army commander chinese peoples volunteers 1953 specifically refer nll said interkorean basic agreement signed 1991 two koreas nll therefore generally recognized selfimposed limitation line determined military commander united states strategic considerations lacking legal basis1 hand military demarcation line set armistice agreement remained nearly de facto border difficult enforce legally north korea china withdrew military armistice commission one month south korea joined commission 1991 set line contact reflects confrontation line adversaries military forces principle uti possidetis reflects postwar situation contrast status quo ante bellum principle recognizes prewar reality2 nll created north korea accepted line necessity ceasefire time remaining legal instrument interkorean basic agreement article 11 agreement prescribes south north korea respect demarcation line provided military armistice agreement jurisdictions exercised authority however although agreement crafted two koreas treatymaking powers parties intention subject agreement rule international law3 thus nonbinding treaty4 interkorean basic agreement compelling legal force effectiveness armistice agreement cast doubt follows nll sustained necessity continuous ceasefire degree legal obligation circumstances three maritime wars broken two koreas 2010 first 1999 second 2002 first two naval clashes occurred south korean navy warned took action norths warships crossed nll escorting fishing boats north claimed south korean warships invaded norths territory third conflict occurred 2009 south korea opened warning fire norths warship crossed nll effort address situation former president south korea roh moohyun kim jongil leader democratic peoples republic korea dprk signed declaration advancement southnorth korean relations peace prosperity 10 4 declaration october 4 2007 104 declaration conceives creating special peace cooperation zone west sea view establishing joint fishing zone maritime peace zone section 55 declaration would place nll control would prevent troubles west sea side consistently adhered agreement hand policy lee myungbak south koreas current president lies stark contrast predecessor lee persisted isolationist approach event sinking cheonan lees government quick move toward internationalizing inquiry case traditionally would recognized interkorean matter6 move easily aroused international reaction7 160a un security council punishment sought although move estranged north korea also backfired due lack conclusive evidence brought serious domestic skepticism regarding credibility international investigation fundamental difference roh lee lee give full credit south korea primary responsible actor conducts peacemaking korean peninsula roh whose engagement policy superior lees isolationist approach would pave way renewing nonviable regime peace proposal showed way forward rohs approach also could reinforced validity interkorean basic agreement moves would secure certainty evading unnecessary conflicts two koreas forceful push denuclearization hand work nuclear nonproliferation regime effective terms preventing countries north korea united states threatening use nuclear weapons international relations furthermore north korea remains outside regime following controversial withdrawal nuclear nonproliferation treaty 1994 although highly unlikely north renounce last resort selfdefense pressing irreversible denuclearization us secretary state hillary clinton announced recent visit south korea gain nothing lees isolationist approach right way manage uncertainty surrounding nll interkorean relations irrespective truth lies concerning real perpetrator cheonan sinking lees reckless internationalization investigation case anything heighten tensions also unwelcome outcome korean people lees government play constructive role creating peace instance building special peace zone west sea establishing interkorean commission settle issues north koreas focus efforts opening third summit meeting renewing partnership peacemaking us may skeptical regarding sixparty negotiations may tempted push north denuclearizing us begun joint military exercises south korea warning signal north regarding cheonan sinking secretary state hillary clinton announced us plan add new sanctions north korea targeting norths arms luxury goods business hopes coerce denuclearization united states rather joining lee imprudent isolationist action secure room necessary two koreas exercise bilateral flexibility restrain rising tension allow sixparty framework function continuously toward aim denuclearization helping two koreas work disputes military incidents crises always require retaliatory response worth considering done order begin repairing situation heavy burden south korea united states pursue peace destruction __________ 1 ryeo hae institute consideration northern limit line february 2009 2 ibid 3 ibid 4 ibid 5 ibid 6scott snyder cheonan reckoning implications northeast asian stability june 2010 httpsitrepglobalsecurityorgarticles100605582thecheonanreckoningimplicathtm 7 ibid | 777 |
<p>(The two posts below were published on NRO’s Bench Memos blog on February 27, 2012.)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/292018/inept-inyti-op-ed-defending-hhs-mandate-part-1-ed-whelan" type="external">Inept NYT Op-Ed Defending HHS Mandate-Part 1</a></p>
<p>Sunday’s New York Times featured an utterly incompetent <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/opinion/sunday/back-to-first-principles-on-religious-freedom.html?_r=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss" type="external">op-ed</a>&#160;by Dorothy Samuels—a member of the NYT <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/opinion/editorialboard.html" type="external">editorial board</a>—contending that the “legal case against the [HHS contraception mandate] is remarkably weak.” But what is “remarkably weak” is Samuels’s grasp of the relevant principles of religious freedom that she undertakes to present:</p>
<p>1. Samuels contends that the HHS mandate does not trigger the protections of the <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000bb-1" type="external">Religious Freedom Restoration Act</a>&#160;because the mandate “does not interfere with a religious practice or ceremony.” The mandate, she asserts, “is no impediment to the exercise of religion,” for it “does not interfere with church governance, prevent anyone from voicing opposition, or force anyone to use contraceptives in violation of religious beliefs.”</p>
<p>Samuels’s contention is a jumble of confusion. She’s trying to advance a very narrow concept of the “exercise of religion” protected by RFRA, but she can’t even sort out what she thinks is the limiting principle. First, she seems to limit the “exercise of religion” to “religious practice or ceremony,” but then she expands the concept to encompass “church governance” and to not being “force[d] … to use contraceptives in violation of religious belief.”</p>
<p>As I have <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/289373/hhs-contraception-mandate-vs-rfra-exercise-religion-ed-whelan" type="external">explained</a>, a person engages in an “exercise of religion” under RFRA when, for religious reasons, he performs, or abstains from performing, certain actions. In the text of RFRA itself, Congress <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000bb-1" type="external">cited</a>&#160;the landmark Free Exercise cases of <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0374_0398_ZS.html" type="external">Sherbert v. Verner</a>&#160;(1963) and <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0406_0205_ZO.html" type="external">Wisconsin v. Yoder</a>&#160;(1972), which set forth the standard of scrutiny that RFRA restores as a matter of federal statutory law. In Sherbert, an individual’s religious beliefs forbade her from working on Saturdays. In Yoder, the parents of teenaged children had religious beliefs that prohibited them from sending their children to high school. So neither case involved “religious practice or ceremony” or “church governance.” Nor has any RFRA case imposed such a narrow reading of “exercise of religion.”</p>
<p>Samuels seems not to grasp that her apparent recognition that RFRA applies when a person is “force[d] … to use contraceptives in violation of religious belief” reflects the broader principle that RFRA applies any time a person is forced to take any action in violation of that person’s religious belief.* (To be clear: In saying that RFRA “applies,” I am maintaining only that RFRA’s standard needs to be satisfied-the point Samuels denies-not that the person’s RFRA challenge will necessarily succeed.) So Samuels is flatly wrong to maintain that a person is not engaged in an “exercise of religion” for purposes of RFRA when that person, for religious reasons, refuses to provide health insurance that covers contraceptives and abortifacients.</p>
<p>2. Samuels’s argument that the HHS mandate can pass RFRA’s strict scrutiny is laughable. Samuels asserts that the HHS mandate “clearly advances the government’s compelling interest in promoting women’s health and autonomy, and broad participation is the least restrictive way to carry out a complicated national health reform.”</p>
<p>Let’s start with the latter first. The question under the “least restrictive means” prong of RFRA is whether the HHS mandate increases access to contraceptives via the means that is least restrictive of the religious liberty of the objecting employer. The obvious answer to that question, as I have <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/289534/hhs-contraception-mandate-vs-rfra-least-restrictive-means-ed-whelan" type="external">explained</a>, is no: There are plenty of means by which the government could provide contraceptives directly, and the Obama administration’s decision instead to dragoon the objecting employer is among the means most restrictive of the employer’s religious liberty.</p>
<p>Rather than confront this argument, Samuels makes the unintelligible assertion that “broad participation is the least restrictive way to carry out a complicated national health reform.” Her statement gives no hint that she even understands that the focus of the “least restrictive means” test is on the religious liberty of the objecting person.</p>
<p>Because the HHS mandate can’t possibly pass the “least restrictive means” test, it flunks RFRA. But as I explain <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/289535/hhs-contraception-mandate-vs-rfra-compelling-governmental-interest-ed-whelan" type="external">here</a>, the HHS mandate also can’t pass the “in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest” prong of RFRA. Samuels’s conclusory assertion provides no response to the points I have made. (See <a href="" type="internal">here</a>&#160;for a one-stop collection of my posts on the HHS mandate and RFRA.)</p>
<p>3. Samuels also makes a superficial argument that the HHS mandate doesn’t violate the Free Exercise Clause, as interpreted in Employment Division v. Smith. (In fairness to Samuels, I will note that many of the assertions that the HHS mandate does violate the Free Exercise Clause are equally superficial and fail to take account of Smith.)</p>
<p>What Samuels fails to recognize is that the exclusion of a broad swath of employers from the mandate for secular reasons—e.g., the employers who have so-called “grandfathered plans” and small employers (see points developed <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/289535/hhs-contraception-mandate-vs-rfra-compelling-governmental-interest-ed-whelan" type="external">here</a>, in the context of RFRA’s “compelling interest” standard)—means that the mandate isn’t neutral and generally applicable. (As the Sixth Circuit recently <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/289507/important-sixth-circuit-ruling-freedom-religious-speech-and-free-exercise-ed-whel" type="external">explained</a>, a law is not neutral and generally applicable if it “permit[s] secular exemptions but not religious ones.” See also the Third Circuit opinion by then-Judge Alito that I discuss <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/287192/pharmacists-conscience-rights-trial-violation-free-exercise-rights-ed-whelan" type="external">here</a>.) The mandate is therefore subject to the same test under the Free Exercise Clause that it faces under RFRA, and it flunks that test for the same reasons.</p>
<p>* On review (5-6 p.m.), I’ve tweaked this sentence to make it more clear.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/292026/inept-inyti-op-ed-defending-hhs-mandate-part-2-ed-whelan" type="external">Inept NYT Op-Ed Defending HHS Mandate-Part 2</a></p>
<p>Dorothy Samuels’s <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/292018/inept-inyti-op-ed-defending-hhs-mandate-part-1-ed-whelan" type="external">legally inept</a>&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/opinion/sunday/back-to-first-principles-on-religious-freedom.html?_r=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss" type="external">op-ed</a>&#160;defending the HHS mandate is replete with other distortions. To cite a few:</p>
<p>1. Samuels c ontends that Catholic bishops are making a “specious claim to impose their religious views on millions of Americans who do not share them” and “[i]n essence … are arguing that they are above the law and their beliefs should be elevated over pressing societal interests.”</p>
<p>That’s nonsense. What Catholic bishops are making is a claim that they and other objecting religious employers shouldn’t be dragooned to violate their own religious convictions. There is no good reason why the government can’t pursue its interest in marginally increasing contraceptive access without conscripting objecting religious employers. Far from “arguing that they are above the law,” those making this claim are defending their actual legal rights under RFRA and the Free Exercise Clause and the broader tradition of religious liberty that Samuels seems so eager to trample.</p>
<p>2. Like many defenders of the HHS mandate, Samuels asserts that the “original rule … exempted churches, mosques, and other houses of worship.” That’s simply not true. The so-called “original rule,” which is the rule that HHS <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=HHS_FRDOC_0001-0443" type="external">formalized</a>&#160;as a final rule on the very day that the White House announced its intention to tweak the rule at some point down the road, provides that a religious employer will be eligible for the exemption only if it</p>
<p>(1) Has the inculcation of religious values as its purpose; (2) primarily employs persons who share its religious tenets; (3) primarily serves persons who share its religious tenets; and (4) is a non-profit organization described in section 6033(a)(1) and section 6033(a)(3)(A)(i) or (iii) of the Code.</p>
<p>What reason is there to believe that a house of worship that, say, provides shelter to the homeless and English language classes to immigrants or that hires lots of staffers irrespective of their religious beliefs would be deemed to satisfy this test? There simply is no blanket exemption even for “churches, mosques, and other houses of worship.”</p>
<p>3. Samuels also claims that the Obama administration “has revised its original rule … and now also relieves colleges, hospitals, charities, and other religiously affiliated groups from having to provide contraceptive coverage directly.” She claims that this supposed revision makes the mandate less vulnerable to legal attack. She’s wrong in multiple respects:</p>
<p>a. No actual revision has yet been made. Just vague promises evidently designed to defuse the controversy until after the election.</p>
<p>b. Samuels contends that the proposed revision would “put the burden on insurance companies to offer contraceptives free of charge.” But how that would happen, without the insurance companies charging a premium that requires the objecting employers to pay for the contraceptives, remains a mystery. Nor is it evident what legal authority the Obama administration would have to impose such an obligation.</p>
<p>c. The many entities that self-insure, like EWTN (one of the plaintiffs challenging the HHS mandate), wouldn’t benefit from this proposed revision.</p>
<p>d. There is no reason to think that the proposed tweak materially affects the religious objection that the employers have to facilitating the provision of contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilization services to their employees. Exactly as with the original mandate, once an employer selects an insurance company to provide coverage to its employees, that insurance company will provide coverage of objectionable services to those employees. The employer who objects on religious grounds to providing coverage of those services is still being compelled to do exactly that.</p>
<p>e. Even if the tweak were meaningful, it would extend only to some as-yet-undefined category of nonprofit religious organizations. It does nothing to respect the religious freedom of other employers.</p>
<p>4. Samuels contends that the legislative relief that opponents of the HHS mandate are seeking “is an outrageous assault on the First Amendment.” But it’s the Obama administration’s attack on the legitimate rights of objectors under the Free Exercise Clause (as well as RFRA)—and Samuels’s support of that attack—that is the “outrageous assault.”</p>
<p>Edward Whelan is president of the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>&#160;and is a regular contributor to NRO’s <a href="http://bench.nationalreview.com/" type="external">Bench Memos blog</a>.</p> | false | 1 | two posts published nros bench memos blog february 27 2012 inept nyt oped defending hhs mandatepart 1 sundays new york times featured utterly incompetent oped160by dorothy samuelsa member nyt editorial boardcontending legal case hhs contraception mandate remarkably weak remarkably weak samuelss grasp relevant principles religious freedom undertakes present 1 samuels contends hhs mandate trigger protections religious freedom restoration act160because mandate interfere religious practice ceremony mandate asserts impediment exercise religion interfere church governance prevent anyone voicing opposition force anyone use contraceptives violation religious beliefs samuelss contention jumble confusion shes trying advance narrow concept exercise religion protected rfra cant even sort thinks limiting principle first seems limit exercise religion religious practice ceremony expands concept encompass church governance forced use contraceptives violation religious belief explained person engages exercise religion rfra religious reasons performs abstains performing certain actions text rfra congress cited160the landmark free exercise cases sherbert v verner1601963 wisconsin v yoder1601972 set forth standard scrutiny rfra restores matter federal statutory law sherbert individuals religious beliefs forbade working saturdays yoder parents teenaged children religious beliefs prohibited sending children high school neither case involved religious practice ceremony church governance rfra case imposed narrow reading exercise religion samuels seems grasp apparent recognition rfra applies person forced use contraceptives violation religious belief reflects broader principle rfra applies time person forced take action violation persons religious belief clear saying rfra applies maintaining rfras standard needs satisfiedthe point samuels deniesnot persons rfra challenge necessarily succeed samuels flatly wrong maintain person engaged exercise religion purposes rfra person religious reasons refuses provide health insurance covers contraceptives abortifacients 2 samuelss argument hhs mandate pass rfras strict scrutiny laughable samuels asserts hhs mandate clearly advances governments compelling interest promoting womens health autonomy broad participation least restrictive way carry complicated national health reform lets start latter first question least restrictive means prong rfra whether hhs mandate increases access contraceptives via means least restrictive religious liberty objecting employer obvious answer question explained plenty means government could provide contraceptives directly obama administrations decision instead dragoon objecting employer among means restrictive employers religious liberty rather confront argument samuels makes unintelligible assertion broad participation least restrictive way carry complicated national health reform statement gives hint even understands focus least restrictive means test religious liberty objecting person hhs mandate cant possibly pass least restrictive means test flunks rfra explain hhs mandate also cant pass furtherance compelling governmental interest prong rfra samuelss conclusory assertion provides response points made see here160for onestop collection posts hhs mandate rfra 3 samuels also makes superficial argument hhs mandate doesnt violate free exercise clause interpreted employment division v smith fairness samuels note many assertions hhs mandate violate free exercise clause equally superficial fail take account smith samuels fails recognize exclusion broad swath employers mandate secular reasonseg employers socalled grandfathered plans small employers see points developed context rfras compelling interest standardmeans mandate isnt neutral generally applicable sixth circuit recently explained law neutral generally applicable permits secular exemptions religious ones see also third circuit opinion thenjudge alito discuss mandate therefore subject test free exercise clause faces rfra flunks test reasons review 56 pm ive tweaked sentence make clear inept nyt oped defending hhs mandatepart 2 dorothy samuelss legally inept160 oped160defending hhs mandate replete distortions cite 1 samuels c ontends catholic bishops making specious claim impose religious views millions americans share essence arguing law beliefs elevated pressing societal interests thats nonsense catholic bishops making claim objecting religious employers shouldnt dragooned violate religious convictions good reason government cant pursue interest marginally increasing contraceptive access without conscripting objecting religious employers far arguing law making claim defending actual legal rights rfra free exercise clause broader tradition religious liberty samuels seems eager trample 2 like many defenders hhs mandate samuels asserts original rule exempted churches mosques houses worship thats simply true socalled original rule rule hhs formalized160as final rule day white house announced intention tweak rule point road provides religious employer eligible exemption 1 inculcation religious values purpose 2 primarily employs persons share religious tenets 3 primarily serves persons share religious tenets 4 nonprofit organization described section 6033a1 section 6033a3ai iii code reason believe house worship say provides shelter homeless english language classes immigrants hires lots staffers irrespective religious beliefs would deemed satisfy test simply blanket exemption even churches mosques houses worship 3 samuels also claims obama administration revised original rule also relieves colleges hospitals charities religiously affiliated groups provide contraceptive coverage directly claims supposed revision makes mandate less vulnerable legal attack shes wrong multiple respects actual revision yet made vague promises evidently designed defuse controversy election b samuels contends proposed revision would put burden insurance companies offer contraceptives free charge would happen without insurance companies charging premium requires objecting employers pay contraceptives remains mystery evident legal authority obama administration would impose obligation c many entities selfinsure like ewtn one plaintiffs challenging hhs mandate wouldnt benefit proposed revision reason think proposed tweak materially affects religious objection employers facilitating provision contraceptives abortifacients sterilization services employees exactly original mandate employer selects insurance company provide coverage employees insurance company provide coverage objectionable services employees employer objects religious grounds providing coverage services still compelled exactly e even tweak meaningful would extend asyetundefined category nonprofit religious organizations nothing respect religious freedom employers 4 samuels contends legislative relief opponents hhs mandate seeking outrageous assault first amendment obama administrations attack legitimate rights objectors free exercise clause well rfraand samuelss support attackthat outrageous assault edward whelan president ethics public policy center160and regular contributor nros bench memos blog | 897 |
<p>Warner Bros. is planning a shakeup and restructuring of its <a href="http://variety.com/t/dc-films/" type="external">DC films</a> operation following the box office disappointment of “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/justice-league/" type="external">Justice League</a>,” Variety has learned.</p>
<p>Jon Berg will be leaving his current job running the comic book’s film production division, according to several sources with knowledge of the studio’s plans. A search is underway for his replacement, these people say. Berg will instead become a production partner with Roy Lee, the producer of “The Lego Movie” and “It,” who has a deal on the lot.</p>
<p>“This is something that Jon approached me about six months ago, and he expressed his goal was to ultimately be a producer at the studio,”&#160;Warner Bros. Picture Group President Toby Emmerich said in a statement to Variety. “I first met Jon when, as a producer, he brought ‘Elf’ to New Line, which remains one of the best and most evergreen titles in the library. We’re thrilled that Jon is partnering with Roy and anticipate their company being a valuable source of movies for Warner Bros. and New Line.”</p>
<p>Warners is expected to name a new person to run point on DC’s films. Geoff Johns, who has partnered with Berg on much of the creative direction of the movies, is expected to continue serving as DC Entertainment’s chief creative officer. Johns, who reports to DC president Diane Nelson, works in areas such as television (and has written various episodes for DC inspired shows), publishing, and consumer products, in addition to his contributions to the films. Going forward, his contributions to the films may evolve, and could be more advisory in nature.</p>
<p>These people also say that Emmerich is weighing the idea of further integrating DC’s film operations into the studio’s main movie arm. That would entail putting the divisions under the same roof rather than having DC remain in a separate building on the lot, sources say. Marvel, which is owned by Disney, does operate its comic book film division autonomously, but other studios, such as Fox and Sony, produce their superhero films under the studio’s banner.</p>
<p>The DC overhaul is expected to happen by January.</p>
<p>Warner Bros.’ corporate leaders at Time Warner support the moves and are said to be unhappy with the financial performance of “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/coco-international-box-office-justice-league-1202629218/" type="external">Justice League</a>.” The film was intended to be DC’s answer to Marvel’s “Avengers,” uniting the likes of Superman, Wonder Woman, and Batman under the banner of a team of world-saving superheroes. With a budget reported to be as high as $300 million, it represents an expensive bet. After three weeks of release, it has managed to gross $570.3 million worldwide. In contrast, the first “Avengers” film racked up $1.5 billion. The studio did have a number of successes this year with “Wonder Woman,” “Dunkirk,” and “It,” which has helped offset the disappointment of “Justice League.”</p>
<p>Berg and Johns were intimately involved in the production. Berg essentially decamped for the film’s London set, and both men have full producer credits on the picture, which would likely not be the case on future movies. “Justice League” suffered from a difficult birth. An early version, directed by Zack Snyder, alarmed studio executives with its dark tone. That had been the knock on Snyder’s two previous DC films, “Man of Steel” and “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.” After his daughter committed suicide, Snyder eventually left the production before it underwent costly re-shoots. Joss Whedon, who had been brought on the punch up the dialogue, took over directing, but studio brass recognized that so much footage had been shot already that there were limits to what could be done to improve the picture. Studio executives recognized early on that Snyder’s decision to have Steppenwolf, a god-like, all CGI creation, as the principal antagonist was faulty. In fact, many reviews were particularly harsh about Steppenwolf, criticizing the character for being one-note and the product of unconvincing visual effects.</p>
<p>There are no immediate plans for Snyder to direct another DC movie though he is producing or executive producing several, including “Wonder Woman 2” and “Aquaman.” Warner Bros. does continue to have a production deal with Snyder, so it’s possible he could direct additional films for the studio. Time Warner is said to be frustrated that Warner Bros. leaders continued to bring the director back, especially after “Batman v Superman” was excoriated by critics even though it made money. They are also upset that each new DC film seems to be making less money than the one that proceeded it. Only “Wonder Woman,” with its optimistic heroine, managed to be both a critical and a big commercial success.</p>
<p>While Ben Affleck is expected to appear as Batman in a standalone <a href="http://variety.com/t/flash/" type="external">Flash</a> movie,&#160; it is highly unlikely he will don the cape and cowl in Matt Reeves’ planned standalone Batman movie. The director is said to want to cast the role with fresh talent, according to sources.</p>
<p>Warner Bros. does believe that “Justice League” succeeded in one importantly respect: it effectively introduced <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/arrowverse-crossover-episodes-dates-cw-supergirl-flash-1202513591/" type="external">Flash</a> (a quippy speedster played by Ezra Miller) and Aquaman (the king of Atlantis, portrayed by Jason Momoa). A solo “Aquaman”&#160; is due out in 2018 and Warners is still developing a standalone Flash adventure. Going forward, Warner Bros. is planning a sequel to “Wonder Woman” that’s believed to be set in the Cold War, and New Line has greenlit a “Shazaam” feature.</p> | false | 1 | warner bros planning shakeup restructuring dc films operation following box office disappointment justice league variety learned jon berg leaving current job running comic books film production division according several sources knowledge studios plans search underway replacement people say berg instead become production partner roy lee producer lego movie deal lot something jon approached six months ago expressed goal ultimately producer studio160warner bros picture group president toby emmerich said statement variety first met jon producer brought elf new line remains one best evergreen titles library thrilled jon partnering roy anticipate company valuable source movies warner bros new line warners expected name new person run point dcs films geoff johns partnered berg much creative direction movies expected continue serving dc entertainments chief creative officer johns reports dc president diane nelson works areas television written various episodes dc inspired shows publishing consumer products addition contributions films going forward contributions films may evolve could advisory nature people also say emmerich weighing idea integrating dcs film operations studios main movie arm would entail putting divisions roof rather dc remain separate building lot sources say marvel owned disney operate comic book film division autonomously studios fox sony produce superhero films studios banner dc overhaul expected happen january warner bros corporate leaders time warner support moves said unhappy financial performance justice league film intended dcs answer marvels avengers uniting likes superman wonder woman batman banner team worldsaving superheroes budget reported high 300 million represents expensive bet three weeks release managed gross 5703 million worldwide contrast first avengers film racked 15 billion studio number successes year wonder woman dunkirk helped offset disappointment justice league berg johns intimately involved production berg essentially decamped films london set men full producer credits picture would likely case future movies justice league suffered difficult birth early version directed zack snyder alarmed studio executives dark tone knock snyders two previous dc films man steel batman v superman dawn justice daughter committed suicide snyder eventually left production underwent costly reshoots joss whedon brought punch dialogue took directing studio brass recognized much footage shot already limits could done improve picture studio executives recognized early snyders decision steppenwolf godlike cgi creation principal antagonist faulty fact many reviews particularly harsh steppenwolf criticizing character onenote product unconvincing visual effects immediate plans snyder direct another dc movie though producing executive producing several including wonder woman 2 aquaman warner bros continue production deal snyder possible could direct additional films studio time warner said frustrated warner bros leaders continued bring director back especially batman v superman excoriated critics even though made money also upset new dc film seems making less money one proceeded wonder woman optimistic heroine managed critical big commercial success ben affleck expected appear batman standalone flash movie160 highly unlikely cape cowl matt reeves planned standalone batman movie director said want cast role fresh talent according sources warner bros believe justice league succeeded one importantly respect effectively introduced flash quippy speedster played ezra miller aquaman king atlantis portrayed jason momoa solo aquaman160 due 2018 warners still developing standalone flash adventure going forward warner bros planning sequel wonder woman thats believed set cold war new line greenlit shazaam feature | 518 |
<p>RENTON, Wash. — When the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Seattle-Seahawks/" type="external">Seattle Seahawks</a> reported for training camp here Saturday, the team confirmed rumors by celebrity TV chef Guy Fiere that the team had a surprise on the menu.</p>
<p>Fiere tweeted Friday morning that versatile Marcel Reece was returning to the Seahawks, with whom he played the final four regular-season games and the playoffs. Fiere, a well-known fan of the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Oakland-Raiders/" type="external">Oakland Raiders</a>, befriended Reece when the player was with that team and last year they worked together on a video.</p>
<p>The team announced Saturday that it re-signed Reece.</p>
<p>Reece was a popular player at the University of Washington in 2006-07, when he was primarily a receiver. With the Raiders, he made the Pro Bowl while lining up as a fullback, tight end and even wide receiver.</p>
<p>After his release by the Raiders in September, Reece signed with the Seahawks in December after injuries diminished the team’s fullback position.</p>
<p>On Friday, the Seahawks traded linebacker Kevin Pierre-Louis to the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kansas-City-Chiefs/" type="external">Kansas City Chiefs</a> in exchange for linebacker D. J. Alexander.</p>
<p>Alexander played mostly special teams for the Chiefs. He started at inside linebacker in the team’s 19-17 loss to the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tennessee-Titans/" type="external">Tennessee Titans</a> in Week 15 last season following <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Derrick_Johnson/" type="external">Derrick Johnson</a>‘s season-ending Achilles injury.</p>
<p>“He was a good <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> player for us,” Chiefs head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Andy_Reid/" type="external">Andy Reid</a> said. “Gives him an opportunity up there.”</p>
<p>When the team begins on-field workouts, a key battle will take place at cornerback, where the Seahawks are looking for somebody to start opposite talkative <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Richard-Sherman/" type="external">Richard Sherman</a>.</p>
<p>With <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/DeShawn-Shead/" type="external">DeShawn Shead</a> sidelined and probably headed to the PUP list with an ACL tear, Jeremy Lane will get significant playing time, either as an outside cornerback or slot option.</p>
<p>Rookie Shaquill Griffin could challenge Lane for the job, or at least take over on the outside in nickel situations so Lane can move inside. Neiko Thorpe, DeAndre Elliot and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Tyson/" type="external">Mike Tyson</a> could also challenge for roles as well.</p>
<p>THE FACTS:</p>
<p>TRAINING CAMP: Virginia Mason Athletic Center; Renton, WA</p>
<p>HEAD COACH: <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pete_Carroll/" type="external">Pete Carroll</a></p>
<p>8th season with Seahawks</p>
<p>79-46-1 overall; 9-5 postseason</p>
<p>12th season as NFL head coach</p>
<p>113-79-1; 10-7 postseason</p>
<p>THE BREAKDOWN</p>
<p>2016 finish: 1st NFC West (10-5-1)</p>
<p>STATISTICS</p>
<p>TOTAL OFFENSE: 357.2 (12th)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 99.4 (25th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 257.8 (10th)</p>
<p>TOTAL DEFENSE: 318.7 (5th)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 92.9 (7th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 225.8 (8th)</p>
<p>2017 PRESEASON SCHEDULE</p>
<p>All times Pacific</p>
<p>Aug. 13, at L.A. Chargers, 5:00</p>
<p>Aug. 18, MINNESOTA (Fri), 7:00</p>
<p>Aug. 25, KANSAS CITY (Fri), 5:00</p>
<p>Aug. 31, at Oakland (Thu), 7:00</p>
<p>UNIT-BY-UNIT ANALYSIS</p>
<p>QUARTERBACKS: Starter — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Russell_Wilson/" type="external">Russell Wilson</a>. Backups — Trevone Boykin, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Austin_Davis/" type="external">Austin Davis</a>.</p>
<p>Wilson returns from the first injury-plagued season of his career looking to rebound from his least efficient season as a pro. Davis brings veteran competition to the backup spot with Boykin, who held the reserve job a season ago.</p>
<p>RUNNING BACKS: Starters — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Eddie-Lacy/" type="external">Eddie Lacy</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Thomas-Rawls/" type="external">Thomas Rawls</a>. Backups — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/CJ-Prosise/" type="external">C.J. Prosise</a>, Alex Collins, Chris Carson, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Davis/" type="external">Mike Davis</a>, FB Tre Madden, FB Marcel Reece, FB Kyle Coleman.</p>
<p>Lacy’s addition expresses a desire by Seattle to regain its running roots, which were lost following <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marshawn_Lynch/" type="external">Marshawn Lynch</a>‘s departure. Staying healthy will be critical as Lacy, Rawls and Prosise all missed significant time due to injuries last year. Collins and Carson will be battling for final roster spots. Reece, Madden and Coleman will compete to become Seattle’s new fullback.</p>
<p>TIGHT ENDS: Starter — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jimmy-Graham/" type="external">Jimmy Graham</a>. Backups — Luke Willson, Nick Vannett, Marcus Lucas, Tyrone Swoopes, Steve Donatell.</p>
<p>Graham set several franchise receiving records by a tight end last season with 65 catches for 923 yards. Willson returns as a trusted rotational player. Vannett looks to earn more playing time in his second season. Lucas, Swoopes and Donatell will have a difficult time cracking the roster.</p>
<p>WIDE RECEIVERS: Starters — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Doug-Baldwin/" type="external">Doug Baldwin</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jermaine-Kearse/" type="external">Jermaine Kearse</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tyler-Lockett/" type="external">Tyler Lockett</a>. Backups — Paul Richardson, Amara Darboh, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David_Moore/" type="external">David Moore</a>, Tanner McEvoy, Kenny Lawler, Kasen Williams, Rodney Smith, Cyril Grayson, J.D. McKissic, Darreus Rogers.</p>
<p>Baldwin is Wilson’s favorite target and became the first Seattle receiver to make the Pro Bowl in 17 years. Lockett is working to return from a broken leg suffered last December. Kearse had a down year last season and may be one of the few veterans on the roster in danger of losing his job in the preseason. Draft picks Darboh and Moore will be trying to create roles for themselves. Richardson had a strong conclusion to last season as he enters a contract year. Lawler, McEvoy and Williams will be in the mix for roster spots as well. Grayson is trying to return to football after being a track athlete exclusively at LSU.</p>
<p>OFFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters — LT George Fant, LG <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Luke-Joeckel/" type="external">Luke Joeckel</a>, C Justin Britt, RG Mark Glowinski, RT Germain Ifedi. Backups — G/T Rees Odhiambo, G/T Oday Aboushi, C Joey Hunt, G/T Ethan Pocic, C/G Will Pericak, T Justin Senior, G Jordon Roos, T Robert Myers.</p>
<p>A young group returns looking for a leap in performance from last year. Joeckel and Aboushi were the only free-agent additions to the squad. Joeckel’s addition likely kicks Glowinski from left guard to right guard (where he played as a rookie) and Ifedi from right guard to right tackle. Joeckel will also compete with Fant at left tackle. Pocic will battle Ifedi at right tackle after being selected in the second round. Odhiambo and Hunt pencil into reserve roles, with Roos and Pericak pushing them for spots.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters — LE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cliff-Avril/" type="external">Cliff Avril</a>, DT Jarran Reed, NT Ahtyba Rubin, RE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael_Bennett/" type="external">Michael Bennett</a>. Backups — DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Frank_Clark/" type="external">Frank Clark</a>, DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Malik-McDowell/" type="external">Malik McDowell</a>, DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marcus_Smith/" type="external">Marcus Smith</a>, DE Cassius Marsh, DE Quinton Jefferson, DT Nazair Jones, DE Dion Jordan, DT Garrison Smith, DT Jeremy Liggins, DT Shaneil Jenkins, DE Tylor Harris, DE David Bass.</p>
<p>A strong defensive front returns intact, while the additions of top draft pick McDowell and third-round pick Jones bolster the group. Avril and Bennett lead the pass-rush unit with Clark, McDowell and Marsh expected to add diversity to the attack. Marcus Smith was signed after being released by the Eagles earlier in the week. There will be competition for the backup tackle spots with Jefferson, Jones, Garrison Smith and Liggins fighting for spots. Jordan is attempting to take advantage of a second chance after two lost seasons to injury and suspension, but another surgery in June has set back the efforts.</p>
<p>LINEBACKERS: Starters — WLB K.J. Wright, MLB Bobby Wagner, SLB Michael Wilhoite. Backups — OLB Terrence Garvin, MLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Arthur_Brown/" type="external">Arthur Brown</a>, MLB Dewey McDonald, OLB Kache Palacio, OLB Otha Peters, OLB Ronald Powell.</p>
<p>The most change on the roster comes at linebacker with Mike Morgan and Brock Coyle no longer with the team. Morgan was a starting strong-side linebacker last season. Wilhoite is the favorite to earn that job moving forward. The depth options could be completely overhauled as free agent additions Garvin and Brown could usurp spots from Pierre-Louis, McDonald or others.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE BACKS: Starters — LCB Richard Sherman, RCB Jeremy Lane, FS <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Earl-Thomas/" type="external">Earl Thomas</a>, SS Kam Chancellor. Backups — CB DeShawn Shead, CB Shaquill Griffin, CB Mike Tyson, CB Neiko Thorpe, FS Bradley McDougald, FS Tedric Thompson, SS Delano Hill, CB DeAndre Elliott, CB Pierre Desir, CB Demetrius McCray, S Marcus Cromartie, S Jordan Simone.</p>
<p>Shead is still recovering from a torn ACL suffered last January, which creates uncertainty at cornerback. Lane, Griffin and Thorpe are the most likely candidates to receive that playing time opposite Sherman. The additions of McDougald through free agency, and Thompson and Hill through the draft, have overhauled the depth at safety behind Thomas and Chancellor. Elliott, Tyson and Desir will all be battling for roles as well.</p>
<p>SPECIAL TEAMS: K <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Blair-Walsh/" type="external">Blair Walsh</a>, P Jon Ryan, LS Nolan Frese, LS Tyler Ott, KOR/PR Tyler Lockett.</p>
<p>For the first time since Pete Carroll’s initial season in Seattle, the Seahawks will have a new kicker. Walsh is the only candidate on the roster to replace <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steven/" type="external">Steven</a> Hauschka, who signed with Buffalo. Hauschka’s inconsistency led to the Seahawks electing to move on, but Walsh has struggled recently as well in Minnesota. Frese and Ott will battle for snapping duties.</p> | false | 1 | renton wash seattle seahawks reported training camp saturday team confirmed rumors celebrity tv chef guy fiere team surprise menu fiere tweeted friday morning versatile marcel reece returning seahawks played final four regularseason games playoffs fiere wellknown fan oakland raiders befriended reece player team last year worked together video team announced saturday resigned reece reece popular player university washington 200607 primarily receiver raiders made pro bowl lining fullback tight end even wide receiver release raiders september reece signed seahawks december injuries diminished teams fullback position friday seahawks traded linebacker kevin pierrelouis kansas city chiefs exchange linebacker j alexander alexander played mostly special teams chiefs started inside linebacker teams 1917 loss tennessee titans week 15 last season following derrick johnsons seasonending achilles injury good football player us chiefs head coach andy reid said gives opportunity team begins onfield workouts key battle take place cornerback seahawks looking somebody start opposite talkative richard sherman deshawn shead sidelined probably headed pup list acl tear jeremy lane get significant playing time either outside cornerback slot option rookie shaquill griffin could challenge lane job least take outside nickel situations lane move inside neiko thorpe deandre elliot mike tyson could also challenge roles well facts training camp virginia mason athletic center renton wa head coach pete carroll 8th season seahawks 79461 overall 95 postseason 12th season nfl head coach 113791 107 postseason breakdown 2016 finish 1st nfc west 1051 statistics total offense 3572 12th rushing 994 25th passing 2578 10th total defense 3187 5th rushing 929 7th passing 2258 8th 2017 preseason schedule times pacific aug 13 la chargers 500 aug 18 minnesota fri 700 aug 25 kansas city fri 500 aug 31 oakland thu 700 unitbyunit analysis quarterbacks starter russell wilson backups trevone boykin austin davis wilson returns first injuryplagued season career looking rebound least efficient season pro davis brings veteran competition backup spot boykin held reserve job season ago running backs starters eddie lacy thomas rawls backups cj prosise alex collins chris carson mike davis fb tre madden fb marcel reece fb kyle coleman lacys addition expresses desire seattle regain running roots lost following marshawn lynchs departure staying healthy critical lacy rawls prosise missed significant time due injuries last year collins carson battling final roster spots reece madden coleman compete become seattles new fullback tight ends starter jimmy graham backups luke willson nick vannett marcus lucas tyrone swoopes steve donatell graham set several franchise receiving records tight end last season 65 catches 923 yards willson returns trusted rotational player vannett looks earn playing time second season lucas swoopes donatell difficult time cracking roster wide receivers starters doug baldwin jermaine kearse tyler lockett backups paul richardson amara darboh david moore tanner mcevoy kenny lawler kasen williams rodney smith cyril grayson jd mckissic darreus rogers baldwin wilsons favorite target became first seattle receiver make pro bowl 17 years lockett working return broken leg suffered last december kearse year last season may one veterans roster danger losing job preseason draft picks darboh moore trying create roles richardson strong conclusion last season enters contract year lawler mcevoy williams mix roster spots well grayson trying return football track athlete exclusively lsu offensive linemen starters lt george fant lg luke joeckel c justin britt rg mark glowinski rt germain ifedi backups gt rees odhiambo gt oday aboushi c joey hunt gt ethan pocic cg pericak justin senior g jordon roos robert myers young group returns looking leap performance last year joeckel aboushi freeagent additions squad joeckels addition likely kicks glowinski left guard right guard played rookie ifedi right guard right tackle joeckel also compete fant left tackle pocic battle ifedi right tackle selected second round odhiambo hunt pencil reserve roles roos pericak pushing spots defensive linemen starters le cliff avril dt jarran reed nt ahtyba rubin michael bennett backups de frank clark de malik mcdowell de marcus smith de cassius marsh de quinton jefferson dt nazair jones de dion jordan dt garrison smith dt jeremy liggins dt shaneil jenkins de tylor harris de david bass strong defensive front returns intact additions top draft pick mcdowell thirdround pick jones bolster group avril bennett lead passrush unit clark mcdowell marsh expected add diversity attack marcus smith signed released eagles earlier week competition backup tackle spots jefferson jones garrison smith liggins fighting spots jordan attempting take advantage second chance two lost seasons injury suspension another surgery june set back efforts linebackers starters wlb kj wright mlb bobby wagner slb michael wilhoite backups olb terrence garvin mlb arthur brown mlb dewey mcdonald olb kache palacio olb otha peters olb ronald powell change roster comes linebacker mike morgan brock coyle longer team morgan starting strongside linebacker last season wilhoite favorite earn job moving forward depth options could completely overhauled free agent additions garvin brown could usurp spots pierrelouis mcdonald others defensive backs starters lcb richard sherman rcb jeremy lane fs earl thomas ss kam chancellor backups cb deshawn shead cb shaquill griffin cb mike tyson cb neiko thorpe fs bradley mcdougald fs tedric thompson ss delano hill cb deandre elliott cb pierre desir cb demetrius mccray marcus cromartie jordan simone shead still recovering torn acl suffered last january creates uncertainty cornerback lane griffin thorpe likely candidates receive playing time opposite sherman additions mcdougald free agency thompson hill draft overhauled depth safety behind thomas chancellor elliott tyson desir battling roles well special teams k blair walsh p jon ryan ls nolan frese ls tyler ott korpr tyler lockett first time since pete carrolls initial season seattle seahawks new kicker walsh candidate roster replace steven hauschka signed buffalo hauschkas inconsistency led seahawks electing move walsh struggled recently well minnesota frese ott battle snapping duties | 935 |
<p>Amazon may be a new-media innovator, but when it comes to making movies, the company isn’t selling itself as a barricade-breaching revolutionary. Unlike its rival, Netflix, which debuts its films on its streaming service and largely forgoes a theatrical run, Amazon is all about releasing its offerings in cinemas.</p>
<p>“Our entry into the market is not particularly disruptive,” says Jason Ropell, worldwide head of Amazon’s motion picture group, as he sips black coffee at the Ritz-Carlton in Toronto, where his company’s Ben Stiller dramedy “Brad’s Status” is premiering at the film festival. “We’re a theatrical company that supports a theatrical window. We have home entertainment sales. In many ways we’re operating like a traditional studio.”</p>
<p>Instead of burning down the customary system of releasing movies, Amazon is ready to become a full-fledged studio, equipped to handle every step in the life span of the films it creates and acquires. In the past, Amazon partnered with the likes of indie distributors Roadside Attractions, Bleecker Street and Lionsgate to support the rollout of its movies in theaters. But starting with Woody Allen’s “Wonder Wheel” in December, Amazon will begin distributing its own films and overseeing all parts of their theatrical campaigns. Among the upcoming pictures it will self-release: Lynne Ramsay’s thriller “You Were Never Really Here,” Luca Guadagnino’s horror remake “Suspiria” and Nash Edgerton’s “Gringo” with Charlize Theron.</p>
<p>“It represents the final stages of the evolution of our strategy,” says Ropell. “It completes the picture in terms of our ability to control a film from its inception to how it comes to customers.”</p>
<p>That’s required staffing up substantially. The company’s marketing and distribution team, headed by <a href="http://variety.com/tag/bob-berney/" type="external">Bob Berney</a>, now tops out at 40 people, quadruple what it was a year ago. It’s also hired Mark Boxer, an IFC executive best known for his work on Richard Linklater’s Oscar-winning “Boyhood,” as head of theatrical distribution. The company believes that distributing its own films will help with branding as well as cut costs.</p>
<p>One thing that will not change is the emphasis on having films screen in theaters. Amazon believes that showing a move on the big screen gives it a patina of respectability, and the publicity that comes with having its talent do interviews and appear on shows draws attention to the company’s Prime streaming service.</p>
<p />
<p>CREDIT: Courtesy of Amazon Studios/Jessica Miglio</p>
<p>“We found that the customers want quality films, but also films that they’ve heard about and perceive as big events, because they’ve been reviewed in newspapers, screened at festivals and had long-running theatrical engagements,” Berney says.</p>
<p>When Amazon first made noise about making movies, studio executives expected the company would take a page from the Netflix playbook and focus on driving customers to its streaming service, just as its sprawling e-commerce platform had encouraged an earlier generation of customers to order their paper products online instead of trucking down to a brick-and-mortar store. Instead, Amazon has fully embraced a more conventional approach to releasing its films and has had little appetite for positioning itself as a market disruptor like Netflix. That’s not to say that what it’s doing isn’t innovative.</p>
<p>“Their agenda is complex,” says sales agent John Sloss, founder of Cinetic Media.&#160;“I increasingly believe that the future belongs to people who will not live or die by the performance of the individual pieces of content. Instead they will have something of a double bottom line where there will be collateral benefits that come from their content.”</p>
<p>Amazon isn’t in the movie business to make money from box office returns and home entertainment sales, though it does both. Nor is it purely a subscription-based service in the vein of Hulu or Netflix, though it is that too.&#160;It’s primarily interested in offering movies to the people who pay $8.99 a month for its Prime shipping service. In addition to getting packages quicker, Prime users can stream movies like “ <a href="http://variety.com/tag/manchester-by-the-sea/" type="external">Manchester by the Sea</a>” or “The Big Sick.”</p>
<p>“Amazon is using movies to drive people into its great virtual shopping store and to keep them on its site longer so they buy more stuff,” says Peter Csathy, founder of Creatv Media, a business and consulting firm.</p>
<p>In the fast-moving movie business — one with a high fatality rate, where companies launch and shutter with dizzying speed — Amazon is looking downright geriatric. In the three years since it entered the scene, the constellation of companies on the prowl for films to release has altered dramatically. As indie studios like Relativity Media, Broad Green and Alchemy close their doors or dial down their ambitions, they’ve been replaced by an onslaught of digital players looking to buy movies. Apple, YouTube Red and Facebook have hit up festivals, kicking the tires on projects that might excite their customers.</p>
<p>Despite the wave of Silicon Valley types riding into Hollywood, Ropell insists that Amazon isn’t going to deviate from its game plan. “It doesn’t change our strategy,” he says. “We’re not a competitor-focused company in any of our businesses. Strategically speaking, we don’t change what we do based on who might be coming intothe space.”</p>
<p>In interviews and public statements, Netflix has been disdainful of the theatrical movie business and critical of Amazon. Last spring, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings quipped that the only innovation cinemas had made was to offer better-tasting popcorn, while chief content officer Ted Sarandos told Variety last month that Amazon’s emphasis on theatrical releasing was puzzling. “I don’t understand why perpetuating a model that feels more and more disconnected with the population is good,” he said.</p>
<p>Amazon doesn’t have Netflix’s sharp elbows. Likewise, Berney, a bookish sort who exudes affability, isn’t eager to get into a battle of put-downs with its streaming rival. “They can take their swipes, but it’s more about showing that our model is actually working,” he says. “We’ve done that.”</p>
<p>“They’ve done some great projects,” Berney adds, complimenting Netflix. “They have their own very religious philosophy that everything just goes online. I think that our approach is working. It enhances and incentivizes artists globally, and that encourages filmmakers to come work with us.”</p>
<p>Since it started releasing movies in 2015, kicking things off with Spike Lee’s “Chi-Raq,” Amazon has primarily backed director-driven projects that appeal to art-house crowds and attract awards attention. Last year, Amazon’s movies won three Oscars, for “ <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/casey-affleck-amazon-studios-1202569684/" type="external">Manchester by the Sea</a>” and Asghar Farhadi’s “The Salesman,” and the company is planning awards campaigns for “The Big Sick,” its surprise summer hit, and upcoming films such as Todd Haynes’ “Wonderstruck,” Linklater’s “Last Flag Flying” and Allen’s “Wonder Wheel.” Going forward, it plans to release between 12 to 14 films a year with budgets ranging from $5 million to $35 million.</p>
<p>“The idea of nurturing talent or working with the masters comes from the older studio system,” Berney says. “But I think we’re a little more filmmaker friendly. Studios tend to have one way they do everything every single time. We’re going to try to maintain a handcrafted, artisanal way of doing each film.”</p>
<p>“We’re going to try to maintain a handcrafted, artisanal way of doing each film.”</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/2016/digital/news/amazon-studios-cinemacon-theaters-1201753955/" type="external">Bob Berney</a></p>
<p>Amazon is also moving more heavily into developing its own projects in-house, as opposed to relying solely on picking up films at Sundance, Cannes and other festivals. “Wonderstruck” and “Wonder Wheel” are Amazon productions, for instance, and the company expects that going forward, fewer than half of its movies will be acquisitions. To augment its slate, the company has been signing development deals with the likes of “Carol” producer Killer Films and <a href="http://variety.com/tag/casey-affleck/" type="external">Casey Affleck</a>’s Sea Change Media. That’s a vestige of traditional studios, which keep top producers on their lot (except in this case, there’s no physical studio lot).</p>
<p>“Filmmakers want to go where they feel their work is respected and where a company has the resources to deliver on their vision,” says Christine Vachon, the founder of Killer Films. “Amazon is delivering on all counts.”</p>
<p>Amazon has been a boon to art-house auteurs. With major studios steering clear of mid-budget dramas in favor of superhero fare, the company has helped fill a void. It’s given Allen his biggest budgets in decades. In “Wonder Wheel,” the director even used CGI to help create 1950s Coney Island. The film’s production budget was in the $20 million range.</p>
<p>“Amazon enabled that film to have a bigger look than some of his other films,” says Berney.</p>
<p>“Wonder Wheel” marks Allen’s third project with the company, following 2016’s “Café Society” and his television series “Crisis in Six Scenes.” In a statement to Variety, the director praises the company. “Working with Amazon has been a pleasure because they’re very sensitive to the needs of the artist,” he says. “That’s worth its weight in gold and is a rarity in this business.”</p>
<p>While Amazon’s focus remains on indie fare from the Richard Linklaters and Woody Allens of the world, the company has been broadening the types of projects it makes. It’s partnering with Warner Bros. on a big-screen adaptation of Donna Tartt’s “The Goldfinch,” a project it joined after seeing how popular the book was with Amazon customers. It has also met with MGM and producer Barbara Broccoli, guardians of the James Bond franchise, to discuss working on the next 007 adventure, according to insiders. Amazon won’t comment on those talks, though Ropell hints that the company isn’t ruling out playing in the blockbuster arena. “We remain open to and very interested in exploring all opportunities and projects of all scales as the movies program continues to grow and evolve,” he says.</p>
<p>Berney and Ropell make the decisions on which films to back, along with Roy Price, head of Amazon Studios, and Ted Hope, the production chief. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos remains “engaged,” Ropell says, but doesn’t call the shots on greenlighting.</p>
<p>Amazon, like Netflix, has one key advantage over the competition: It has a wealth of information about what its estimated 65 million Prime members worldwide want, buy and browse. Traditional studios would kill for that kind of insight. Yet, Amazon’s film executives say that while data guides decisions, they’re not relying solely on algorithms.</p>
<p>“We’re a data-centric company across all of our businesses,” Ropell says. “It’s certainly going to be helpful, but we try not to be slavishly devoted to data. We’re not trying to reverse-engineer great films. Creativity and quality can’t necessarily be measured by data.”</p> | false | 1 | amazon may newmedia innovator comes making movies company isnt selling barricadebreaching revolutionary unlike rival netflix debuts films streaming service largely forgoes theatrical run amazon releasing offerings cinemas entry market particularly disruptive says jason ropell worldwide head amazons motion picture group sips black coffee ritzcarlton toronto companys ben stiller dramedy brads status premiering film festival theatrical company supports theatrical window home entertainment sales many ways operating like traditional studio instead burning customary system releasing movies amazon ready become fullfledged studio equipped handle every step life span films creates acquires past amazon partnered likes indie distributors roadside attractions bleecker street lionsgate support rollout movies theaters starting woody allens wonder wheel december amazon begin distributing films overseeing parts theatrical campaigns among upcoming pictures selfrelease lynne ramsays thriller never really luca guadagninos horror remake suspiria nash edgertons gringo charlize theron represents final stages evolution strategy says ropell completes picture terms ability control film inception comes customers thats required staffing substantially companys marketing distribution team headed bob berney tops 40 people quadruple year ago also hired mark boxer ifc executive best known work richard linklaters oscarwinning boyhood head theatrical distribution company believes distributing films help branding well cut costs one thing change emphasis films screen theaters amazon believes showing move big screen gives patina respectability publicity comes talent interviews appear shows draws attention companys prime streaming service credit courtesy amazon studiosjessica miglio found customers want quality films also films theyve heard perceive big events theyve reviewed newspapers screened festivals longrunning theatrical engagements berney says amazon first made noise making movies studio executives expected company would take page netflix playbook focus driving customers streaming service sprawling ecommerce platform encouraged earlier generation customers order paper products online instead trucking brickandmortar store instead amazon fully embraced conventional approach releasing films little appetite positioning market disruptor like netflix thats say isnt innovative agenda complex says sales agent john sloss founder cinetic media160i increasingly believe future belongs people live die performance individual pieces content instead something double bottom line collateral benefits come content amazon isnt movie business make money box office returns home entertainment sales though purely subscriptionbased service vein hulu netflix though too160its primarily interested offering movies people pay 899 month prime shipping service addition getting packages quicker prime users stream movies like manchester sea big sick amazon using movies drive people great virtual shopping store keep site longer buy stuff says peter csathy founder creatv media business consulting firm fastmoving movie business one high fatality rate companies launch shutter dizzying speed amazon looking downright geriatric three years since entered scene constellation companies prowl films release altered dramatically indie studios like relativity media broad green alchemy close doors dial ambitions theyve replaced onslaught digital players looking buy movies apple youtube red facebook hit festivals kicking tires projects might excite customers despite wave silicon valley types riding hollywood ropell insists amazon isnt going deviate game plan doesnt change strategy says competitorfocused company businesses strategically speaking dont change based might coming intothe space interviews public statements netflix disdainful theatrical movie business critical amazon last spring netflix ceo reed hastings quipped innovation cinemas made offer bettertasting popcorn chief content officer ted sarandos told variety last month amazons emphasis theatrical releasing puzzling dont understand perpetuating model feels disconnected population good said amazon doesnt netflixs sharp elbows likewise berney bookish sort exudes affability isnt eager get battle putdowns streaming rival take swipes showing model actually working says weve done theyve done great projects berney adds complimenting netflix religious philosophy everything goes online think approach working enhances incentivizes artists globally encourages filmmakers come work us since started releasing movies 2015 kicking things spike lees chiraq amazon primarily backed directordriven projects appeal arthouse crowds attract awards attention last year amazons movies three oscars manchester sea asghar farhadis salesman company planning awards campaigns big sick surprise summer hit upcoming films todd haynes wonderstruck linklaters last flag flying allens wonder wheel going forward plans release 12 14 films year budgets ranging 5 million 35 million idea nurturing talent working masters comes older studio system berney says think little filmmaker friendly studios tend one way everything every single time going try maintain handcrafted artisanal way film going try maintain handcrafted artisanal way film bob berney amazon also moving heavily developing projects inhouse opposed relying solely picking films sundance cannes festivals wonderstruck wonder wheel amazon productions instance company expects going forward fewer half movies acquisitions augment slate company signing development deals likes carol producer killer films casey afflecks sea change media thats vestige traditional studios keep top producers lot except case theres physical studio lot filmmakers want go feel work respected company resources deliver vision says christine vachon founder killer films amazon delivering counts amazon boon arthouse auteurs major studios steering clear midbudget dramas favor superhero fare company helped fill void given allen biggest budgets decades wonder wheel director even used cgi help create 1950s coney island films production budget 20 million range amazon enabled film bigger look films says berney wonder wheel marks allens third project company following 2016s café society television series crisis six scenes statement variety director praises company working amazon pleasure theyre sensitive needs artist says thats worth weight gold rarity business amazons focus remains indie fare richard linklaters woody allens world company broadening types projects makes partnering warner bros bigscreen adaptation donna tartts goldfinch project joined seeing popular book amazon customers also met mgm producer barbara broccoli guardians james bond franchise discuss working next 007 adventure according insiders amazon wont comment talks though ropell hints company isnt ruling playing blockbuster arena remain open interested exploring opportunities projects scales movies program continues grow evolve says berney ropell make decisions films back along roy price head amazon studios ted hope production chief amazon founder jeff bezos remains engaged ropell says doesnt call shots greenlighting amazon like netflix one key advantage competition wealth information estimated 65 million prime members worldwide want buy browse traditional studios would kill kind insight yet amazons film executives say data guides decisions theyre relying solely algorithms datacentric company across businesses ropell says certainly going helpful try slavishly devoted data trying reverseengineer great films creativity quality cant necessarily measured data | 1,016 |
<p>The Weinstein Co.’s television operations have been far more successful than the company’s feature business in the past few years. <a href="http://variety.com/tag/harvey-weinstein/" type="external">Harvey Weinstein</a> has been adept at packaging projects and leveraging his connections to meet the voracious demand for TV content.</p>
<p>But that business is in jeopardy with the detailed <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/harvey-weinstein-sexual-harassment-leave-of-absence-new-york-times-1202581677/" type="external">revelations of alleged sexual harassment</a> and inappropriate behavior that Weinstein allegedly exhibited in the context of his work as a producer.</p>
<p>The lengthy report published Thursday by the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html?smid=tw-nytimes&amp;smtyp=cur&amp;_r=0" type="external">New York Times</a> comes at a moment when mainstream media companies are extremely sensitive to criticism that they are engaging in or turning a blind eye to gender and racial discrimination. The persistent rumors about Weinstein’s alleged misconduct toward women have been a factor in the company’s unsuccessful effort to shop its TV division to prospective buyers.</p>
<p>The allegations leveled against Weinstein are so specific as to likely make it uncomfortable for Weinstein’s creative partners.</p>
<p>Oddly enough, one of those creative partners is his lawyer, Lisa Bloom, who has been an aggressive advocate for clients who have leveled sexual harassment claims against Fox News and other high-profile targets. Weinstein Co. is at work on a <a href="http://variety.com/2017/film/news/jay-z-trayvon-martin-movie-documentary-series-weinstein-1202015276/" type="external">docu-series about the Trayvon Martin</a> murder case that is based in part on Bloom’s book “Suspicion Nation: The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It.”</p>
<p>Weinstein Co. has been looking to sell all or part of its TV division for the past two and a half years, amid a flurry of M&amp;A activity around independent TV production entities of size.</p>
<p>With characteristic braggadocio, reports surfaced in 2015 that Weinsteins were seeking a $900 million valuation of the business — a number that led to much scoffing in TV circles. ITV, the U.K. TV giant that has been on a spending spree for production companies, engaged in talks but ultimately walked away. It didn’t help that the company’s big-budget Netflix drama “Marco Polo” was canceled after two seasons in late 2016.</p>
<p>The loss of “Marco Polo” was a blow because while Weinstein Co. has a lot of activity, it doesn’t have a big profit generator other than the long-running “Project Runway” franchise. Last year, Weinstein Co. retained investment banker Moelis &amp; Co. to shop a 50% to 70% stake in the TV side but there’s been little chatter about it in investment circles. Weinstein and his brother Bob are under pressure to deliver return to investors who bankrolled the Weinstein Co. launch back in 2005.</p>
<p>At present, Weinstein Co. has a range of other scripted and unscripted projects spread among cable and streaming outlets, notably the long-running reality franchise “Project Runway” and its spinoffs on Lifetime.&#160;But the company’s level of involvement in its productions is varied.</p>
<p>Weinstein Co. is a production entity on Matthew Weiner’s upcoming <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/mad-men-matt-weiner-the-romanoffs-amazon-drama-1202000372/" type="external">Amazon anthology series “The Romanoffs”</a> but <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/harvey-weinstein-bob-weinstein-1202581952/" type="external">Harvey Weinstein</a> does not have an executive producer credit on the show and has not had creative input on the project, according to sources. “Romanoffs” is in the midst of filming, with Weiner in firm control as showrunner and director of all eight episodes.</p>
<p>Weinstein Co. is also a producer on the high-profile David O. Russell Amazon drama starring Robert De Niro and Julianne Moore. Weinstein has worked with Russell on numerous features but his level of involvement in the show is unclear.</p>
<p>Weinstein has been much more hands-on with two scripted projects in the works for Paramount Network (the remodeled Spike TV as of Jan. 18). He has been a big creative force behind the limited series “Waco” and “Yellowstone.” “Waco” recently wrapped production and is slated to bow Jan. 24, making it a big part of the Spike TV rebranding effort.</p>
<p>The Trayvon Martin series, a joint venture with Jay-Z, is in the midst of production.</p>
<p>Weinstein was front and center earlier this year on another docu-series project for Spike TV also produced with Jay-Z. “Time: The Kalief Browder” told the story of the young man who took his life after more than three years locked up on New York’s Rikers Island without a conviction. Weinstein and Jay-Z stumped for the movie at the Sundance Film Festival this year. They also appeared together on an hourlong live Spike TV town hall special discussing the issue of criminal justice reform and juvenile incarceration.</p>
<p>Weinstein Co. has produced a number of specials for Investigation Discovery — including one examining the history of sordid rape and harassment allegations against comedian Bill Cosby. A knowledgable source said Weinstein Co. has been mostly hands-off on those projects. Their involvement largely stems from the content partnership that Weinstein Co. struck in December 2015 with National Enquirer parent company American Media Inc., which provides the tabloid fodder for the specials.</p>
<p>At Lifetime sibling network History, Weinstein Co. is a producer on the military drama “Six.” It’s understood that there was significant tension and tussling among Harvey Weinstein, producers of the show and network execs over the final cut of episodes prior to the first season premiere in July 2016.</p>
<p>Representatives for A+E Networks and Paramount Network declined to comment on the allegations surrounding Weinstein. Reps for Amazon could not immediately be reached for comment.</p> | false | 1 | weinstein cos television operations far successful companys feature business past years harvey weinstein adept packaging projects leveraging connections meet voracious demand tv content business jeopardy detailed revelations alleged sexual harassment inappropriate behavior weinstein allegedly exhibited context work producer lengthy report published thursday new york times comes moment mainstream media companies extremely sensitive criticism engaging turning blind eye gender racial discrimination persistent rumors weinsteins alleged misconduct toward women factor companys unsuccessful effort shop tv division prospective buyers allegations leveled weinstein specific likely make uncomfortable weinsteins creative partners oddly enough one creative partners lawyer lisa bloom aggressive advocate clients leveled sexual harassment claims fox news highprofile targets weinstein co work docuseries trayvon martin murder case based part blooms book suspicion nation inside story trayvon martin injustice continue repeat weinstein co looking sell part tv division past two half years amid flurry mampa activity around independent tv production entities size characteristic braggadocio reports surfaced 2015 weinsteins seeking 900 million valuation business number led much scoffing tv circles itv uk tv giant spending spree production companies engaged talks ultimately walked away didnt help companys bigbudget netflix drama marco polo canceled two seasons late 2016 loss marco polo blow weinstein co lot activity doesnt big profit generator longrunning project runway franchise last year weinstein co retained investment banker moelis amp co shop 50 70 stake tv side theres little chatter investment circles weinstein brother bob pressure deliver return investors bankrolled weinstein co launch back 2005 present weinstein co range scripted unscripted projects spread among cable streaming outlets notably longrunning reality franchise project runway spinoffs lifetime160but companys level involvement productions varied weinstein co production entity matthew weiners upcoming amazon anthology series romanoffs harvey weinstein executive producer credit show creative input project according sources romanoffs midst filming weiner firm control showrunner director eight episodes weinstein co also producer highprofile david russell amazon drama starring robert de niro julianne moore weinstein worked russell numerous features level involvement show unclear weinstein much handson two scripted projects works paramount network remodeled spike tv jan 18 big creative force behind limited series waco yellowstone waco recently wrapped production slated bow jan 24 making big part spike tv rebranding effort trayvon martin series joint venture jayz midst production weinstein front center earlier year another docuseries project spike tv also produced jayz time kalief browder told story young man took life three years locked new yorks rikers island without conviction weinstein jayz stumped movie sundance film festival year also appeared together hourlong live spike tv town hall special discussing issue criminal justice reform juvenile incarceration weinstein co produced number specials investigation discovery including one examining history sordid rape harassment allegations comedian bill cosby knowledgable source said weinstein co mostly handsoff projects involvement largely stems content partnership weinstein co struck december 2015 national enquirer parent company american media inc provides tabloid fodder specials lifetime sibling network history weinstein co producer military drama six understood significant tension tussling among harvey weinstein producers show network execs final cut episodes prior first season premiere july 2016 representatives ae networks paramount network declined comment allegations surrounding weinstein reps amazon could immediately reached comment | 515 |
<p>By Ed Davies and Agustinus Beo Da Costa</p>
<p>NUSA DUA, Indonesia, (Reuters) – When students at Indonesia’s prestigious Institute of Agricultural Studies swore an oath to support a caliphate in the world’s largest Muslim-majority country last year, a video of the event went viral and the government grew alarmed.</p>
<p>Months later, Indonesian President Joko Widodo banned the decades-old hardline group Hizb ut-Tahrir Indonesia (HTI), which organized the student pledge, and declared its goal to set up a caliphate was incompatible with the constitution and could threaten security.</p>
<p>Last month, under prodding from the government, thousands of students across the nation made an anti-radicalism pledge. It followed an unprecedented gathering in late September of some 3,000 academics in Bali, who also pledged to fight extremism and defend the secular constitution.</p>
<p>The campaign against extremism in education comes amid a rise of a hardline, politicized Islam in Indonesia, which until recently had occupied the fringe of the nation’s politics.</p>
<p>“Radical organizations can spread like a virus in universities,” said Professor Muhammad Sirozi, rector of the State Islamic University Raden Fatah in Palembang on Sumatra.</p>
<p>“These are not the organizations that students form themselves, but they are from outside,” he said at a briefing that outlined ways to help universities tackle radicalism following the Bali conference.</p>
<p>The campaign to root out boosters of the caliphate is not just confined to schools.</p>
<p>A document collated by Indonesia’s intelligence agency lists 1,300 HTI members in senior posts in the civil service, universities, the military and police.</p>
<p>An intelligence source confirmed the authenticity of the document, which was reviewed by Reuters. Some of those on it declined to comment after being contacted, but HTI’s former spokesman Ismail Yusanto said it did include some of its members.</p>
<p>SUHARTO TACTICS</p>
<p>Illustrating how a politicized brand of Islam has gained traction, nearly 20 percent of high school and university students in Indonesia support the establishment of a caliphate, a survey showed last week.</p>
<p>Moreover, around one in four of the 4,200 Muslim students in the survey by pollster Alvara said they were, to varying degrees, ready to wage jihad to achieve this.</p>
<p>Hizb ut-Tahrir, an international organization, established by a Palestinian Islamic scholar in 1953, has been banned in some Arab, Asian and European countries. One of its former members in Indonesia is Bahrun Naim, who went to fight for Islamic State in Syria and is accused of masterminding a series of attacks in Indonesia since early last year.</p>
<p>An officially registered organization in Indonesia since 2000, HTI has sought a judicial review in the constitutional court over its disbanding.</p>
<p>“They never gave us a chance to defend ourselves. Is it not an authoritarian and repressive action?” said HTI spokesman Yusanto, who likened the crackdown to the tactics used against opponents under former strongman President Suharto.</p>
<p>Asked whether HTI was still operating, Yusanto said no one could ban members from their duty to do “Dakwah” (missionary work) and those activities would continue.</p>
<p>Higher Education Minister Muhammad Nasir told reporters in July that HTI members were lecturers “in many universities” – Indonesia has 394 state universities and about 3,000 private ones. He warned they could be sacked unless they proffer loyalty to Indonesia’s secular ideology Pancasila, or “five principles”.</p>
<p>Yusanto said, however, no lecturers who were HTI members had been sacked. A Home Ministry spokesman said a task force set up to find members in the civil service had not found any so far.</p>
<p>MILITARY SYMPATHIZERS</p>
<p>One former HTI member, Ayik Heriansyah, said the group tries to enlist support from influential members of society and sympathizers in the security forces to overthrow governments, or what it terms “the handing over of power”.</p>
<p>Universities have been a key recruiting ground.</p>
<p>Heriansyah, who was once chairman of HTI at the University of Indonesia, said potential recruits were usuallyinvited to an Islamic study group. After about three months, they might be asked to participate in intensive Hiz b-ut-Tahrir study, said Heriansyah, who said left the group after a falling out with its central board.</p>
<p>Heriansyah said the ban on the group would simply push it underground.</p>
<p>“They are still running the movement as usual, but with a new structure and stewardship,” he said.</p>
<p>HTI has not disclosed its membership. Raymond Arifianto, a research fellow at Singapore’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said his sources say HTI had about one million members, including an estimated 10-15 percent of junior army officers as members or sympathizers.</p>
<p>A spokesman for Indonesia’s military denied this.</p>
<p>TARGETING HIGH SCHOOLS</p>
<p>The group has also gained a strong presence in state universities that train public school teachers, meaning new teachers could spread HTI ideology to high school pupils.</p>
<p>A survey published last December by the Institute for the Study of Islam and Society, showed that 78 percent of 505 religious teachers in public schools supported implementing sharia law in Indonesia. The survey also found that 77 percent backed Islamist groups advocating this goal.</p>
<p>Muhammad Abdullah Darraz, director of the Maarif Institute, which promotes religious and cultural harmony, said HTI had targeted religious lessons at state high schools to spread its ideology.</p>
<p>Clerics offered their services for free, often with school principals and teachers being unaware of their affiliation, he told Reuters.HTI’s spokesman denied this was a strategy but said members were obliged to do missionary work without charge.</p>
<p>Indonesia’s biggest Islamic groups, the moderate Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah, which claim to have about 120 million members between them, back the crackdown on HTI.</p>
<p>Yaqut Cholil Qoumas, chairman of NU’s GP Ansor youth wing, said that Indonesia had been built by many religions and cultures, but “HTI came and wanted to change this diversity into one nation called an Islamic country.”&#160;</p> | false | 1 | ed davies agustinus beo da costa nusa dua indonesia reuters students indonesias prestigious institute agricultural studies swore oath support caliphate worlds largest muslimmajority country last year video event went viral government grew alarmed months later indonesian president joko widodo banned decadesold hardline group hizb uttahrir indonesia hti organized student pledge declared goal set caliphate incompatible constitution could threaten security last month prodding government thousands students across nation made antiradicalism pledge followed unprecedented gathering late september 3000 academics bali also pledged fight extremism defend secular constitution campaign extremism education comes amid rise hardline politicized islam indonesia recently occupied fringe nations politics radical organizations spread like virus universities said professor muhammad sirozi rector state islamic university raden fatah palembang sumatra organizations students form outside said briefing outlined ways help universities tackle radicalism following bali conference campaign root boosters caliphate confined schools document collated indonesias intelligence agency lists 1300 hti members senior posts civil service universities military police intelligence source confirmed authenticity document reviewed reuters declined comment contacted htis former spokesman ismail yusanto said include members suharto tactics illustrating politicized brand islam gained traction nearly 20 percent high school university students indonesia support establishment caliphate survey showed last week moreover around one four 4200 muslim students survey pollster alvara said varying degrees ready wage jihad achieve hizb uttahrir international organization established palestinian islamic scholar 1953 banned arab asian european countries one former members indonesia bahrun naim went fight islamic state syria accused masterminding series attacks indonesia since early last year officially registered organization indonesia since 2000 hti sought judicial review constitutional court disbanding never gave us chance defend authoritarian repressive action said hti spokesman yusanto likened crackdown tactics used opponents former strongman president suharto asked whether hti still operating yusanto said one could ban members duty dakwah missionary work activities would continue higher education minister muhammad nasir told reporters july hti members lecturers many universities indonesia 394 state universities 3000 private ones warned could sacked unless proffer loyalty indonesias secular ideology pancasila five principles yusanto said however lecturers hti members sacked home ministry spokesman said task force set find members civil service found far military sympathizers one former hti member ayik heriansyah said group tries enlist support influential members society sympathizers security forces overthrow governments terms handing power universities key recruiting ground heriansyah chairman hti university indonesia said potential recruits usuallyinvited islamic study group three months might asked participate intensive hiz buttahrir study said heriansyah said left group falling central board heriansyah said ban group would simply push underground still running movement usual new structure stewardship said hti disclosed membership raymond arifianto research fellow singapores rajaratnam school international studies said sources say hti one million members including estimated 1015 percent junior army officers members sympathizers spokesman indonesias military denied targeting high schools group also gained strong presence state universities train public school teachers meaning new teachers could spread hti ideology high school pupils survey published last december institute study islam society showed 78 percent 505 religious teachers public schools supported implementing sharia law indonesia survey also found 77 percent backed islamist groups advocating goal muhammad abdullah darraz director maarif institute promotes religious cultural harmony said hti targeted religious lessons state high schools spread ideology clerics offered services free often school principals teachers unaware affiliation told reutershtis spokesman denied strategy said members obliged missionary work without charge indonesias biggest islamic groups moderate nahdlatul ulama nu muhammadiyah claim 120 million members back crackdown hti yaqut cholil qoumas chairman nus gp ansor youth wing said indonesia built many religions cultures hti came wanted change diversity one nation called islamic country160 | 594 |
<p>As the first full week of preseason games kick off, there is competition at numerous spots on rosters. Some are for starting jobs and many are for key backup roles.</p>
<p>Writers on the scene for The Sports Xchange provided a snapshot of one of the battles on their team this week. The variety illustrates how much is up for grabs.</p>
<p>The area with the most competition is cornerback, which was identified by six teams. After that, four positions have three teams with competition.</p>
<p>Following is a look at 32 teams, grouped by division.</p>
<p>DALLAS COWBOYS</p>
<p>— <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Rod_Smith/" type="external">Rod Smith</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alfred-Morris/" type="external">Alfred Morris</a> at third running back. Morris is the veteran. He is in the best shape of his career and can still look like the former 1,000-yard rusher he was with the Redskins. But he doesn’t play special teams and is not good in pass protection or receiving. Smith can play special teams, and the Cowboys found out he is a pretty good runner in the preseason opener. Smith has the advantage. Morris might be trade bait.</p>
<p>NEW YORK GIANTS</p>
<p>–Offense vs. the defense: Offenses going against defenses is nothing new to NFL training camps, but what has made the Giants’ offense vs. the defense so interesting to watch is how much more lethal the Giants’ offense now is. At the start of camp, many predicted that the offense would get a good test against the 10th-ranked defense from last year, and sure enough, that battle has come to fruition. Head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ben-McAdoo/" type="external">Ben McAdoo</a> has designed periods during the practice that pit a receiver against a defender, for example, and he’ll keep score to see which side wins. The competition has not only resulted in some classic battles, but more important, it’s provided an early glimpse into just how far the offense, which last year this time looked sluggish and flat, has really come.</p>
<p>PHILADELPHIA EAGLES</p>
<p>–Isaac Seumalo and Chance Warmack for the starting left-guard job. Seumalo will start Thursday night against Green Bay and it’s his job to lose. But Warmack, who played for offensive line coach Jeff Stoutland at Alabama, has had a pretty good camp thus far.</p>
<p>WASHINGTON REDSKINS</p>
<p>–Rob Kelley vs. Samaje Perine at running back: Kelley was the surprise of last season as an undrafted rookie free agent who took over for <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Matt_Jones/" type="external">Matt Jones</a> in Week 8. Coaches love him for his push after contact and his reliability. If a hole is there, Kelley will find it and at least get the Redskins into a manageable down and distance. Perine, a fourth-round pick in 2017, is a true power back. Overshadowed by star running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe-Mixon/" type="external">Joe Mixon</a> at Oklahoma, Perine is well positioned for playing time if Kelley falters. He has better hands than Washington’s coaches expected, though he needs to be better in pass protection and he drew the coaches’ ire for a fumble in practice last week. For now, Kelley is the No. 1 back.</p>
<p>CHICAGO BEARS</p>
<p>— Mitch Unrein vs. Jonathan Bullard and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jaye-Howard/" type="external">Jaye Howard</a> at defensive end. Unrein isn’t particularly fast or powerful but has displayed enough on both counts to remain with starters for two years. He played in Denver for <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Fox/" type="external">John Fox</a> four seasons. He’s been dependable and has 44 tackles in two seasons playing largely in the base 3-4 defense. In nickel, he usually came off the field. The Bears acquired Howard in the offseason and his strength and experience have been apparent, although he is trying to come back from last year’s season-ending hip injury. Bullard has the most to prove after a rookie year when he drew criticism from coaches and didn’t make an impact until the season’s final games. Bullard has a new jersey number (90, after being 74), a new outlook and has been moved to both end spots in camp. He has generally been more disruptive. Yet, the real test for him will be preseason games. Howard and Bullard are perceived as bigger pass rush threats than Unrein. It would appear the Bears can use all three on the roster, but this might be impacted by how many pure nose tackles they keep. All three have been tried at nose at times to add depth. Former Packers <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/C.J._Wilson/" type="external">C.J. Wilson</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Jenkins/" type="external">John Jenkins</a> are run-stuffing nose tackles who could back up starter <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Eddie-Goldman/" type="external">Eddie Goldman</a>. At 6-3, 314, Howard is heavier than both Unrein and Bullard and a better emergency fit at nose if needed there.</p>
<p>DETROIT LIONS</p>
<p>–Quandre Diggs vs. D.J. Hayden at nickel cornerback: While <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Darius-Slay/" type="external">Darius Slay</a> and Nevin Lawson have the starting cornerback jobs locked up, a good battle is brewing between Diggs and Hayden for the No. 3 spot. Diggs has taken most of the reps so far, but he’s coming off a down season that ended prematurely because of a torn pectoral muscle. The Lions signed Hayden to a one-year deal in free agency with the expectation that he would contribute in nickel packages. Both players have had solid camps so far, with Diggs looking more and more like the player who overachieved as a part-time starter his rookie year.</p>
<p>GREEN BAY PACKERS</p>
<p>— <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Quinten-Rollins/" type="external">Quinten Rollins</a> vs. Kevin King vs. Damarious Randall at cornerback. Green Bay, which had some of the worst cornerback play in <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> last season, solved half of its problems this offseason by signing Davon House in free agency. The other cornerback job remains open, although Rollins has surged to the lead. Rollins had an injury-plagued, forgettable 2016 season in which he allowed seven touchdowns. Foes also had a 133.8 passer rating against Rollins and completed 71.4 percent of their passes.</p>
<p>But Rollins, who played four years of college basketball at Miami (Ohio) and just one year of football, has been an early star of camp. “He’s quick. You can tell his core issues have been taken care of,” Packers cornerbacks coach Joe Whitt said of Rollins. “He’s fluid. You can see the explosiveness out of his breaks. The kid is coming in with a focus that our standard of play wasn’t there last year and he’s a very prideful man. He hasn’t said two words. He’s just been working. That’s what I like. We don’t need a lot of talking.”</p>
<p>MINNESOTA VIKINGS</p>
<p>–Emmanuel Lamur vs. Ben Gedeon at weak-side linebacker: Gedeon, the rookie fourth-round draft pick, has muscled his way into the competition for the job in the base defense. This is the position Chad Greenway played before retiring after 11 seasons. The position is needed for only about 40 percent of the snaps since the Vikings play so many nickel packages. Camp started with Lamur competing with Edmond Robinson for the job. But Robinson has tailed off, while Gedeon has come on strong. The 6-foot-2, 244-pound Gedeon is a more natural middle linebacker, but has enough athleticism to handle the primary job of stopping the run as weak-side backer in the base.</p>
<p>ATLANTA FALCONS</p>
<p>–With cornerback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jalen-Collins/" type="external">Jalen Collins</a> suspended for the first 10 games, the Falcons will turn to C.J. Goodwin to take over the fourth cornerback spot. Goodwin, a former college basketball player and converted wide receiver, made the team last season as a special teams player. He played in 14 games and made one start. The Falcons are hoping Goodwin can make a big jump in his second year as a cornerback. He was already working with the second team as the Falcons had to be anticipating the news on Collins, who was working with the third team.</p>
<p>“One other corner that has jumped out to me so far and I thought he was making progress last year is C.J. Goodwin,” Falcons head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Dan_Quinn/" type="external">Dan Quinn</a> said. “For sure, he’s one that we counted on. He made the team as a special teams player first and then through injuries, him and Jalen Collins really jumped in quickly and both of them answered the bell.”</p>
<p>Goodwin, 6-foot-3 and 190 pounds, played 16 plays on defense and 23 on special teams in Super Bowl LI. He had two tackles and one pass breakup.</p>
<p>“Goodwin, to me, I know he’s going into his third year technically in the NFL, but it’s his second year as a defensive player, so I’m hopeful that jump we talked about, going from year one to year two, that’s the jump I hope he’ll make,” Quinn said.</p>
<p>CAROLINA PANTHERS</p>
<p>–The role of backup tight end doesn’t receive a lot of chatter, but given the heavy workload placed on <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Greg_Olsen/" type="external">Greg Olsen</a>, there’s a need to have a steady reserve. Ed Dickson and Scott Simonson are in contention for this role, though Dickson’s experience as an eight-year veteran and Simonson, who has been waived by the organization three times since 2015, but had a slow start to camp because of an injury have probably tilted this competition. Still, there’s ample opportunity for the needle to move here. Because Olsen is so productive, there hasn’t been a need to go after another high-profile player at that position, but that shouldn’t lessen the importance.</p>
<p>NEW ORLEANS SAINTS</p>
<p>–Third-year DE Hau’oli Kikaha has recovered from his third surgery on his left ACL and has been getting reps with the first team as he tries to surpass Alex Okafor, who was signed as a free agent to upgrade the pass rush. Okafor is the front-runner but a healthy Kikaha, who was a second-round draft choice in 2015, has a chance to challenge him if he performs well early in the preseason.</p>
<p>TAMPA BAY BUCCANEERS</p>
<p>–Javeon Elliott vs. Robert McClain at slot cornerback: Elliott, who was an undrafted rookie signed after a tryout, is the starting slot corner in nickel passing downs. He has a knack for making plays on the football. But McClain enters his eighth NFL season and is a real asset on special teams. He adds some experience to the position and, right now, it’s Elliott’s job to lose.</p>
<p>ARIZONA CARDINALS</p>
<p>–Second-year defensive tackle Robert Nkemdiche keeps turning heads in camp seemingly every single day and it’s getting to the point now where the former first-round pick could be on the verge of overtaking 12-year veteran Frostee Rucker for a starting role in the Cardinals’ 3-4 base defense. Rucker, who turns 34 in September, might be difficult to displace because of his experience and reliability. The Cardinals like to rotate their defensive linemen in and out of games, however, so Nkemdiche is sure to see plenty of action. Because of his youth and explosiveness and ability to be an overall disruptor, he’s likely to find himself getting most of the snaps up front in 2017.</p>
<p>LOS ANGELES RAMS</p>
<p>–Cooper Kupp vs. Pharoh Cooper at wide receiver: The Rams under head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sean-McVay/" type="external">Sean McVay</a> feature a number of different wide-receiver and tight-end packages, but it will be interesting to see who earns the bulk of the time alongside <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Robert-Woods/" type="external">Robert Woods</a> and Tavon Austin between Cooper and Kupp. Kupp, a rookie from Eastern Washington, has impressed with his command of the playbook and route-running polish.</p>
<p>“I see a mature rookie,” McVay said. “I think one of the things that really impressed us about (him), just watching him in college is that he’s one of those receivers that sees the game through the quarterback’s eyes. He always has a plan at the line of scrimmage, understands coverages and route concepts and I think that’s what enables him to be such a productive player and very advanced for a rookie. He’s one of the more mature rookies that I’ve ever been around and we’re expecting some good things from him moving forward.”</p>
<p>Cooper also drew praise from McVay.</p>
<p>“I think Pharoh is a great competitor,” McVay said. “I think what Pharoh Cooper’s doing is continuing to get more comfortable playing the receiver position as a whole. This guy is just a very good athlete that’s continuing to become a better receiver each and every day. A tough, physical player, competes well in the run game and I think you see the play that he makes down in the red zone yesterday — he’s aggressively running through the football, he’s kind of a fearless mindset and mentality. I really enjoy being around Pharoh and love what he’s done the last few days.”</p>
<p>SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS</p>
<p>— <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Matt_Barkley/" type="external">Matt Barkley</a> vs. C.J. Beathard for backup quarterback. Training camp began with a clear-cut pecking order at quarterback, with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brian_Hoyer/" type="external">Brian Hoyer</a> starting, Barkley backing up and Beathard probably headed to a season on the developmental squad. But the rookie has outplayed the veteran in the early going, giving 49ers coaches something to watch in Friday’s preseason opener against Kansas City.</p>
<p>SEATTLE SEAHAWKS</p>
<p>–Backup quarterback: Trevone Boykin earned the backup job to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Russell_Wilson/" type="external">Russell Wilson</a> last season without a challenge from a veteran quarterback in training camp. He doesn’t have that luxury this year as <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Austin_Davis/" type="external">Austin Davis</a> is pushing him hard for the reserve role. Davis unofficially completed 8 of 13 passes with an interception during the team’s scrimmage on Monday while Boykin was 6 of 11 with an interception. Boykin struggled significantly in the first handful of practices of camp, but has looked marginally better in recent days. It will be a fight that should last all of camp.</p>
<p>BUFFALO BILLS</p>
<p>–Tight end has been interesting because of the presence of Logan Thomas in the competition. Charles Clay is the starter, and unless his nagging knee injury barks, that will be the case come opening day. Behind him, Nick O’Leary is probably No. 2, but that’s certainly not set in stone. Thomas, a converted quarterback who is trying to make the transition to tight end at the NFL level, is 6-foot-6 and weighs 250 pounds. He’s a big target down the middle, and he has good hands. The big issue for him is will he be able to block? O’Leary has improved in that area, and if Thomas does, too, he could make the team and even get meaningful snaps because he has real potential to be a downfield threat.</p>
<p>MIAMI DOLPHINS</p>
<p>–QB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jay_Cutler/" type="external">Jay Cutler</a> vs. time: Not to be cute or flip, but this is a real battle because the opener is Sept. 10 against Tampa Bay, which gives the newly-acquired Cutler roughly one month to learn the offense and his teammates. Cutler, signed Monday, retired in May and admitted he hadn’t been working out recently. In the QB-driven NFL, this is now the biggest battle of training camp.</p>
<p>NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS</p>
<p>–Cameron Fleming vs. LaAdrian Waddle for backup swing offensive tackle. The New England offensive line returns its five starters, who seem pretty well entrenched in their roles. Fleming and Waddle served as backups a year ago, although the latter was a healthy scratch virtually all season. Despite New England using two draft picks at the position — Tony Garcia and Conor McDermott — Fleming and Waddle have split reps at left tackle when starter Nate Solder has missed practice time. With neither rookie stepping up at this point, it looks like Fleming and Waddle are likely battling it out for one roster spot as the veteran swing tackle backup. Fleming’s ability to serve as a tight end in jumbo packages could give him an edge, but the battle likely will have to play out in preseason game action.</p>
<p>NEW YORK JETS</p>
<p>–No. 1 wide receiver: Last week’s battle was for the No. 2 wide receiver job. Well, every understudy is now battling to be the headline attraction following the season-ending neck injury suffered by No. 1 wideout Quincy Enunwa. Robby Anderson, whose 42 catches for 587 yards last season are by far the most of any returning player in camp, is the favorite by default, though he’s gotten off to a slow start this summer. Veteran Marquess Wilson, who had 56 catches for 777 yards in four seasons with the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago_Bears/" type="external">Chicago Bears</a>, is also a candidate but has broken his foot three times in the last two years. Rookies ArDarius Stewart and Chad Hansen will each have a big learning curve to negotiate, which might leave Chris Harper – who has 14 catches in two NFL seasons but has displayed good hands and big-play ability thus far in training camp – as the sneakiest candidate to win the job.</p>
<p>BALTIMORE RAVENS</p>
<p>–Returner: The Ravens have as many as 10 players looking to earn their way onto the roster as a returner. Michael Campanaro, a fourth-year player from Wake Forest, has the most experience, but he has battled through injuries throughout his career. Keenan Reynolds, a former record-setting quarterback at Navy, has shown much improvement since his rookie season and is pushing hard for the job. Baltimore has also been impressed with undrafted rookie receiver Tim White. He has shown blazing speed and the poise to handle kicks. Other players getting looks at returner are Griff Whalen, C.J. Board, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris_Moore/" type="external">Chris Moore</a>, Bobby Rainey, Lardarius Webb, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Danny-Woodhead/" type="external">Danny Woodhead</a>, and Taquan Mizzell.</p>
<p>CINCINNATI BENGALS</p>
<p>–With <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adam_Jones/" type="external">Adam Jones</a> suspended for the first game of the season, the starting cornerback spot for that game, and subsequent chance for a player to showcase themselves on Sunday, Sept. 10 versus the Ravens, is available. William Jackson III, whom the Bengals selected as the 24th overall pick in last year’s draft, appears to be the favorite. Jackson missed his rookie season after being injured during training camp. He’s battling Darqueze Dennard for this spot. Dennard also has had his share of injury issues in his career. Jackson has performed well in 11-on-11 drills against the first team-offense even handling himself quite well in one-on-one coverage with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/AJ-Green/" type="external">A.J. Green</a>.</p>
<p>CLEVELAND BROWNS</p>
<p>–Incumbent Cody Parkey and rookie seventh-round draft choice Zane Gonzalez usually end practice every other day in a kicking duel. The competition is close to dead even at this point, which makes the preseason opener against the Saints on Thursday and the next three games critical to both kickers. Gonzalez kicked field goals of 39 and 22 yards in an intrasquad scrimmage on Friday. Parkey connected from 40 yards. Both can reach the back of the end zone on kickoffs. Practice ended Monday with another field-goal session. Parkey was 5-for-5. Gonzalez missed from 33 yards. but then hit his next two kicks.</p>
<p>PITTSBURGH STEELERS</p>
<p>–Backup running back: <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/LeVeon-Bell/" type="external">Le’Veon Bell</a> has not yet reported and rookie third-round pick <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/James-Conner/" type="external">James Conner</a> has missed most of camp with a shoulder injury. That has left most of the reps with the first-team offense to Fitzgerald Toussaint and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Knile-Davis/" type="external">Knile Davis</a>. Toussaint was designated the starter when the Steelers released their first depth chart of training camp Tuesday. It’s been a spirited competition between the two. Toussaint has been with the Steelers the past two seasons, and Davis was signed as a free agent in March. Conner returned to practice Tuesday, but Toussaint and Davis will continue to battle because the Steelers will keep only three tailbacks.</p>
<p>HOUSTON TEXANS</p>
<p>–Wide receiver: Jaelen Strong and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Braxton-Miller/" type="external">Braxton Miller</a> are competing to be the No. 2 receiver opposite Pro-Bowl selection <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/DeAndre-Hopkins/" type="external">DeAndre Hopkins</a>. Strong is big and jumps well and has improved his conditioning. Miller is shifty and smart and has sound hands. A converted quarterback, Miller knows the game extremely well.</p>
<p>INDIANAPOLIS COLTS</p>
<p>–Inside linebacker: Second-year linebacker Antonio Morrison has been having a good camp thus far. Morrison played relatively well against the run as a rookie, but struggled in pass coverage. He has getting first-team reps while doing a better job of playing under control. Veteran Jon Bostic was a free-agent pickup in the offseason from Chicago and has done a nice job. Bostic has also been working with the first defensive unit. The big question is if he can stay healthy over the course of the season. Sean Spence has had a consistent camp as he continues to push for work. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Edwin_Jackson/" type="external">Edwin Jackson</a>, who got extensive playing time last season, remains in the mix. Lee Rhodes is also a possibility.</p>
<p>JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS</p>
<p>— <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Cam-Robinson/" type="external">Cam Robinson</a> vs. Josh Wells at left tackle. When veteran <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Branden-Albert/" type="external">Branden Albert</a> made his surprising announcement last week that he was retiring, it was assumed that rookie Cam Robinson would move into the starting spot that Albert was supposed to have had this year. But Jaguars head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Doug-Marrone/" type="external">Doug Marrone</a> made it clear that Robinson would not be handed the job, rather he would have to earn it. Josh Wells may have something to say about that. A thumb injury cost Wells the entire 2015 season and the first 11 weeks last year. But he’s healthy now and is pushing Robinson for the starting spot. Both players are 6-foot-6, but Robinson has a 15-pound weight advantage. They’ve shared working with the first unit offensive line in recent days and while most expect Robinson to win the job, Wells is making a strong push for the starting spot.</p>
<p>TENNESSEE TITANS</p>
<p>–Adoree’ Jackson vs. Eric Weems at kickoff returner: Jackson has been electric, but Weems was signed to fill that role in the offseason. It will be interesting to see just how much the Titans want to put on Jackson’s plate, as the first-round pick is already likely to be the punt returner and is in the race for a starting cornerback spot as well.</p>
<p>DENVER BRONCOS</p>
<p>–Starting left guard: After being acquired in a pre-camp trade, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Allen-Barbre/" type="external">Allen Barbre</a> was expected to make a push for the left-guard spot, but Max Garcia has held him off so far, taking every first-team repetition at the position where he started last year. The Broncos moved Garcia back to left guard after he struggled at right guard during OTAs, gambling that free-agent pickup Ron Leary would be as effective at right guard as he was on the left side, where he started in Dallas before jumping to the Broncos in March. Barbre could still make a push for the job, but right now, it appears the spot is Garcia’s to lose.</p>
<p>KANSAS CITY CHIEFS</p>
<p>–Kansas City struggled against the run last season, and one reason stemmed from a plethora of injuries and lack of experienced depth at inside linebacker. The Chiefs added significant competition with the addition of fifth-round pick Ukeme Eligwe and acquiring Kevin Pierre-Louis from Seattle via a trade. Kansas City also re-signed veteran Josh Mauga, who missed last season with a labral tear in his hip. The leader of the group remains <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Derrick_Johnson/" type="external">Derrick Johnson</a>, who returns from an Achilles tear in December that ended his season. Ramik Wilson appears to be the likely starter alongside Johnson, but the competition remains fierce behind them for the remaining roster spots. Defensive coordinator Bob Sutton continues rotating Mauga, Eligwe and Pierre-Louis with Justin March-Lillard and Terrance Smith looking for the right chemistry in shutting down the run.</p>
<p>LOS ANGELES CHARGERS</p>
<p>–Dwight Lowery vs. Tre’ Boston at safety. Lowery is the returning veteran here, but Boston wasn’t brought in to stand on the sidelines. Lowery provided solid play last year and was often the calming factor in the secondary when <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jahleel-Addae/" type="external">Jahleel Addae</a> played loose. Boston, a former Carolina Panther, is opening eyes with his plays around the ball. He capped Tuesday’s practice by picking off <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Philip_Rivers/" type="external">Philip Rivers</a> in the red zone.</p>
<p>OAKLAND RAIDERS</p>
<p>— <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sean_Smith/" type="external">Sean Smith</a> vs. Obi Melifonwu at dime back. Smith, at 6-foot-3, 220 pounds, was recently getting time covering tight ends in four-receiver sets, a role that the Raiders specifically selected Melifonwu to fill. The problem? Melifonwu struggled early and then was injured. As for Smith, he was at least temporarily demoted from his starting position at corner but his length could enable him to compete for that role, depending on his approach and attitude.</p> | false | 1 | first full week preseason games kick competition numerous spots rosters starting jobs many key backup roles writers scene sports xchange provided snapshot one battles team week variety illustrates much grabs area competition cornerback identified six teams four positions three teams competition following look 32 teams grouped division dallas cowboys rod smith alfred morris third running back morris veteran best shape career still look like former 1000yard rusher redskins doesnt play special teams good pass protection receiving smith play special teams cowboys found pretty good runner preseason opener smith advantage morris might trade bait new york giants offense vs defense offenses going defenses nothing new nfl training camps made giants offense vs defense interesting watch much lethal giants offense start camp many predicted offense would get good test 10thranked defense last year sure enough battle come fruition head coach ben mcadoo designed periods practice pit receiver defender example hell keep score see side wins competition resulted classic battles important provided early glimpse far offense last year time looked sluggish flat really come philadelphia eagles isaac seumalo chance warmack starting leftguard job seumalo start thursday night green bay job lose warmack played offensive line coach jeff stoutland alabama pretty good camp thus far washington redskins rob kelley vs samaje perine running back kelley surprise last season undrafted rookie free agent took matt jones week 8 coaches love push contact reliability hole kelley find least get redskins manageable distance perine fourthround pick 2017 true power back overshadowed star running back joe mixon oklahoma perine well positioned playing time kelley falters better hands washingtons coaches expected though needs better pass protection drew coaches ire fumble practice last week kelley 1 back chicago bears mitch unrein vs jonathan bullard jaye howard defensive end unrein isnt particularly fast powerful displayed enough counts remain starters two years played denver john fox four seasons hes dependable 44 tackles two seasons playing largely base 34 defense nickel usually came field bears acquired howard offseason strength experience apparent although trying come back last years seasonending hip injury bullard prove rookie year drew criticism coaches didnt make impact seasons final games bullard new jersey number 90 74 new outlook moved end spots camp generally disruptive yet real test preseason games howard bullard perceived bigger pass rush threats unrein would appear bears use three roster might impacted many pure nose tackles keep three tried nose times add depth former packers cj wilson john jenkins runstuffing nose tackles could back starter eddie goldman 63 314 howard heavier unrein bullard better emergency fit nose needed detroit lions quandre diggs vs dj hayden nickel cornerback darius slay nevin lawson starting cornerback jobs locked good battle brewing diggs hayden 3 spot diggs taken reps far hes coming season ended prematurely torn pectoral muscle lions signed hayden oneyear deal free agency expectation would contribute nickel packages players solid camps far diggs looking like player overachieved parttime starter rookie year green bay packers quinten rollins vs kevin king vs damarious randall cornerback green bay worst cornerback play football last season solved half problems offseason signing davon house free agency cornerback job remains open although rollins surged lead rollins injuryplagued forgettable 2016 season allowed seven touchdowns foes also 1338 passer rating rollins completed 714 percent passes rollins played four years college basketball miami ohio one year football early star camp hes quick tell core issues taken care packers cornerbacks coach joe whitt said rollins hes fluid see explosiveness breaks kid coming focus standard play wasnt last year hes prideful man hasnt said two words hes working thats like dont need lot talking minnesota vikings emmanuel lamur vs ben gedeon weakside linebacker gedeon rookie fourthround draft pick muscled way competition job base defense position chad greenway played retiring 11 seasons position needed 40 percent snaps since vikings play many nickel packages camp started lamur competing edmond robinson job robinson tailed gedeon come strong 6foot2 244pound gedeon natural middle linebacker enough athleticism handle primary job stopping run weakside backer base atlanta falcons cornerback jalen collins suspended first 10 games falcons turn cj goodwin take fourth cornerback spot goodwin former college basketball player converted wide receiver made team last season special teams player played 14 games made one start falcons hoping goodwin make big jump second year cornerback already working second team falcons anticipating news collins working third team one corner jumped far thought making progress last year cj goodwin falcons head coach dan quinn said sure hes one counted made team special teams player first injuries jalen collins really jumped quickly answered bell goodwin 6foot3 190 pounds played 16 plays defense 23 special teams super bowl li two tackles one pass breakup goodwin know hes going third year technically nfl second year defensive player im hopeful jump talked going year one year two thats jump hope hell make quinn said carolina panthers role backup tight end doesnt receive lot chatter given heavy workload placed greg olsen theres need steady reserve ed dickson scott simonson contention role though dicksons experience eightyear veteran simonson waived organization three times since 2015 slow start camp injury probably tilted competition still theres ample opportunity needle move olsen productive hasnt need go another highprofile player position shouldnt lessen importance new orleans saints thirdyear de hauoli kikaha recovered third surgery left acl getting reps first team tries surpass alex okafor signed free agent upgrade pass rush okafor frontrunner healthy kikaha secondround draft choice 2015 chance challenge performs well early preseason tampa bay buccaneers javeon elliott vs robert mcclain slot cornerback elliott undrafted rookie signed tryout starting slot corner nickel passing downs knack making plays football mcclain enters eighth nfl season real asset special teams adds experience position right elliotts job lose arizona cardinals secondyear defensive tackle robert nkemdiche keeps turning heads camp seemingly every single day getting point former firstround pick could verge overtaking 12year veteran frostee rucker starting role cardinals 34 base defense rucker turns 34 september might difficult displace experience reliability cardinals like rotate defensive linemen games however nkemdiche sure see plenty action youth explosiveness ability overall disruptor hes likely find getting snaps front 2017 los angeles rams cooper kupp vs pharoh cooper wide receiver rams head coach sean mcvay feature number different widereceiver tightend packages interesting see earns bulk time alongside robert woods tavon austin cooper kupp kupp rookie eastern washington impressed command playbook routerunning polish see mature rookie mcvay said think one things really impressed us watching college hes one receivers sees game quarterbacks eyes always plan line scrimmage understands coverages route concepts think thats enables productive player advanced rookie hes one mature rookies ive ever around expecting good things moving forward cooper also drew praise mcvay think pharoh great competitor mcvay said think pharoh coopers continuing get comfortable playing receiver position whole guy good athlete thats continuing become better receiver every day tough physical player competes well run game think see play makes red zone yesterday hes aggressively running football hes kind fearless mindset mentality really enjoy around pharoh love hes done last days san francisco 49ers matt barkley vs cj beathard backup quarterback training camp began clearcut pecking order quarterback brian hoyer starting barkley backing beathard probably headed season developmental squad rookie outplayed veteran early going giving 49ers coaches something watch fridays preseason opener kansas city seattle seahawks backup quarterback trevone boykin earned backup job russell wilson last season without challenge veteran quarterback training camp doesnt luxury year austin davis pushing hard reserve role davis unofficially completed 8 13 passes interception teams scrimmage monday boykin 6 11 interception boykin struggled significantly first handful practices camp looked marginally better recent days fight last camp buffalo bills tight end interesting presence logan thomas competition charles clay starter unless nagging knee injury barks case come opening day behind nick oleary probably 2 thats certainly set stone thomas converted quarterback trying make transition tight end nfl level 6foot6 weighs 250 pounds hes big target middle good hands big issue able block oleary improved area thomas could make team even get meaningful snaps real potential downfield threat miami dolphins qb jay cutler vs time cute flip real battle opener sept 10 tampa bay gives newlyacquired cutler roughly one month learn offense teammates cutler signed monday retired may admitted hadnt working recently qbdriven nfl biggest battle training camp new england patriots cameron fleming vs laadrian waddle backup swing offensive tackle new england offensive line returns five starters seem pretty well entrenched roles fleming waddle served backups year ago although latter healthy scratch virtually season despite new england using two draft picks position tony garcia conor mcdermott fleming waddle split reps left tackle starter nate solder missed practice time neither rookie stepping point looks like fleming waddle likely battling one roster spot veteran swing tackle backup flemings ability serve tight end jumbo packages could give edge battle likely play preseason game action new york jets 1 wide receiver last weeks battle 2 wide receiver job well every understudy battling headline attraction following seasonending neck injury suffered 1 wideout quincy enunwa robby anderson whose 42 catches 587 yards last season far returning player camp favorite default though hes gotten slow start summer veteran marquess wilson 56 catches 777 yards four seasons chicago bears also candidate broken foot three times last two years rookies ardarius stewart chad hansen big learning curve negotiate might leave chris harper 14 catches two nfl seasons displayed good hands bigplay ability thus far training camp sneakiest candidate win job baltimore ravens returner ravens many 10 players looking earn way onto roster returner michael campanaro fourthyear player wake forest experience battled injuries throughout career keenan reynolds former recordsetting quarterback navy shown much improvement since rookie season pushing hard job baltimore also impressed undrafted rookie receiver tim white shown blazing speed poise handle kicks players getting looks returner griff whalen cj board chris moore bobby rainey lardarius webb danny woodhead taquan mizzell cincinnati bengals adam jones suspended first game season starting cornerback spot game subsequent chance player showcase sunday sept 10 versus ravens available william jackson iii bengals selected 24th overall pick last years draft appears favorite jackson missed rookie season injured training camp hes battling darqueze dennard spot dennard also share injury issues career jackson performed well 11on11 drills first teamoffense even handling quite well oneonone coverage aj green cleveland browns incumbent cody parkey rookie seventhround draft choice zane gonzalez usually end practice every day kicking duel competition close dead even point makes preseason opener saints thursday next three games critical kickers gonzalez kicked field goals 39 22 yards intrasquad scrimmage friday parkey connected 40 yards reach back end zone kickoffs practice ended monday another fieldgoal session parkey 5for5 gonzalez missed 33 yards hit next two kicks pittsburgh steelers backup running back leveon bell yet reported rookie thirdround pick james conner missed camp shoulder injury left reps firstteam offense fitzgerald toussaint knile davis toussaint designated starter steelers released first depth chart training camp tuesday spirited competition two toussaint steelers past two seasons davis signed free agent march conner returned practice tuesday toussaint davis continue battle steelers keep three tailbacks houston texans wide receiver jaelen strong braxton miller competing 2 receiver opposite probowl selection deandre hopkins strong big jumps well improved conditioning miller shifty smart sound hands converted quarterback miller knows game extremely well indianapolis colts inside linebacker secondyear linebacker antonio morrison good camp thus far morrison played relatively well run rookie struggled pass coverage getting firstteam reps better job playing control veteran jon bostic freeagent pickup offseason chicago done nice job bostic also working first defensive unit big question stay healthy course season sean spence consistent camp continues push work edwin jackson got extensive playing time last season remains mix lee rhodes also possibility jacksonville jaguars cam robinson vs josh wells left tackle veteran branden albert made surprising announcement last week retiring assumed rookie cam robinson would move starting spot albert supposed year jaguars head coach doug marrone made clear robinson would handed job rather would earn josh wells may something say thumb injury cost wells entire 2015 season first 11 weeks last year hes healthy pushing robinson starting spot players 6foot6 robinson 15pound weight advantage theyve shared working first unit offensive line recent days expect robinson win job wells making strong push starting spot tennessee titans adoree jackson vs eric weems kickoff returner jackson electric weems signed fill role offseason interesting see much titans want put jacksons plate firstround pick already likely punt returner race starting cornerback spot well denver broncos starting left guard acquired precamp trade allen barbre expected make push leftguard spot max garcia held far taking every firstteam repetition position started last year broncos moved garcia back left guard struggled right guard otas gambling freeagent pickup ron leary would effective right guard left side started dallas jumping broncos march barbre could still make push job right appears spot garcias lose kansas city chiefs kansas city struggled run last season one reason stemmed plethora injuries lack experienced depth inside linebacker chiefs added significant competition addition fifthround pick ukeme eligwe acquiring kevin pierrelouis seattle via trade kansas city also resigned veteran josh mauga missed last season labral tear hip leader group remains derrick johnson returns achilles tear december ended season ramik wilson appears likely starter alongside johnson competition remains fierce behind remaining roster spots defensive coordinator bob sutton continues rotating mauga eligwe pierrelouis justin marchlillard terrance smith looking right chemistry shutting run los angeles chargers dwight lowery vs tre boston safety lowery returning veteran boston wasnt brought stand sidelines lowery provided solid play last year often calming factor secondary jahleel addae played loose boston former carolina panther opening eyes plays around ball capped tuesdays practice picking philip rivers red zone oakland raiders sean smith vs obi melifonwu dime back smith 6foot3 220 pounds recently getting time covering tight ends fourreceiver sets role raiders specifically selected melifonwu fill problem melifonwu struggled early injured smith least temporarily demoted starting position corner length could enable compete role depending approach attitude | 2,312 |
<p>CARSON CITY — Business owners and low-wage workers jammed hearing rooms in both ends of the state Wednesday to face off over a bill to raise Nevada’s minimum wage.</p>
<p>Assembly Bill 175, introduced Monday by Assemblyman William McCurdy II, D-Las Vegas, would raise the minimum wage by $1.25 per hour each year until it reaches $14 if an employer provides health insurance, or $15 per hour if no insurance is offered.</p>
<p>“This is our opportunity to boost our Nevada families,” McCurdy said.</p>
<p>But business groups and small business owners said the raise would result in job losses and have a ripple effect on wages that puts companies out of business. They said it also would reduce opportunities for young people who take entry-level jobs where they learn skills for the future .</p>
<p>Robert Buckel, a small-business owner in Las Vegas, said if he paid everyone equally under McCurdy’s bill it would cost him $100,000. But raising wages for lowest-paid workers would also require increasing pay for upper-level employees.</p>
<p>“I will be at 86 percent increased costs,” Buckel said.</p>
<p>McCurdy said 794,000 Nevadans are paid hourly and 20,000 receive the minimum. Nearly 300,000 Nevada low-wage workers would see a raise under his bill.</p>
<p>“Raising Nevada’s minimum wage is an important step towards bridging the widening gap between income and opportunity inequality,” McCurdy said.</p>
<p>Assemblyman Ira Hansen, R-Sparks, said he was “sympathetic” to efforts to pay workers more, but factors such as illegal immigrants and unlicensed contractors contribute to the problem.</p>
<p>“Wages are really a function of supply and demand,” Hansen said.</p>
<p>Paul Sonns with the National Employment Law Project said a single worker without children in Nevada needs to earn $15 per hour to make ends meet, adding 536,000 workers in Nevada — about 4 in at 10 — make less than that.</p>
<p>Sonns said studies have shown fears of higher labor costs are offset by the increasing buying power of low-wage earners. Assembly Minority Leader Paul Anderson, R-Las Vegas, questioned those findings.</p>
<p>“There are reports that would counter any reports that were just mentioned,” he said.</p>
<p>After the hearing, Anderson issued a statement accusing Democrats of showing a “reckless disregard for Nevada’s small businesses.”</p>
<p>Peter Guzman, President of the Latin Chamber of Commerce, was among the people in a packed Sawyer Building in Las Vegas. He said the lawmakers pushing the bill need to reach out to small business owners for their input.</p>
<p>“Not enough has been done to find out the pulse of the small business community,” Guzman told the Review-Journal after testifying. “Small business is the engine that runs this country. So we have to be looking out for them.”</p>
<p>Several low-wage workers, from hospitality industry workers to home health care aides, testified about their struggles to provide for their families.</p>
<p>“I work two jobs to help support my family,” said Maria Salinas. The raise, she said, “will not make me or any other health care worker rich.”</p>
<p>Elliot Malin, with Americans for Prosperity, said restaurants in particular would have to raise prices.</p>
<p>But Assemblywoman Maggie Carlton, D-Las Vegas, didn’t buy his argument.</p>
<p>Carlton said she looked up the price of buffalo wings from one chain restaurant at locations in different states with different minimum wages. The food prices varied by only a penny or two, she said.</p>
<p>“I find your argument about hospitality not quite accurate,” Carlton said.</p>
<p>Bryan Wachter with the Retail Association of Nevada said only 2.9 percent of U.S. workers and 1.6 percent in Nevada make minimum wage.</p>
<p>He argued that Seattle lost 11,000 jobs over six months after the city initiated raising its minimum wage to $15. He urged lawmakers to look at all labor-related issues such as requiring sick leave to adequately judge impacts on business.</p>
<p>Critics also decried the quick hearing, held only two days after the bill was introduced.</p>
<p>“The Las Vegas Metro Chamber of Commerce … is deeply concerned about the potential impact of AB175 on Nevada’s employers and employees,” Kristin McMillan, chamber president, said in a statement Tuesday.</p>
<p>She also said there was inadequate time to properly evaluate the bill, but the chamber opposed it on its face because of “a high potential of hurting job creation by employers, both large and small and adversely impacting the stability of existing jobs in this state.”</p>
<p>Under a constitutional amendment approved by voters in 2006, Nevada has a two-tiered minimum wage scale, currently $8.25 for workers not offered health benefits. It is $1 per hour less if insurance is offered.</p>
<p>A bill introduced in the Nevada Senate seeks a gradual increase of 75 cents per hour each year until it reaches $11 with insurance or $12 without insurance.</p>
<p>Even if a minimum wage increase is approved by lawmakers, its ultimate fate is not assured.</p>
<p>Democrats control both chambers of the Nevada Legislature, though they lack super majorities needed to override vetoes by Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval. Sandoval has not taken a stance on the bill, though he has historically opposed a legislative mandate to increase the minimum wage.</p>
<p>No action on the bill was taken by the committee.</p>
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p />
<p>Colton Lochhead contributed to this report. Contact Sandra Chereb at [email protected] or 775-461-3821. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/@SandraChereb" type="external">@SandraChereb</a>on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | carson city business owners lowwage workers jammed hearing rooms ends state wednesday face bill raise nevadas minimum wage assembly bill 175 introduced monday assemblyman william mccurdy ii dlas vegas would raise minimum wage 125 per hour year reaches 14 employer provides health insurance 15 per hour insurance offered opportunity boost nevada families mccurdy said business groups small business owners said raise would result job losses ripple effect wages puts companies business said also would reduce opportunities young people take entrylevel jobs learn skills future robert buckel smallbusiness owner las vegas said paid everyone equally mccurdys bill would cost 100000 raising wages lowestpaid workers would also require increasing pay upperlevel employees 86 percent increased costs buckel said mccurdy said 794000 nevadans paid hourly 20000 receive minimum nearly 300000 nevada lowwage workers would see raise bill raising nevadas minimum wage important step towards bridging widening gap income opportunity inequality mccurdy said assemblyman ira hansen rsparks said sympathetic efforts pay workers factors illegal immigrants unlicensed contractors contribute problem wages really function supply demand hansen said paul sonns national employment law project said single worker without children nevada needs earn 15 per hour make ends meet adding 536000 workers nevada 4 10 make less sonns said studies shown fears higher labor costs offset increasing buying power lowwage earners assembly minority leader paul anderson rlas vegas questioned findings reports would counter reports mentioned said hearing anderson issued statement accusing democrats showing reckless disregard nevadas small businesses peter guzman president latin chamber commerce among people packed sawyer building las vegas said lawmakers pushing bill need reach small business owners input enough done find pulse small business community guzman told reviewjournal testifying small business engine runs country looking several lowwage workers hospitality industry workers home health care aides testified struggles provide families work two jobs help support family said maria salinas raise said make health care worker rich elliot malin americans prosperity said restaurants particular would raise prices assemblywoman maggie carlton dlas vegas didnt buy argument carlton said looked price buffalo wings one chain restaurant locations different states different minimum wages food prices varied penny two said find argument hospitality quite accurate carlton said bryan wachter retail association nevada said 29 percent us workers 16 percent nevada make minimum wage argued seattle lost 11000 jobs six months city initiated raising minimum wage 15 urged lawmakers look laborrelated issues requiring sick leave adequately judge impacts business critics also decried quick hearing held two days bill introduced las vegas metro chamber commerce deeply concerned potential impact ab175 nevadas employers employees kristin mcmillan chamber president said statement tuesday also said inadequate time properly evaluate bill chamber opposed face high potential hurting job creation employers large small adversely impacting stability existing jobs state constitutional amendment approved voters 2006 nevada twotiered minimum wage scale currently 825 workers offered health benefits 1 per hour less insurance offered bill introduced nevada senate seeks gradual increase 75 cents per hour year reaches 11 insurance 12 without insurance even minimum wage increase approved lawmakers ultimate fate assured democrats control chambers nevada legislature though lack super majorities needed override vetoes republican gov brian sandoval sandoval taken stance bill though historically opposed legislative mandate increase minimum wage action bill taken committee colton lochhead contributed report contact sandra chereb scherebreviewjournalcom 7754613821 follow sandracherebon twitter | 545 |
<p>Can Financial Assets Beat Social Security? Not in the Real World.</p>
<p>a report by John Mueller Senior Vice President &amp; Chief Economist Lehrman Bell Mueller Cannon, Inc. for the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare Washington, D.C. October 1997</p>
<p>1. An Overview of the Debate</p>
<p>Since retirees began collecting Social Security benefits in 1941, the average real return on payroll taxes paid has been about 9% — far above the average returns in the stock market.[i]</p>
<p>Moreover, until the late 1970s, most economists believed that, while future returns could not remain so high, the average long-run return on pay-as-you-go[ii] Social Security would approximate the rate of economic growth; and that this rate of return must exceed the average return on financial investments of comparable risk.[iii]</p>
<p>About 25 years ago, economists like Martin Feldstein began to question this conclusion.[iv] Feldstein agreed that the long-term return on Social Security would equal the rate of economic growth. But the return on Social Security, according to Feldstein, must be compared, not with a low-risk investment like Treasury bills, but with the total pretax return on business investment.</p>
<p>“The average growth of real wages since 1960 — 2.6 percent — can serve as a reasonable estimate of what an unfunded Social Security program can yield over the long-term future. In contrast, the the real pretax return on nonfinancial corporate capital (i.e., profits before all taxes plus the net interest paid) averaged 9.3 percent over the same period. Although individuals do not earn the full 9.3 percent return even in Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and 401(k) accounts because of federal and state corporate taxes, a funded retirement system could deliver the full 9.3 percent pretax return to each individual saver if the government credited back the corporate tax collections.”[v]</p>
<p>Feldstein and others seek to “privatize” Social Security — replace it with government-mandated financial savings accounts.[vi] But most “privatizers” do not go as far as Feldstein — proposing that all Federal, state and local taxes on the investment financed by retirement saving be abolished. Instead, they argue that, even without major changes in taxation, the future average return on financial assets like stocks and bonds will exceed the return on pay-as-you-go Social Security.</p>
<p>For example, they point out, the average annual real return on common stocks since 1926 has been about 7.4%, while real economic growth averaged about 3.2%.</p>
<p>Usually, “privatizers” push their case still further, comparing past average real returns on the stock market with hypothetical future real returns on Social Security as low as 1% — or even past hypothetical returns of 9% on investment in plant and equipment with future hypothetical returns on Social Security.</p>
<p>To deal with one fallacy at a time, we examine different aspects of the “privatizers'” argument in a series of different papers.</p>
<p>In the current paper, we compare past returns on financial assets with the rate of real economic growth — which all agree is the average long-run real return on pay-as-you-go Social Security. We show that, adjusted for the difference in risk, the return on financial assets has been much lower than the rate of economic growth — and thus below the long-term rate of return on Social Security under the same economic conditions.</p>
<p>In a second paper, we show how to determine the future rate of return on the stock market implied by projections of slower economic growth and changing demographic trends. Under the assumptions of the Social Security actuaries, the average real return on the stock market will be about 1.4% over the next 20 years, and about 3.2% over the next 75 years. The risk-adjusted return on financial assets would remain significantly below the return on Social Security.</p>
<p>In a third paper, we examine the economic theory of Social Security and show what’s wrong with Feldstein’s reasoning as cited above: he ignores the existence of “human capital.” Feldstein compares the pretax return on the investment in nonhuman capital financed by retirement saving placed in stocks and bonds, with the after-tax return on the investment in “human capital” financed by pay-as-you Social Security. The pretax rate of return on human capital is significantly higher than on nonhuman capital. This reinforces the conclusion that ending Social Security would lower, not raise, the return on retirement saving.</p>
<p>2. The “Privatizers'” Main Argument — and Its Flaw.</p>
<p>The main argument of those who seek to end pay-as-you-go Social Security has always been quite simple: “While those retired today are still receiving above-market returns through social security, those now entering the work force are offered low, below-market returns.”[vii]</p>
<p>The argument is typically reinforced by comparing the average real return on the stock market since the end of 1925 (about 7%), or on a mix of stocks and bonds (4% to 5%), with the average real rate of economic growth (about 3% in the past, but possibly lower in the future). The real return on Social Security in the long run should equal the rate of economic growth.</p>
<p>The particular numbers chosen for comparison differ. But the key point, according to the “privatizers,” is that future rates of return on financial investments like the stock market will be higher than the rate of economic growth: “Indeed, any private returns higher than the social security returns discussed earlier would result in higher benefits through the private investment system than through social security.”[viii]</p>
<p>Thus, the “privatizers” conclude, future generations would be better off if pay-as-you-go retirement benefits were replaced by financial savings accounts invested in stock and bonds.</p>
<p>The argument is simple and clear. It is also remarkable for its basic assumption: that investors are indifferent to risk. What the “privatizers” overlook is that, while the return on Social Security is tied to the growth of the economy, so is its volatility– which is only a quarter of the risk of the stock market. And for nearly all investors, the extra return on the stock market is not large enough to offset its extra risk.</p>
<p>If risk could be ignored, no one would (or should) invest in the stock market. This is because many investments promise a much higher return. For example, the three-month Treasury bills of the Turkish government recently have yielded more than 100% — a compound annual return of more than 250%! Since the “privatizers” talk about the U.S. stock market, and not Turkish bonds, it implies that even they recognize the reality of risk — though they leave it out of their calculations.</p>
<p>But investors wouldn’t need to go abroad to raise average returns — if risk didn’t matter. Virtually any average real yield could be manufactured, simply by borrowing enough and investing in almost any asset. The average 7% real yield on common stocks could be doubled to 14%, merely by buying the stocks with 50% “margin” — borrowing an amount equal to the investor’s wealth, and buying twice as many stocks. Borrowing twice as much would yield an average of 21%, borrowing three times as much 28%, and so on.</p>
<p>The reason that no sane person does this on any scale is that the risk is multiplied by the same proportion. Any sensible person would obviously prefer a sure return of 9% or 7% to an equally sure return of 3%. But only a compulsive gambler actually chooses a portfolio with an average real return of 9% or 7%, over one with an average return of 3%, or even 1% — if each entails the average risk actually associated with such average returns in the past 70 years.</p>
<p>3. Measuring Risk and Risk Aversion: A Dollar in Hand. . .</p>
<p>To compare apples with apples, we need to adjust the returns on different investments for their different risks.</p>
<p>What is risk? In a technical sense, risk is simply the probability of a loss. But in investment, risk has two key aspects.</p>
<p>The first is that almost everyone prefers to avoid risk. This means that investors require a financial reward for undertaking risk, and this “risk premium” rises faster than risk.</p>
<p>The second aspect is that a higher average return on investment generally requires accepting higher risk — and over the range of possible investments, risk rises faster than return.</p>
<p>These two factors combined explain why investors as a group do not seek the highest possible average return, but rather the highest risk-adjusted return.</p>
<p>Though most of us don’t use the term “risk aversion,” we all know what it means. The idea is captured in the adage, “A bird in hand is worth two in the bush.” To be risk-averse means that the prospect of losing a dollar you already own weighs more heavily than the chance of gaining a dollar you don’t yet own.[ix]</p>
<p>You can easily find out whether you are risk-averse. We agree to flip a coin. If the coin comes up tails, you lose half your wealth — half your bank accounts, stocks, bonds, house, car and other assets; and also half of what you will earn for the rest of your life. If the coin comes up heads, you win an equal amount.</p>
<p>A “risk-neutral” investor — one who neither seeks nor avoids risk — would just accept this bet, because it is “actuarially fair”: the odds of winning or losing are equal, and so are the potential gains and losses.</p>
<p>If you would not accept the bet, you are risk averse. And you are not alone. Risk aversion is the rational response to the human condition: none of us lives long enough or has enough resources to try risky things an infinite number of times.</p>
<p>Moreover, we have just settled the question whether you are the sort of person who would be better or worse off if pay-as-you-go Social Security were abolished. Those who would be better off are the few who regard a bird in the bush as equal to a bird in hand. You, on the other hand, would be worse off; how much worse depends on how much you prefer to avoid risk.</p>
<p>Almost no one would risk half his wealth on a coin toss. (If you would accept the bet, please see me about some investment ideas that could prove to be mutually advantageous.) But there are degrees of aversion to risk. Most people would accept the bet if it were modified — so that the risk of loss were smaller, the promised payoff larger, or the odds of winning better. It’s possible to measure your risk aversion by comparing how large a gain, and at what odds, would induce you to risk losing some specified share of your wealth.</p>
<p>Economists do a lot of theorizing about risk aversion, but seldom pay much attention to its measurement.[x] The evidence indicates that, for the typical investor, a bird (or a dollar) in hand is indeed worth two in the bush (or in the stock market) — at least, if the number of birds or dollars at stake is not too large compared with the number you start with.</p>
<p>For example, to balance the chance of losing 1% of his wealth, the typical investor requires an equal chance of gaining about 2%. A more conservative investor requires an equal chance of gaining about 3%. A more speculative investor might require only a 1-1/2% gain. (An investor indifferent to risk, of course, would risk a 1% loss for a gain of only 1%.)</p>
<p>What this means, mathematically, is that the value a typical investor places on each extra dollar of wealth varies inversely with the square of his wealth.[xi] For the conservative investor, this “marginal utility” of wealth varies inversely with the cube of his wealth. As the size of possible losses increases, each investor requires more than just 1-1/2 or 2 or 3 times the gain.</p>
<p>Graph 1 shows the conditions under which each might accept a wager like the one just described — along with the result of such an experiment.</p>
<p>The decision to invest is a lot like our example of the coin toss. The risk of an investment is typically measured by the variability of its return: how much above or (more important) below average does the return tend to fluctuate?[xii]</p>
<p>Suppose two investments yield an average return of 10%, but one yields exactly 10% every year, while the other ranges randomly from 0% to 20%. According to the “privatizers,” investors should see both investments as equivalent, because the average return is the same. But rational investors will obviously choose the first investment. The first investment offers a return of exactly 10%, but the second investment has two parts: a 10% average return, and a 50/50 chance of either gaining or losing 10% — a coin toss. Therefore, the second investment requires a “risk premium” — a higher return to compensate for the higher risk. Because the average return is the same for both, the “risk-adjusted” return, after subtracting the risk premium, is lower on the second investment than on the first.</p>
<p>The risk premium is the sum of the possible losses and the required offsetting gains, weighted by their probabilities[xiii]. On an investment with 10% average volatility, the typical investor requires a risk premium of about 1.8%, the conservative investor about 4.1%, and the speculative investor about 1.0%. Graph 2 shows the risk/return tradeoffs which would be equivalent to a 0% absolutely safe return for each of our sample investors. (For the convenience of future researchers, we attach a table of risk premia.)</p>
<p>Notice that the risk premium is different at each level of risk: not a single number for all investments, but a curve tracing all the tradeoffs between risk and return that the same investor would consider equivalent to a single risk-free rate of return (in this case, 0%). A 1% risk-adjusted return would trace a parallel curve, 1 percentage point higher, and so on.</p>
<p>Notice also that the risk premium rises faster than risk: an investment with 20% average variability is twice as risky as one with 10% variability, but for each of our investors, the required risk premium is about four times as high.</p>
<p>To compare the returns on investments involving different risks, then, we must subtract the appropriate risk premium from the average return on each investment. This gives us the “risk-adjusted” return: we can use it to compare apples with apples.</p>
<p>4. The “Frontier” of Possible Investments</p>
<p>The other key aspect of risk is that seeking higher returns generally requires accepting more risk. And on the whole, the risk rises faster than the return.</p>
<p>We can see this by comparing the average return of different investments with their average variability, measured by the “standard deviation” of returns.</p>
<p>For many years, Ibbotson Associates has tracked the average risk vs. return since the end of 1925, for Treasury securities, long-term corporate bonds, common stocks, and small-company stocks.[xiv] The results for the years 1926 to 1996 are shown in Graph 3.</p>
<p>Treasury bills had the lowest average variability (4.2%), but also the lowest inflation-adjusted return: 0.6%. Corporate bonds returned an average of 2.4% beyond inflation, but with a variability of 10.0%. Common stocks yielded 7.4% on average, but with 20.4% average variability in return. Small-cap stocks had the highest average real return (9.2%) but also the highest average volatility: 33.5%.</p>
<p>However, investors do not ordinarily invest all their wealth in a single asset. By mixing different assets, it is usually possible to find a combination with a higher return (at any level of risk), or a lower risk (for any level or return) than is possible by investing in a single asset.[xv] The line tracing the highest return possible at each level of risk is sometimes called the “efficient frontier.” No rational investor should accept a lower return for the risk, and no higher average return is available.</p>
<p>What effect does Social Security have on this range of investment choices?</p>
<p>As we noted earlier, for those already retired the real return on Social Security has averaged about 9%. But the rate of return started much higher, and has declined over time. For the very first retirees in the 1940s, the rate of return on payroll taxes approached 20 percent. For those retired from 1960 to 1968, the real rate of return averaged about 12%; from 1969 to 1975, about 9%; from 1976 to 1981, about 8%, and from 1982 to 1987, about 6%.[xvi] (Graph 4)</p>
<p>What we wish to focus on is what will happen when the average rate of return on Social Security levels out. The average rate of return of “steady-state” Social Security will be about the same as the growth rate of the economy. Since we wish to compare this return with the risks and real returns of financial investments from 1926 to 1996, we need to find out the average growth rate of the economy (adjusted by the same price index), as well as itsvolatility, during the same period. From 1926 to 1996, real GDP grew at an average rate of about 3.2%, with a standard deviation of about 5.5%.[xvii]</p>
<p>Graph 5 shows how the range of investment possibilities would have looked if pay-as-you-go Social Security had already reached its “steady state” before 1926. With “steady-state” Social Security, the return is higher at each level of risk, for all portfolio combinations between investing 100% in Treasury bills and 100% in common stocks.</p>
<p>However, one further adjustment is necessary. The return actually received by investors on financial assets or on Social Security is reduced by administrative and management fees. It is generally agreed that the relative size of administrative costs of Social Securty is vastly smaller than the fees charged on private financial accounts.[xviii] Put on the same basis, Social Security administrative costs amount to about 4 basis points (4 hundredths of a percentage point)[xix]; but the management fees on private financial accounts average close to 100 basis points (1 full percentage point).[xx]</p>
<p>Graph 6 shows how management fees affects the range of investment possibilities. The fees lower the return at each level of risk. But the reduction is slight to the extent that a portfolio includes Social Security, and relatively large to the extent that it includes stocks and bonds.</p>
<p>5. How Social Security Raises Investment Returns</p>
<p>We are now able to compare the risk-adjusted returns on “steady-state” Social Security and on financial investments.</p>
<p>The choice of investments actually made by each investor is the result of matching the range of possibilities with his or her attitude to risk. Each rational, well-informed investor will choose the portfolio that provides the highest risk-adjusted return.</p>
<p>Our “typical” investor also serves as a good representative of the median investor — one who is more risk averse than half the population, and less risk averse than the other half.</p>
<p>In the absence of Social Security, under the economic conditions from 1926 to 1996, the median investor would have realized the highest risk-adjusted return — 1.2% — with a portfolio consisting, on average, of about 55% Treasury bills and 45% common stocks.[xxi] But with steady-state Social Security, the median investor chooses a portfolio consisting of about 80% Social Security and 20% common stocks, which offers both a higher average return and lower average risk. The risk-adjusted return is 2.9% — more than twice as high. (Graph 7)</p>
<p>For our conservative investor, the gain due to Social Security is still larger. Without Social Security, the highest achievable real return, adjusted for risk, is zero — on a portfolio consisting of about 80% Treasury bills and 20% common stocks. Every portfolio with either a higher or lower average return has a negative risk-adjusted return. But Social Security raises the risk adjusted return by 2 percentage points. This return is possible with a portfolio consisting 80% of Social Security and 20% of common stocks. (Graph 8)</p>
<p>The biggest shift in portfolio (though not the largest increase in return) occurs with the speculative investor. Without Social Security, his highest achievable risk-adjusted return is 2.7%, on a portfolio consisting of about 75% common stocks and 25% intermediate Treasury securities. With Social Security, the speculative investor prefers a mix of about 60% Social Security and 40% common stocks. This shift causes the risk premium to fall much more than average return, so the risk-adjusted real return, net of fees, rises to 3.4%. (Graph 9)</p>
<p>This answers our original question. Does “steady-state” pay-as-you-go Social Security raise or lower the risk-adjusted real return on retirement saving for all future generations?</p>
<p>The answer, clearly, is that “steady-state” Social Security more than doubles the risk-adjusted real return for the median investor.[xxii] The evidence therefore argues against “privatizing” Social Security.</p>
<p>6. The “Privatizers” as Money Managers</p>
<p>But we are not quite finished. One of the most disturbing aspects of “privatization” schemes is that, although touted as an expansion of individual freedom, each would severely limit investment choices.</p>
<p>As one pair of proponents explains: “In fact, most proposals for a privatized national retirement system have regulatory elements that restrict investment strategies that are either too risky or that would be insufficiently aggressive to provide needed retirement benefits.”[xxiii]</p>
<p>Translation: In addition to abolishing pay-as-you-go retirement benefits, “privatization” plans would further reduce the risk-adjusted returns on retirement saving by imposing a one-size-fits-all approach to portfolio selection.</p>
<p>To see how this works, let’s consider the “model portfolios” put forward by the “privatizers.” Some are quite simple; others are enormously complex. But all have one thing in common: they do not allow for differences in risk aversion.</p>
<p>Peter Ferrara recommends a portfolio consisting 100% of common stocks, but argues that any mix of stocks and corporate bonds with an average yield higher than the rate of economic growth would be preferable to pay-as-you-go Social Security.[xxiv] Martin Feldstein also puts common stocks first, but falls back on a “conservative” portfolio, consisting of 60% common stocks and 40% long-term corporate bonds, or else 50% common stocks and 50% corporate bonds.[xxv] William Shipman has produced at least four model portfolios: two all-stock portfolios, one consisting of 75% large-company stocks and 25% small company stocks, the other 90% large-company stocks and 10% small company stocks; a “balanced” fund consisting of 54% common stocks, 6% small-company stocks, 20% long-term corporate bonds and 20% government bonds; and a long-term bond fund divided equally between corporate and government securities.[xxvi]</p>
<p>What is striking about all these choices is that each “privatizer” ranks the attractiveness of a portfolio purely by its 70-year average return, without regard to an individual investor’s attitude toward risk.</p>
<p>Let’s consider the effect that this cookie-cutter approach would have on risk-adjusted returns for our three kinds of individual investors. (For the moment, we will ignore a fact noted in a separate paper: for most families, a 20-year average return is appropriate. A 70-year average rate of return makes sense only for someone planning to retire at about age 165 — not age 65.)</p>
<p>We have already described the portfolios which are most efficient for each of our typical investors, with and without Social Security. So this time we will simply compare the real average risk-adjusted return on steady-state Social Security with the risk-adjusted returns of the model portfolios of the “privatizers,” and ignore the fact that more efficient portfolios are possible. The characteristics of each portfolio, as well as the risk-adjusted returns, are compared in a table.</p>
<p>Graph 10 shows the results for the typical or median investor. Steady-state Social Security alone beats every one of the “model” portfolio by a wide margin. What’s almost as interesting: the portfolios which the privatizers consider inferior outperform the portfolios which they consider superior. The portfolios consisting entirely of stocks actually have a negative return after adjusting for risk, while the “balanced funds” at least have a positive risk-adjusted yield.</p>
<p>Graph 11 shows the comparison for the conservative investor. This time, every one of the “privatizers'” model portfolios is sharply negative. Only steady-state Social Security offers a positive return.</p>
<p>Graph 12 compares the returns for the speculative investor. As might be expected, this case should offer the most favorable comparison for the model portfolios of the “privatizers”: for the speculative investor, at least, all the portfolios offer a positive return. Nevertheless, the risk-adjusted return of Social Security still beats the risk-adjusted return on each of the “model” portfolios.</p>
<p>7. Conclusion: Keep Social Security Pay-as-you-go.</p>
<p>Half a century of advances in portfolio theory and Wall Street practice seem to have been lost, as far as the “privatizers” are concerned. The “privatizers” labor under the impression that the way to improve investment returns is to assume more risk. The lesson that Wall Street has learned over the past few decades, on the contrary, is that the way to increase investment performance is by ruthlessly eliminating risk, either through diversification or by taking advantage of information which is not widely known.</p>
<p>By ignoring risk, the “privatizers” also ignore the most remarkable (and popular) characteristic of Social Security, considered as an investment: its “risk-adjusted” return is extraordinarily high, because its average volatility is quite low. The average future return on Social Security will indeed approximate the average rate of economic growth. And the variability of return on Social Security will also approximate that of the U.S. economy — which has been about one-quarter of the volatility of stock market returns.</p>
<p>After adjusting for this difference in risk, the average return on financial assets — or the stock market alone — has always been far lower than the average rate of economic growth. This means that the average risk-adjusted return on “steady-state” Social Security is higher than that of any class of financial investment. We have also shown that no possible combination of stocks and bonds could beat the risk-adjusted return of a portfolio that includes pay-as-you-go Social Security.</p>
<p>Finally, we have shown that the risk-adjusted returns of the “model portfolios” recommended by “privatizers” — who seek to make such portfolios mandatory — are inferior for nearly all investors. But the losses would be most acute for those investors who are most risk averse.</p>
<p>Based on the evidence, “privatizing” Social Security must lower, not raise, the total return on retirement saving.[xxvii]</p>
<p>Endnotes References</p>
<p>Bernoulli, Daniel (1738), “Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk,” Comentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperiales Petropolitanae, 5:175-192; translated in Econometrica, 1954, 22:23-36.</p>
<p>Bernstein, Peter L. (1996), Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk, John Wiley &amp; Sons, New York.</p>
<p>Black, Fischer (1971), “Implications of the Random Walk Hypothesis for Portfolio Management,” Financial Analysts Journal, March-April.</p>
<p>Brealey, Richard A. (1969), An Introduction to Risk and Return from Common Stocks, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass.</p>
<p>Chang, W.W., D. Hamberg, and J. Hirata (1983), “Liquidity preference as behavior towards risk in a demand for short-term securities — not money,” American Economic Review, v. 73, 420-427.</p>
<p>Cootner, Paul H. (1962), “Stock Prices: Random vs. Systematic Changes,” Industrial Management Review (Spring).</p>
<p>Duggan, James E., Robert Gillinghan and John S. Greenlees (1993), “Returns Paid to Early Social Security Cohorts,” Contemporary Policy Issues, Vol. XI, October, 1-13.</p>
<p>Fama, Eugene F. (1965), “The Behavior of Stock Market Prices,” Journal of Business, v. 38 (January), 34-105.</p>
<p>Fama, Eugene F. (1970), “Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work,” Journal of Finance, May.</p>
<p>Fama, Eugene F. and Kenneth R. French (1992), “The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns,” Journal of Finance, June.</p>
<p>Feldstein, Martin (1965), “The Derivation of Social Time Preference Rates,” Kyklos vol. XVIII no. 2, 277-287.</p>
<p>Feldstein, Martin (1974), “Social Security, Induced Retirement, and Aggregate Capital Accumulation,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 82, 905-26.</p>
<p>Feldstein, Martin (1977), “Facing the Social Security Crisis,” The Public Interest Number 47 (Spring), 88-100.</p>
<p>Feldstein, Martin (1997), “Privatizing Social Security: The $10 Trillion Opportunity,” The Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., SSP No. 7.</p>
<p>Ferrara, Peter J. and John R. Lott Jr. (1985), “Rates of Return Promised by Social Security to Today’s Young Workers,” in Social Security: Prospects for Real Reform, Ferrara, ed., The Cato Institute.</p>
<p>Godfrey, Michael D., Clive W.J. Granger, and Oskar Morgenstern (1964), “The Random-Walk Hypothesis of Stock Market Behavior,” Kyklos, v. 17, 1-30.</p>
<p>Hieger, Melissa and William Shipman (1997), “Common Objections to a Market-Based Social Security System: A Response,” Cato Institute, Washington, D.C., SSP No. 10.</p>
<p>Ibbotson, Roger G. and Rex A. Sinquefield (1997), Stocks Bonds Bills and Inflation: 1997 Yearbook, Ibbotson Associates, Chicago.</p>
<p>Jagannathan, Ravi and Zhenyu Wang (1993), “The CAPM is Alive and Well,” Working Paper 517 (August), Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.</p>
<p>Jagannathan, Ravi and Zhenyu Wang (1996), “The Conditional CAPM and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns,” Staff Report 208 (August), Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.</p>
<p>Jensen, Michael C. (1967), “Random Walks: Reality or Myth; Comment,” Financial Analysts Journal, November-December.</p>
<p>Johnson, Mark A. (1988), The Random Walk and Beyond: An Inside Guide to the Stock Market, John Wiley &amp; Sons, New York.</p>
<p>Leimer, Dean R. and Selig D. Lesnoy (1982), “Social Security and Private Savings: New Time-Series Evidence,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 90, 606-629.</p>
<p>Levy, Robert A. (1967), “Random Walks: Reality or Myth,” Financial Analysts Journal, November-December.</p>
<p>Levy, Robert A. (1974), “Beta Coefficients as Predictors of Return,” Financial Analysts Journal, January-February.</p>
<p>MacCrimmon, Kenneth R. &amp; Donald A. Wehrung (1988), Taking Risks: The Management of Uncertainty, The Free Press (Macmillan), New York.</p>
<p>Malkiel, Burton G. (1996), A Random Walk Down Wall Street, W.W. Norton &amp; Co., New York.</p>
<p>Markowitz, Harry M. (1959), Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments, John Wiley &amp; Sons, New York.</p>
<p>McCloskey, Donald N. (1985), The Applied Theory of Price, 2d ed., Macmillan, New York.</p>
<p>Modigliani, Franco and Gerald A. Pogue (1974), “An Introduction to Risk and Return,” Financial Analysts Journal, March-April and May-June.</p>
<p>Roll, Richard (1977), “A Critique of the Asset Pricing Theory’s Tests: Part 1: On Past and Potential Testability of the Theory,” Journal of Financial Economics, March.</p>
<p>Sharpe, William F. (1965), “Risk Aversion in the Stock Market: Some Empirical Evidence,” Journal of Finance, v. 20 (September), 416-422.</p>
<p>Sharpe, William F. (1970), Portfolio Theory and Capital Markets, McGraw-Hill, New York.</p>
<p>Shipman, William (1995), “Retiring With Dignity: Social Security vs. Private Markets,” SSP No. 2, Cato Institute, Washington, D.C. (August).</p>
<p>Social Security Trustees (1997), The 1997 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Trust Funds, Ways and Means Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, April 24.</p>
<p>Thompson, Neil (1993), Portfolio Theory and the Demand for Money, St. Martin’s Press, New York.</p>
<p>Tobin, James (1965), “The Theory of Portfolio Selection,” in F. Hahn and F.P.R. Brechling, eds., The Theory of Interest Rates, Macmillan, London, 3-51.</p>
<p>Can Financial Assets Beat Social Security? Not in the Real World. a report by John Mueller Senior Vice President &amp; Chief Economist Lehrman Bell Mueller Cannon, Inc. for the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare Washington, D.C. October 1997</p>
<p>Summary</p>
<p>For those retired in the past 60 years, the average real return on Social Security payroll taxes — about 9% — has exceeded that of the stock market. But those who favor “privatizing” Social Security — replacing pay-as-you-go benefits with mandatory financial savings accounts — argue that future returns on financial assets will be higher than the return from Social Security.</p>
<p>Average future returns on Social Security, they point out, must approximate the average growth of the economy. Yet average real returns on financial assets since 1926 were higher — about 7% for a portfolio of common stocks, and about 5% for a mix of common stocks and corporate bonds, compared with 3% real economic growth.</p>
<p>However, the argument assumes that investors are indifferent to risk — the volatility of returns on investment. Because investors as a group are “risk-averse,” they do not seek the highest possible average return, but rather the highest risk-adjusted return. Just as nominal returns must be adjusted for inflation, real returns must be adjusted for risk.</p>
<p>The paper shows how to adjust returns on different investments for differences in risk. The average risk-adjusted returns from 1926 to 1996 on all classes of financial assets — including the stock market — were significantly lower than the rate of economic growth. So financial returns, under the same economic conditions, are lower than the average return on a “mature” pay-as-you-go Social Security system. The difference is still larger when the returns are measured net of management fees.</p>
<p>The paper also shows that the risk-adjusted return of a portfolio including Social Security can systematically exceed the return on a portfolio limited to financial assets. All of the model portfolios recommended by the “privatizers” — who seek to write them into law — fail to match the risk-adjusted return of “steady-state” Social Security.</p>
<p>Conclusion: ending pay-as-you-go Social Security must lower the total return on retirement saving.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>[i] Duggan et al., 1993.</p>
<p>[ii] “Pay-as-you-go” means that workers’ current payroll taxes are used to pay for the current pensions of retired workers.</p>
<p>[iii] In a separate paper (“The Economics of Pay-as-you-go Social Security and the Economic Cost of Ending It”), we examine the history of economists’ thinking about Social Security, and compare it with economic experience. We conclude that this earlier view about Social Security, though it requires updating in some respects, was essentially correct in its conclusion.</p>
<p>[iv] Feldstein (1974), Feldstein (1977).</p>
<p>[v] Feldstein, 1997, 2-3.</p>
<p>[vi] The word “privatize” is used in quotation marks, because under all the “privatization” plans, the government would be called upon to closely regulate the kind of investments allowed. It is therefore debatable whether what is proposed is to “privatize” Social Security, or to “socialize” the private capital markets. Also, the economic arguments apply to replacing pay-as-you-go Social Security with any system of financial saving, public or private. Hence even some “privatizers,” like Martin Feldstein, prefer a different word.</p>
<p>[vii] Ferrara and Lott (1985), 32.</p>
<p>[viii] Ferrara and Lott (1985), 32.</p>
<p>[ix] This insight is usually attributed to Daniel Bernoulli (1738). An interesting but philosophically quirky history of risk theory can be found in Bernstein (1996). For a brief and readable but slightly more technical introduction, see “The Measurement of Utility and the Economics of Risk,” in McCloskey (1985), Chapter 2.</p>
<p>[x] A brief but comprehensive overview of the theory and research in this field can be found in MacCrimmon &amp; Wehrung (1988), 44-50. MacCrimmon and Wehrung’s own study includes an experiment like the bet just described (shown for comparison in Graph 1). The authors describe flaws in the study’s design from the point of view of the original purpose (p. 120). Most conservative investors accepted the smallest bet and refused to gamble on the largest, so results of the smallest bet were skewed toward the most risk-averse investors and the largest bet was skewed toward the least risk-averse. For the purpose of the current paper this was fortunate, however, because it suggested three distinct subgroups with different attitudes toward risk, rather than just a single average.</p>
<p>[xi] The “utility function” described here is slightly different from two often used in theoretical discussions: the quadratic and the negative exponential. Both forms have two major drawbacks: they don’t seem to fit the observed facts, and neither is easily calculable by the investor whose decisions the function is supposed to describe. The negative exponential form makes people more risk-averse than they seem to behave, while the quadratic form can lead to absurd results (as explained in a readable appendix to Brealey, [1969], 133-139). The plain-vanilla utility function used in this paper has the advantages of fitting the facts — in controlled experiments as well as in observed investment returns — while being intuitively appealing and making the risk premium easy for an investor to calculate. Marginal utility declines inversely to wealth (k) raised to some power (s, s&gt;0): U'(k) = k-s. Then total utility is U(k) = (1 – s)-1ak1-s + c, where a and c are scaling constants.</p>
<p>[xii] Volatility is typically measured by the standard deviation of returns. The standard deviation is measured in percent, but a 10% standard deviation with a 0% average return doesn’t exactly mean that the investment will be as likely to fall 10% the first year as to rise 10% the second. If that happened you would have only 99% of your original wealth. A 10% decline (to 9/10ths of your original wealth) the first year has to be followed by about an 11% gain (10/9ths) the second year to make up the loss. This is why investors learn to think, not in percent gains or losses of wealth, but in reciprocals of wealth.</p>
<p>Using the standard deviation as a measure of risk involves limiting assumptions which are too often ignored.</p>
<p>For example, it requires that fluctuations in the rate of return are individually random, but taken together have a probability that can be calculated: a so-called “normal” distribution. Therefore, using the standard deviation of returns as a measure of risk is valid only after we account for systematic factors — such as the growth of the economy, demography, and changing perceptions of risk — which can, at least in principle, be predicted.</p>
<p>Moreover, events which are individually unpredictable, but for which probability cannot be calculated, involve “uncertainty,” not risk. For example, the chance that Congress will unexpectedly change policy affecting Social Security benefits, or the taxation of investments in the stock market, cannot be stated as a matter of probabilities.</p>
<p>Finally, risk properly applies only to volatility involving below-average, not above-average returns; some have accordingly proposed different risk measures in cases where the positive and negative variance is not symmetrical.</p>
<p>Since we are not concerned in this paper to make a forecast, but only to determine what happened in the past — and because we will take these important qualifications into account in a separate paper — the standard deviation of returns can serve as a useful definition of risk.</p>
<p>Two justifiably popular surveys of research in this field are Malkiel (1996) and Johnson (1988).</p>
<p>[xiii] Our measurement of the risk premium amounts to the investor perceiving the return on an investment as including, in addition to some average return, a 50/50 “side bet” of either gaining or losing an amount equal to some multiple of the asset’s volatility, as measured by the (log) standard deviation of returns. The multiple corresponds to the investor’s aversion to risk: more risk-averse investors have a higher multiple. The “side bet” represents the largest (positive or negative) surprise likely to occur within some specified percentage of the time. If the events are in fact random, this simple choice yields a precise risk/return tradeoff and an easily calculated risk premium. For example, we saw that the typical investor seems to have a marginal utility function that varies with the inverse square of his wealth: with ratios of his wealth to the second power. Another way of interpreting this is to say that the typical investor appears to require about 95% certainty when dealing with random events — that is, allowing for events that might occur 1 year in 20. This is because about 95% of all random or “normal” variation in returns occurs within 2 standard deviations of the mean. If the extra standard deviation of an asset’s return is 10%, compared with some risk-free investment, then the required risk premium for this “typical” investor is .5(1.12) + .5/(1.12) – 1 = 1.82%.</p>
<p>Similarly, a conservative investor might allow for events that can be expected to occur at least 1 in 100 random events. About 99% of random events occur within 3 standard deviations of the mean, which corresponds to a marginal utility function that varies inversely with the cube of his wealth: ratios of wealth to the third power. So the risk premium for the conservative investor on an asset with a 10% standard deviation of returns is .5(1.13) + .5/(1.13) – 1 = 4.12%.</p>
<p>A relatively aggressive investor, our typical “commodity speculator,” might allow only for events that occur 1 in 4 times, which suggests a risk aversion factor of about 1.5. And so on.</p>
<p>[xiv] Ibbotson and Sinquefield (1997). The 1926 starting date is often chosen because the current Standard &amp; Poor’s 500-stock index dates from that year — but the Cowles Commission index on which it is based goes back at least to 1880.</p>
<p>[xv] This “portfolio” return is determined not only by the average return on each investment, but also by the correlation of returns on different investments.</p>
<p>[xvi] Duggan et al., 1993, 10. Economists like Feldstein argue that these high rates of return on Social Security caused workers to save less, reducing total national investment. In a separate paper (“The Economics of Pay-as-you-go Social Security, and the Economic Cost of Ending It”), we show that Feldstein’s claim is based merely on re-defining investments in so-called “human capital” — expenses of child-rearing, education and training, health, safety and mobility of workers that increase earning ability — as “consumption.” In fact, the high initial rates of return on Social Security retirement saving appear to have played a major role in financing the Baby Boom — the most massive investment in “human capital” (so far) in world history.</p>
<p>[xvii] Only annual data for GDP are available until after World War II. Using annual data results in a slightly lower standard deviation than monthly data, upon which the Ibbotson calculations of standard deviation are based. However, this is offset by the fact that the volatility of wages, and therefore of the return on Social Security, is somewhat lower than for GDP. To calculate portfolio risks, it was also necessary to measure the correlation of GDP with each class of financial asset.</p>
<p>[xviii] For example, Hieger and Shipman (1997), 6.</p>
<p>[xix] Social Security administrative expenses last year comprised about $1.8 billion of total expenses of $308.2 billion: just under 0.6% (Social Security Trustees, 1997, 8). But from 1926 to 1996, about half the growth of nominal GDP was due to inflation; so administrative expenses would take about twice as large a share of the real rate of return on “steady-state” Social Security. 1.2% of the 3.2% growth rate of real GDP is about 0.04%, or 4 basis points.</p>
<p>[xx] 1994-96 Advisory Council on Social Security, 1997, Volume II, 487. The text notes that fees on IRA accounts tend to be higher than this. The figures cited, from Morningstar, Inc., were 99 basis points for equity funds, 84 basis points for balanced funds, 67 basis points for corporate bonds, and 89 basis points for government bonds. Our calculations will use these fees, and also assume 50 basis points for short-term securities.</p>
<p>[xxi] Such a portfolio had an average real return of 3.6% before fees, but 2.9% after fees. The portfolio’s 9.7% standard deviation requires a risk premium of 1.7%, leaving a risk-adjusted real return of 1.2%. The investor chooses this portfolio, because no portfolio with a higher average return compensates adequately for its additional risk; and no portfolio with lower risk offers a high enough average return.</p>
<p>[xxii] Since those who are risk averse, by all accounts, far outnumber the relative risk-takers, this is presumably true of the “average” investor as well as the median investor. However, the median investor is more appropriate than the average, because even a single investor with absolute aversion to risk would raise the average risk premium to infinity.</p>
<p>[xxiii] Hieger and Shipman (1997), 6.</p>
<p>[xxiv] Ferrara and Lott (1985).</p>
<p>[xxv] Feldstein (1977) and Feldstein and Samwick (1997).</p>
<p>[xxvi] Shipman (1995). Hieger and Shipman (1997).</p>
<p>[xxvii] In addition, phasing out pay-as-you-go Social Security would necessarily involve a large transition cost. The last generation covered would have to “pay twice for retirement” — its parents’ and its own — to finance the transition from pay-as-you-go to “pay-it-yourself” retirement pensions. The cost of ending pay-as-you-go Social Security is estimated in a separate paper.</p> | false | 1 | financial assets beat social security real world report john mueller senior vice president amp chief economist lehrman bell mueller cannon inc national committee preserve social security medicare washington dc october 1997 1 overview debate since retirees began collecting social security benefits 1941 average real return payroll taxes paid 9 far average returns stock marketi moreover late 1970s economists believed future returns could remain high average longrun return payasyougoii social security would approximate rate economic growth rate return must exceed average return financial investments comparable riskiii 25 years ago economists like martin feldstein began question conclusioniv feldstein agreed longterm return social security would equal rate economic growth return social security according feldstein must compared lowrisk investment like treasury bills total pretax return business investment average growth real wages since 1960 26 percent serve reasonable estimate unfunded social security program yield longterm future contrast real pretax return nonfinancial corporate capital ie profits taxes plus net interest paid averaged 93 percent period although individuals earn full 93 percent return even individual retirement accounts iras 401k accounts federal state corporate taxes funded retirement system could deliver full 93 percent pretax return individual saver government credited back corporate tax collectionsv feldstein others seek privatize social security replace governmentmandated financial savings accountsvi privatizers go far feldstein proposing federal state local taxes investment financed retirement saving abolished instead argue even without major changes taxation future average return financial assets like stocks bonds exceed return payasyougo social security example point average annual real return common stocks since 1926 74 real economic growth averaged 32 usually privatizers push case still comparing past average real returns stock market hypothetical future real returns social security low 1 even past hypothetical returns 9 investment plant equipment future hypothetical returns social security deal one fallacy time examine different aspects privatizers argument series different papers current paper compare past returns financial assets rate real economic growth agree average longrun real return payasyougo social security show adjusted difference risk return financial assets much lower rate economic growth thus longterm rate return social security economic conditions second paper show determine future rate return stock market implied projections slower economic growth changing demographic trends assumptions social security actuaries average real return stock market 14 next 20 years 32 next 75 years riskadjusted return financial assets would remain significantly return social security third paper examine economic theory social security show whats wrong feldsteins reasoning cited ignores existence human capital feldstein compares pretax return investment nonhuman capital financed retirement saving placed stocks bonds aftertax return investment human capital financed payasyou social security pretax rate return human capital significantly higher nonhuman capital reinforces conclusion ending social security would lower raise return retirement saving 2 privatizers main argument flaw main argument seek end payasyougo social security always quite simple retired today still receiving abovemarket returns social security entering work force offered low belowmarket returnsvii argument typically reinforced comparing average real return stock market since end 1925 7 mix stocks bonds 4 5 average real rate economic growth 3 past possibly lower future real return social security long run equal rate economic growth particular numbers chosen comparison differ key point according privatizers future rates return financial investments like stock market higher rate economic growth indeed private returns higher social security returns discussed earlier would result higher benefits private investment system social securityviii thus privatizers conclude future generations would better payasyougo retirement benefits replaced financial savings accounts invested stock bonds argument simple clear also remarkable basic assumption investors indifferent risk privatizers overlook return social security tied growth economy volatility quarter risk stock market nearly investors extra return stock market large enough offset extra risk risk could ignored one would invest stock market many investments promise much higher return example threemonth treasury bills turkish government recently yielded 100 compound annual return 250 since privatizers talk us stock market turkish bonds implies even recognize reality risk though leave calculations investors wouldnt need go abroad raise average returns risk didnt matter virtually average real yield could manufactured simply borrowing enough investing almost asset average 7 real yield common stocks could doubled 14 merely buying stocks 50 margin borrowing amount equal investors wealth buying twice many stocks borrowing twice much would yield average 21 borrowing three times much 28 reason sane person scale risk multiplied proportion sensible person would obviously prefer sure return 9 7 equally sure return 3 compulsive gambler actually chooses portfolio average real return 9 7 one average return 3 even 1 entails average risk actually associated average returns past 70 years 3 measuring risk risk aversion dollar hand compare apples apples need adjust returns different investments different risks risk technical sense risk simply probability loss investment risk two key aspects first almost everyone prefers avoid risk means investors require financial reward undertaking risk risk premium rises faster risk second aspect higher average return investment generally requires accepting higher risk range possible investments risk rises faster return two factors combined explain investors group seek highest possible average return rather highest riskadjusted return though us dont use term risk aversion know means idea captured adage bird hand worth two bush riskaverse means prospect losing dollar already weighs heavily chance gaining dollar dont yet ownix easily find whether riskaverse agree flip coin coin comes tails lose half wealth half bank accounts stocks bonds house car assets also half earn rest life coin comes heads win equal amount riskneutral investor one neither seeks avoids risk would accept bet actuarially fair odds winning losing equal potential gains losses would accept bet risk averse alone risk aversion rational response human condition none us lives long enough enough resources try risky things infinite number times moreover settled question whether sort person would better worse payasyougo social security abolished would better regard bird bush equal bird hand hand would worse much worse depends much prefer avoid risk almost one would risk half wealth coin toss would accept bet please see investment ideas could prove mutually advantageous degrees aversion risk people would accept bet modified risk loss smaller promised payoff larger odds winning better possible measure risk aversion comparing large gain odds would induce risk losing specified share wealth economists lot theorizing risk aversion seldom pay much attention measurementx evidence indicates typical investor bird dollar hand indeed worth two bush stock market least number birds dollars stake large compared number start example balance chance losing 1 wealth typical investor requires equal chance gaining 2 conservative investor requires equal chance gaining 3 speculative investor might require 112 gain investor indifferent risk course would risk 1 loss gain 1 means mathematically value typical investor places extra dollar wealth varies inversely square wealthxi conservative investor marginal utility wealth varies inversely cube wealth size possible losses increases investor requires 112 2 3 times gain graph 1 shows conditions might accept wager like one described along result experiment decision invest lot like example coin toss risk investment typically measured variability return much important average return tend fluctuatexii suppose two investments yield average return 10 one yields exactly 10 every year ranges randomly 0 20 according privatizers investors see investments equivalent average return rational investors obviously choose first investment first investment offers return exactly 10 second investment two parts 10 average return 5050 chance either gaining losing 10 coin toss therefore second investment requires risk premium higher return compensate higher risk average return riskadjusted return subtracting risk premium lower second investment first risk premium sum possible losses required offsetting gains weighted probabilitiesxiii investment 10 average volatility typical investor requires risk premium 18 conservative investor 41 speculative investor 10 graph 2 shows riskreturn tradeoffs would equivalent 0 absolutely safe return sample investors convenience future researchers attach table risk premia notice risk premium different level risk single number investments curve tracing tradeoffs risk return investor would consider equivalent single riskfree rate return case 0 1 riskadjusted return would trace parallel curve 1 percentage point higher notice also risk premium rises faster risk investment 20 average variability twice risky one 10 variability investors required risk premium four times high compare returns investments involving different risks must subtract appropriate risk premium average return investment gives us riskadjusted return use compare apples apples 4 frontier possible investments key aspect risk seeking higher returns generally requires accepting risk whole risk rises faster return see comparing average return different investments average variability measured standard deviation returns many years ibbotson associates tracked average risk vs return since end 1925 treasury securities longterm corporate bonds common stocks smallcompany stocksxiv results years 1926 1996 shown graph 3 treasury bills lowest average variability 42 also lowest inflationadjusted return 06 corporate bonds returned average 24 beyond inflation variability 100 common stocks yielded 74 average 204 average variability return smallcap stocks highest average real return 92 also highest average volatility 335 however investors ordinarily invest wealth single asset mixing different assets usually possible find combination higher return level risk lower risk level return possible investing single assetxv line tracing highest return possible level risk sometimes called efficient frontier rational investor accept lower return risk higher average return available effect social security range investment choices noted earlier already retired real return social security averaged 9 rate return started much higher declined time first retirees 1940s rate return payroll taxes approached 20 percent retired 1960 1968 real rate return averaged 12 1969 1975 9 1976 1981 8 1982 1987 6xvi graph 4 wish focus happen average rate return social security levels average rate return steadystate social security growth rate economy since wish compare return risks real returns financial investments 1926 1996 need find average growth rate economy adjusted price index well itsvolatility period 1926 1996 real gdp grew average rate 32 standard deviation 55xvii graph 5 shows range investment possibilities would looked payasyougo social security already reached steady state 1926 steadystate social security return higher level risk portfolio combinations investing 100 treasury bills 100 common stocks however one adjustment necessary return actually received investors financial assets social security reduced administrative management fees generally agreed relative size administrative costs social securty vastly smaller fees charged private financial accountsxviii put basis social security administrative costs amount 4 basis points 4 hundredths percentage pointxix management fees private financial accounts average close 100 basis points 1 full percentage pointxx graph 6 shows management fees affects range investment possibilities fees lower return level risk reduction slight extent portfolio includes social security relatively large extent includes stocks bonds 5 social security raises investment returns able compare riskadjusted returns steadystate social security financial investments choice investments actually made investor result matching range possibilities attitude risk rational wellinformed investor choose portfolio provides highest riskadjusted return typical investor also serves good representative median investor one risk averse half population less risk averse half absence social security economic conditions 1926 1996 median investor would realized highest riskadjusted return 12 portfolio consisting average 55 treasury bills 45 common stocksxxi steadystate social security median investor chooses portfolio consisting 80 social security 20 common stocks offers higher average return lower average risk riskadjusted return 29 twice high graph 7 conservative investor gain due social security still larger without social security highest achievable real return adjusted risk zero portfolio consisting 80 treasury bills 20 common stocks every portfolio either higher lower average return negative riskadjusted return social security raises risk adjusted return 2 percentage points return possible portfolio consisting 80 social security 20 common stocks graph 8 biggest shift portfolio though largest increase return occurs speculative investor without social security highest achievable riskadjusted return 27 portfolio consisting 75 common stocks 25 intermediate treasury securities social security speculative investor prefers mix 60 social security 40 common stocks shift causes risk premium fall much average return riskadjusted real return net fees rises 34 graph 9 answers original question steadystate payasyougo social security raise lower riskadjusted real return retirement saving future generations answer clearly steadystate social security doubles riskadjusted real return median investorxxii evidence therefore argues privatizing social security 6 privatizers money managers quite finished one disturbing aspects privatization schemes although touted expansion individual freedom would severely limit investment choices one pair proponents explains fact proposals privatized national retirement system regulatory elements restrict investment strategies either risky would insufficiently aggressive provide needed retirement benefitsxxiii translation addition abolishing payasyougo retirement benefits privatization plans would reduce riskadjusted returns retirement saving imposing onesizefitsall approach portfolio selection see works lets consider model portfolios put forward privatizers quite simple others enormously complex one thing common allow differences risk aversion peter ferrara recommends portfolio consisting 100 common stocks argues mix stocks corporate bonds average yield higher rate economic growth would preferable payasyougo social securityxxiv martin feldstein also puts common stocks first falls back conservative portfolio consisting 60 common stocks 40 longterm corporate bonds else 50 common stocks 50 corporate bondsxxv william shipman produced least four model portfolios two allstock portfolios one consisting 75 largecompany stocks 25 small company stocks 90 largecompany stocks 10 small company stocks balanced fund consisting 54 common stocks 6 smallcompany stocks 20 longterm corporate bonds 20 government bonds longterm bond fund divided equally corporate government securitiesxxvi striking choices privatizer ranks attractiveness portfolio purely 70year average return without regard individual investors attitude toward risk lets consider effect cookiecutter approach would riskadjusted returns three kinds individual investors moment ignore fact noted separate paper families 20year average return appropriate 70year average rate return makes sense someone planning retire age 165 age 65 already described portfolios efficient typical investors without social security time simply compare real average riskadjusted return steadystate social security riskadjusted returns model portfolios privatizers ignore fact efficient portfolios possible characteristics portfolio well riskadjusted returns compared table graph 10 shows results typical median investor steadystate social security alone beats every one model portfolio wide margin whats almost interesting portfolios privatizers consider inferior outperform portfolios consider superior portfolios consisting entirely stocks actually negative return adjusting risk balanced funds least positive riskadjusted yield graph 11 shows comparison conservative investor time every one privatizers model portfolios sharply negative steadystate social security offers positive return graph 12 compares returns speculative investor might expected case offer favorable comparison model portfolios privatizers speculative investor least portfolios offer positive return nevertheless riskadjusted return social security still beats riskadjusted return model portfolios 7 conclusion keep social security payasyougo half century advances portfolio theory wall street practice seem lost far privatizers concerned privatizers labor impression way improve investment returns assume risk lesson wall street learned past decades contrary way increase investment performance ruthlessly eliminating risk either diversification taking advantage information widely known ignoring risk privatizers also ignore remarkable popular characteristic social security considered investment riskadjusted return extraordinarily high average volatility quite low average future return social security indeed approximate average rate economic growth variability return social security also approximate us economy onequarter volatility stock market returns adjusting difference risk average return financial assets stock market alone always far lower average rate economic growth means average riskadjusted return steadystate social security higher class financial investment also shown possible combination stocks bonds could beat riskadjusted return portfolio includes payasyougo social security finally shown riskadjusted returns model portfolios recommended privatizers seek make portfolios mandatory inferior nearly investors losses would acute investors risk averse based evidence privatizing social security must lower raise total return retirement savingxxvii endnotes references bernoulli daniel 1738 exposition new theory measurement risk comentarii academiae scientiarum imperiales petropolitanae 5175192 translated econometrica 1954 222336 bernstein peter l 1996 gods remarkable story risk john wiley amp sons new york black fischer 1971 implications random walk hypothesis portfolio management financial analysts journal marchapril brealey richard 1969 introduction risk return common stocks mit press cambridge mass chang ww hamberg j hirata 1983 liquidity preference behavior towards risk demand shortterm securities money american economic review v 73 420427 cootner paul h 1962 stock prices random vs systematic changes industrial management review spring duggan james e robert gillinghan john greenlees 1993 returns paid early social security cohorts contemporary policy issues vol xi october 113 fama eugene f 1965 behavior stock market prices journal business v 38 january 34105 fama eugene f 1970 efficient capital markets review theory empirical work journal finance may fama eugene f kenneth r french 1992 crosssection expected stock returns journal finance june feldstein martin 1965 derivation social time preference rates kyklos vol xviii 2 277287 feldstein martin 1974 social security induced retirement aggregate capital accumulation journal political economy vol 82 90526 feldstein martin 1977 facing social security crisis public interest number 47 spring 88100 feldstein martin 1997 privatizing social security 10 trillion opportunity cato institute washington dc ssp 7 ferrara peter j john r lott jr 1985 rates return promised social security todays young workers social security prospects real reform ferrara ed cato institute godfrey michael clive wj granger oskar morgenstern 1964 randomwalk hypothesis stock market behavior kyklos v 17 130 hieger melissa william shipman 1997 common objections marketbased social security system response cato institute washington dc ssp 10 ibbotson roger g rex sinquefield 1997 stocks bonds bills inflation 1997 yearbook ibbotson associates chicago jagannathan ravi zhenyu wang 1993 capm alive well working paper 517 august federal reserve bank minneapolis jagannathan ravi zhenyu wang 1996 conditional capm crosssection expected returns staff report 208 august federal reserve bank minneapolis jensen michael c 1967 random walks reality myth comment financial analysts journal novemberdecember johnson mark 1988 random walk beyond inside guide stock market john wiley amp sons new york leimer dean r selig lesnoy 1982 social security private savings new timeseries evidence journal political economy vol 90 606629 levy robert 1967 random walks reality myth financial analysts journal novemberdecember levy robert 1974 beta coefficients predictors return financial analysts journal januaryfebruary maccrimmon kenneth r amp donald wehrung 1988 taking risks management uncertainty free press macmillan new york malkiel burton g 1996 random walk wall street ww norton amp co new york markowitz harry 1959 portfolio selection efficient diversification investments john wiley amp sons new york mccloskey donald n 1985 applied theory price 2d ed macmillan new york modigliani franco gerald pogue 1974 introduction risk return financial analysts journal marchapril mayjune roll richard 1977 critique asset pricing theorys tests part 1 past potential testability theory journal financial economics march sharpe william f 1965 risk aversion stock market empirical evidence journal finance v 20 september 416422 sharpe william f 1970 portfolio theory capital markets mcgrawhill new york shipman william 1995 retiring dignity social security vs private markets ssp 2 cato institute washington dc august social security trustees 1997 1997 annual report board trustees federal oldage survivors insurance disability trust funds ways means committee us house representatives april 24 thompson neil 1993 portfolio theory demand money st martins press new york tobin james 1965 theory portfolio selection f hahn fpr brechling eds theory interest rates macmillan london 351 financial assets beat social security real world report john mueller senior vice president amp chief economist lehrman bell mueller cannon inc national committee preserve social security medicare washington dc october 1997 summary retired past 60 years average real return social security payroll taxes 9 exceeded stock market favor privatizing social security replacing payasyougo benefits mandatory financial savings accounts argue future returns financial assets higher return social security average future returns social security point must approximate average growth economy yet average real returns financial assets since 1926 higher 7 portfolio common stocks 5 mix common stocks corporate bonds compared 3 real economic growth however argument assumes investors indifferent risk volatility returns investment investors group riskaverse seek highest possible average return rather highest riskadjusted return nominal returns must adjusted inflation real returns must adjusted risk paper shows adjust returns different investments differences risk average riskadjusted returns 1926 1996 classes financial assets including stock market significantly lower rate economic growth financial returns economic conditions lower average return mature payasyougo social security system difference still larger returns measured net management fees paper also shows riskadjusted return portfolio including social security systematically exceed return portfolio limited financial assets model portfolios recommended privatizers seek write law fail match riskadjusted return steadystate social security conclusion ending payasyougo social security must lower total return retirement saving 160 duggan et al 1993 ii payasyougo means workers current payroll taxes used pay current pensions retired workers iii separate paper economics payasyougo social security economic cost ending examine history economists thinking social security compare economic experience conclude earlier view social security though requires updating respects essentially correct conclusion iv feldstein 1974 feldstein 1977 v feldstein 1997 23 vi word privatize used quotation marks privatization plans government would called upon closely regulate kind investments allowed therefore debatable whether proposed privatize social security socialize private capital markets also economic arguments apply replacing payasyougo social security system financial saving public private hence even privatizers like martin feldstein prefer different word vii ferrara lott 1985 32 viii ferrara lott 1985 32 ix insight usually attributed daniel bernoulli 1738 interesting philosophically quirky history risk theory found bernstein 1996 brief readable slightly technical introduction see measurement utility economics risk mccloskey 1985 chapter 2 x brief comprehensive overview theory research field found maccrimmon amp wehrung 1988 4450 maccrimmon wehrungs study includes experiment like bet described shown comparison graph 1 authors describe flaws studys design point view original purpose p 120 conservative investors accepted smallest bet refused gamble largest results smallest bet skewed toward riskaverse investors largest bet skewed toward least riskaverse purpose current paper fortunate however suggested three distinct subgroups different attitudes toward risk rather single average xi utility function described slightly different two often used theoretical discussions quadratic negative exponential forms two major drawbacks dont seem fit observed facts neither easily calculable investor whose decisions function supposed describe negative exponential form makes people riskaverse seem behave quadratic form lead absurd results explained readable appendix brealey 1969 133139 plainvanilla utility function used paper advantages fitting facts controlled experiments well observed investment returns intuitively appealing making risk premium easy investor calculate marginal utility declines inversely wealth k raised power sgt0 uk ks total utility uk 1 s1ak1s c c scaling constants xii volatility typically measured standard deviation returns standard deviation measured percent 10 standard deviation 0 average return doesnt exactly mean investment likely fall 10 first year rise 10 second happened would 99 original wealth 10 decline 910ths original wealth first year followed 11 gain 109ths second year make loss investors learn think percent gains losses wealth reciprocals wealth using standard deviation measure risk involves limiting assumptions often ignored example requires fluctuations rate return individually random taken together probability calculated socalled normal distribution therefore using standard deviation returns measure risk valid account systematic factors growth economy demography changing perceptions risk least principle predicted moreover events individually unpredictable probability calculated involve uncertainty risk example chance congress unexpectedly change policy affecting social security benefits taxation investments stock market stated matter probabilities finally risk properly applies volatility involving belowaverage aboveaverage returns accordingly proposed different risk measures cases positive negative variance symmetrical since concerned paper make forecast determine happened past take important qualifications account separate paper standard deviation returns serve useful definition risk two justifiably popular surveys research field malkiel 1996 johnson 1988 xiii measurement risk premium amounts investor perceiving return investment including addition average return 5050 side bet either gaining losing amount equal multiple assets volatility measured log standard deviation returns multiple corresponds investors aversion risk riskaverse investors higher multiple side bet represents largest positive negative surprise likely occur within specified percentage time events fact random simple choice yields precise riskreturn tradeoff easily calculated risk premium example saw typical investor seems marginal utility function varies inverse square wealth ratios wealth second power another way interpreting say typical investor appears require 95 certainty dealing random events allowing events might occur 1 year 20 95 random normal variation returns occurs within 2 standard deviations mean extra standard deviation assets return 10 compared riskfree investment required risk premium typical investor 5112 5112 1 182 similarly conservative investor might allow events expected occur least 1 100 random events 99 random events occur within 3 standard deviations mean corresponds marginal utility function varies inversely cube wealth ratios wealth third power risk premium conservative investor asset 10 standard deviation returns 5113 5113 1 412 relatively aggressive investor typical commodity speculator might allow events occur 1 4 times suggests risk aversion factor 15 xiv ibbotson sinquefield 1997 1926 starting date often chosen current standard amp poors 500stock index dates year cowles commission index based goes back least 1880 xv portfolio return determined average return investment also correlation returns different investments xvi duggan et al 1993 10 economists like feldstein argue high rates return social security caused workers save less reducing total national investment separate paper economics payasyougo social security economic cost ending show feldsteins claim based merely redefining investments socalled human capital expenses childrearing education training health safety mobility workers increase earning ability consumption fact high initial rates return social security retirement saving appear played major role financing baby boom massive investment human capital far world history xvii annual data gdp available world war ii using annual data results slightly lower standard deviation monthly data upon ibbotson calculations standard deviation based however offset fact volatility wages therefore return social security somewhat lower gdp calculate portfolio risks also necessary measure correlation gdp class financial asset xviii example hieger shipman 1997 6 xix social security administrative expenses last year comprised 18 billion total expenses 3082 billion 06 social security trustees 1997 8 1926 1996 half growth nominal gdp due inflation administrative expenses would take twice large share real rate return steadystate social security 12 32 growth rate real gdp 004 4 basis points xx 199496 advisory council social security 1997 volume ii 487 text notes fees ira accounts tend higher figures cited morningstar inc 99 basis points equity funds 84 basis points balanced funds 67 basis points corporate bonds 89 basis points government bonds calculations use fees also assume 50 basis points shortterm securities xxi portfolio average real return 36 fees 29 fees portfolios 97 standard deviation requires risk premium 17 leaving riskadjusted real return 12 investor chooses portfolio portfolio higher average return compensates adequately additional risk portfolio lower risk offers high enough average return xxii since risk averse accounts far outnumber relative risktakers presumably true average investor well median investor however median investor appropriate average even single investor absolute aversion risk would raise average risk premium infinity xxiii hieger shipman 1997 6 xxiv ferrara lott 1985 xxv feldstein 1977 feldstein samwick 1997 xxvi shipman 1995 hieger shipman 1997 xxvii addition phasing payasyougo social security would necessarily involve large transition cost last generation covered would pay twice retirement parents finance transition payasyougo payityourself retirement pensions cost ending payasyougo social security estimated separate paper | 4,388 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. Dean Heller and Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval said Friday they won’t support the House health care bill.</p>
<p>Heller reportedly joined a handful of Republican senators in announcing opposition to the beleaguered legislation. That leaves Senate GOP leaders at least two votes shy of what they’d need to pass the plan.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Sandoval and three other GOP governors told congressional leaders that they opposed the proposal in its present form because it takes away flexibility and shifts costs to the states.</p>
<p>The Republican governors have met previously with President Donald Trump and House and Senate leaders in an attempt to formulate legislation that preserves federal funding for Medicaid expansion in their states.</p>
<p>And they said they were encouraged by Trump’s joint speech to Congress where he assured that the GOP replacement to the Affordable Care Act would provide “governors the resources and flexibility they need with Medicaid to make sure no one is left out.”</p>
<p>But Sandoval, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder, all Republicans who expanded Medicaid in their states, said the House replacement bill wending its way through Congress does none of that.</p>
<p>“It provides no new flexibility for states, does not ensure the resources necessary to make sure no one is left out, and shifts significant new costs to states,” the governors said in a letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.</p>
<p>The letter, dated March 16, was obtained Friday as Trump announced his 100 percent support for the bill, which has fractured the Republican caucus. Democrats in both chambers are united in their opposition to the replacement legislation.</p>
<p>‘A GREAT PLAN’</p>
<p>Despite efforts by Ryan to tamp down opposition to the bill in his party, Trump said the health care proposal is in “great shape.”</p>
<p>“It’s a great plan. The press doesn’t give it a fair read, but I’ve heard that before. What are you going to do — the fake news,” Trump said. “But it’s a great plan or I wouldn’t be involved with it.”</p>
<p>Trump made the comments after meeting with conservative House GOP lawmakers who have opposed the replacement bill because it leaves too much of the ACA, known as Obamacare, intact.</p>
<p>Ryan acknowledged Republican opposition to the bill this week, but he said the plan, which emerged from two House committees, is the best chance that the Republican-led Congress has to repeal and replace Obamacare.</p>
<p>The bill, which could receive a full House vote next week, faces even more challenges in the Senate, where Republican senators who represent broader constituencies than GOP House members with smaller districts have voiced concern.</p>
<p>“I agree with Governor Sandoval. I do not support the House bill in its current form,” Heller said in a statement to the Associated Press in Carson City.</p>
<p>Heller joined three fellow GOP senators in opposing the bill: Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah. Republican Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Ted Cruz of Texas also have voiced strong objections.</p>
<p>Republicans have a 52-48 Senate majority.</p>
<p>Several conservative Republicans have said they do not support the House plan because it leaves intact too many regulations that were included in the Obamacare legislation.</p>
<p>Moderates have balked at measures to block funding to Planned Parenthood, and cuts in federal support for Medicaid expansion in states, which would wind down in 2020.</p>
<p>House conservatives with the Republican Study Committee want to ratchet down on Medicaid sooner, curtailing funds to states in 2018 and requiring Medicaid recipients to seek work to be eligible for subsidies.</p>
<p>THE ‘AGE TAX’</p>
<p>Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., said a new analysis by the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging, of which she is a member, showed that the Republican replacement bill, the American Health Care Act, would allow insurance companies to charge older Americans five times more than younger adults.</p>
<p>Current law caps the increase at 3-1.</p>
<p>Cortez Masto said the “age tax” in the Republican plan would raise premiums in Nevada by $1,772 a year for a 60-year-old.</p>
<p>The analysis also showed that Medicaid spending would be reduced by $880 billion, and make Medicaid eligibility more difficult through a number of rule changes.</p>
<p>Kasich met with Trump at the White House earlier this month to urge the administration to seek modifications to Medicaid changes in the House bill.</p>
<p>Sandoval, the National Governors Association vice chairman, also met with administration officials and Republican leaders in Washington, warning that changes in Medicaid funding would have an adverse impact on states.</p>
<p>Nevada is one of 31 states that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare. About 300,000 people were insured under the expansion.</p>
<p>In their letter to Ryan and McConnell, Sandoval and the GOP governors said “we support fundamental reform of the Medicaid entitlement.”</p>
<p>But they said they wanted to see reform that does not penalize expansion and non-expansion states.</p>
<p>“Additionally, we believe Congress should focus first on stabilizing the private insurance market, where the greatest disruption from Obamacare has occurred,” the governors wrote.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at 202-662-7390 or [email protected]. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>RELATED</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Sandoval says overhaul of Affordable Care Act remains a top concern for governors</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Potential repeal of Affordable Care Act leaves uncertainty for Nevada lawmakers, budget</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Think tank: 370,000 Nevadans could lose health insurance with repeal of Affordable Care Act</a></p>
<p>STATES THAT EXPANDED MEDICAID</p>
<p>—14 states with Democratic governors and the District of Columbia</p>
<p>—16 states with Republican governors, including Nevada, Ohio, Michigan and Arkansas</p>
<p>—1 state with an Independent governor, Alaska</p>
<p>—19 states did not expand Medicaid, including Utah and Idaho</p>
<p>—11 million people, including roughly 300,000 in Nevada, became eligible for Medicaid benefits under ACA.</p>
<p>Source: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation</p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington republican sen dean heller nevada gov brian sandoval said friday wont support house health care bill heller reportedly joined handful republican senators announcing opposition beleaguered legislation leaves senate gop leaders least two votes shy theyd need pass plan meanwhile sandoval three gop governors told congressional leaders opposed proposal present form takes away flexibility shifts costs states republican governors met previously president donald trump house senate leaders attempt formulate legislation preserves federal funding medicaid expansion states said encouraged trumps joint speech congress assured gop replacement affordable care act would provide governors resources flexibility need medicaid make sure one left sandoval ohio gov john kasich arkansas gov asa hutchinson michigan gov rick snyder republicans expanded medicaid states said house replacement bill wending way congress none provides new flexibility states ensure resources necessary make sure one left shifts significant new costs states governors said letter house speaker paul ryan rwis senate majority leader mitch mcconnell rky letter dated march 16 obtained friday trump announced 100 percent support bill fractured republican caucus democrats chambers united opposition replacement legislation great plan despite efforts ryan tamp opposition bill party trump said health care proposal great shape great plan press doesnt give fair read ive heard going fake news trump said great plan wouldnt involved trump made comments meeting conservative house gop lawmakers opposed replacement bill leaves much aca known obamacare intact ryan acknowledged republican opposition bill week said plan emerged two house committees best chance republicanled congress repeal replace obamacare bill could receive full house vote next week faces even challenges senate republican senators represent broader constituencies gop house members smaller districts voiced concern agree governor sandoval support house bill current form heller said statement associated press carson city heller joined three fellow gop senators opposing bill susan collins maine rand paul kentucky mike lee utah republican sens tom cotton arkansas ted cruz texas also voiced strong objections republicans 5248 senate majority several conservative republicans said support house plan leaves intact many regulations included obamacare legislation moderates balked measures block funding planned parenthood cuts federal support medicaid expansion states would wind 2020 house conservatives republican study committee want ratchet medicaid sooner curtailing funds states 2018 requiring medicaid recipients seek work eligible subsidies age tax sen catherine cortez masto dnev said new analysis us senate special committee aging member showed republican replacement bill american health care act would allow insurance companies charge older americans five times younger adults current law caps increase 31 cortez masto said age tax republican plan would raise premiums nevada 1772 year 60yearold analysis also showed medicaid spending would reduced 880 billion make medicaid eligibility difficult number rule changes kasich met trump white house earlier month urge administration seek modifications medicaid changes house bill sandoval national governors association vice chairman also met administration officials republican leaders washington warning changes medicaid funding would adverse impact states nevada one 31 states expanded medicaid obamacare 300000 people insured expansion letter ryan mcconnell sandoval gop governors said support fundamental reform medicaid entitlement said wanted see reform penalize expansion nonexpansion states additionally believe congress focus first stabilizing private insurance market greatest disruption obamacare occurred governors wrote contact gary martin 2026627390 gmartinreviewjournalcom follow garymartindc twitter related sandoval says overhaul affordable care act remains top concern governors potential repeal affordable care act leaves uncertainty nevada lawmakers budget think tank 370000 nevadans could lose health insurance repeal affordable care act states expanded medicaid 14 states democratic governors district columbia 16 states republican governors including nevada ohio michigan arkansas 1 state independent governor alaska 19 states expand medicaid including utah idaho 11 million people including roughly 300000 nevada became eligible medicaid benefits aca source henry j kaiser family foundation | 608 |
<p>WASHINGTON — The Trump administration will begin a review on recent national monument declarations, including <a href="" type="internal">Gold Butte in</a> <a href="" type="internal">Nevada</a>, with an eye on changes to the 1906 law that authorized the executive branch to set aside public lands for protection.</p>
<p>President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order on Wednesday at the Department of Interior asking Secretary Ryan Zinke to review national monument declarations over the past two decades.</p>
<p>The executive order will be one of more than 25 the president has signed in the first 100 days of his administration.</p>
<p>“No president has ever called into question any national monument protected under the Antiquities Act until President Trump,” said Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev.</p>
<p>She said the president’s “unprecedented executive order threatens decades’ worth of conservation efforts and could potentially revoke designations to places that have significant cultural and historical value.”</p>
<p>Presidents dating back to Theodore Roosevelt have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to create national monuments, which restrict commercial use of public land. The law, legal experts said, does not give a president authority to rescind a previous declaration.</p>
<p>President Barack Obama in December 2016 designated 335,000 acres in Nevada and 1.3 million acres in Utah as national monuments — calling Gold Butte and Bears Ears cultural, historical and natural treasures.</p>
<p>Republicans in both states decried the designations as a federal overreach, taking away access to commercial interests like cattle grazing and mineral development.</p>
<p>Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., urged Obama not to make the declaration, saying new designations, “especially ones in Nevada,” need to be considered in an open process that would require congressional support.</p>
<p>But then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., as well as tribal leaders, urged Obama to make the Gold Butte designation to protect the land.</p>
<p>Reid and Titus urged Obama to declare 704,000 acres in Lincoln and Nye counties as the Basin and Range National Monument in 2015.</p>
<p>That declaration was criticized by proponents of the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository because the national monument cut off a possible rail route for transportation of waste through Utah.</p>
<p>One of many executive orders</p>
<p>The executive order seeking a review is one of many Trump has signed to roll back Obama-era regulations.</p>
<p>Zinke told the Senate Energy and Commerce Committee this year that he would be open to reviewing recent national monument declarations. He told Cortez Masto he would visit Nevada and talk to stakeholders before completing his review.</p>
<p>The White House is touting orders the president has signed to lessen burdens on business and eliminate regulation that will save $18 billion annually, said Marc Short, the White House legislative liaison officer.</p>
<p>Review of presidential declarations of national monuments will look at restricting public land use for agriculture and industry interests.</p>
<p>“The goal is to look back and review these federal land designations to see if there has been any federal overreach where the government has unnecessarily stepped in a restricted land use on government-owned land,” said Andy Koenig with the White House legislative affairs office.</p>
<p>Short said the review is more about the impact on local landowners, although the review would include the Antiquities Act.</p>
<p>As far as any proposed changes to the 1906 law, Short said the administration would “allow the review process to play out.”</p>
<p>The administration could seek legislative changes to the law, or suggest modifications in acreage or limits to how declarations are made.</p>
<p>Since the Antiquities Act was passed, 16 presidents have designated 152 national monuments using the legislative authority, according to the National Parks Conservation Association.</p>
<p>Supreme Court support</p>
<p>The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld previous use of the act by presidents, despite controversy over the setting aside of public lands, most notably in the Southwest, for conservation and to protect artifacts.</p>
<p>When Congress passed the Antiquities Act in 1906, it granted presidential authority to declare monuments, but gave no authority to reverse a jurisdiction, according to Heidi McIntosh, an attorney forEarthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law organization.</p>
<p>The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, has urged Congress to repeal the law, claiming recent declarations have thwarted economic opportunity and removed states and private citizens from decisions made on land use.</p>
<p>Gold Butte became a flashpoint in 2014 over an armed standoff between federal employees and rancher Cliven Bundy, his family and militiamen.</p>
<p>Bundy is facing a trial in federal court on criminal charges.</p>
<p>After Obama announced his decision on Gold Butte, the Bundy family chastised the president for making “our ranch and home a national monument.”</p>
<p>But environmentalists, Native American leaders and congressional Democrats applauded Obama’s decision to designate Gold Butte as a national monument, in essence closing a gap of public land between Lake Mead and the Grand Canyon to commercial use.</p>
<p>The area would be open to hiking and camping, while protecting a natural habitat for Bighorn Sheep, mountain lions and the Mojave Desert tortoise. It also contains Native American artifacts and historical sites from early pioneer ranchers and Spanish explorers.</p>
<p>The Trump administration’s review of national monument declarations goes back 21 years, to include Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, a 1.9 million-acre reserve established by President Bill Clinton in 1996.</p>
<p>The Salt Lake Tribune first reported the Trump executive order on national monuments earlier this week.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at 202-662-7390 or [email protected]. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>Related</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Trump’s pick to head Interior vows to review Gold Butte designation</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">BLM schedules public forum about Gold Butte National Monument</a></p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington trump administration begin review recent national monument declarations including gold butte nevada eye changes 1906 law authorized executive branch set aside public lands protection president donald trump expected sign executive order wednesday department interior asking secretary ryan zinke review national monument declarations past two decades executive order one 25 president signed first 100 days administration president ever called question national monument protected antiquities act president trump said sen catherine cortez masto dnev said presidents unprecedented executive order threatens decades worth conservation efforts could potentially revoke designations places significant cultural historical value presidents dating back theodore roosevelt used antiquities act 1906 create national monuments restrict commercial use public land law legal experts said give president authority rescind previous declaration president barack obama december 2016 designated 335000 acres nevada 13 million acres utah national monuments calling gold butte bears ears cultural historical natural treasures republicans states decried designations federal overreach taking away access commercial interests like cattle grazing mineral development sen dean heller rnev urged obama make declaration saying new designations especially ones nevada need considered open process would require congressional support thensenate minority leader harry reid dnev rep dina titus dnev well tribal leaders urged obama make gold butte designation protect land reid titus urged obama declare 704000 acres lincoln nye counties basin range national monument 2015 declaration criticized proponents yucca mountain nuclear repository national monument cut possible rail route transportation waste utah one many executive orders executive order seeking review one many trump signed roll back obamaera regulations zinke told senate energy commerce committee year would open reviewing recent national monument declarations told cortez masto would visit nevada talk stakeholders completing review white house touting orders president signed lessen burdens business eliminate regulation save 18 billion annually said marc short white house legislative liaison officer review presidential declarations national monuments look restricting public land use agriculture industry interests goal look back review federal land designations see federal overreach government unnecessarily stepped restricted land use governmentowned land said andy koenig white house legislative affairs office short said review impact local landowners although review would include antiquities act far proposed changes 1906 law short said administration would allow review process play administration could seek legislative changes law suggest modifications acreage limits declarations made since antiquities act passed 16 presidents designated 152 national monuments using legislative authority according national parks conservation association supreme court support us supreme court upheld previous use act presidents despite controversy setting aside public lands notably southwest conservation protect artifacts congress passed antiquities act 1906 granted presidential authority declare monuments gave authority reverse jurisdiction according heidi mcintosh attorney forearthjustice nonprofit environmental law organization heritage foundation conservative think tank urged congress repeal law claiming recent declarations thwarted economic opportunity removed states private citizens decisions made land use gold butte became flashpoint 2014 armed standoff federal employees rancher cliven bundy family militiamen bundy facing trial federal court criminal charges obama announced decision gold butte bundy family chastised president making ranch home national monument environmentalists native american leaders congressional democrats applauded obamas decision designate gold butte national monument essence closing gap public land lake mead grand canyon commercial use area would open hiking camping protecting natural habitat bighorn sheep mountain lions mojave desert tortoise also contains native american artifacts historical sites early pioneer ranchers spanish explorers trump administrations review national monument declarations goes back 21 years include grand staircaseescalante national monument 19 millionacre reserve established president bill clinton 1996 salt lake tribune first reported trump executive order national monuments earlier week contact gary martin 2026627390 gmartinreviewjournalcom follow garymartindc twitter related trumps pick head interior vows review gold butte designation blm schedules public forum gold butte national monument | 606 |
<p>PITTSBURGH — The <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pittsburgh_Steelers/" type="external">Pittsburgh Steelers</a> are 27th in the NFL in rushing and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/LeVeon-Bell/" type="external">Le’Veon Bell</a>, the highest-paid running back in the league, has yet to rush for 100 yards in a game. But head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Tomlin/" type="external">Mike Tomlin</a> isn’t worried about his star back or his highly-paid offensive line underperforming.</p>
<p>Tomlin said falling behind against the Bears prevented the Steelers from running more than they did.</p>
<p>“Last week, I thought we had acceptable yards per carry if you look at Le’Veon’s numbers,” Tomlin said. “Our issue last week was simply volume of runs. When we muffed that punt, we lost a possession in the first half and we gave them a possession. As you go in at halftime after the blocked kick, you’re down by 10 and you’re playing with 30 minutes. You worry about balance as time becomes a factor and you play catch-up football. We simply just didn’t run enough because of circumstances that had nothing to do with the run.</p>
<p>“We got behind in the football game, and you’re going to lose your balance when you do that. They possessed the ball because they were able to run the ball. We lost time of possession because they possessed the ball. None of those things have anything to do directly with the running game. The only issue I feel like we had with our run game in the last game was volume or lack thereof.”</p>
<p>Tomlin’s players have a little more urgency in getting the run game going. Several of them believe it’s essential for it to improve if the Steelers want to get back on the winning track after they were upset by the Bears.</p>
<p>“We’ve gone away from it a little bit,” tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jesse_James/" type="external">Jesse James</a> said. “We were down in the Chicago game and we tried passing our way out of the deficit. That’s happened to us in the past. We have to establish the run and keep it going. We got a penalty on a 10-yard run early in the game against Chicago. I don’t know if that kept them away from that box of the play-call sheet, but we have to keep pounding the run if we want to be successful.”</p>
<p>The opponent this week, the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Baltimore-Ravens/" type="external">Baltimore Ravens</a>, are traditionally strong against the run although they allowed 166 to the Jaguars last week in their 44-7 loss in London.</p>
<p>“The unfortunate part is we’re playing a really good defense this week,” quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ben_Roethlisberger/" type="external">Ben Roethlisberger</a> said. “This defense is opportunistic. They create a lot of turnovers, interceptions especially. We still need to come out and run the ball and almost force run it at times.”</p>
<p>The Steelers opened as 2.5-point favorites in this game. The reason is the struggling Ravens offense. They are dead last in the NFL in total offense (263 yards per game) and tied for 23rd in scoring (17 points per game).</p>
<p>SERIES HISTORY: 43rd regular-season meeting. Steelers lead series, 22-20. The Steelers snapped a four-game losing streak against the Ravens with their 31-27 victory on Christmas Day last year, a win that clinched the AFC North. The Ravens are 12-9 all-time in games played in Baltimore and have won the past four at M&amp;T Bank Stadium. The previous time the Steelers won there was 2012.</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Steelers center Maurkice <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Pouncey/" type="external">Pouncey</a> said Wednesday he was confident the Steelers would have all of their players stand for the national anthem Sunday afternoon in Baltimore.</p>
<p>The Steelers have been criticized for remaining in the tunnel just outside their locker room in Chicago last week. The only Steelers player to go onto the field for the anthem was former Army Ranger Alejandro Villanueva.</p>
<p>“I promise you one thing this week we’ll all be standing out there for the national anthem,” Pouncey said after practice Wednesday. “Trust me. We respect our flag and we respect the military. I think the bigger message was we were trying to stay out of it. That we should be united inside. It was all about the flag. It was just a big misunderstanding. Trust me, I’m very sorry to anyone who feels the way they do. I care about the flag dearly. Trust me, this team will be out there standing Sunday.”</p>
<p>Pouncey also apologized to Steelers fans who were offended by the team not being on the field in Chicago.</p>
<p>“We have to make it right,” Pouncey said. “I honestly think we will go out there and make it right. Our Commander in Chief said one thing and people really took it overboard, and rightfully so, because people have opinions. That’s what America is about. So we can have opinions. But we’re here to play football. We’re not here to play politics.</p>
<p>“We love this country. This is America. Yeah, we know there is injustice in this world. But for me personally, football is for football and that’s how we have to approach it. I tell a lot of the guys if you want to do anything in the offseason or on Tuesdays, Team Pouncey will be there with you. We’ll help you and do whatever you want. But we’re football players.</p>
<p>“I hate that the media tries to put politics in this and all this different stuff. Trust me, this team loves this flag. We love how we represent Al. We feel just as bad as everyone else does. Trust me, we do. This week, we’ll show that. We’re sorry for all of our fans who are upset about the things that went down. I honestly think we’ll come together and this will be all out the window.”</p>
<p>—</p>
<p>Quarterback Ben Roethlisberger reiterated Wednesday what he said Sunday after the loss to the Bears. He feels responsible for the Steelers dropping that game.</p>
<p>Roethlisberger was 22 for 39 for 235 yards passing and missed several open receivers throughout the game.</p>
<p>“I didn’t play well enough to win,” Roethlisberger said. “I feel like we lost the game because of me. That’s how I felt. You have to own it. If I play better in that game I feel like we win that game. If I play better in the first two weeks, we’ll have a more productive offense and we won’t have to answer why our offense is where it is.”</p>
<p>Through three games, the Steelers are 21st in the NFL in total offense (303 yards per game) and tied for 16th in scoring offense (21.3 points per game).</p>
<p>NOTES: T Marcus Gilbert, who missed the Bears game with a hamstring injury, practiced for the first time in more than a week. … OLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/TJ-Watt/" type="external">T.J. Watt</a>, who missed the Bears game with a groin injury, also was a full practice participant. … DE Stephon Tuitt, who missed his second consecutive game with a biceps injury, was a full participant in practice. … OLB Bud Dupree was limited Wednesday with a shoulder injury. … TE Jesse James also was limited Wednesday with a shoulder injury. … S Sean Davis, who sustained an ankle injury against the Bears, did not practice Wednesday. … G Ramon Foster, who left the Bears game with a thumb injury and did not return, did not practice Wednesday. … WR <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Martavis-Bryant/" type="external">Martavis Bryant</a> did not practice Wednesday because of an illness.</p> | false | 1 | pittsburgh pittsburgh steelers 27th nfl rushing leveon bell highestpaid running back league yet rush 100 yards game head coach mike tomlin isnt worried star back highlypaid offensive line underperforming tomlin said falling behind bears prevented steelers running last week thought acceptable yards per carry look leveons numbers tomlin said issue last week simply volume runs muffed punt lost possession first half gave possession go halftime blocked kick youre 10 youre playing 30 minutes worry balance time becomes factor play catchup football simply didnt run enough circumstances nothing run got behind football game youre going lose balance possessed ball able run ball lost time possession possessed ball none things anything directly running game issue feel like run game last game volume lack thereof tomlins players little urgency getting run game going several believe essential improve steelers want get back winning track upset bears weve gone away little bit tight end jesse james said chicago game tried passing way deficit thats happened us past establish run keep going got penalty 10yard run early game chicago dont know kept away box playcall sheet keep pounding run want successful opponent week baltimore ravens traditionally strong run although allowed 166 jaguars last week 447 loss london unfortunate part playing really good defense week quarterback ben roethlisberger said defense opportunistic create lot turnovers interceptions especially still need come run ball almost force run times steelers opened 25point favorites game reason struggling ravens offense dead last nfl total offense 263 yards per game tied 23rd scoring 17 points per game series history 43rd regularseason meeting steelers lead series 2220 steelers snapped fourgame losing streak ravens 3127 victory christmas day last year win clinched afc north ravens 129 alltime games played baltimore past four mampt bank stadium previous time steelers 2012 steelers center maurkice pouncey said wednesday confident steelers would players stand national anthem sunday afternoon baltimore steelers criticized remaining tunnel outside locker room chicago last week steelers player go onto field anthem former army ranger alejandro villanueva promise one thing week well standing national anthem pouncey said practice wednesday trust respect flag respect military think bigger message trying stay united inside flag big misunderstanding trust im sorry anyone feels way care flag dearly trust team standing sunday pouncey also apologized steelers fans offended team field chicago make right pouncey said honestly think go make right commander chief said one thing people really took overboard rightfully people opinions thats america opinions play football play politics love country america yeah know injustice world personally football football thats approach tell lot guys want anything offseason tuesdays team pouncey well help whatever want football players hate media tries put politics different stuff trust team loves flag love represent al feel bad everyone else trust week well show sorry fans upset things went honestly think well come together window quarterback ben roethlisberger reiterated wednesday said sunday loss bears feels responsible steelers dropping game roethlisberger 22 39 235 yards passing missed several open receivers throughout game didnt play well enough win roethlisberger said feel like lost game thats felt play better game feel like win game play better first two weeks well productive offense wont answer offense three games steelers 21st nfl total offense 303 yards per game tied 16th scoring offense 213 points per game notes marcus gilbert missed bears game hamstring injury practiced first time week olb tj watt missed bears game groin injury also full practice participant de stephon tuitt missed second consecutive game biceps injury full participant practice olb bud dupree limited wednesday shoulder injury te jesse james also limited wednesday shoulder injury sean davis sustained ankle injury bears practice wednesday g ramon foster left bears game thumb injury return practice wednesday wr martavis bryant practice wednesday illness | 619 |
<p>I. Introduction</p>
<p>Policymakers are increasingly focused on the rising burden of chronic diseases in the United States, and rightfully so. Chronic diseases such as heart disease, diabetes, and Alzheimer’s account for 75 percent of health care spending nationwide. The onset of debilitating conditions, however, is not always an inevitability. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 80 percent of heart disease and type 2 diabetes cases could be prevented through a combination of healthier diets, improved physical fitness, and no tobacco use. Similarly, WHO estimates that some 40 percent of cancer cases could also be prevented with healthier living.</p>
<p>As awareness of the significant impact of chronic diseases on health and health care costs has grown, policymaker interest in exploring the role public policy might play in reducing the toll also has increased. Certainly, there is great public interest to find ways to ease the disease burden — and possibly the cost burden as well.</p>
<p>Indeed, when the issue of chronic disease prevention and treatment is raised in public policy discussions, inevitably the conversation turns rather quickly to costs — for patients and federal taxpayers alike. Some expect, not unreasonably, that an investment today might lead to reduce cost pressures tomorrow.</p>
<p>In that regard, policymaking in Congress relies heavily on independent, non-partisan estimates of the impact of proposed legislative changes. The ultimate feasibility and, accordingly, political viability of legislative proposals often rests on the determination of the budgetary impact these estimates project. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) produces the estimates of potential policy changes on the federal budget, as well as on the states, for Members of Congress.</p>
<p>Understandably, professional cost estimators are cautious regarding calls to alter the federal costestimating practices and budget processes, particularly given that the information is used for making often politically-charged decisions. However, it is important to examine possible opportunities to simultaneously increase the scientific rigor of cost estimates while enhancing the information provided to policymakers about their policy choices. Our improved understanding of epidemiology and the natural history of certain chronic diseases provides just such an opportunity.</p>
<p>This paper is an attempt to explain the context within which current cost-estimating for health policy proposals occurs. The paper also explores some possible enhancements that could, if done well and in the right context, provide policymakers with better information about certain of their health policy options. The document is intended as a resource for guiding a discussion on these issues among all interested parties.</p>
<p>To place this discussion in context, we examine not only the relationship between chronic disease on current and projected health care costs, but also the challenges associated with evaluating interventions to improve health status and measuring impact. Then, we describe and assess the current budget process and its relationship to the major health care programs, particularly Medicare.</p>
<p>Finally, we explore opportunities to enhance modeling that might more fully capture the costs and savings associated with interventions to improve health. Specifically, we discuss enhancements:</p>
<p>II. Chronic Disease and Health Care Costs</p>
<p>The health policy community increasingly is aware that the cost associated with caring for those with chronic diseases is rising rapidly.</p>
<p>In fact, a large proportion of the American population is already living with chronic conditions. As shown in Figure 1, almost half of all Americans have some form of chronic illness and a greater number are projected to develop chronic conditions over the next few decades. Moreover, many Americans have more than one of these common ailments. By 2025, more than one in four people in America are expected to have two or more chronic illnesses.</p>
<p>For the Medicare population, the problem is already at hand. Figure 2 shows how Medicare spending is dominated by spending on the chronically ill, especially those Medicare beneficiaries with five or more chronic illnesses. The chronically ill not only account for a very large percentage of Medicare spending, but also that percentage has grown over time. Some of this growth may be the result of better screening or other factors, but the stark reality is that any effort to improve the Medicare program and slow the growth in Medicare spending will be unsuccessful if it fails to deal with the dominance of chronic illness.</p>
<p>Recognizing these challenges, CBO has produced important analytical studies on the emerging issue of chronic disease costs. In its 2005 study analyzing high-cost Medicare beneficiaries, CBO found that 5 percent of Medicare beneficiaries with the highest cost health care account for 43 percent of Medicare spending. For these Medicare beneficiaries, health care spending averaged $63,000 a year. The bottom 50 percent of beneficiaries accounted for only 4 percent of spending, with an average cost of $550 per year. These findings are remarkably consistent with spending for the overall US population over the last 40 years. In 1970, the top 5 percent of the US population accounted for 50 percent of total spending. The concentration of spending among a small proportion of beneficiaries has naturally generated interest in finding ways to target policy changes on these significant centers of spending activity.</p>
<p>The CBO analysis also found that three-quarters of high-cost beneficiaries have a major chronic condition (asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic renal failure, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, diabetes, or senility). Although high-cost beneficiaries are more likely to have a chronic disease or condition, not all beneficiaries with a chronic condition are high cost. For instance, a number of chronic conditions were found to be highly prevalent among high-cost beneficiaries, and considerably less prevalent among low-cost beneficiaries. However, because the number of low-cost beneficiaries is three times as large as the number of high-cost beneficiaries, large numbers of low-cost beneficiaries have less severe symptoms from several chronic conditions. So, while diabetes is nearly twice as prevalent among high-cost beneficiaries as it is among low-cost ones, the actual number of low-cost beneficiaries with diabetes greatly exceeds the number of highcost beneficiaries with that condition. This finding will have implications for how CBO assesses the targeting of interventions to improve prevention, treatment and control of these high-cost chronic conditions.</p>
<p>Chronic diseases develop over time — often long periods of time. Without intervention, the health status of the person affected typically progresses from a period of escalating risks of developing a disease to early, often symptom-free stages of illness. Continued progression leads to the recognition of symptoms and/or a clinical diagnosis followed by disease progression and the development of complications. Ultimately, death from the disease itself or associated complications may result. Across this continuum of disease development and progression, there may be opportunities to reduce risks, delay or avoid disease onset, and slow or prevent disease progression and the development of complications.</p>
<p>“Prevention” is a blanket term often used to capture the opportunities to intervene, but important distinctions exist depending on the stage of disease progression at which the preventive intervention is aimed. Pri mary prevention is the preemptive behavior that seeks to avert disease before it develops — for example, encouraging smoking cessation or physical fitness. Secondary prevention is the early detection of disease before symptoms appear, with the aim of preventing or curing it. Examples include mammography and cholesterol screening for people at risk. Tertiary prevention is an attempt to stop or limit the progression of disease that is already present. Examples include foot exams and managing blood glucose levels for people with diabetes and controlling blood pressure for people with hypertension.</p>
<p>Importantly, there could be very different levels of empirical evidence on the effectiveness of such interventions. For instance, although tertiary preventive interventions may come later in the progression of a disease, the direct relationship between such interventions and avoidance of costly complications might be clearer than with a more population-based primary prevention program.</p>
<p>The complete costs or savings of preventive efforts of all types also depend on the interaction between the time it takes for the risk of disease to manifest and progress and the timing of the intervention. This interaction between the “natural history” of the disease and the timing of the intervention is particularly salient as there is often a significant time lag between the act of prevention and the realization of a possible health benefit.</p>
<p>III. The Context for Federal Cost Estimating for Chronic Diseases</p>
<p>The Process of Developing Cost Estimates</p>
<p>Nonpartisan cost-estimating is essential to the legislative process. As official scorekeeper to the Congress, CBO’s cost estimates frequently can be the difference between speedy passage of a lowcost idea and the shelving of a proposal found to be too expensive to be affordable within current budget realities. Policymakers need to know who will be affected by any change and whether the change will cost money, save money or be budget-neutral.</p>
<p>CBO is one of the federal government’s most respected analytical institutions, and for good reason. The agency employs a highly professional staff with substantial expertise in health care policy. Its recent health care publications have included many useful insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the current health care system, which have helped inform policymakers of the challenges ahead. CBO’s efforts to provide long-term projections of health care costs have been particularly useful — and eye-opening. CBO is providing a steady stream of reports to help policymakers understand the challenge presented by rising health care costs.</p>
<p>Both the House and the Senate have standing rules requiring bills reported to the respective chambers to be analyzed for cost implications by CBO. Congress requires cost estimates for taxes or mandatory spending bills project costs over a ten-year period. Changes in health policy are projected for the same time period as a wide range of very different policies, including farm program amendments, tax policy changes, and changes in unemployment benefits.</p>
<p>To address the complex challenges in determining the effect of health policy changes, the CBO has developed rigorous methods to develop their estimates. They incorporate assumptions based upon predicted timeframes for implementation, the extent of adoption within the patient and provider community, and the effect of those policy changes on federal programs over the 10-year budgetary window.</p>
<p>In providing the estimated budgetary impact of a proposed new law, CBO first has to estimate the impact of current law. This estimated level for the budget provides a “baseline” or benchmark against which CBO measures the incremental effects of a new policy. The “score” is the difference between the amount of spending projected in the baseline and the amount that would occur if the scored legislation were enacted.</p>
<p>Cost estimating can be either immensely complex or extremely simple. The cost estimate for increasing the Medicare payment rate for diabetes test strip from $5.00 to $5.25 is a relatively straightforward exercise. Estimating how health plans, pharmaceutical manufacturers, physicians and patients would all respond to a unique new set of incentives in the Medicare Part D drug benefit was immensely complex.</p>
<p>The professional judgment of the CBO staff drives the choice of an analytical approach, assumptions used, and any other key aspects of the cost estimates. In general, the staff attempts to assign costs based both on the expected direct implication of a change in policy and on the possible changes in behavior associated with each proposal.</p>
<p>With respect to health care costs projections, current CBO cost estimating practices represent state-of- the-art of modeling and data analysis, particularly given the history of how Medicare and Medicaid have evolved. Consequently, CBO’s cost estimating has been built primarily around assessment of the implications of various changes in provider payment structures in the Medicare and Medicaid programs.</p>
<p>For Medicare and Medicare baseline expenditures, the CBO relies upon different economic and demographic variables to estimate the number of people receiving services, the cost of those services, and both increases in the costs of medical care and the number of people receiving benefits.</p>
<p>Modeling to Predict Effects of Large Scale Implementation</p>
<p>CBO is also tasked with projecting the large-scale implementation of policy changes that may have been tried in clinical trials, pilot programs, demonstration projects or otherwise implemented on a different scale than the policy change would involve. Extrapolating results is needed for two basic reasons. First, clinical trials and other studies are rarely conducted over long enough periods of time to see major changes in patients’ health. With notable exceptions (e.g. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study), researchers are unable to undertake and sustain long-term clinical trials because of the needs of research careers and the instability of research funding. A second and highly related issue is that clinical trials have typically focused on intermediate outcomes such as change in glucose or blood pressure levels, but not on long-term outcomes such as the development of a chronic disease or complications. As a result, the findings of trials that alter intermediate outcomes need to be extrapolated to understand their long-term implications.</p>
<p>To determine the effect of policy changes and using data from smaller programs to project larger scale policy changes, CBO has developed sophisticated modeling strategies.</p>
<p>A Closer Look at Existing Epidemiological Models and Their Possible Contribution to Cost Estimating: Diabetes Studies/Models</p>
<p>As a costly, long-term disease common among Medicare beneficiaries, diabetes is perhaps the best candidate to demonstrate the potential contribution epidemiological modeling can make to cost estimating in particular and policymaking in general. Over the past decade, diabetes prevention and care have been evaluated routinely using cost-effectiveness analysis techniques to assess their economic value. Because of the long-term nature of the development of diabetes and its complications, it has been necessary in these analyses to utilize disease simulation models that combine epidemiological data and clinical trial data. Disease simulation models allow analysts to more easily extrapolate clinical trial findings over the lifetime of patients.</p>
<p>A consistent history of findings is available from the major models of diabetes complications. The first major model of diabetes complications was a type 1 diabetes model developed by the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The model used DCCT trial data to project the lifetime benefits and costs of intensive glucose control in type 1 diabetes. The analysts found that intensive control was highly cost-effective in this population.</p>
<p>This mode l then was adapted for use by a team led by the head of NIDDK to evaluate the value of different therapies in type 2 diabetes. It helped to illustrate the long-term cost-effectiveness of intensive glucose control applying DCCT data to the lives of patients with type 2 diabetes. These results were confirmed later with the arrival of United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) data, which illustrated the benefits of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. The model also was used to evaluate the value of screening for diabetes, a diabetes prevention strategy.</p>
<p>The CDC/RTI model of diabetes complications later was developed using the NIH model structure in combination with published UKPDS results. This model was designed to simultaneously evaluate the economic value of intensive glucose control, intensive blood pressure control, and intensive cholesterol control if the entire population of diabetes patients actually adopted these therapies. The analysis showed that intensive glucose control and cholesterol control were cost-effective, while intensive blood pressure control was actually a cost-saving therapy. The model also was used to evaluate the economic value of diabetes prevention in individuals with pre-diabetes (impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance) and found that a lifestyle intervention for preventing diabetes was highly cost-effective.</p>
<p>More recently the UKPDS group has developed a comprehensive model of diabetes complications that is based entirely on the UKPDS data. At its core, the model predicts the risk of developing specific diabetes-related complications, diabetes-related mortality, and overall life expectancy of people living with type 2 diabetes based on risk factors such as glucose and blood pressure. The model can be used to project the long-term health benefits of altering these risk factors. This model has been used to calculate the incremental net annual cost of implementing intensive control of blood glucose and blood pressure to all people with diagnosed type 2 diabetes in England (¤100.5 million). The UKPDS group has made its model publicly available for use by researchers and policy analysts.</p>
<p>Other models of diabetes complications have been developed by other academic and industry groups. One of the most notable models is the Archimedes model developed by David Eddy. The model differs from the other complication models in that it sets out to account for basic cellular and organ functioning in the body as it predicts the risks of complications. Most complication models account for the risks of complications by using directly observed epidemiological or clinical trial data.</p>
<p>In some contexts, such as early estimates of potential spending from a prescription drug benefit, different models have yielded very different results. But that is generally not the case with models aimed at predicting the complications which will follow from poorly managed diabetes. The outputs of these models closely track each other, despite differences in model assumptions and inputs. For instance, a recent conference convened to compare the performance of various diabetes models found that their predictions for cardiovascular complications were very similar.</p>
<p>Potential Implications of Diabetes Simulation Models</p>
<p>In other nations diabetes simulation models already are being used by policymakers to guide public health decisions and public health spending. For example, the UKPDS model already is being used for health care planning in the United Kingdom at the national and regional level. In addition, the provincial government of Ontario in Canada and the Mexican government have commissioned analyses that have used the UKPDS model.</p>
<p>In the U.S. context, the simulation models might be used to supplement current estimates with more health-status data based on number of prevalent cases of diabetes over time. In terms of assessing specific health care proposals, these models might play a role in projecting the overall cost implications of tertiary prevention programs as well as chronic care management programs given the long-term impact of such programs.</p>
<p>CBO’s Long-Term Health Projections</p>
<p>Though the Congress requires cost estimates for taxes or mandatory spending bills to project costs over a ten-year period, CBO has built the capacity to make long-term budgetary projections. While not used for official scoring of proposals, these projections have typically been used in testimony, speeches and a series of reports in recent years, including The Long-Term Outlook for Health Care Spending, published in November 2007, and The Long-Term Budget Outlook, published in December 2007. These long-term cost projections have been cited extensively to better inform Congress about the expected dramatic growth in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid programs.</p>
<p>CBO has spent the better part of a decade building a sophisticated microsimulation capacity for Social Security projections and proposal estimation. The model is aimed specifically at assessing the dynamic behavioral effects associated with altered financial incentives in the program over the longrun — namely seventy-five years. CBO’s Social Security model “generates realistic demographic and economic outcomes for a representative sample of the population and then applies tax and benefit rules to that sample in order to draw inferences about the effects of various policy alternatives.”</p>
<p>CBO describes their model as — “A microsimulation model starts with individual data from a representative sample of the population and projects demographic and economic outcomes for that sample through time. In CBOLT [Congressional Budget Office Long-Term projection], the basic demographic processes include fertility, educational attainment, marital transitions, marital partner assignments, and eventual death.”</p>
<p>CBO estimates earnings, for instance, by calculating the predicted labor force participation, hours worked, unemployment status, and wages based on the age, educational level, marital status, birth cohort, number of children in school, and disability status. Incorporated into the equations are permanent and transitory shocks that affect the wages an individual would expect.</p>
<p>To provide a form of confidence interval around its projections, CBO uses a Monte Carlo estimating technique. First, CBO develops functions that relate the input variables (such as age, educational achievement, etc.) to the output (unemployment, for instance). Then, CBO determines a probability for each outcome based on each set of inputs. The final step is assigning random numbers to each input set, which are used to assign outcomes by probability. Repeating this procedure allows CBO to produce probability distributions of various outcomes for each set of inputs.</p>
<p>Although the main focus of the model is Social Security, in a conversation with the authors, CBO analysts explained that it has begun to add health inputs and outputs to its model, but it knows it will take some time before a workable approach to modeling long-term health outcome trends is ready for use.</p>
<p>In this longer term modeling, if CBO assumed current health spending growth rates, 100 percent of the American economy would be consumed on health care. At the same time, they do not want to make too strong an assumption that Congress will act to slow growth and thus leave Congress the impression that the spending trend will slow on its own, so no Congressional actions is required. They attempt to strike a balance assuming instead that private and public participants in health care will have to pursue cost-cutting to slow spending growth below the rates seen in the past. Even with this moderate set of assumptions, CBO still sees dramatic increases in health costs in the future, with total public and private spending on health increasing from 15 percent of GDP today and 49 percent in 2082.</p>
<p>IV. Discussion: Exploring Possible Cost Estimating</p>
<p>Improvements trong&gt;</p>
<p>Professional cost estimators are cautious regarding calls to alter the federal cost-estimating practices and budget processes, which is understandable given the implications their estimates bear on the fate of policy proposals and their need to remain non-partisan. While caution is certainly understandable, it is important to both consider and pursue opportunities to enhance the quality of information provided to policymakers.</p>
<p>a. Reflection of best epidemiologic trend data in baseline estimates</p>
<p>In forming the basis for determining how changes to health policy will affect federal spending, the baseline assumptions of costs should to the extent possible reflect the current and future health status of the population. This is particularly relevant today in the context of obesity trends, which are alarming and will likely have a significant impact on spending under current law.</p>
<p>According to the CDC, almost 60 percent of adults in America are overweight and 34 percent are obese. Among adults (aged 40-59), many of whom will enter Medicare over the next decade, obesity prevalence is 40 percent. Research on obesity among Medicare beneficiaries has shown that obese Medicare beneficiaries incur significantly higher lifetime medical costs than their normal weight peers. Researchers found that obese seventy-year olds will live about as long as those of normal weight, but will spend $39,000 more on healthcare. Obese beneficiaries also experienced almost three years more years of disability than their normal weight peers, two years of which involved moderate to severe levels of disability. The stark difference in disability levels led the authors to conclude that the costs of disability may contribute an even greater difference than the overall costs of obesity.</p>
<p>Baseline estimates are important because they indicate both what will happen under current law and are the measurements against which a new policy is assessed. Thus, it is important in the case of chronic illness to ensure that baseline estimates fully reflect the health risk associated with current societal trends. In particular, obesity trends could have a significant impact on policies aimed at heading off or improving the management of diabetes, heart disease, and other obesity-related chronic conditions.</p>
<p>b. Extending the Budget Window in Selected Instances</p>
<p>Given the lengthy, natural course of chronic diseases and the difference in time between a health care intervention and realizing its impact, measuring the results of some interventions requires a longerterm perspective. In the area of health care policy for chronic illnesses, a 10-year cost projection period may not be long enough to make sound policy because it does not fully capture the health outcome and cost implications of certain alternative policy scenarios.</p>
<p>Type 2 diabetes mellitus provides a prototypical example of this phenomenon. Diabetes results from the progressive failure of the body to regulate insulin and process blood glucose. The early stages are often asymptomatic, making detection and accordingly acting to avoid the realization of escalating risks of developing diabetes difficult. Full onset of type 2 diabetes can progress toward the development of the range of complications related to diabetes. These complications include kidney disease (e.g., end-stage renal disease), stoke, blindness, heart disease and amputation. Type 2 diabetes typically develops in middle-aged or older individuals, many of whom may have been in the early, symptom-free stages for several years. Given the lack of symptoms in the early stages, a person affected may not seek care and receive an actual diagnosis of diabetes for years.</p>
<p>It can also take many years before the complications of diabetes appear. This long time period has the advantage of offering many opportunities to slow or avoid the onset of the disease, its progression, and the development of complications. However, as a result of this lengthy natural history, the positive effects of improved prevention, treatment and control of diabetes also often take time to show any positive and significant effects. In clinical trials sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of intensive glucose control, it has been found to require up to 9 years of therapy before reductions in complications and therefore reductions in spending are realized.</p>
<p>But when they are, in fact, realized, the improvements are dramatic and highly consequential in health status and cost terms. As shown in Figure 4, within the first ten years of an aggressive intervention, the amount of health care costs averted from an intensive protocol compared to a conventional one is rather small — only about $400 in the tenth year. However, from there, the costs averted grow dramatically, reaching more than $2000 per year per person by year twenty.</p>
<p>Cost estimates used in the Congressional budget process which cover only ten years cannot capture much of this information.</p>
<p>In contrast to the timing of treatment effect for intensive glucose control, other components of diabetes care such as intensive blood pressure and cholesterol control have far shorter time to treatment effects. This timing of treatment effects has important implications for studies evaluating the costs associated with efforts to prevent diabetes and/or improve the delivery of diabetes care.</p>
<p>Who bears the costs and who enjoys the savings is also affected by this interaction between the “natural history” of the disease and the timing of the intervention. For the typical middle-aged working individual who develops Type 2 diabetes, the initial costs of treatment fall on the patient’s insurer, typically an employer or Medicaid and on the patient themselves as either cost sharing for the insured and full costs for the uninsured. Complications may develop well after retirement and after the individual becomes Medicare eligible.</p>
<p>If prevention and treatment inventions are implemented, employers and/or Medicaid will bear much of the costs of the interventions. Employers and/or Medicaid also will reap much of the savings that occur prior to Medicare eligibility. After Medicare becomes the primary insurer, employers and/or Medicaid will typically become the secondary payer. While employers and/or Medicaid will see some of the savings from these interventions, Medicare will see the majority of the savings.</p>
<p>If prevention and treatment inventions are not implemented, employers and/or Medicaid save the costs of the interventions, and incur most of the costs of complications prior to Medicare eligibility and a smaller percentage after Medicare eligibility. Ultimately, however, Medicare will bear most of the burden of the costs of complications that develop late in life.</p>
<p>Apart from consideration of the natural history of disease, it may be important to reconsider the traditional budgetary timeframe simply because of the potential threat of the long-term health care cost problems for the economy. As the CBO Director and the Comptroller General of the United States have stated, the most important threat to the nation’s economic strength over the long run is the coming explosion in governmental health care spending in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. But today’s budget process does not provide a full perspective on the problem.</p>
<p>Long-term cost-estimates need not be done for all legislation, however. It could be that Congress maintains a ten-year perspective for most legislation but gets longer-term estimates when the policy and data call for it. For instance, in the case of chronic diseases, cost estimates could be provided beyond ten years when the modeling capacity is viewed as sufficiently robust to capture the health and cost consequences over a somewhat longer period of time, such as twenty-five years.</p>
<p>Once a modeling capacity is in place for certain conditions, the budgetary context could be examined to determine how to the information might be used within the existing budget enforcement regim e. For instance, Congress could consider using special rules under the pay-as-you-go procedure to capture budget information beyond ten years, when warranted.</p>
<p>Conclusion</p>
<p>In coming decades, the country will be facing very different health care problems than those we confronted in the last century. While science and technology have made dramatic advances in health and longevity, we still face dramatic increases in chronic disease burden in the future if no policy changes are made.</p>
<p>In this context, it is inevitable that policymakers will become increasingly interested in pursuing policies that can both prevent the expected rise in disease burden and head off expensive public commitments to care for the chronically ill.</p>
<p>Current cost estimating practices and the budget process they inform both provide important safeguards for ensuring a disciplined budget process. These practices, by and large, should remain in place as they exist today, if not with additional safeguards to further encourage restraint.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, to make sound policy, lawmakers and others in the policy process need sound information, and today’s methods and procedures may not work as well as needed in the context of certain efforts to prevent costly complications chronic diseases. Being able to capture the impact of current health status trends and the growing prevalence of chronic disease in policy efforts to improve health would provide lawmakers with valuable information.</p>
<p>Sound policymaking for diabetes interventions and other chronic conditions with similar natural histories is likely to require cost estimates beyond ten years. These estimates will also need to incorporate the latest, most rigorous evidence from clinical medicine regarding the health status changes that might be expected from various interventions.</p>
<p>Current cost estimating practices will need to be re-tooled to help policymakers carefully examine such questions. The possible avenues for improved estimating presented in this paper should be explored aggressively to determine if they would add valuable information and thus improve policy.</p>
<p>About the Authors: James C. Capretta, is a Director of Health Policy Consulting at Civic Enterprises, LLC and a Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. From January 2001 to May 2004, Mr. Capretta served as an associate director in the White House Office of Management and Budget, with responsibility for health care, Social Security, education, and labor issues. Prior to joining the White House in 2001, Mr. Capretta served for nearly a decade as a Senior Policy Analyst on the Republican Staff for the U.S. Senate Budget Committee, handling health care and Social Security issues, and as a Professional Staff Member of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Health. Mr. Capretta began his career as a budget examiner at OMB from 1987 to 1990 after graduating with an M.A. in Public Policy Studies from Duke University. He graduated from the University of Notre Dame in 1985, receiving a B.A. in Government.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>Michael J. O’Grady, Ph.D. is a Senior Fellow at the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago and Principal of O’Grady Health Policy LLC, a private health policy consulting firm. He is a veteran health policy expert with 24 years working in Congress and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). As the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation at HHS, a senior health advisor at the Senate Finance Committee, the Joint Economic Committee, and three congressionally mandated Medicare Commissions, he has shaped critical legislation and Federal policy and programs tackling some of the most complex and controversial health issues facing the country. He has an outstanding reputation for developing innovative, realistic solutions and knowing how to guide them through the complex political process. He is nationally known for his work on Medicare, Medicaid, and the uninsured. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Rochester.</p> | false | 1 | introduction policymakers increasingly focused rising burden chronic diseases united states rightfully chronic diseases heart disease diabetes alzheimers account 75 percent health care spending nationwide onset debilitating conditions however always inevitability according world health organization 80 percent heart disease type 2 diabetes cases could prevented combination healthier diets improved physical fitness tobacco use similarly estimates 40 percent cancer cases could also prevented healthier living awareness significant impact chronic diseases health health care costs grown policymaker interest exploring role public policy might play reducing toll also increased certainly great public interest find ways ease disease burden possibly cost burden well indeed issue chronic disease prevention treatment raised public policy discussions inevitably conversation turns rather quickly costs patients federal taxpayers alike expect unreasonably investment today might lead reduce cost pressures tomorrow regard policymaking congress relies heavily independent nonpartisan estimates impact proposed legislative changes ultimate feasibility accordingly political viability legislative proposals often rests determination budgetary impact estimates project nonpartisan congressional budget office cbo produces estimates potential policy changes federal budget well states members congress understandably professional cost estimators cautious regarding calls alter federal costestimating practices budget processes particularly given information used making often politicallycharged decisions however important examine possible opportunities simultaneously increase scientific rigor cost estimates enhancing information provided policymakers policy choices improved understanding epidemiology natural history certain chronic diseases provides opportunity paper attempt explain context within current costestimating health policy proposals occurs paper also explores possible enhancements could done well right context provide policymakers better information certain health policy options document intended resource guiding discussion issues among interested parties place discussion context examine relationship chronic disease current projected health care costs also challenges associated evaluating interventions improve health status measuring impact describe assess current budget process relationship major health care programs particularly medicare finally explore opportunities enhance modeling might fully capture costs savings associated interventions improve health specifically discuss enhancements ii chronic disease health care costs health policy community increasingly aware cost associated caring chronic diseases rising rapidly fact large proportion american population already living chronic conditions shown figure 1 almost half americans form chronic illness greater number projected develop chronic conditions next decades moreover many americans one common ailments 2025 one four people america expected two chronic illnesses medicare population problem already hand figure 2 shows medicare spending dominated spending chronically ill especially medicare beneficiaries five chronic illnesses chronically ill account large percentage medicare spending also percentage grown time growth may result better screening factors stark reality effort improve medicare program slow growth medicare spending unsuccessful fails deal dominance chronic illness recognizing challenges cbo produced important analytical studies emerging issue chronic disease costs 2005 study analyzing highcost medicare beneficiaries cbo found 5 percent medicare beneficiaries highest cost health care account 43 percent medicare spending medicare beneficiaries health care spending averaged 63000 year bottom 50 percent beneficiaries accounted 4 percent spending average cost 550 per year findings remarkably consistent spending overall us population last 40 years 1970 top 5 percent us population accounted 50 percent total spending concentration spending among small proportion beneficiaries naturally generated interest finding ways target policy changes significant centers spending activity cbo analysis also found threequarters highcost beneficiaries major chronic condition asthma chronic obstructive pulmonary disease chronic renal failure congestive heart failure coronary artery disease diabetes senility although highcost beneficiaries likely chronic disease condition beneficiaries chronic condition high cost instance number chronic conditions found highly prevalent among highcost beneficiaries considerably less prevalent among lowcost beneficiaries however number lowcost beneficiaries three times large number highcost beneficiaries large numbers lowcost beneficiaries less severe symptoms several chronic conditions diabetes nearly twice prevalent among highcost beneficiaries among lowcost ones actual number lowcost beneficiaries diabetes greatly exceeds number highcost beneficiaries condition finding implications cbo assesses targeting interventions improve prevention treatment control highcost chronic conditions chronic diseases develop time often long periods time without intervention health status person affected typically progresses period escalating risks developing disease early often symptomfree stages illness continued progression leads recognition symptoms andor clinical diagnosis followed disease progression development complications ultimately death disease associated complications may result across continuum disease development progression may opportunities reduce risks delay avoid disease onset slow prevent disease progression development complications prevention blanket term often used capture opportunities intervene important distinctions exist depending stage disease progression preventive intervention aimed pri mary prevention preemptive behavior seeks avert disease develops example encouraging smoking cessation physical fitness secondary prevention early detection disease symptoms appear aim preventing curing examples include mammography cholesterol screening people risk tertiary prevention attempt stop limit progression disease already present examples include foot exams managing blood glucose levels people diabetes controlling blood pressure people hypertension importantly could different levels empirical evidence effectiveness interventions instance although tertiary preventive interventions may come later progression disease direct relationship interventions avoidance costly complications might clearer populationbased primary prevention program complete costs savings preventive efforts types also depend interaction time takes risk disease manifest progress timing intervention interaction natural history disease timing intervention particularly salient often significant time lag act prevention realization possible health benefit iii context federal cost estimating chronic diseases process developing cost estimates nonpartisan costestimating essential legislative process official scorekeeper congress cbos cost estimates frequently difference speedy passage lowcost idea shelving proposal found expensive affordable within current budget realities policymakers need know affected change whether change cost money save money budgetneutral cbo one federal governments respected analytical institutions good reason agency employs highly professional staff substantial expertise health care policy recent health care publications included many useful insights strengths weaknesses current health care system helped inform policymakers challenges ahead cbos efforts provide longterm projections health care costs particularly useful eyeopening cbo providing steady stream reports help policymakers understand challenge presented rising health care costs house senate standing rules requiring bills reported respective chambers analyzed cost implications cbo congress requires cost estimates taxes mandatory spending bills project costs tenyear period changes health policy projected time period wide range different policies including farm program amendments tax policy changes changes unemployment benefits address complex challenges determining effect health policy changes cbo developed rigorous methods develop estimates incorporate assumptions based upon predicted timeframes implementation extent adoption within patient provider community effect policy changes federal programs 10year budgetary window providing estimated budgetary impact proposed new law cbo first estimate impact current law estimated level budget provides baseline benchmark cbo measures incremental effects new policy score difference amount spending projected baseline amount would occur scored legislation enacted cost estimating either immensely complex extremely simple cost estimate increasing medicare payment rate diabetes test strip 500 525 relatively straightforward exercise estimating health plans pharmaceutical manufacturers physicians patients would respond unique new set incentives medicare part drug benefit immensely complex professional judgment cbo staff drives choice analytical approach assumptions used key aspects cost estimates general staff attempts assign costs based expected direct implication change policy possible changes behavior associated proposal respect health care costs projections current cbo cost estimating practices represent stateof theart modeling data analysis particularly given history medicare medicaid evolved consequently cbos cost estimating built primarily around assessment implications various changes provider payment structures medicare medicaid programs medicare medicare baseline expenditures cbo relies upon different economic demographic variables estimate number people receiving services cost services increases costs medical care number people receiving benefits modeling predict effects large scale implementation cbo also tasked projecting largescale implementation policy changes may tried clinical trials pilot programs demonstration projects otherwise implemented different scale policy change would involve extrapolating results needed two basic reasons first clinical trials studies rarely conducted long enough periods time see major changes patients health notable exceptions eg united kingdom prospective diabetes study researchers unable undertake sustain longterm clinical trials needs research careers instability research funding second highly related issue clinical trials typically focused intermediate outcomes change glucose blood pressure levels longterm outcomes development chronic disease complications result findings trials alter intermediate outcomes need extrapolated understand longterm implications determine effect policy changes using data smaller programs project larger scale policy changes cbo developed sophisticated modeling strategies closer look existing epidemiological models possible contribution cost estimating diabetes studiesmodels costly longterm disease common among medicare beneficiaries diabetes perhaps best candidate demonstrate potential contribution epidemiological modeling make cost estimating particular policymaking general past decade diabetes prevention care evaluated routinely using costeffectiveness analysis techniques assess economic value longterm nature development diabetes complications necessary analyses utilize disease simulation models combine epidemiological data clinical trial data disease simulation models allow analysts easily extrapolate clinical trial findings lifetime patients consistent history findings available major models diabetes complications first major model diabetes complications type 1 diabetes model developed diabetes control complications trial research group model used dcct trial data project lifetime benefits costs intensive glucose control type 1 diabetes analysts found intensive control highly costeffective population mode l adapted use team led head niddk evaluate value different therapies type 2 diabetes helped illustrate longterm costeffectiveness intensive glucose control applying dcct data lives patients type 2 diabetes results confirmed later arrival united kingdom prospective diabetes study ukpds data illustrated benefits intensive glucose control type 2 diabetes model also used evaluate value screening diabetes diabetes prevention strategy cdcrti model diabetes complications later developed using nih model structure combination published ukpds results model designed simultaneously evaluate economic value intensive glucose control intensive blood pressure control intensive cholesterol control entire population diabetes patients actually adopted therapies analysis showed intensive glucose control cholesterol control costeffective intensive blood pressure control actually costsaving therapy model also used evaluate economic value diabetes prevention individuals prediabetes impaired fasting glucose impaired glucose tolerance found lifestyle intervention preventing diabetes highly costeffective recently ukpds group developed comprehensive model diabetes complications based entirely ukpds data core model predicts risk developing specific diabetesrelated complications diabetesrelated mortality overall life expectancy people living type 2 diabetes based risk factors glucose blood pressure model used project longterm health benefits altering risk factors model used calculate incremental net annual cost implementing intensive control blood glucose blood pressure people diagnosed type 2 diabetes england 1005 million ukpds group made model publicly available use researchers policy analysts models diabetes complications developed academic industry groups one notable models archimedes model developed david eddy model differs complication models sets account basic cellular organ functioning body predicts risks complications complication models account risks complications using directly observed epidemiological clinical trial data contexts early estimates potential spending prescription drug benefit different models yielded different results generally case models aimed predicting complications follow poorly managed diabetes outputs models closely track despite differences model assumptions inputs instance recent conference convened compare performance various diabetes models found predictions cardiovascular complications similar potential implications diabetes simulation models nations diabetes simulation models already used policymakers guide public health decisions public health spending example ukpds model already used health care planning united kingdom national regional level addition provincial government ontario canada mexican government commissioned analyses used ukpds model us context simulation models might used supplement current estimates healthstatus data based number prevalent cases diabetes time terms assessing specific health care proposals models might play role projecting overall cost implications tertiary prevention programs well chronic care management programs given longterm impact programs cbos longterm health projections though congress requires cost estimates taxes mandatory spending bills project costs tenyear period cbo built capacity make longterm budgetary projections used official scoring proposals projections typically used testimony speeches series reports recent years including longterm outlook health care spending published november 2007 longterm budget outlook published december 2007 longterm cost projections cited extensively better inform congress expected dramatic growth social security medicare medicaid programs cbo spent better part decade building sophisticated microsimulation capacity social security projections proposal estimation model aimed specifically assessing dynamic behavioral effects associated altered financial incentives program longrun namely seventyfive years cbos social security model generates realistic demographic economic outcomes representative sample population applies tax benefit rules sample order draw inferences effects various policy alternatives cbo describes model microsimulation model starts individual data representative sample population projects demographic economic outcomes sample time cbolt congressional budget office longterm projection basic demographic processes include fertility educational attainment marital transitions marital partner assignments eventual death cbo estimates earnings instance calculating predicted labor force participation hours worked unemployment status wages based age educational level marital status birth cohort number children school disability status incorporated equations permanent transitory shocks affect wages individual would expect provide form confidence interval around projections cbo uses monte carlo estimating technique first cbo develops functions relate input variables age educational achievement etc output unemployment instance cbo determines probability outcome based set inputs final step assigning random numbers input set used assign outcomes probability repeating procedure allows cbo produce probability distributions various outcomes set inputs although main focus model social security conversation authors cbo analysts explained begun add health inputs outputs model knows take time workable approach modeling longterm health outcome trends ready use longer term modeling cbo assumed current health spending growth rates 100 percent american economy would consumed health care time want make strong assumption congress act slow growth thus leave congress impression spending trend slow congressional actions required attempt strike balance assuming instead private public participants health care pursue costcutting slow spending growth rates seen past even moderate set assumptions cbo still sees dramatic increases health costs future total public private spending health increasing 15 percent gdp today 49 percent 2082 iv discussion exploring possible cost estimating improvements tronggt professional cost estimators cautious regarding calls alter federal costestimating practices budget processes understandable given implications estimates bear fate policy proposals need remain nonpartisan caution certainly understandable important consider pursue opportunities enhance quality information provided policymakers reflection best epidemiologic trend data baseline estimates forming basis determining changes health policy affect federal spending baseline assumptions costs extent possible reflect current future health status population particularly relevant today context obesity trends alarming likely significant impact spending current law according cdc almost 60 percent adults america overweight 34 percent obese among adults aged 4059 many enter medicare next decade obesity prevalence 40 percent research obesity among medicare beneficiaries shown obese medicare beneficiaries incur significantly higher lifetime medical costs normal weight peers researchers found obese seventyyear olds live long normal weight spend 39000 healthcare obese beneficiaries also experienced almost three years years disability normal weight peers two years involved moderate severe levels disability stark difference disability levels led authors conclude costs disability may contribute even greater difference overall costs obesity baseline estimates important indicate happen current law measurements new policy assessed thus important case chronic illness ensure baseline estimates fully reflect health risk associated current societal trends particular obesity trends could significant impact policies aimed heading improving management diabetes heart disease obesityrelated chronic conditions b extending budget window selected instances given lengthy natural course chronic diseases difference time health care intervention realizing impact measuring results interventions requires longerterm perspective area health care policy chronic illnesses 10year cost projection period may long enough make sound policy fully capture health outcome cost implications certain alternative policy scenarios type 2 diabetes mellitus provides prototypical example phenomenon diabetes results progressive failure body regulate insulin process blood glucose early stages often asymptomatic making detection accordingly acting avoid realization escalating risks developing diabetes difficult full onset type 2 diabetes progress toward development range complications related diabetes complications include kidney disease eg endstage renal disease stoke blindness heart disease amputation type 2 diabetes typically develops middleaged older individuals many may early symptomfree stages several years given lack symptoms early stages person affected may seek care receive actual diagnosis diabetes years also take many years complications diabetes appear long time period advantage offering many opportunities slow avoid onset disease progression development complications however result lengthy natural history positive effects improved prevention treatment control diabetes also often take time show positive significant effects clinical trials sponsored national institutes health nih intensive glucose control found require 9 years therapy reductions complications therefore reductions spending realized fact realized improvements dramatic highly consequential health status cost terms shown figure 4 within first ten years aggressive intervention amount health care costs averted intensive protocol compared conventional one rather small 400 tenth year however costs averted grow dramatically reaching 2000 per year per person year twenty cost estimates used congressional budget process cover ten years capture much information contrast timing treatment effect intensive glucose control components diabetes care intensive blood pressure cholesterol control far shorter time treatment effects timing treatment effects important implications studies evaluating costs associated efforts prevent diabetes andor improve delivery diabetes care bears costs enjoys savings also affected interaction natural history disease timing intervention typical middleaged working individual develops type 2 diabetes initial costs treatment fall patients insurer typically employer medicaid patient either cost sharing insured full costs uninsured complications may develop well retirement individual becomes medicare eligible prevention treatment inventions implemented employers andor medicaid bear much costs interventions employers andor medicaid also reap much savings occur prior medicare eligibility medicare becomes primary insurer employers andor medicaid typically become secondary payer employers andor medicaid see savings interventions medicare see majority savings prevention treatment inventions implemented employers andor medicaid save costs interventions incur costs complications prior medicare eligibility smaller percentage medicare eligibility ultimately however medicare bear burden costs complications develop late life apart consideration natural history disease may important reconsider traditional budgetary timeframe simply potential threat longterm health care cost problems economy cbo director comptroller general united states stated important threat nations economic strength long run coming explosion governmental health care spending medicare medicaid programs todays budget process provide full perspective problem longterm costestimates need done legislation however could congress maintains tenyear perspective legislation gets longerterm estimates policy data call instance case chronic diseases cost estimates could provided beyond ten years modeling capacity viewed sufficiently robust capture health cost consequences somewhat longer period time twentyfive years modeling capacity place certain conditions budgetary context could examined determine information might used within existing budget enforcement regim e instance congress could consider using special rules payasyougo procedure capture budget information beyond ten years warranted conclusion coming decades country facing different health care problems confronted last century science technology made dramatic advances health longevity still face dramatic increases chronic disease burden future policy changes made context inevitable policymakers become increasingly interested pursuing policies prevent expected rise disease burden head expensive public commitments care chronically ill current cost estimating practices budget process inform provide important safeguards ensuring disciplined budget process practices large remain place exist today additional safeguards encourage restraint nonetheless make sound policy lawmakers others policy process need sound information todays methods procedures may work well needed context certain efforts prevent costly complications chronic diseases able capture impact current health status trends growing prevalence chronic disease policy efforts improve health would provide lawmakers valuable information sound policymaking diabetes interventions chronic conditions similar natural histories likely require cost estimates beyond ten years estimates also need incorporate latest rigorous evidence clinical medicine regarding health status changes might expected various interventions current cost estimating practices need retooled help policymakers carefully examine questions possible avenues improved estimating presented paper explored aggressively determine would add valuable information thus improve policy authors james c capretta director health policy consulting civic enterprises llc fellow ethics public policy center january 2001 may 2004 mr capretta served associate director white house office management budget responsibility health care social security education labor issues prior joining white house 2001 mr capretta served nearly decade senior policy analyst republican staff us senate budget committee handling health care social security issues professional staff member house ways means subcommittee health mr capretta began career budget examiner omb 1987 1990 graduating public policy studies duke university graduated university notre dame 1985 receiving ba government 160 michael j ogrady phd senior fellow national opinion research center norc university chicago principal ogrady health policy llc private health policy consulting firm veteran health policy expert 24 years working congress department health human services hhs assistant secretary planning evaluation hhs senior health advisor senate finance committee joint economic committee three congressionally mandated medicare commissions shaped critical legislation federal policy programs tackling complex controversial health issues facing country outstanding reputation developing innovative realistic solutions knowing guide complex political process nationally known work medicare medicaid uninsured holds phd political science university rochester | 3,305 |
<p>A U.S. proposal for Mexico and Canada to vastly raise the value of online purchases that can be imported duty-free from stores like Amazon.com and eBay is emerging as a flashpoint in an upcoming renegotiation of the NAFTA trade deal.</p>
<p>Vulnerable industries like footwear, textiles and bricks and mortar retail in Mexico and Canada are pushing back hard against the proposal by the U.S. trade representative to raise Mexican and Canadian duty-free import limits for e-commerce to the U.S. level of $800, from current thresholds of $50 and C$20, respectively.</p>
<p>For the Mexicans, the main worry is that such a move could open a back door for cheap imports from Asia and beyond. For Canadian retailers, the fear is that e-commerce companies will undercut their prices.</p>
<p>The U.S. plan was unveiled in July as part of the Trump administration’s goals to renegotiate the 25-year-old treaty.</p>
<p>While Mexico and Canada are still formulating their responses, Mexico City is leaning strongly against the proposal in its current form, and Ottawa may not be far behind.</p>
<p>The proposed $800 level “opens a completely unnecessary door” to imports from outside the NAFTA trading bloc, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo said on Thursday on the sidelines of a NAFTA-related event, calling it “a very sensitive topic.”</p>
<p>The growing controversy over how to account for a burgeoning regional e-commerce sector dominated by the United States highlights a rare area where the Trump administration is pushing to liberalize trade rules rather than tightening them.</p>
<p>Much of Trump’s criticism of NAFTA stems from his belief it has decimated U.S. manufacturing as companies shifted production to Mexican factories with cheaper labor, creating a U.S. trade deficit with Mexico worth more than $60 billion.</p>
<p>TOP PRIORITY</p>
<p>But Mexican and Canadian business leaders fear the rule change could make their industries vulnerable, arguing that unless online retailers can show products are made in North America, they should not be exempted from duties levied on other imports.</p>
<p>“We can’t open the door to inputs from outside the region coming in tax-free when we’re talking about the need to reduce the deficit and create jobs,” said Moises Kalach, who fronts the international negotiating arm of Mexico’s CCE business lobby. “It goes completely against that.”</p>
<p>Guajardo said Mexico’s retail group the National Self-service and Department Store Association, which includes powerful members such as Wal-Mart de Mexico, had visited him last week to express concerns about the proposal.</p>
<p>He said the group’s representative brought to the meeting a $250 jacket bought on the internet as evidence that violations to the existing limit were already threatening members’ businesses.</p>
<p>A package of the FedEx courier delivery services company is pictured in this June 8, 2017 illustration photo.Carlos Jasso/Illustration</p>
<p>“Suppose there was an $800 free limit. Can you imagine how many shirts Vietnam could send to Mexico in a packet below that price? They could easily flood us with packets of 100,” he said, while recognizing the need to smooth customs processes.</p>
<p>Complicating efforts to agree on a common set of rules is a tangle of diverging regulations on tax and how the restrictions on imports differ in the region depending on whether they enter by air, sea or land.</p>
<p>Amazon.com Inc and eBay Inc declined to comment for this story.</p>
<p>eBay has previously said it supports an increase to Canada’s low-value customs ‘de minimis’ threshold for ecommerce to promote seamless access to the global marketplace.” Increasing the threshold “absolutely” is eBay’s top priority in the NAFTA renegotiation, a person familiar with the matter said.</p>
<p>The logo of the web service Amazon is pictured in this June 8, 2017 illustration photo.Carlos Jasso/Illustration</p>
<p>Canadian opposition is being led by retailers, whose industry association said it was concerned about “the behavioral shift that would inevitably result if shoppers can buy a far wider range and higher value of goods tax-free and duty-free.”</p>
<p>The Retail Council of Canada said in a submission to the government that clothes, books, toys, sporting goods and consumer electronics would be among the items most affected, and expressed confidence Ottawa would fend off such requests.</p>
<p>NOT FROM OTHER NATIONS</p>
<p>“eBay in particular has lead this charge to three different finance ministers in a row – Jim Flaherty, Joe Oliver, and Bill Morneau – and in each case they have failed,” said Karl Littler, a spokesman for the Retail Council of Canada.</p>
<p>“The U.S. raised this quite frequently in the TPP (Trans-Pacific-Partnership trade) round and they also failed to secure this concession,” he added.</p>
<p>There have been hints from Canada’s government about a compromise under which a higher limit would exempt products ordered from e-commerce from duties but not sales taxes.</p>
<p>“When it comes to waiving duties and taxes, we need to carefully consider the impact that would have on Canadians and on Canadian businesses,” said Chloe Luciani-Girouard, a spokeswoman for Morneau.</p>
<p>Mexican firms could accept a higher import limit for goods produced in the NAFTA region – but not from other nations, said Alejandro Gomez Tamez, executive president of the Chamber of Commerce for the footwear industry in the central Mexican state of Guanajuato, a hub of textile manufacturing.</p>
<p>“When a product comes in, even if it’s packaged and sent from the United States, if it’s from a third country, it should pay duties,” he said.</p> | false | 1 | us proposal mexico canada vastly raise value online purchases imported dutyfree stores like amazoncom ebay emerging flashpoint upcoming renegotiation nafta trade deal vulnerable industries like footwear textiles bricks mortar retail mexico canada pushing back hard proposal us trade representative raise mexican canadian dutyfree import limits ecommerce us level 800 current thresholds 50 c20 respectively mexicans main worry move could open back door cheap imports asia beyond canadian retailers fear ecommerce companies undercut prices us plan unveiled july part trump administrations goals renegotiate 25yearold treaty mexico canada still formulating responses mexico city leaning strongly proposal current form ottawa may far behind proposed 800 level opens completely unnecessary door imports outside nafta trading bloc mexican economy minister ildefonso guajardo said thursday sidelines naftarelated event calling sensitive topic growing controversy account burgeoning regional ecommerce sector dominated united states highlights rare area trump administration pushing liberalize trade rules rather tightening much trumps criticism nafta stems belief decimated us manufacturing companies shifted production mexican factories cheaper labor creating us trade deficit mexico worth 60 billion top priority mexican canadian business leaders fear rule change could make industries vulnerable arguing unless online retailers show products made north america exempted duties levied imports cant open door inputs outside region coming taxfree talking need reduce deficit create jobs said moises kalach fronts international negotiating arm mexicos cce business lobby goes completely guajardo said mexicos retail group national selfservice department store association includes powerful members walmart de mexico visited last week express concerns proposal said groups representative brought meeting 250 jacket bought internet evidence violations existing limit already threatening members businesses package fedex courier delivery services company pictured june 8 2017 illustration photocarlos jassoillustration suppose 800 free limit imagine many shirts vietnam could send mexico packet price could easily flood us packets 100 said recognizing need smooth customs processes complicating efforts agree common set rules tangle diverging regulations tax restrictions imports differ region depending whether enter air sea land amazoncom inc ebay inc declined comment story ebay previously said supports increase canadas lowvalue customs de minimis threshold ecommerce promote seamless access global marketplace increasing threshold absolutely ebays top priority nafta renegotiation person familiar matter said logo web service amazon pictured june 8 2017 illustration photocarlos jassoillustration canadian opposition led retailers whose industry association said concerned behavioral shift would inevitably result shoppers buy far wider range higher value goods taxfree dutyfree retail council canada said submission government clothes books toys sporting goods consumer electronics would among items affected expressed confidence ottawa would fend requests nations ebay particular lead charge three different finance ministers row jim flaherty joe oliver bill morneau case failed said karl littler spokesman retail council canada us raised quite frequently tpp transpacificpartnership trade round also failed secure concession added hints canadas government compromise higher limit would exempt products ordered ecommerce duties sales taxes comes waiving duties taxes need carefully consider impact would canadians canadian businesses said chloe lucianigirouard spokeswoman morneau mexican firms could accept higher import limit goods produced nafta region nations said alejandro gomez tamez executive president chamber commerce footwear industry central mexican state guanajuato hub textile manufacturing product comes even packaged sent united states third country pay duties said | 524 |
<p>Can you zap old material into new life? The perennial problem of the family Frankenstein is the same one facing the comedian <a href="http://variety.com/t/mel-brooks/" type="external">Mel Brooks</a>. Exhuming “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/young-frankenstein/" type="external">Young Frankenstein</a>,” his classic comic caper from 1974, he finds it a fresh pulse in musical theater.</p>
<p>“ <a href="http://variety.com/2016/legit/news/gene-wilder-dead-dies-willie-wonka-young-frankenstein-1201846745/" type="external">Young Frankenstein</a>” works because it makes an unlikely musical. Where the original set out to spoof one genre – the gothic horror whose tropes had come to feel camp – a musical reboot allows him to send up another. Young Frederick Frankenstein’s return to his uncle’s Transylvanian castle came with one set of clichés; the new form adds a whole other layer of fun. Alongside the hunchbacked servants and pitchfork-wielding villagers, Brooks’ own score chucks in torch songs and high-kicking chorus lines.</p>
<p>Brooks wisely sees his film for what it is – a series of skits stitched into a story – and so expands its best routines into setpieces and songs. The result is an old-school vaudeville musical that switches styles for each scene. That chaste farewell between Frederick and his wife blows up into big song and dance about sexual frustration, while the hayride at the other end becomes a bawdy Bavarian sing-a-long. Even if a lot of it tips into tribute act, with the best gags thwacked into an appreciative audience, it’s played with enough knowing relish to entice surrender from even stony-faced cynics. Brooks’ timing is so neat, his comic touch so infectious, that even the crustiest, creakiest turns – be they rotating bookcases or creaking false limbs – come out looking like classics.</p>
<p>That <a href="http://variety.com/t/susan-stroman/" type="external">Susan Stroman</a> serves up an old-school staging, complete with painted backdrops and showbiz pizzazz, makes the whole thing self-aware — enough to disarm any defenses against silliness. The stagey approach culminates in the movie’s best known sequence: “Puttin’ On the Ritz” blossoms from a goofy front-curtain routine to a full-scale fantasia with a chorus of top-hatted, tailcoated monsters tap dancing their heads off beneath a frenzy of strobes. It must be the most purely joyful 10 minutes in town.</p>
<p>That will, most likely, be the making of “Young Frankenstein.” On Broadway, Brooks’ effort lumbered along for a year, trailing mixed reviews in its wake. In Britain, however, it chimes with a comic tradition. Stroman nods to legends of light entertainment – Morecambe and Wise, and Bruce Forsyth – and Brooks’ numbers hark back to the nimble, infantile wit of Monty Python. It’s a smart acquisition by producers Fiery Angel, who scored a big hit with their spoof of “The 39 Steps.”</p>
<p>A lot of that’s in the playing – a cast of willing fools having a lot of fun. Northern comic Ross Noble plays Igor, and though, inevitably, he’s no match for the googly-eyed oddity of the film’s deadpan Marty Feldman, he shuffles around the stage with the relish of a true fan. Shuler Hensley beats his barrel chest as the monster, really coming to life in the second half, and Lesley Joseph’s old housekeeper Frau Bluchner is as dry as the dry ice that floods through the lab.</p>
<p>Really, though, it’s Hadley Fraser’s show. As the chipper Frederick Frankenstein, he steps into Gene Wilder’s considerable shoes and makes them his own. You can tell he’s studied his predecessor – his wild looks and plosive speech taps into Wilder’s comic technique – but he’s never weighed down by impersonation. His Frederick is both fresh-faced and elastic, lending the scientist a frazzled urbanity.</p>
<p>That instills some substance into the silliness, and Brooks and his fellow book-writer, the late Thomas Meehan, layers a scheme on top of his script. In the gap between demented scientist and dumb monster, “Young Frankenstein” muses on the nature of mankind. A musical that opens singing the brain’s praises is motored by men who think with their bodies. Frederick’s lust leads him into temptation – no better than the brute who follows his urges, nor the mob mentality of the villagers that would string him up.</p>
<p>However, just like Frederick’s monster, the musical could use some reconstruction. One can put up with a lashing of light blue sauce – Summer Strallen flashes her frillies as Frankenstein’s buxom assistant, and Fraser does well to instill him with innocence – but it’s harder to stomach Brook’s slips into all-out misogyny. Frau Bluchner hymns an abusive ex in ‘He Vas My Boyfriend,’&#160; while watching the Monster chase his future bride off screaming cuts consent out of the question. They’re the sort of gags that, dug up 40 years on, look altogether putrid. No amount of lightening can make them humane.</p>
<p><a href="http://variety.com/t/west-end/" type="external">West End</a> Review: ‘Young Frankenstein’Garrick Theatre, London; 732 seats; £97.50 ($130) top. Opened, reviewed Oct. 10, 2017. Running time: 2 HOURS, 20 MIN.</p>
<p>ProductionA Fiery Angel production of a musical in two acts by <a href="http://variety.com/2017/scene/news/carl-reiner-mel-brooks-dick-van-dyke-if-youre-not-in-the-obit-eat-breakfast-premiere-1202433968/" type="external">Mel Brooks</a> and Thomas Meehan.</p>
<p>CreativeBook by Mel Brooks and Thomas Meehan; Music and lyrics by Mel Brooks; Directed by <a href="http://variety.com/2016/legit/reviews/dot-review-play-1201714882/" type="external">Susan Stroman</a>; Set Design, Beowulf Boritt; Costume design, William Ivey Long; musical supervision, Glen Kelly; musical direction, Andrew Hilton; orchestrations, Doug Besterman; lighting, Ben Cracknell; sound, Gareth Owen; wigs and hair, Paul Huntley.</p>
<p>CastImogen Brooke, Matthew Crandon, Patrick Clancy, Bethan Downing, Nathan Elwick, Kelly Ewins-Prouse, Hadley Fraser, Andrew Gordon-Watkins, Shuler Hensley, Sammy Kelly, Lesley Joseph, Ross Noble, Perry O’Dea, Dianne Pilkington, Richard Pitt, Harriet Samuel-Gray, Gemma Scholes, Emily Squibb, Summer Strallen, Matthew Whennell-Clark, Aron Wild, Josh Wilmott.</p> | false | 1 | zap old material new life perennial problem family frankenstein one facing comedian mel brooks exhuming young frankenstein classic comic caper 1974 finds fresh pulse musical theater young frankenstein works makes unlikely musical original set spoof one genre gothic horror whose tropes come feel camp musical reboot allows send another young frederick frankensteins return uncles transylvanian castle came one set clichés new form adds whole layer fun alongside hunchbacked servants pitchforkwielding villagers brooks score chucks torch songs highkicking chorus lines brooks wisely sees film series skits stitched story expands best routines setpieces songs result oldschool vaudeville musical switches styles scene chaste farewell frederick wife blows big song dance sexual frustration hayride end becomes bawdy bavarian singalong even lot tips tribute act best gags thwacked appreciative audience played enough knowing relish entice surrender even stonyfaced cynics brooks timing neat comic touch infectious even crustiest creakiest turns rotating bookcases creaking false limbs come looking like classics susan stroman serves oldschool staging complete painted backdrops showbiz pizzazz makes whole thing selfaware enough disarm defenses silliness stagey approach culminates movies best known sequence puttin ritz blossoms goofy frontcurtain routine fullscale fantasia chorus tophatted tailcoated monsters tap dancing heads beneath frenzy strobes must purely joyful 10 minutes town likely making young frankenstein broadway brooks effort lumbered along year trailing mixed reviews wake britain however chimes comic tradition stroman nods legends light entertainment morecambe wise bruce forsyth brooks numbers hark back nimble infantile wit monty python smart acquisition producers fiery angel scored big hit spoof 39 steps lot thats playing cast willing fools lot fun northern comic ross noble plays igor though inevitably hes match googlyeyed oddity films deadpan marty feldman shuffles around stage relish true fan shuler hensley beats barrel chest monster really coming life second half lesley josephs old housekeeper frau bluchner dry dry ice floods lab really though hadley frasers show chipper frederick frankenstein steps gene wilders considerable shoes makes tell hes studied predecessor wild looks plosive speech taps wilders comic technique hes never weighed impersonation frederick freshfaced elastic lending scientist frazzled urbanity instills substance silliness brooks fellow bookwriter late thomas meehan layers scheme top script gap demented scientist dumb monster young frankenstein muses nature mankind musical opens singing brains praises motored men think bodies fredericks lust leads temptation better brute follows urges mob mentality villagers would string however like fredericks monster musical could use reconstruction one put lashing light blue sauce summer strallen flashes frillies frankensteins buxom assistant fraser well instill innocence harder stomach brooks slips allout misogyny frau bluchner hymns abusive ex vas boyfriend160 watching monster chase future bride screaming cuts consent question theyre sort gags dug 40 years look altogether putrid amount lightening make humane west end review young frankensteingarrick theatre london 732 seats 9750 130 top opened reviewed oct 10 2017 running time 2 hours 20 min productiona fiery angel production musical two acts mel brooks thomas meehan creativebook mel brooks thomas meehan music lyrics mel brooks directed susan stroman set design beowulf boritt costume design william ivey long musical supervision glen kelly musical direction andrew hilton orchestrations doug besterman lighting ben cracknell sound gareth owen wigs hair paul huntley castimogen brooke matthew crandon patrick clancy bethan downing nathan elwick kelly ewinsprouse hadley fraser andrew gordonwatkins shuler hensley sammy kelly lesley joseph ross noble perry odea dianne pilkington richard pitt harriet samuelgray gemma scholes emily squibb summer strallen matthew whennellclark aron wild josh wilmott | 564 |
<p>There wasn’t much suspense in the run-up to last night’s state of the union address because President Barack Obama long ago signaled the kind of populist and heavily political speech he was going to deliver.</p>
<p>Last September, after a long hot summer of debt limit brinksmanship, he convened a joint session of Congress to deliver what was billed as <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/08/address-president-joint-session-congress" type="external">a “jobs” speech</a> but what was really the first salvo in the 2012 general election campaign. The proposals the president outlined that evening were not new and had previously been rejected by Congress. But that didn’t matter. They weren’t offered to start a legislative process that would result in passage of a bill that would get signed into law and would create jobs; they were offered to provide voters with a stark contrast between the parties in advance of an election year.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of the jobs speech, the president went on the road and denounced the “do-nothing” Congress in several campaign-style events in critical electoral states, even though no real effort was made by the White House to move a compromise plan through Congress. The president’s early autumn speeches were punctuated with the kind of heavily political rhetoric normally reserved for the party conventions just before presidential elections, such as when he <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/17/obama_gop_wants_dirtier_air_dirtier_water_less_people_with_health_insurance.html" type="external">said</a> the Republican plan for the country boils down to “dirtier air, dirtier water, and less people with health insurance.”</p>
<p>In early December, the president ratcheted up the rhetoric still further with <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/12/06/remarks-president-economy-osawatomie-kansas" type="external">an economic speech in Osawatomie, Kansas</a> focused on supposed reasons for the struggles of the American middle class.</p>
<p>So, it was no real surprise that during last night’s state of the union address the president hit on the same populist themes he has been pounding since Labor Day, which essentially come down to this: the nation’s economic troubles—anemic job growth today, massive federal borrowing and debt accumulation, and stagnant wage growth for the middle class—can all be traced to public policies which deliver excessive economic gains to the rich at the expense of everyone else.</p>
<p>In other words, if only the Republicans were willing to tax the rich, all would be well.</p>
<p>Predictably, that was again the central message in the president’s address last evening, as was clear when <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/warren-buffets-secretary-to-sit-with-michelle-obama-during-state-of-the-union-address/2012/01/24/gIQAAwObNQ_story_1.html" type="external">the White House announced</a> that Warren Buffett’s secretary would be the First Lady’s special guest for the evening.</p>
<p>There’s no question that the president’s populist, tax-the-rich rhetoric resonates with a segment of the electorate that has struggled economically and is all-too-willing to accept the simplistic explanation that the blame for their troubles lies with the so-called “rich.”</p>
<p>But what President Obama didn’t explain last evening—indeed, has never really explained—is how a tax hike on higher income households will help the struggling middle class.</p>
<p>Because it’s not at all obvious it would.</p>
<p>For starters, if, as the president proposes, the rich are taxed at higher rates but the government’s main entitlement programs remain entirely unreformed, the government’s deficit and debt problems will not be solved. <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12039" type="external">According to the Congressional Budget Office</a> (CBO), spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid in 1980 was just 6.0 percent of GDP. In 2030, spending on those programs plus ObamaCare <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12039" type="external">is expected to reach</a> 15.2 percent of GDP (using assumptions about health cost growth that is slightly more realistic than current law). That jump in spending is the real cause of our fiscal problems. If, as the president proposes, the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire for those with incomes above $200,000 ($250,000 for couples), that might raise revenue by about 0.4 percent of GDP per year. That’s not nearly enough to cover the explosion in entitlement spending that will occur over the coming two decades.</p>
<p>Moreover, there’s strong evidence <a href="http://american.com/archive/2011/august/obamasfollytaxingtherich" type="external">that higher taxes will hurt growth and job creation</a>, despite the claims of the president to the contrary. Among economists, it’s really a debate about how damaging higher tax rates will be to growth and job creation. There’s no real debate that such taxes are neutral in that regard.</p>
<p>But even setting aside the likely damage that would ensue from higher taxes, the president has never articulated a coherent theory about how a presumably larger government would bring about higher paying jobs for the middle class. Because there’s no evidence whatsoever that the middle class or anyone else will be better off if the government increased spending on items that the president likes to call “investments.” The president is not calling for stimulus spending to raise aggregate demand in a Keynesian sense. He long ago abandoned that line of argument. No, what he proposed last night is simply more spending on certain programs financed by higher tax collection. Thus, any benefit to the middle class would have to come from the quality of the government’s “investments.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately for the president, there’s no evidence that more governmental spending will lead to better jobs for anyone. He mentioned against last evening that job training is a central component of his program. But federal job training efforts have a four decade record of failure, and the president’s speech gave no indication that his administration has found a way to deliver services in ways that will lead to better results.</p>
<p>After the deep recession of 2008 and 2009, what the country needs more than anything else is a period of robust economic growth. That’s the only remedy that will truly help the American middle class. But in his speech last evening, the president again served up the kind of populist rhetoric that might make his most devoted followers feel better but will do nothing to address the growth deficit that threatens his presidency.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a> and project director of e21’s <a href="http://www.obamacarewatch.org/" type="external">ObamaCare Watch</a>. He was an associate director at the Office of Management and Budget from 2001 to 2004.</p> | false | 1 | wasnt much suspense runup last nights state union address president barack obama long ago signaled kind populist heavily political speech going deliver last september long hot summer debt limit brinksmanship convened joint session congress deliver billed jobs speech really first salvo 2012 general election campaign proposals president outlined evening new previously rejected congress didnt matter werent offered start legislative process would result passage bill would get signed law would create jobs offered provide voters stark contrast parties advance election year aftermath jobs speech president went road denounced donothing congress several campaignstyle events critical electoral states even though real effort made white house move compromise plan congress presidents early autumn speeches punctuated kind heavily political rhetoric normally reserved party conventions presidential elections said republican plan country boils dirtier air dirtier water less people health insurance early december president ratcheted rhetoric still economic speech osawatomie kansas focused supposed reasons struggles american middle class real surprise last nights state union address president hit populist themes pounding since labor day essentially come nations economic troublesanemic job growth today massive federal borrowing debt accumulation stagnant wage growth middle classcan traced public policies deliver excessive economic gains rich expense everyone else words republicans willing tax rich would well predictably central message presidents address last evening clear white house announced warren buffetts secretary would first ladys special guest evening theres question presidents populist taxtherich rhetoric resonates segment electorate struggled economically alltoowilling accept simplistic explanation blame troubles lies socalled rich president obama didnt explain last eveningindeed never really explainedis tax hike higher income households help struggling middle class obvious would starters president proposes rich taxed higher rates governments main entitlement programs remain entirely unreformed governments deficit debt problems solved according congressional budget office cbo spending social security medicare medicaid 1980 60 percent gdp 2030 spending programs plus obamacare expected reach 152 percent gdp using assumptions health cost growth slightly realistic current law jump spending real cause fiscal problems president proposes bush tax cuts allowed expire incomes 200000 250000 couples might raise revenue 04 percent gdp per year thats nearly enough cover explosion entitlement spending occur coming two decades moreover theres strong evidence higher taxes hurt growth job creation despite claims president contrary among economists really debate damaging higher tax rates growth job creation theres real debate taxes neutral regard even setting aside likely damage would ensue higher taxes president never articulated coherent theory presumably larger government would bring higher paying jobs middle class theres evidence whatsoever middle class anyone else better government increased spending items president likes call investments president calling stimulus spending raise aggregate demand keynesian sense long ago abandoned line argument proposed last night simply spending certain programs financed higher tax collection thus benefit middle class would come quality governments investments unfortunately president theres evidence governmental spending lead better jobs anyone mentioned last evening job training central component program federal job training efforts four decade record failure presidents speech gave indication administration found way deliver services ways lead better results deep recession 2008 2009 country needs anything else period robust economic growth thats remedy truly help american middle class speech last evening president served kind populist rhetoric might make devoted followers feel better nothing address growth deficit threatens presidency james c capretta fellow ethics public policy center project director e21s obamacare watch associate director office management budget 2001 2004 | 553 |
<p>Senators Kamala Harris (D-California) and Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) are reaching across the aisle in a bid to support prison reform. They are co-sponsoring a bill to reform bail conditions which serves as an example of a reform idea that has bipartisan appeal.</p>
<p>In a New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/20/opinion/kamala-harris-and-rand-paul-lets-reform-bail.html" type="external">op-ed</a> on Thursday, the two senators set out their case by recalling the horrifying saga of Kalief Browder, a 16-year-old New Yorker who was arrested on charges of stealing a backpack in 2010.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/391721-federal-prison-growth-budget/" type="external" /></p>
<p>The family was unable to post $3,000 in bail, and Browder was sent to jail on Rikers Island to wait for his day in court. He ended up staying there for three years before charges were dropped and he was released.</p>
<p>“Haunted by his experience, Mr. Browder hanged himself in 2015,” wrote Harris and Paul. The pair notes that as many as 450,000 Americans are in jail today awaiting trial because they could not afford to pay jail.</p>
<p>“Whether someone stays in jail or not is far too often determined by wealth or social connections, even though just a few days behind bars can cost people their job, home, custody of their children — or their life,” wrote Harris and Paul.</p>
<p>Black and Latino defendants are more likely to be detained before trial and less likely to be able to post bail compared to white defendants, they noted.</p>
<p>The senators pointed out that nine out of ten defendants who are detained cannot afford to post bail, which can exceed $20,000 for minor crimes like stealing $105 worth of clothing.</p>
<p>“As criminal justice groups work to change sentencing and mandatory minimum laws, we must also reform a bail system that is discriminatory and wasteful,” they wrote.</p>
<p>Their bill, the Pretrial Integrity and Safety Act, would provide three-year, $10 million grants through the Department of Justice for states to create their own policies for bail reform.</p>
<p>Currently, Colorado and West Virginia send the defendant a telephone reminder not to miss the court date and end up detained.</p>
<p>Kentucky and New Jersey create personalized risk assessments for defendants to determine whether there is a flight risk or a threat to the public that would necessitate a suspect be held without bail.</p>
<p>In 2016, the Movement for Black Lives, a collective of more than 50 groups, called for activists to target federal and state legislatures and urge them to end money bail practices.</p>
<p>Harris and Paul’s bill, which is Harris’ first signature legislation, goes even further. It would establish an additional $5 million for a National Pretrial Reporting Program, which would require the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics to collect data on how states and municipal courts process defendants.</p>
<p>While prison reform has long been considered a liberal or Democratic goal, conservative criminal justice reformers have been nodding towards rehabilitation and non-prison sentences for drug crimes as early as 2008.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/335075-koch-bernie-sanders-ad/" type="external" /></p>
<p>An April 2016 resolution, adopted by the Republican National Committee, argues that despite the massive growth in incarceration, many who are released from prison commit new crimes, leading to the conclusion that prison might not be the best investment for public safety.</p>
<p>“We have created, with drug prohibition, a multi-billion dollar underground economy, and a generation of Al Capones,”&#160;Republican delegate Giovanni Cicione, an attorney from Rhode Island&#160; <a href="https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/07/18/two-parties-two-platforms-on-criminal-justice" type="external">told</a>&#160;the Marshall Project.</p>
<p>It was decided that prisons should do more than punish. Rather,&#160;“they should attempt to rehabilitate and institute proven prisoner reentry systems to reduce recidivism and future victimization…[by] encouraging States to offer opportunities for literacy and vocational education to prepare prisoners for release to the community.”</p>
<p>Right-leaning American billionaires Charles and David Koch became <a href="https://www.rt.com/usa/310128-koch-brothers-obama-prisons/" type="external">allies with then-President Barack Obama</a> in advocating for criminal justice reform.</p>
<p>“It’s morally, constitutionally and fiscally the right thing to do to reform our criminal justice system,” Mark Holden, senior vice president and general counsel for Koch Industries, told Democracy Now at the time.</p>
<p>Along with more liberal philanthropic groups like the MacArthur Foundation, the billionaire brothers are core supporters of the Coalition for Public Safety.</p>
<p>According to its website, the group works “across the political spectrum to pursue a comprehensive set of federal, state, and local criminal justice reforms to reduce our jail and prison populations and associated costs; end the systemic problems of over-criminalization and over-incarceration – particularly of low-income communities and communities of color; ensure swift and fair outcomes for both the accused and the victim; and make communities safe by reducing recidivism and breaking down barriers faced by those returning home after detention or incarceration.”</p>
<p>In describing the Koch brothers’ interest in the issue of reform, Holden told Democracy Now that the Kochs were “classical liberals who believe in expansive individual liberties in the Bill of Rights and limited government,” and “if your goals are to honor the Bill of Rights and to remove obstacles to opportunity, especially for the poor and the disadvantaged, you have to be in the criminal justice arena.”</p>
<p>A close advisor to Charles Koch, Holden said the current system has to be addressed “across the board” to help ensure prisoners have a fair shot at improving their lives once they have served their time.</p>
<p>[embedded content]</p> | false | 1 | senators kamala harris dcalifornia rand paul rkentucky reaching across aisle bid support prison reform cosponsoring bill reform bail conditions serves example reform idea bipartisan appeal new york times oped thursday two senators set case recalling horrifying saga kalief browder 16yearold new yorker arrested charges stealing backpack 2010 read family unable post 3000 bail browder sent jail rikers island wait day court ended staying three years charges dropped released haunted experience mr browder hanged 2015 wrote harris paul pair notes many 450000 americans jail today awaiting trial could afford pay jail whether someone stays jail far often determined wealth social connections even though days behind bars cost people job home custody children life wrote harris paul black latino defendants likely detained trial less likely able post bail compared white defendants noted senators pointed nine ten defendants detained afford post bail exceed 20000 minor crimes like stealing 105 worth clothing criminal justice groups work change sentencing mandatory minimum laws must also reform bail system discriminatory wasteful wrote bill pretrial integrity safety act would provide threeyear 10 million grants department justice states create policies bail reform currently colorado west virginia send defendant telephone reminder miss court date end detained kentucky new jersey create personalized risk assessments defendants determine whether flight risk threat public would necessitate suspect held without bail 2016 movement black lives collective 50 groups called activists target federal state legislatures urge end money bail practices harris pauls bill harris first signature legislation goes even would establish additional 5 million national pretrial reporting program would require federal bureau justice statistics collect data states municipal courts process defendants prison reform long considered liberal democratic goal conservative criminal justice reformers nodding towards rehabilitation nonprison sentences drug crimes early 2008 read april 2016 resolution adopted republican national committee argues despite massive growth incarceration many released prison commit new crimes leading conclusion prison might best investment public safety created drug prohibition multibillion dollar underground economy generation al capones160republican delegate giovanni cicione attorney rhode island160 told160the marshall project decided prisons punish rather160they attempt rehabilitate institute proven prisoner reentry systems reduce recidivism future victimizationby encouraging states offer opportunities literacy vocational education prepare prisoners release community rightleaning american billionaires charles david koch became allies thenpresident barack obama advocating criminal justice reform morally constitutionally fiscally right thing reform criminal justice system mark holden senior vice president general counsel koch industries told democracy time along liberal philanthropic groups like macarthur foundation billionaire brothers core supporters coalition public safety according website group works across political spectrum pursue comprehensive set federal state local criminal justice reforms reduce jail prison populations associated costs end systemic problems overcriminalization overincarceration particularly lowincome communities communities color ensure swift fair outcomes accused victim make communities safe reducing recidivism breaking barriers faced returning home detention incarceration describing koch brothers interest issue reform holden told democracy kochs classical liberals believe expansive individual liberties bill rights limited government goals honor bill rights remove obstacles opportunity especially poor disadvantaged criminal justice arena close advisor charles koch holden said current system addressed across board help ensure prisoners fair shot improving lives served time embedded content | 512 |
<p>Yale law professor Jack Balkin offers a <a href="http://balkin.blogspot.com/2005/05/bad-originalism.html" type="external">lengthy critique</a> of <a href="" type="internal">my recent NRO essay</a>&#160;in which I disputed the Left’s contention that the result in Brown v. Board of Education is incompatible with an originalist approach to constitutional interpretation. Balkin’s critique is yet another example of the insistence by non-originalists that they know what originalism is better than dedicated originalists (such as Michael McConnell and Robert Bork). His critique also repeatedly misstates the arguments he takes issue with.</p>
<p>Balkin begins by asserting that I try “to show that it is obvious” that the result in Brown is consistent with originalism. My aim was far more modest: to show that there are serious originalist arguments for the result in Brown. To show, in other words, that, contrary to the Left’s contention, it is far from obvious that the result in Brown is inconsistent with originalism.</p>
<p>Balkin then asserts that I try “to show that Brown is ‘really’ an originalist decision.” I nowhere claim that the actual Brown decision is originalist. Nor do I use “really” — the word he places in quotation marks — anywhere in my essay. (For a fuller account of my objections to Brown’s methodology, read <a href="" type="internal">this piece</a>.)</p>
<p>What Balkin presents as my “first” argument is merely my refutation of Margaret Talbot’s claim that the same Congress that passed the Fourteenth Amendment segregated Washington schools. This opening part of my essay was showing the sloppiness of Talbot’s all-too-typical assertion that the result in Brown is incompatible with originalism. It was not making the affirmative case that Brown is compatible with originalism. Yet Balkin misses the point and leads anyone who reads only his essay to think that I was arguing that Congress’s appropriation of money to segregated schools was my first (and presumably best) argument in favor of the position that the result in Brown is compatible with originalism.</p>
<p>Balkin then addresses Michael McConnell’s argument from his 1995 Virginia Law Review article. As I accurately summarized this argument in my essay:</p>
<p>[A]s McConnell’s law-review article shows, in the years immediately following ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, as Congress acted to enact legislation enforcing the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment, a substantial majority of both houses of Congress repeatedly voted to abolish segregation in the public schools. Although filibuster tactics and other procedural obstacles prevented ultimate passage of legislation abolishing segregated schools, McConnell demonstrates that these votes provide powerful evidence that the original understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment was that segregated public schools were unconstitutional.</p>
<p>By contrast, Balkin presents an oddly weak account of McConnell’s argument. He asserts that McConnell’s “originalist argument for Brown is that Congress considered but ultimately rejected a ban on segregated public schooling in what ultimately became the Civil Rights Act of 1875,” and he states that “McConnell correctly points out that many of the people who voted for the Fourteenth Amendment also voted for the school desegregation language in the 1875 Act, hence he concludes that this is evidence of what they intended in 1868.” In referring to “many” people and in omitting mention of the actual and repeated supermajority support, Balkin fails to confront the essence of McConnell’s far more sophisticated and compelling argument, which McConnell summarizes in this way:</p>
<p>The belief that school segregation does in fact violate the Fourteenth Amendment was held during the years immediately following ratification by a substantial majority of political leaders who had supported the Amendment. In a large number of votes over a three and one half year period, between one-half and two-thirds of both houses of Congress voted in favor of school desegregation and against the principle of separate but equal. These deliberations, which were conducted in explicitly constitutional terms by Congresses charged with enforcing the new Amendment in the years immediately following its enactment, constitute the best available evidence of its meaning.</p>
<p>Balkin also criticizes McConnell for giving more weight to the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment than to popular opinion (which Balkin equates with the “actual ratifiers”). But he fails to present, much less counter, McConnell’s powerful argument that the Fourteenth Amendment, like the Fifteenth, was the result of an extraordinary time “when a political minority, armed with the prestige of victory in the Civil War and with military control over the political apparatus of the rebel states, imposed constitutional change on the Nation as the price of reunion, with little regard for popular opinion.” As McConnell points out, enfranchisement of black voters was also deeply unpopular, so anyone who relies on popular opinion to dispute his reading of the Fourteenth Amendment should likewise contend that the Fifteenth Amendment doesn’t mean what it plainly says.</p>
<p>Balkin next claims that I read the 1880 Strauder case “through 21st century eyes” and fail to appreciate the historic distinction between civil equality and political equality. Yet he also claims that Strauder itself “blurs the civil/political distinction recognized by the framers” of the Fourteenth Amendment. So perhaps his real disagreement is with what Strauder says, not with my reading of Strauder.</p>
<p>Balkin likewise asserts that my treatment of Plessy overlooks “the tripartite distinction between civil, political and social equality.” But his effort to claim that Justice Harlan — the famous dissenter in Plessy — understood this distinction the same way that he does is unconvincing. Harlan’s position that the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to “remove[] the race line from our governmental systems” (buttressed by his quotation of the same passage in Strauder that I quoted) is fully reconcilable with his supposition that the “white race” will retain social dominance. The principle that reconciles these propositions is that the Fourteenth Amendment addresses only state action, not private action.</p>
<p>Balkin also criticizes the alternative originalist argument by Judge Bork that I present — that is, Bork’s argument that by the time of Brown any assumption by the framers that segregated schools were compatible with the Fourteenth Amendment’s clear purpose of establishing racial equality under the law was no longer tenable. Balkin asserts that “Bork’s argument isn’t actually originalist” and instead is “a perfect example of how one does living constitutionalism,” for it “views changed circumstances and prudential considerations as having significant weight in interpreting the meaning of the document.” But “separate but equal” is nowhere stated in the Fourteenth Amendment. It was instead a judicially created doctrine that was thought to be consistent with the meaning of what the Amendment does say. What Balkin calls “changed circumstances” in Bork’s argument is the increasing evidence over time that governmentally segregated schools are incompatible with racial equality, and what he calls reliance upon “prudential considerations” is the priority Bork gives the Fourteenth Amendment’s original meaning of racial equality under the law over the mistaken assertion by a non-originalist Court in Plessy that separate could ever be equal. It is far from clear why originalism is supposed to be unable to accommodate these factors.</p>
<p>As I explained in my original essay, non-originalists have little interest in exploring whether the result in Brown can be reconciled with the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. They prefer instead to use Brown as a weapon against originalism. As a result, they cannot be trusted to describe accurately the nature of an originalist analysis or evidence of original meaning.</p>
<p>— Edward Whelan is president of the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a> and directs EPPC’s program on <a href="" type="internal">The Constitution, the Courts, and the Culture</a>.</p> | false | 1 | yale law professor jack balkin offers lengthy critique recent nro essay160in disputed lefts contention result brown v board education incompatible originalist approach constitutional interpretation balkins critique yet another example insistence nonoriginalists know originalism better dedicated originalists michael mcconnell robert bork critique also repeatedly misstates arguments takes issue balkin begins asserting try show obvious result brown consistent originalism aim far modest show serious originalist arguments result brown show words contrary lefts contention far obvious result brown inconsistent originalism balkin asserts try show brown really originalist decision nowhere claim actual brown decision originalist use really word places quotation marks anywhere essay fuller account objections browns methodology read piece balkin presents first argument merely refutation margaret talbots claim congress passed fourteenth amendment segregated washington schools opening part essay showing sloppiness talbots alltootypical assertion result brown incompatible originalism making affirmative case brown compatible originalism yet balkin misses point leads anyone reads essay think arguing congresss appropriation money segregated schools first presumably best argument favor position result brown compatible originalism balkin addresses michael mcconnells argument 1995 virginia law review article accurately summarized argument essay mcconnells lawreview article shows years immediately following ratification fourteenth amendment congress acted enact legislation enforcing requirements fourteenth amendment substantial majority houses congress repeatedly voted abolish segregation public schools although filibuster tactics procedural obstacles prevented ultimate passage legislation abolishing segregated schools mcconnell demonstrates votes provide powerful evidence original understanding fourteenth amendment segregated public schools unconstitutional contrast balkin presents oddly weak account mcconnells argument asserts mcconnells originalist argument brown congress considered ultimately rejected ban segregated public schooling ultimately became civil rights act 1875 states mcconnell correctly points many people voted fourteenth amendment also voted school desegregation language 1875 act hence concludes evidence intended 1868 referring many people omitting mention actual repeated supermajority support balkin fails confront essence mcconnells far sophisticated compelling argument mcconnell summarizes way belief school segregation fact violate fourteenth amendment held years immediately following ratification substantial majority political leaders supported amendment large number votes three one half year period onehalf twothirds houses congress voted favor school desegregation principle separate equal deliberations conducted explicitly constitutional terms congresses charged enforcing new amendment years immediately following enactment constitute best available evidence meaning balkin also criticizes mcconnell giving weight framers fourteenth amendment popular opinion balkin equates actual ratifiers fails present much less counter mcconnells powerful argument fourteenth amendment like fifteenth result extraordinary time political minority armed prestige victory civil war military control political apparatus rebel states imposed constitutional change nation price reunion little regard popular opinion mcconnell points enfranchisement black voters also deeply unpopular anyone relies popular opinion dispute reading fourteenth amendment likewise contend fifteenth amendment doesnt mean plainly says balkin next claims read 1880 strauder case 21st century eyes fail appreciate historic distinction civil equality political equality yet also claims strauder blurs civilpolitical distinction recognized framers fourteenth amendment perhaps real disagreement strauder says reading strauder balkin likewise asserts treatment plessy overlooks tripartite distinction civil political social equality effort claim justice harlan famous dissenter plessy understood distinction way unconvincing harlans position purpose fourteenth amendment remove race line governmental systems buttressed quotation passage strauder quoted fully reconcilable supposition white race retain social dominance principle reconciles propositions fourteenth amendment addresses state action private action balkin also criticizes alternative originalist argument judge bork present borks argument time brown assumption framers segregated schools compatible fourteenth amendments clear purpose establishing racial equality law longer tenable balkin asserts borks argument isnt actually originalist instead perfect example one living constitutionalism views changed circumstances prudential considerations significant weight interpreting meaning document separate equal nowhere stated fourteenth amendment instead judicially created doctrine thought consistent meaning amendment say balkin calls changed circumstances borks argument increasing evidence time governmentally segregated schools incompatible racial equality calls reliance upon prudential considerations priority bork gives fourteenth amendments original meaning racial equality law mistaken assertion nonoriginalist court plessy separate could ever equal far clear originalism supposed unable accommodate factors explained original essay nonoriginalists little interest exploring whether result brown reconciled original meaning fourteenth amendment prefer instead use brown weapon originalism result trusted describe accurately nature originalist analysis evidence original meaning edward whelan president ethics public policy center directs eppcs program constitution courts culture | 683 |
<p />
<p>The U.S. House of Representatives <a href="https://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hH_iWTtIJQd1_B3phNUKdf3CKOvA" type="external">will vote on Tuesday</a> on a resolution calling on President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the ‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’ in multilateral fora.”</p>
<p>Headed by Justice Richard Goldstone, a former judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa and Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, the U.N. report found that evidence indicates both Israel and Hamas committed war crimes during Israel’s 22-day assault on the Gaza Strip, dubbed “Operation Cast Lead”, which began on December 27, 2008.</p>
<p>The report recommended that allegations of war crimes by both parties be investigated.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/" type="external">current text</a> of the proposed Congressional resolution, H. Res. 867, contains numerous factual inaccuracies, beginning with the assertion that the U.N. inquiry had “pre-judged” its findings and was “one-sidedly” mandated to “investigate all violations of international human rights law and International Humanitarian Law by . . . Israel, against the Palestinian people . . . particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression”.</p>
<p>The actual <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/FactFindingMission.htm" type="external">mandate</a> adopted on April 3 was “to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or after.”</p>
<p>The quoted text is not from the April 3 mandate, but from <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/A-HRC-S-91-L1.doc" type="external">U.N. General Assembly resolution S-9/1</a> on January 12, 2009, which resulted in the later appointment of the mission by the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC).</p>
<p>Also, omitted in the draft resolution’s reproduction of the text are the words “occupying Power” before “Israel”. Under international law, the occupying power is in fact obligated to investigate allegations of war crimes and violations of human rights.</p>
<p>The draft U.S. resolution states that the Goldstone report “makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, which numbered in the thousands and spanned a period of eight years, by Hamas and other violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive measures”.</p>
<p>But this criticism itself ignores the fact that even if Israel’s military operations were justifiable as &#160;“defensive measures”, Israel would still be legally obligated to conduct its operations in accordance with international law, and to conduct investigations into alleged war crimes conducted by its own forces.</p>
<p>The draft resolution also makes no mention of the relentless siege of Gaza by Israel, or the fact that Hamas had been strictly observing a cease-fire agreed to in June, only firing rockets after Israel had first violated that truce with repeated attacks against Gazans, a continuation of the crippling siege, and an airstrike and invasion of Gaza by Israeli forces on November 4 that ultimately resulted in the complete breakdown of the truce.</p>
<p>It also makes no mention of the fact that the Goldstone report contains a section dedicated to examining the impact of rocket and mortar attacks by Palestinian militants on southern Israel, or that mission’s efforts to do so were impeded by Israel’s refusal to cooperate.</p>
<p>The draft resolution states that the U.N. mission “included a member who, before joining the mission, had already declared Israel guilty of committing atrocities in Operation Cast Lead by signing a public letter on January 11, 2009, published in the Sunday Times, that called Israel’s actions ‘war crimes’”.</p>
<p>That <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article5488380.ece" type="external">letter to the Sunday Times</a> also stated, “We condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel and suicide bombings which are also contrary to international humanitarian law and are war crimes.”</p>
<p>But criticism of the Goldstone report on the similar basis that one of its members had beforehand declared Hamas guilty of war crimes is lacking in the draft resolution.</p>
<p>It calls the Goldstone report’s findings “that the Israeli military had deliberately attacked civilians during Operation Cast Lead” “unsubstantiated”. In fact, the 575 page report provides extensive documentation for its findings.</p>
<p>The draft resolution states that “the authors of the report, in the body of the report itself, admit that ‘we did not deal with the issues . . . regarding the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas and second-guessing decisions made by soldiers and their commanding officers ‘ in the fog of war.’”</p>
<p>This is an outright fabrication. Those words do not in fact appear in the body of the <a href="http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf" type="external">actual report</a>.</p>
<p>Those words actually come from an <a href="http://www.2nd-thoughts.org/id233.html" type="external">alleged e-mail</a> from Richard Goldstone in which he explained why the U.N. report did not rely on a Colonel Kemp for its inquiry. The full text of the statement from that e-mail, replacing the part omitted in the draft resolution, reads “we did not deal with the issues he raised regarding the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas…” (emphasis added).</p>
<p>The draft resolution states that Richard Goldstone had been quoted in the October 16 edition of the Jewish daily Forward as saying, “If this was a court of law, there would have been nothing proven”.</p>
<p>But omitted is the further context of that remark in <a href="http://www.forward.com/articles/116269/" type="external">the same article</a>, which added, “He recalled his work as chief prosecutor for the international war crimes tribunal in Yugoslavia in 1994. When he began working, Goldstone was presented with a report commissioned by the U.N. Security Council based on what he said was a fact-finding mission similar to his own in Gaza.</p>
<p>“’We couldn’t use that report as evidence at all,’ Goldstone said. ‘But it was a useful roadmap for our investigators, for me as chief prosecutor, to decide where we should investigate. And that’s the purpose of this sort of report.”</p>
<p>The draft resolution asserts that the Goldstone report “in effect, denied the State of Israel the right to self-defense”, but offers no supporting evidence for this.</p>
<p>The Goldstone report found that “While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self-defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole.”</p>
<p>The draft resolution states that “the report usually considered public statements made by Israeli officials not to be credible, while frequently giving uncritical credence to statements taken from what it called the ‘Gaza authorities’, i.e. the Gaza leadership of Hamas”, but offers no examples from the report.</p>
<p>The report does, in fact, question the credibility of Israeli officials. It notes in one instance that “it considers the credibility of Israel’s position damaged by the series of inconsistencies, contradictions and factual inaccuracies in the statements justifying the attack.”</p>
<p>In another example illustrating Israel’s lack of credibility, it “acknowledges that significant efforts [were] made by Israel to issue warnings”, but that “The credibility of instructions to move to city centres for safety was also diminished by the fact that the city centres themselves had been the subject of intense attacks”.</p>
<p>The Goldstone report also observed that “By refusing to cooperate with the Mission, the Government of Israel prevented it from meeting Israeli Government officials, but also from travelling to Israel to meet Israeli victims and to the West Bank to meet Palestinian Authority representatives and Palestinian victims.”</p>
<p>The U.N. report also noted that “In establishing its findings, the Mission sought to rely primarily and whenever possible on information it gathered first-hand. Information produced by others, including reports, affidavits and media reports, was used primarily as corroboration.”</p>
<p>The draft resolution asserts that “notwithstanding a great body of evidence that Hamas and other violent Islamist groups committed war crimes by using civilians and civilian institutions, such as mosques, schools, and hospitals, as shields, the report repeatedly downplayed or cast doubt upon that claim”.</p>
<p>The “great body of evidence” is an apparent reference to remarks from Israeli officials found to be demonstrably lacking in credibility, which were commonly simply repeated by U.S. officials and the mainstream media.</p>
<p>The U.N. mission did examine “whether and to what extent the Palestinian armed groups violated their obligation to exercise care and take all feasible precaution to protect the civilian population in Gaza” and found that “Palestinian armed groups were present in urban areas during the military operations and launched rockets from urban areas”.</p>
<p>But it “found no evidence, however, to suggest that Palestinian armed groups either directed civilians to areas where attacks were being launched or that they forced civilians to remain within the vicinity of the attacks.”</p>
<p>While there is no evidence that Hamas deliberately used civilians as human shields, the Goldstone report “investigated four incidents in which the Israeli armed forces coerced Palestinian civilian men at gunpoint to take part in house searches during the military operations” and concluded “that this practice amounts to the Use of Palestinian civilians as human shields and is therefore prohibited by international humanitarian law.”</p>
<p>The draft resolution, besides calling upon the White House and State Department to reject the Goldstone report and its recommendations, also “reaffirms its support for the democratic, Jewish State of Israel, for Israel’s security and right to self-defense, and, specifically for Israel’s right to defend its citizens from violent militant groups and their state sponsors.”</p>
<p>It makes no similar mention of the right of Palestinians to security and self-defense from Israel and its U.S. sponsor.</p>
<p>Human rights groups, <a href="http://www.btselem.org/English/Gaza_Strip/20091019_BTselem_position_on_the_Goldstone_commission_report.asp" type="external">including the Israeli organization B’Tselem</a>, have called upon the international community to implement its recommendation that suspected violations of international law be investigated.</p> | false | 1 | us house representatives vote tuesday resolution calling president barack obama secretary state hillary clinton oppose unequivocally endorsement consideration report united nations fact finding mission gaza conflict multilateral fora headed justice richard goldstone former judge constitutional court south africa prosecutor international criminal tribunals former yugoslavia rwanda un report found evidence indicates israel hamas committed war crimes israels 22day assault gaza strip dubbed operation cast lead began december 27 2008 report recommended allegations war crimes parties investigated current text proposed congressional resolution h res 867 contains numerous factual inaccuracies beginning assertion un inquiry prejudged findings onesidedly mandated investigate violations international human rights law international humanitarian law israel palestinian people particularly occupied gaza strip due current aggression actual mandate adopted april 3 investigate violations international human rights law international humanitarian law might committed time context military operations conducted gaza period 27 december 2008 18 january 2009 whether quoted text april 3 mandate un general assembly resolution s91 january 12 2009 resulted later appointment mission un human rights council unhrc also omitted draft resolutions reproduction text words occupying power israel international law occupying power fact obligated investigate allegations war crimes violations human rights draft us resolution states goldstone report makes mention relentless rocket mortar attacks numbered thousands spanned period eight years hamas violent militant groups gaza civilian targets israel necessitated israels defensive measures criticism ignores fact even israels military operations justifiable 160defensive measures israel would still legally obligated conduct operations accordance international law conduct investigations alleged war crimes conducted forces draft resolution also makes mention relentless siege gaza israel fact hamas strictly observing ceasefire agreed june firing rockets israel first violated truce repeated attacks gazans continuation crippling siege airstrike invasion gaza israeli forces november 4 ultimately resulted complete breakdown truce also makes mention fact goldstone report contains section dedicated examining impact rocket mortar attacks palestinian militants southern israel missions efforts impeded israels refusal cooperate draft resolution states un mission included member joining mission already declared israel guilty committing atrocities operation cast lead signing public letter january 11 2009 published sunday times called israels actions war crimes letter sunday times also stated condemn firing rockets hamas israel suicide bombings also contrary international humanitarian law war crimes criticism goldstone report similar basis one members beforehand declared hamas guilty war crimes lacking draft resolution calls goldstone reports findings israeli military deliberately attacked civilians operation cast lead unsubstantiated fact 575 page report provides extensive documentation findings draft resolution states authors report body report admit deal issues regarding problems conducting military operations civilian areas secondguessing decisions made soldiers commanding officers fog war outright fabrication words fact appear body actual report words actually come alleged email richard goldstone explained un report rely colonel kemp inquiry full text statement email replacing part omitted draft resolution reads deal issues raised regarding problems conducting military operations civilian areas emphasis added draft resolution states richard goldstone quoted october 16 edition jewish daily forward saying court law would nothing proven omitted context remark article added recalled work chief prosecutor international war crimes tribunal yugoslavia 1994 began working goldstone presented report commissioned un security council based said factfinding mission similar gaza couldnt use report evidence goldstone said useful roadmap investigators chief prosecutor decide investigate thats purpose sort report draft resolution asserts goldstone report effect denied state israel right selfdefense offers supporting evidence goldstone report found israeli government sought portray operations essentially response rocket attacks exercise right selfdefence mission considers plan directed least part different target people gaza whole draft resolution states report usually considered public statements made israeli officials credible frequently giving uncritical credence statements taken called gaza authorities ie gaza leadership hamas offers examples report report fact question credibility israeli officials notes one instance considers credibility israels position damaged series inconsistencies contradictions factual inaccuracies statements justifying attack another example illustrating israels lack credibility acknowledges significant efforts made israel issue warnings credibility instructions move city centres safety also diminished fact city centres subject intense attacks goldstone report also observed refusing cooperate mission government israel prevented meeting israeli government officials also travelling israel meet israeli victims west bank meet palestinian authority representatives palestinian victims un report also noted establishing findings mission sought rely primarily whenever possible information gathered firsthand information produced others including reports affidavits media reports used primarily corroboration draft resolution asserts notwithstanding great body evidence hamas violent islamist groups committed war crimes using civilians civilian institutions mosques schools hospitals shields report repeatedly downplayed cast doubt upon claim great body evidence apparent reference remarks israeli officials found demonstrably lacking credibility commonly simply repeated us officials mainstream media un mission examine whether extent palestinian armed groups violated obligation exercise care take feasible precaution protect civilian population gaza found palestinian armed groups present urban areas military operations launched rockets urban areas found evidence however suggest palestinian armed groups either directed civilians areas attacks launched forced civilians remain within vicinity attacks evidence hamas deliberately used civilians human shields goldstone report investigated four incidents israeli armed forces coerced palestinian civilian men gunpoint take part house searches military operations concluded practice amounts use palestinian civilians human shields therefore prohibited international humanitarian law draft resolution besides calling upon white house state department reject goldstone report recommendations also reaffirms support democratic jewish state israel israels security right selfdefense specifically israels right defend citizens violent militant groups state sponsors makes similar mention right palestinians security selfdefense israel us sponsor human rights groups including israeli organization btselem called upon international community implement recommendation suspected violations international law investigated | 903 |
<p>In the “fiscal cliff” talks, Republicans are demanding serious entitlement reforms in exchange for an agreement to raise revenues. But in the aftermath of the November election, what kinds of reforms should be on the table, especially in the Medicare program? President Obama made clear during the campaign his opposition to the one idea that could really make a difference—premium support of the kind developed and championed by the Republican vice presidential candidate, Paul Ryan. That’s the most direct route to injecting the kind of market discipline that Medicare and the rest of the health system desperately need.</p>
<p>But if premium support can’t be secured in this round of negotiation because of Democratic opposition, are there other reforms that are still worth fighting for?</p>
<p>The answer is yes, but to determine what they are requires a proper understanding of what is driving the cost problem in Medicare in the first place.</p>
<p>The most pressing problem in Medicare is the dominant and poorly designed fee-for-service (FFS) insurance model. Seventy-five percent of the beneficiaries are enrolled in FFS, with the other 25 percent enrolled in private plans (called Medicare Advantage). The FFS program is essentially a claims-paying machine. If a licensed provider renders a medical service to a beneficiary, the Medicare FFS program generally pays for the service, no questions asked. In that sense, it’s an FFS program modeled on the private insurance plans prevalent in 1965, when Medicare was created.</p>
<p>The problem is that FFS insurance requires effective cost-sharing on the part of the enrollees to provide some check on use of services. Otherwise, FFS insurance costs will soar as there is no other control mechanism overseeing appropriate care.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, Medicare FFS does not have an effective cost-sharing structure. The law certainly requires cost-sharing on the part of the beneficiaries (irrationally designed, but cost-sharing nonetheless). But the vast majority of FFS enrollees—90 percent, according to data from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission—have secondary insurance that pays for the all of the costs that Medicare doesn’t cover. This secondary insurance comes in the form of Medigap plans, employer-sponsored wraparound coverage, or Medicaid. For beneficiaries with these kinds of secondary insurance coverage, Medicare’s cost-sharing is useless because the insurance pays it for them. Thus, there is very little reason for these beneficiaries to steer away from extra procedures and tests because they don’t pay any of the added cost that arises from the additional use of services.</p>
<p>The predictable result of these incentives is a steady and unrelenting rise in the volume and intensity of services provided to Medicare FFS enrollees. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated that between 1997 and 2005, the real price per capita paid for physician services declined by about 5 percent, but overall spending per FFS enrollee rose nearly 40 percent because of an explosion in the use of services.</p>
<p>Any serious reform of Medicare must tackle this problem of a dysfunctional cost-sharing system.</p>
<p>The Obama administration’s solution is to try to enroll FFS beneficiaries into a new version of “managed care”—without really ever telling the beneficiaries what’s going on. The health law encourages doctors and hospitals to form Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs)—essentially HMOs without the insurance component. The idea is that these organizations will work against the fragmentation and lack of coordination in Medicare FFS and begin to reduce costs.</p>
<p>But the ACO model as currently constituted is flawed. The Medicare beneficiaries have no role whatsoever in selecting an ACO to get their care. The government is assigning the beneficiaries to ACOs based on who their primary physician is. If their doctor is part of an ACO, so are they. With this kind of “passive enrollment” system, the ACOs are destined to disappoint. They either won’t deliver much in terms of cost-cutting, or, if they do, the beneficiaries will revolt because they never really agreed to be a part of a more controlled “managed care” program.</p>
<p>Medicare reform could be jumpstarted with a far-reaching reform of both the secondary insurance system and the ACO concept. There are three parts to a sensible approach. First, in general, Medigap plans and employer-sponsored retiree coverage should not be allowed to fill in entirely Medicare’s cost-sharing. In an FFS insurance model, that’s commonsense. In addition to regular Medigap insurance, this rule would apply to the health program for retired federal employees as well as the military health system, both of which serve as secondary insurance for millions of former government workers and military personnel.</p>
<p>Second, the ACO “shared savings” program should be explicitly expanded to foster competition among ACOs through beneficiary choice. Instead of the automatic enrollment system now in place, beneficiaries should be given the option to enroll in an ACO of their choosing. And, as an incentive to do so, they should be allowed to share in the savings from ACO cost-cutting. The amount of savings they would get (in the form of reduced Medicare premiums) should be directly proportional to how much ACOs can bring down overall costs below what would otherwise occur in unmanaged FFS. Thus, ACOs that are particularly effective at cutting costs would attract market share and enrollment because beneficiaries would experience reduced premiums if they signed up with them.</p>
<p>Third, to provide even more incentive for enrollment in cost-effective care, the reform should allow secondary insurance to provide more favorable cost-sharing for beneficiaries who get their care from an approved integrated system (that could be an ACO model or perhaps even more aggressively managed models). This would give the beneficiaries even stronger financial incentives to forgo unmanaged FFS and would create within Medicare something like an “in-network” and “out-of-network” structure, much like what many private employers have in place today.</p>
<p>These three reforms would dramatically change the cost dynamic in the program. Even so, other reforms would still be necessary. The Medicare system of co-insurance and deductibles is completely out-of-date and needs to be modernized. The age of eligibility for Medicare needs to be updated to reflect the nearly five-year improvement in longevity that has occurred since 1965. And the move toward greater means testing should accelerate. All of these reforms would complement a thoroughgoing reform of the secondary insurance system and ACOs.</p>
<p>Of course, even with these reforms, Medicare will still need the full benefit that would come from opening up the program to stiff competition between private plans and FFS in a premium support reform plan. The potential for cost-cutting innovation with such a reform far exceeds what can be done within the FFS framework.</p>
<p>But until that model can be adopted in full, it’s important to start injecting into the program more rational consumer incentives to begin correcting the flaws that are now driving up costs so rapidly.</p>
<p>James C. Capretta is a fellow at the <a href="" type="internal">Ethics and Public Policy Center</a>, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute,&#160;and project director of <a href="http://obamacarewatch.org/" type="external">ObamaCareWatch.org</a>.</p> | false | 1 | fiscal cliff talks republicans demanding serious entitlement reforms exchange agreement raise revenues aftermath november election kinds reforms table especially medicare program president obama made clear campaign opposition one idea could really make differencepremium support kind developed championed republican vice presidential candidate paul ryan thats direct route injecting kind market discipline medicare rest health system desperately need premium support cant secured round negotiation democratic opposition reforms still worth fighting answer yes determine requires proper understanding driving cost problem medicare first place pressing problem medicare dominant poorly designed feeforservice ffs insurance model seventyfive percent beneficiaries enrolled ffs 25 percent enrolled private plans called medicare advantage ffs program essentially claimspaying machine licensed provider renders medical service beneficiary medicare ffs program generally pays service questions asked sense ffs program modeled private insurance plans prevalent 1965 medicare created problem ffs insurance requires effective costsharing part enrollees provide check use services otherwise ffs insurance costs soar control mechanism overseeing appropriate care unfortunately medicare ffs effective costsharing structure law certainly requires costsharing part beneficiaries irrationally designed costsharing nonetheless vast majority ffs enrollees90 percent according data medicare payment advisory commissionhave secondary insurance pays costs medicare doesnt cover secondary insurance comes form medigap plans employersponsored wraparound coverage medicaid beneficiaries kinds secondary insurance coverage medicares costsharing useless insurance pays thus little reason beneficiaries steer away extra procedures tests dont pay added cost arises additional use services predictable result incentives steady unrelenting rise volume intensity services provided medicare ffs enrollees congressional budget office cbo estimated 1997 2005 real price per capita paid physician services declined 5 percent overall spending per ffs enrollee rose nearly 40 percent explosion use services serious reform medicare must tackle problem dysfunctional costsharing system obama administrations solution try enroll ffs beneficiaries new version managed carewithout really ever telling beneficiaries whats going health law encourages doctors hospitals form accountable care organizations acosessentially hmos without insurance component idea organizations work fragmentation lack coordination medicare ffs begin reduce costs aco model currently constituted flawed medicare beneficiaries role whatsoever selecting aco get care government assigning beneficiaries acos based primary physician doctor part aco kind passive enrollment system acos destined disappoint either wont deliver much terms costcutting beneficiaries revolt never really agreed part controlled managed care program medicare reform could jumpstarted farreaching reform secondary insurance system aco concept three parts sensible approach first general medigap plans employersponsored retiree coverage allowed fill entirely medicares costsharing ffs insurance model thats commonsense addition regular medigap insurance rule would apply health program retired federal employees well military health system serve secondary insurance millions former government workers military personnel second aco shared savings program explicitly expanded foster competition among acos beneficiary choice instead automatic enrollment system place beneficiaries given option enroll aco choosing incentive allowed share savings aco costcutting amount savings would get form reduced medicare premiums directly proportional much acos bring overall costs would otherwise occur unmanaged ffs thus acos particularly effective cutting costs would attract market share enrollment beneficiaries would experience reduced premiums signed third provide even incentive enrollment costeffective care reform allow secondary insurance provide favorable costsharing beneficiaries get care approved integrated system could aco model perhaps even aggressively managed models would give beneficiaries even stronger financial incentives forgo unmanaged ffs would create within medicare something like innetwork outofnetwork structure much like many private employers place today three reforms would dramatically change cost dynamic program even reforms would still necessary medicare system coinsurance deductibles completely outofdate needs modernized age eligibility medicare needs updated reflect nearly fiveyear improvement longevity occurred since 1965 move toward greater means testing accelerate reforms would complement thoroughgoing reform secondary insurance system acos course even reforms medicare still need full benefit would come opening program stiff competition private plans ffs premium support reform plan potential costcutting innovation reform far exceeds done within ffs framework model adopted full important start injecting program rational consumer incentives begin correcting flaws driving costs rapidly james c capretta fellow ethics public policy center visiting fellow american enterprise institute160and project director obamacarewatchorg | 655 |
<p>Four years after delving deep into the romantic troubles of a singles-bar-haunting fiftysomething in “Gloria,” and a few months after casting a sensitive eye on a young transgender waitress in the wake of tragedy in “A Fantastic Woman,” Chilean director <a href="http://variety.com/t/sebastian-lelio/" type="external">Sebastian Lelio</a> offers yet another striking and warmly nuanced portrait of the kinds of women whose internal lives are rarely portrayed on screen, tackling a lesbian love affair within London’s Orthodox Jewish community in “ <a href="http://variety.com/t/disobedience/" type="external">Disobedience</a>.” Taking on his first English-language feature, he directs <a href="http://variety.com/t/rachel-weisz/" type="external">Rachel Weisz</a> and <a href="http://variety.com/t/rachel-mcadams/" type="external">Rachel McAdams</a> in an adaptation of Naomi Alderman’s novel, which begins as a case study in religious repression and gradually evolves into something much richer. Slower and more deliberate than some of his recent work, though anchored by a remarkably honest and unrestrained sex scene, “Disobedience” may not catapult Lelio beyond the arthouse world, but it’s yet another triumph in what’s shaping up to be a major career.</p>
<p>Also serving as a producer, Weisz was the one who initially optioned Alderman’s book, and here she plays Ronit, an artistically-minded, single British expat working as a photographer in New York. In the middle of a shoot, she receives word that her estranged father (Anton Lesser), a powerful Orthodox rabbi, has died. (We glimpse him the opening scene, delivering a sermon about free will that haunts the film like a soft minor key melody.) We learn a lot about Ronit by the way she grieves – a long walk, a few drinks, a drunken hookup in a bathroom stall – and she’s soon on a plane to London. Arriving back home, she’s barely let in the door by Dovid (Alessando Nivola), her childhood friend and her father’s longtime spiritual protégé, so shocked is he to see her back.</p>
<p>Everyone is shocked to see her back. We never get the full details on what drove her to flee the community, but the fact that she reflexively tries to hug Dovid – an observer of negiah, the prohibition on physical contact between men and women outside of family or marriage – tells us just how long she’s been away. She can only manage a few minutes of the cold stares at the reception before she’s retreated to the kitchen, with only Dovid seeming to acknowledge that her loss of a father, however distant their relationship, deserves the same respect as the neighborhood’s loss of a rabbi. (She isn’t even mentioned in the obituary.)</p>
<p>Yet the biggest jolt comes when she sees Esti (McAdams), her childhood best friend, now married to Dovid. A timid, tired-eyed schoolteacher, Esti scarcely seems like the kind of person who could have ever gone to-to-toe with the outspoken Ronit, but the two were more than just friends: they were teenage lovers. Exactly to what extent, and to whose knowledge, is purposely left vague, but the two hesitantly feel each other out over the next few days, with the eventual rekindling of their affair always at risk of attracting a prying eye.</p>
<p>Ronit may be the film’s primary protagonist, but Esti is its heart, and McAdams crafts a character unlike any we’ve yet seen from her. At times, the actress almost seems to be consciously struggling to stifle the sort of effortless magnetism she usually exudes, but so too is her character; it isn’t until Esti boldly takes a drag off of Ronit’s cigarette midway through the film that we see her fully exhale. While Ronit is eager to create miniature firestorms among her devout extended family – particularly during a Shabbat dinner scene that’s shot through with matzo-dry humor – Esti takes her faith and her community seriously, and Ronit’s arrival has a shattering effect on the incomplete yet nonetheless meaningful life she had managed to forge in her absence.</p>
<p>The film – at times a tad to somber for its own good – loosens up as the two finally stop talking around the margins of their past, with a few stolen alleyway kisses leading up to a rendezvous in a hotel. This scene, which has already drawn rather misleading comparisons to “Blue Is the Warmest Color,” is certainly unabashed, at times startlingly so, but it manages to be explicit without suggesting male-gaze voyeurism is the primary force lurking behind it. Its eroticism serves a function, and the two women’s sense of abandon is all the more significant in contrast to Esti’s dutiful, passionless weekly sex with Dovid.</p>
<p>In a lesser film, Dovid would merely serve as an obstacle to Ronit and Esti’s affair, but Lelio regards him with far more sympathy as he juggles his desire to do right by the two women in his life with the suspicions of the community whose shul he’s about to take over. No flat personification of religious rigidity, he’s a fundamentally decent man who faces choices every bit as difficult as his wife’s, and he’s fully inhabited by a career-best performance from Nivola. None of these three characters are tidy, but neither is desire, nor faith, nor love, and Lelio resists every opportunity to make them so. As the rabbi preaches at the start of the film, free will is both a gift and a burden, and freedom is impossible without accepting a degree of loss.</p>
<p>Reviewed at Toronto International Film Festival (Special Presentations), September 10, 2017. Running time: 114 MINS.</p>
<p>A Film4 and FilmNation Entertainment presentation of an Element Pictures, LC6, Braven Films production. Produced by Frida Torresblanco, Ed Guiney, Rachel Weisz. Executive producers, Rose Garnett, Daniel Battsek, Ben Browning, Glen Basner, Andrew Lowe, Eric Laufer, Giovanna Randall.</p>
<p>Directed by Sebastian Lelio. Screenplay: Lelio, Rebecca Lenkiewicz, based on the novel by Naomi Alderman. Camera (color): Danny Cohen. Editor: Nathan Nugent. Music: Matthew Herbert.</p>
<p>Rachel Weisz, Rachel McAdams, Alessandro Nivola, Anton Lesser.</p> | false | 1 | four years delving deep romantic troubles singlesbarhaunting fiftysomething gloria months casting sensitive eye young transgender waitress wake tragedy fantastic woman chilean director sebastian lelio offers yet another striking warmly nuanced portrait kinds women whose internal lives rarely portrayed screen tackling lesbian love affair within londons orthodox jewish community disobedience taking first englishlanguage feature directs rachel weisz rachel mcadams adaptation naomi aldermans novel begins case study religious repression gradually evolves something much richer slower deliberate recent work though anchored remarkably honest unrestrained sex scene disobedience may catapult lelio beyond arthouse world yet another triumph whats shaping major career also serving producer weisz one initially optioned aldermans book plays ronit artisticallyminded single british expat working photographer new york middle shoot receives word estranged father anton lesser powerful orthodox rabbi died glimpse opening scene delivering sermon free haunts film like soft minor key melody learn lot ronit way grieves long walk drinks drunken hookup bathroom stall shes soon plane london arriving back home shes barely let door dovid alessando nivola childhood friend fathers longtime spiritual protégé shocked see back everyone shocked see back never get full details drove flee community fact reflexively tries hug dovid observer negiah prohibition physical contact men women outside family marriage tells us long shes away manage minutes cold stares reception shes retreated kitchen dovid seeming acknowledge loss father however distant relationship deserves respect neighborhoods loss rabbi isnt even mentioned obituary yet biggest jolt comes sees esti mcadams childhood best friend married dovid timid tiredeyed schoolteacher esti scarcely seems like kind person could ever gone tototoe outspoken ronit two friends teenage lovers exactly extent whose knowledge purposely left vague two hesitantly feel next days eventual rekindling affair always risk attracting prying eye ronit may films primary protagonist esti heart mcadams crafts character unlike weve yet seen times actress almost seems consciously struggling stifle sort effortless magnetism usually exudes character isnt esti boldly takes drag ronits cigarette midway film see fully exhale ronit eager create miniature firestorms among devout extended family particularly shabbat dinner scene thats shot matzodry humor esti takes faith community seriously ronits arrival shattering effect incomplete yet nonetheless meaningful life managed forge absence film times tad somber good loosens two finally stop talking around margins past stolen alleyway kisses leading rendezvous hotel scene already drawn rather misleading comparisons blue warmest color certainly unabashed times startlingly manages explicit without suggesting malegaze voyeurism primary force lurking behind eroticism serves function two womens sense abandon significant contrast estis dutiful passionless weekly sex dovid lesser film dovid would merely serve obstacle ronit estis affair lelio regards far sympathy juggles desire right two women life suspicions community whose shul hes take flat personification religious rigidity hes fundamentally decent man faces choices every bit difficult wifes hes fully inhabited careerbest performance nivola none three characters tidy neither desire faith love lelio resists every opportunity make rabbi preaches start film free gift burden freedom impossible without accepting degree loss reviewed toronto international film festival special presentations september 10 2017 running time 114 mins film4 filmnation entertainment presentation element pictures lc6 braven films production produced frida torresblanco ed guiney rachel weisz executive producers rose garnett daniel battsek ben browning glen basner andrew lowe eric laufer giovanna randall directed sebastian lelio screenplay lelio rebecca lenkiewicz based novel naomi alderman camera color danny cohen editor nathan nugent music matthew herbert rachel weisz rachel mcadams alessandro nivola anton lesser | 561 |
<p>Where do things stand among Republicans in Washington regarding the repeal and replacement of Obamacare? Every day seems to bring fresh twists in the story, and the basic thread can be hard to follow. Is this the beginning of an arduous but ultimately fruitful legislative process? Is it the painful end of an illusion? Will it yield in a quagmire or a vindication for the party that has made the fight against Obamacare its foremost mission for more than half a decade?</p>
<p>One lesson I’ve learned from working on public policy in and out of government is that in a complex legislative debate, success and failure often feel exactly the same while they are happening. They both feel pretty much like pandemonium. During the lengthy period when some basic questions of strategy and substance are still open, everything seems up for grabs and the entire edifice always looks on the edge of collapsing. So it is not easy to judge the prospects for success by orderliness or discipline along the way. A better yardstick is whether there is a plausible strategy being championed by a critical mass of people on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue.</p>
<p>By that measure, the effort to replace Obamacare is in some trouble. On its face, the legislative strategy lawmakers are now pursuing is not a good fit for the substantive policy objectives it is expected to achieve, and Republicans have yet to come to terms with the mismatch. But we are very early in the process, there is a growing awareness at all levels of the inadequacies of the approach, the incoming administration has yet to truly have its say, and ample opportunity remains for Republicans in Congress to correct their course as they go. That course will inevitably change several times before the story ends.</p>
<p>What follows, with due apologies for its length, is one observer’s general sense of where things stand. I’ll lay out the logic of the reigning strategy, take up its faults, consider the role the incoming administration has played, and offer some reflections on where things might be headed.</p>
<p>Repeal and Delay</p>
<p>Immediately after the election, it seemed as though congressional Republicans had quickly chosen a course on health care. The idea was a dual-reconciliation strategy for repealing and replacing Obamacare.</p>
<p>The reconciliation process allows budget-related legislation to get through the Senate without the threat of filibuster — and so with only a simple majority. Because no budget resolution was enacted last year, Republicans have the option of advancing two separate reconciliation bills in 2017, where normally only one per year is possible. The plan was to begin the year with a quick reconciliation measure, enacted by the end of February. It would repeal significant pieces of Obamacare (though by no means all, because only provisions related to spending or taxes can be included in reconciliation bills). Then, later in the year, a more comprehensive reconciliation bill would include both tax reform and key elements of a conservative health-care reform as an Obamacare replacement. Repeal and replace would both be written to take effect in two or three years, together, but they would be enacted separately.</p>
<p>The logic behind this approach was basically threefold. First, and most important, was a logic of momentum: It would allow Republicans to move very quickly on what had been a key campaign commitment for years and not lose time and focus as usually happens with major legislative initiatives. They even had a bill already written that they knew the Senate parliamentarian would deem eligible for reconciliation. When Republicans took over the Senate in 2015, they sent President Obama a short, simple reconciliation bill repealing, with a delayed effective date, Obamacare’s subsidies, mandates, taxes, and Medicaid expansion but not touching the law’s insurance regulations (which probably aren’t removable by reconciliation). Everyone understood that Obama would veto it, but the idea was to do a test run of a partial repeal by reconciliation. Now with Trump in the White House, Republicans could just send him the same bill, get it signed into law, and then get to work on a replacement before the repeal took effect, having clearly signaled their seriousness.</p>
<p>Second, there was a logic of inertia, which reaches back well beyond this year: The movement to repeal and replace Obamacare was born with 2012 in mind. Obamacare was enacted in 2010 but would not take full effect for four years, and there was a presidential election in the middle of that period. The idea was that if Republicans won in 2012, they would move swiftly to unravel the law before it took effect and then move more slowly and incrementally to enact conservative reforms that would enable a genuine consumer market in coverage for individuals.</p>
<p>The Romney transition team in 2012 developed a detailed strategy for such a two-step approach (including plans for an early repeal-by-reconciliation bill if Republicans took over the Senate). They effectively locked it away in a glass box marked “break in case of Republican president” – and left it unbroken in 2012. But after Trump’s unexpected victory, the first instinct of some Capitol Hill Republicans was to break the glass and get going.</p>
<p>This may seem like silly reasoning for a legislative strategy, but it’s actually a very common way of thinking about policy. Clever plans denied their chance by lost elections or failed votes often grow only more brilliant in the imagination of their champions; these plans are then the first default when those champions have their next opportunity to act. A great deal of the misbegotten structure of Obamacare itself can be explained by such reasoning ( <a href="http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-clintonian-roots-of-obamacare" type="external">with its roots in the failure of Hillarycare</a>), as can a lot of the policy landscape. Public programs are often designed to win the last war, ignoring crucial changes over time.</p>
<p>When it comes to Obamacare, one very important thing has changed since 2012: The law has now been implemented for several years, so that millions are insured through its mechanisms. A repeal and replacement today would need to provide some kind of bridge for at least some of these beneficiaries and so would probably need to connect its repeal and replace elements fairly explicitly.</p>
<p>Conservative health wonks have proposed various ways to do this. (Here is one <a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/getting-there/article/804816" type="external">general overview</a> and one fairly <a href="https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Improving-Health-and-Health-Care-online.pdf" type="external">specific proposal</a> I’ve been involved with, and many others have offered a variety of good ideas.) A quick repeal with no hint of replacement would create at least a temporary situation in which there was no such bridge; this would cause great uncertainty for the people involved and also put great political pressure on Republicans. But the inertia of the quick repeal idea has driven some Republicans to overlook or minimize that challenge.</p>
<p>And third, the idea of a dual-reconciliation strategy was driven by a logic of tax reform. The first reconciliation bill, by eliminating the Obamacare taxes, would lower the revenue baseline against which an eventual Republican tax reform was measured — making deeper tax cuts possible later in the year. And the second reconciliation bill, by providing some tax credits for insurance to lower-income people at the same time it enacted corporate and personal income-tax cuts, would improve the distribution tables of the Republican tax reform, making its benefits less skewed toward higher-income people. Since repeal and replace would take effect at the same time (in two or three years under this hopeful scenario), the effect on health policy would be the same as one bill, but the tax-reform effort would be much aided by splitting them up.</p>
<p>In different combinations, these three arguments have added up to a case for a dual-reconciliation strategy over the past two months. In the immediate aftermath of the election, the Trump team also pressed congressional Republicans for quick action on health care. They even asked whether a bill could be ready for signature by inauguration day, which added to the pressure for speed and for starting with legislation that was already written and tested. And the dual-reconciliation approach soon also became the preferred strategy of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who has long maintained a studied agnosticism about the substance of health reform.</p>
<p>McConnell’s priorities are procedural and institutional. He wants the Senate to work and not to be paralyzed, and he wants to avoid massive, comprehensive legislation that cannot possibly be legible to legislators. Splitting repeal and replace, and then perhaps further dividing any replacement effort into smaller steps, would be more like the way he wants to see the Senate work. And it would avoid making incremental progress dependent on full agreement in advance about the specifics of the ultimate reforms.</p>
<p>If Republicans can pass one bill now that all of them would support, and then worry about the next step later, why should they wait?</p>
<p>The Trouble with Delay</p>
<p>But by early December, as they began to focus on the details and contemplate the politics, some Republicans in Congress (especially in the Senate) became increasingly uneasy with this strategy.</p>
<p>Their worries were straightforward. A repeal bill pursued without a replacement would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office as significantly increasing the number of uninsured Americans (as the <a href="https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52371" type="external">CBO has already signaled</a> this week), and Republican Members of Congress did not relish answering questions about that score with assurances that a plan would be forthcoming later. Leaving Obamacare’s insurance regulations in place while eliminating its taxes, mandates, and subsidies (and offering no plan for further changes) could also hasten the departure of insurers from the system during any transition period, leaving Republicans with the blame.</p>
<p>But most important, dividing repeal from replace could leave the prospects for a replacement much bleaker, since support for any particular approach to reform is likely to be narrower than support for even a partial repeal. This would also mean that any further steps toward full repeal would be more difficult. And there is no guarantee that a second reconciliation deal this year will be possible: Arriving at a ten-year budget trajectory that 50 Republican senators can accept without being able to assume further savings from Obamacare’s repeal (which will have been enacted by then), and apparently without entitlement reform, will be no simple matter. In effect, the dual-reconciliation strategy threatens to undermine both repeal and replace while leaving Republicans with some of the blame for Obamacare’s ongoing collapse.</p>
<p>These concerns built up quietly in December, expressed in meetings of members, or in closed conversations with health wonks. But when members returned for the new Congress in January, it became apparent that the worries were widely shared and were not being answered; senators in particular then began to complain in public. This has helped create the sense that the strategy’s fate is in doubt. That’s true, but as long as no alternative strategy is out there, the danger to the dual-reconciliation approach is probably not fatal.</p>
<p>It’s important to see that the debate is more about legislative strategy than policy substance. The story most frequently told these days about the sources of the chaos around health care in Congress suggests that the problem is that Republicans just can’t agree on policy. And they are certainly far from unanimous about health reform. But Republicans have actually made a great deal of progress toward broad agreement on a general policy approach over the past half-decade, albeit more so in the House than in the Senate. That approach, now most fully embodied in legislation authored by Representative Tom Price, combines returning insurance regulation to the states, a federal tax credit for coverage in the individual market, and continuous-coverage protection to cover Americans with preexisting conditions. And Donald Trump has chosen Price to be his Secretary of Health and Human Services.</p>
<p>It is a general approach that could take a number of different forms in practice. Some of these would allow the states to auto-enroll uninsured people in plans with premiums equal to the federal tax credit for which they are eligible; these could amount to a kind of “universal catastrophic coverage” policy, nearly zeroing out the uninsured and then enabling a competitive market for more comprehensive coverage above that. (This is the form that would seem best aligned with Donald Trump’s rhetoric about the uninsured.) Others might employ income-based credits but a less aggressive enrollment strategy. Others might deliver a subsidy for coverage through the states, allowing each state to tailor the benefit differently. And various approaches to Medicaid reform have been proposed.</p>
<p>The differences among these proposals involve serious tradeoffs, and it certainly remains the case that most congressional Republicans have not thought deeply about them and are not immersed in the details of health care. But the Republican health-care debates now occur mostly within the general boundaries of an approach long laid out by various conservative health experts, translated into legislation in different ways by Price, Senator Bill Cassidy, and others, and backed by House Speaker Paul Ryan and the relevant committee chairmen in both houses.</p>
<p>There are important opponents, of course, and there are arguments about important particulars within the boundaries of this approach. But the raging debates about its basic elements have faded some. On the substance of health reform, Republicans aren’t that much further from agreement than Democrats were about their own approach eight years ago.</p>
<p>Making Health Care Great Again</p>
<p>But the Democrats got from a general outline to a legislative process only after a Democratic president took office and advanced a particular version of their overall approach. And that brings us to Donald Trump.</p>
<p>It is strange that we should reach him this late in our story, but that is how the post-election Republican health-care debate has worked so far. And that fact underlies a fair bit of the chaos. Getting from a debate to a law was always going to require a president who settles some of the open questions and pushes the process forward. Whether that will happen under the incoming president is still unclear, and that is a primary reason that the fate of the effort to repeal and replace Obamacare is itself hazy.</p>
<p>For one thing, the attitude of Trump and his team toward the dual-reconciliation strategy has sometimes been unclear to many Republicans. Almost everything Trump himself has said in public so far has suggested he is not a fan of the strategy. From his earliest post-election interviews, he has said he does not want to see a period of uncertainty after a repeal is enacted before some replacement takes shape.</p>
<p>In a November 16 interview with 60 Minutes, his first discussion of the subject after the election, Trump was asked what would happen in the period between repealing and replacing the law. He said:</p>
<p>We’re going to do it simultaneously. It’ll be just fine. We’re not going to have, like, a two-day period and we’re not going to have a two-year period where there’s nothing. It will be repealed and replaced.</p>
<p>In a January 11 press conference, in response to a similar question, he said:</p>
<p>It’ll be repeal and replace. It will be essentially, simultaneously. It will be various segments, you understand, but will most likely be on the same day or the same week, but probably, the same day, could be the same hour.</p>
<p>Everything he said publicly in the intervening two months made the same point, albeit equally obliquely: Repeal and replace would be simultaneous. Public reports from people who spoke with Trump privately about this (most notably <a href="https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/817557831683608576" type="external">Senator Rand Paul</a>) have suggested the same. And Trump’s own tweets on health care have vaguely pressed Republicans to be careful on this front.</p>
<p>On January 15, in an interview with the Washington Post, Trump even suggested that his team would propose its own health-care reform, and that it would cover everyone now covered and at lower costs. And he again distanced himself from any approach that would separate the repeal of Obamacare from its replacement.</p>
<p>And yet, this repeatedly expressed view of the president-elect’s has had remarkably little effect on the Republican debate about strategy. This seems in part to be a price of Trump’s style. The way in which he has expressed himself on this question (and others) suggests to people immersed in the issue that he is talking off the cuff, without command of the particulars.</p>
<p>After Rand Paul announced he had spoken with Trump, who agreed with him about making repeal and replace simultaneous, one congressional staffer suggested at a Capitol Hill meeting on health care that his boss could call Trump and get him to say the opposite. After Trump’s news conference last week, several members and staffers suggested (independently) that Trump must mean that repeal and replace should take effect simultaneously, rather than that they should be enacted simultaneously, in which case congressional Republicans were already on the same page as Trump. (And of course, that could very well be what Trump meant.) After Trump’s Washington Post interview this past Sunday, the conservative health-care universe, including some people on Trump’s own team, quickly concluded that the separate administration plan he described was entirely a figment of Trump’s imagination.</p>
<p>But another reason that Trump’s statements about repeal and replace have not shaken up the strategy is that Trump’s team has, at least since the new year, mostly been cooperating with House and Senate leaders in advancing the dual-reconciliation approach and looking for ways to improve it. On health care, Trump’s policy team (which includes some conservative health-care experts, lawyers, and former officials) has cut a very different figure than Trump himself. They have been careful, steeped in the details, and engaged with key players both in Congress and in the health sector.</p>
<p>That engagement so far seems largely to have focused on developing a set of executive and regulatory actions that could help stabilize the individual-insurance market during any transition period. Conservative health experts did an enormous amount of detailed work on this front well before Trump was elected (or even nominated), with an eye to a possible Republican president, and Trump’s team has built on that work. With regard to legislative strategy, meanwhile, they have not resisted the dual-reconciliation approach but have encouraged congressional Republicans to include some elements of a replacement in an early reconciliation bill along with a partial repeal, rather than leaving it all for later.</p>
<p>Congressional Republicans have tried to ignore Trump’s inscrutable statements to reporters and Olympian potshots delivered through Twitter and, instead, just deal with his staff. It is a disposition they may need to hone in the coming years to contend with a kind of standing crisis in the executive that seems unlikely to abate. But they should also notice that in this instance, as will probably be the case in many others, Trump is actually steering them toward caution, despite his bombastic style. And warnings to be cautious should not simply be ignored.</p>
<p>For politicians, populism is after all frequently a form of timidity, a way of never straying far from the most intensely engaged voters. Such an attitude generally cannot lead the way, but it should influence it. That way of understanding the utility of Trump’s instincts — unmoored as they are from both political ideas in a traditional sense and many practical realities yet sensitive to certain crucial voter impulses — will not come easily to Republicans. But it could help them make the most of the circumstances in which they find themselves. Seeing Trump as a kind of empowered one-man focus group of cable-news viewers, for good and bad, could help all involved and might even mitigate some of the dangerous dysfunction of this period just a little.</p>
<p>For now, Republican leaders have responded to Trump’s statements and the urgings of his staff by suggesting that they might include some elements of a replacement in the early reconciliation bill, and by stressing that the two parts will take effect at the same time even if they are legislated separately. At a CNN town hall on January 12, for instance, House Speaker Paul Ryan said, “We want to do this at the same time, and in some cases in the same bill.” The same day, Senate Finance Committee chairman Orrin Hatch said in a statement, “We should definitely work on making the largest possible down payment on the Obamacare replacement with the budget reconciliation bill.”</p>
<p>It remains to be seen — and to be decided — just what this down payment could consist of. Members have talked about some loosening of the rules governing Health Savings Accounts, and some measures to keep insurers from bolting the exchanges during a transition, and returning some regulatory power to the states. But they may be open to considering whether more ambitious steps toward a conservative health reform could make it into an early reconciliation.</p>
<p>Beyond this adjustment in response to Trump’s remarks, congressional Republicans are still unsure how to work with the incoming administration. Trump’s style, some uncertainty about who is in charge on his staff, and a touch of resentment at his vague public criticism of their strategy has left many uneasy about committing to any path. They fear getting far down the road toward legislation only to have Trump hear it criticized on Morning Joe and then declare on Twitter that he’ll veto it.</p>
<p>But in the absence of a real alternative, the dual-reconciliation strategy remains the default. Both houses of Congress passed the preliminary budget resolutions needed to pave a path for that strategy last week. That doesn’t mean the votes will be there for an early partial-repeal bill. But it means that’s the plan.</p>
<p>Repeal Plus</p>
<p>Can the strategy work? It’s possible, but it would probably require the early reconciliation bill to involve a more robust down payment than is now in the works.</p>
<p>For a dual-reconciliation strategy to actually enable repeal and replacement, the first step would have to enable the ones to follow rather than undermine them. That means the early reconciliation bill would have to ensure that the individual insurance markets continue to function during the transition period to a post-Obamacare health-care system, and it would have to clearly lay the policy foundations for conservative reforms to follow. A carbon copy of the 2015 reconciliation bill would not achieve these goals.</p>
<p>What might it take to achieve them? There are many steps the new administration could take to smooth the transition. Trump’s health-care team has a good sense of what these will need to be, which they have further sharpened in detailed discussions with the major insurers since the election. But congressional Republicans might have to take some key steps legislatively — for instance, by appropriating funds for Obamacare’s cost-sharing reductions during the transition period. And they might be wise to have the early reconciliation delay the termination of the individual mandate until the new system takes effect, rather than ending the mandate immediately. This would also significantly improve the CBO score of the early reconciliation bill’s effect on the uninsured rate.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, to lay the groundwork for replace, Republicans could include in the early reconciliation bill a provision for one or two years of a new funding stream — whether it is available as a credit to individuals or as a per capita payment to states that develop new insurance rules — that would help people in the individual market access coverage. This would take effect after the termination of Obamacare’s subsidies, taxes, and mandates (and so two or three years after enactment of the early reconciliation bill), could be used for the purchase of any state-approved insurance coverage, and would provide a bridge to a new system without yet fully defining it.</p>
<p>This approach might also help Republicans root out Obamacare’s federal insurance regulations, which otherwise probably cannot be undone in reconciliation. By creating an alternative funding stream that applies to insurance purchased under alternative rules, Republicans could effectively repeal the heart of Obamacare in the very process of replacing it. They would render irrelevant the insurance regulations they cannot yet repeal. If reconciliation is the only vehicle available to Republican reformers, then repeal simply might not be possible without replace.</p>
<p>But piling all of this into a quick early reconciliation bill would be an enormous challenge — perhaps more than the congressional committees can handle on short order. Ultimately, therefore, this advice may add up to arguing that Republicans should put aside the dual-reconciliation approach rather than expand it. Separating much of a repeal of Obamacare from most of a replacement for it, as the dual-reconciliation strategy would do, risks preventing both a full repeal and a real replacement.</p>
<p>A Year of Action</p>
<p>As an early reconciliation bill is developed and scored, many congressional Republicans will probably come to recognize this danger and may find other reasons — both political and practical — to grow uneasy with the dual-reconciliation approach. That could drive them to push for a more robust down payment on replacement, or it might undermine the strategy and send Republicans searching for another.</p>
<p>This would not be the end of the world. The momentum argument for early action is a strong one, but it need not be decisive. Republicans should consider their steps carefully and avoid some obvious mistakes — including those the Democrats made in enacting Obamacare.</p>
<p>If the dual-reconciliation strategy falls through, the first fallback would need to involve including the key elements of both repeal and replace in the later, fuller reconciliation bill for the 2018 budget year. It would of course also be wise to pursue any elements of a replacement that might be achievable outside the reconciliation process, with enough Democratic support to reach 60 votes. But the Democrats have little incentive to cooperate with any Republican health reforms, so while Republicans should seek their support and be willing to make some real concessions for it, they should not expect to gain it at this point.</p>
<p>The danger of a trial-and-error approach to finding a legislative strategy on health care is that it will lead to inaction and a fallback to the status quo. But rather unusually, total inaction is not an option in this case, because the status quo is not sustainable. The economics of the Obamacare exchange system is untenable in many parts of the country. And if Republicans can articulate their vision of health policy — including a competitive individual insurance market regulated by the states and an approach to Medicaid reform — they will find that they can readily justify reforms that provide greater stability, help reduce insurance costs, give people more options, and make coverage more attractive to the young and healthy. Whether alone or with some Democrats, they will have to act.</p>
<p>At this point, the intra-Republican health-care debate is chaotic and uneasy. There is no unanimity on substance and not much of a margin for internal dissent. And it is still unclear whether the new administration can help steer Congress toward any particular path. But major legislative efforts are always chaotic and uneasy. They proceed in fits and starts and frequently seem on the verge of collapse. The difference between success and failure often depends upon a combination of strategy, luck, and a willingness to take action.</p>
<p>On health care, Republicans have long lacked the latter in particular. But in that respect, at least, this time could well be different. The GOP has been preparing for this opportunity for years, and it now faces both a party electorate and a health-care system that will not allow for endless indecision. It is too soon to know what the final product will look like, and whether a series of reconciliation bills or some uneasy combination of partisan and bipartisan measures will emerge. But it does seem likely that a year of intense action on health care is beginning.</p>
<p>— Yuval Levin is the editor of National Affairs, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and a contributing editor of National Review.</p> | false | 1 | things stand among republicans washington regarding repeal replacement obamacare every day seems bring fresh twists story basic thread hard follow beginning arduous ultimately fruitful legislative process painful end illusion yield quagmire vindication party made fight obamacare foremost mission half decade one lesson ive learned working public policy government complex legislative debate success failure often feel exactly happening feel pretty much like pandemonium lengthy period basic questions strategy substance still open everything seems grabs entire edifice always looks edge collapsing easy judge prospects success orderliness discipline along way better yardstick whether plausible strategy championed critical mass people sides pennsylvania avenue measure effort replace obamacare trouble face legislative strategy lawmakers pursuing good fit substantive policy objectives expected achieve republicans yet come terms mismatch early process growing awareness levels inadequacies approach incoming administration yet truly say ample opportunity remains republicans congress correct course go course inevitably change several times story ends follows due apologies length one observers general sense things stand ill lay logic reigning strategy take faults consider role incoming administration played offer reflections things might headed repeal delay immediately election seemed though congressional republicans quickly chosen course health care idea dualreconciliation strategy repealing replacing obamacare reconciliation process allows budgetrelated legislation get senate without threat filibuster simple majority budget resolution enacted last year republicans option advancing two separate reconciliation bills 2017 normally one per year possible plan begin year quick reconciliation measure enacted end february would repeal significant pieces obamacare though means provisions related spending taxes included reconciliation bills later year comprehensive reconciliation bill would include tax reform key elements conservative healthcare reform obamacare replacement repeal replace would written take effect two three years together would enacted separately logic behind approach basically threefold first important logic momentum would allow republicans move quickly key campaign commitment years lose time focus usually happens major legislative initiatives even bill already written knew senate parliamentarian would deem eligible reconciliation republicans took senate 2015 sent president obama short simple reconciliation bill repealing delayed effective date obamacares subsidies mandates taxes medicaid expansion touching laws insurance regulations probably arent removable reconciliation everyone understood obama would veto idea test run partial repeal reconciliation trump white house republicans could send bill get signed law get work replacement repeal took effect clearly signaled seriousness second logic inertia reaches back well beyond year movement repeal replace obamacare born 2012 mind obamacare enacted 2010 would take full effect four years presidential election middle period idea republicans 2012 would move swiftly unravel law took effect move slowly incrementally enact conservative reforms would enable genuine consumer market coverage individuals romney transition team 2012 developed detailed strategy twostep approach including plans early repealbyreconciliation bill republicans took senate effectively locked away glass box marked break case republican president left unbroken 2012 trumps unexpected victory first instinct capitol hill republicans break glass get going may seem like silly reasoning legislative strategy actually common way thinking policy clever plans denied chance lost elections failed votes often grow brilliant imagination champions plans first default champions next opportunity act great deal misbegotten structure obamacare explained reasoning roots failure hillarycare lot policy landscape public programs often designed win last war ignoring crucial changes time comes obamacare one important thing changed since 2012 law implemented several years millions insured mechanisms repeal replacement today would need provide kind bridge least beneficiaries would probably need connect repeal replace elements fairly explicitly conservative health wonks proposed various ways one general overview one fairly specific proposal ive involved many others offered variety good ideas quick repeal hint replacement would create least temporary situation bridge would cause great uncertainty people involved also put great political pressure republicans inertia quick repeal idea driven republicans overlook minimize challenge third idea dualreconciliation strategy driven logic tax reform first reconciliation bill eliminating obamacare taxes would lower revenue baseline eventual republican tax reform measured making deeper tax cuts possible later year second reconciliation bill providing tax credits insurance lowerincome people time enacted corporate personal incometax cuts would improve distribution tables republican tax reform making benefits less skewed toward higherincome people since repeal replace would take effect time two three years hopeful scenario effect health policy would one bill taxreform effort would much aided splitting different combinations three arguments added case dualreconciliation strategy past two months immediate aftermath election trump team also pressed congressional republicans quick action health care even asked whether bill could ready signature inauguration day added pressure speed starting legislation already written tested dualreconciliation approach soon also became preferred strategy senate republican leader mitch mcconnell long maintained studied agnosticism substance health reform mcconnells priorities procedural institutional wants senate work paralyzed wants avoid massive comprehensive legislation possibly legible legislators splitting repeal replace perhaps dividing replacement effort smaller steps would like way wants see senate work would avoid making incremental progress dependent full agreement advance specifics ultimate reforms republicans pass one bill would support worry next step later wait trouble delay early december began focus details contemplate politics republicans congress especially senate became increasingly uneasy strategy worries straightforward repeal bill pursued without replacement would scored congressional budget office significantly increasing number uninsured americans cbo already signaled week republican members congress relish answering questions score assurances plan would forthcoming later leaving obamacares insurance regulations place eliminating taxes mandates subsidies offering plan changes could also hasten departure insurers system transition period leaving republicans blame important dividing repeal replace could leave prospects replacement much bleaker since support particular approach reform likely narrower support even partial repeal would also mean steps toward full repeal would difficult guarantee second reconciliation deal year possible arriving tenyear budget trajectory 50 republican senators accept without able assume savings obamacares repeal enacted apparently without entitlement reform simple matter effect dualreconciliation strategy threatens undermine repeal replace leaving republicans blame obamacares ongoing collapse concerns built quietly december expressed meetings members closed conversations health wonks members returned new congress january became apparent worries widely shared answered senators particular began complain public helped create sense strategys fate doubt thats true long alternative strategy danger dualreconciliation approach probably fatal important see debate legislative strategy policy substance story frequently told days sources chaos around health care congress suggests problem republicans cant agree policy certainly far unanimous health reform republicans actually made great deal progress toward broad agreement general policy approach past halfdecade albeit house senate approach fully embodied legislation authored representative tom price combines returning insurance regulation states federal tax credit coverage individual market continuouscoverage protection cover americans preexisting conditions donald trump chosen price secretary health human services general approach could take number different forms practice would allow states autoenroll uninsured people plans premiums equal federal tax credit eligible could amount kind universal catastrophic coverage policy nearly zeroing uninsured enabling competitive market comprehensive coverage form would seem best aligned donald trumps rhetoric uninsured others might employ incomebased credits less aggressive enrollment strategy others might deliver subsidy coverage states allowing state tailor benefit differently various approaches medicaid reform proposed differences among proposals involve serious tradeoffs certainly remains case congressional republicans thought deeply immersed details health care republican healthcare debates occur mostly within general boundaries approach long laid various conservative health experts translated legislation different ways price senator bill cassidy others backed house speaker paul ryan relevant committee chairmen houses important opponents course arguments important particulars within boundaries approach raging debates basic elements faded substance health reform republicans arent much agreement democrats approach eight years ago making health care great democrats got general outline legislative process democratic president took office advanced particular version overall approach brings us donald trump strange reach late story postelection republican healthcare debate worked far fact underlies fair bit chaos getting debate law always going require president settles open questions pushes process forward whether happen incoming president still unclear primary reason fate effort repeal replace obamacare hazy one thing attitude trump team toward dualreconciliation strategy sometimes unclear many republicans almost everything trump said public far suggested fan strategy earliest postelection interviews said want see period uncertainty repeal enacted replacement takes shape november 16 interview 60 minutes first discussion subject election trump asked would happen period repealing replacing law said going simultaneously itll fine going like twoday period going twoyear period theres nothing repealed replaced january 11 press conference response similar question said itll repeal replace essentially simultaneously various segments understand likely day week probably day could hour everything said publicly intervening two months made point albeit equally obliquely repeal replace would simultaneous public reports people spoke trump privately notably senator rand paul suggested trumps tweets health care vaguely pressed republicans careful front january 15 interview washington post trump even suggested team would propose healthcare reform would cover everyone covered lower costs distanced approach would separate repeal obamacare replacement yet repeatedly expressed view presidentelects remarkably little effect republican debate strategy seems part price trumps style way expressed question others suggests people immersed issue talking cuff without command particulars rand paul announced spoken trump agreed making repeal replace simultaneous one congressional staffer suggested capitol hill meeting health care boss could call trump get say opposite trumps news conference last week several members staffers suggested independently trump must mean repeal replace take effect simultaneously rather enacted simultaneously case congressional republicans already page trump course could well trump meant trumps washington post interview past sunday conservative healthcare universe including people trumps team quickly concluded separate administration plan described entirely figment trumps imagination another reason trumps statements repeal replace shaken strategy trumps team least since new year mostly cooperating house senate leaders advancing dualreconciliation approach looking ways improve health care trumps policy team includes conservative healthcare experts lawyers former officials cut different figure trump careful steeped details engaged key players congress health sector engagement far seems largely focused developing set executive regulatory actions could help stabilize individualinsurance market transition period conservative health experts enormous amount detailed work front well trump elected even nominated eye possible republican president trumps team built work regard legislative strategy meanwhile resisted dualreconciliation approach encouraged congressional republicans include elements replacement early reconciliation bill along partial repeal rather leaving later congressional republicans tried ignore trumps inscrutable statements reporters olympian potshots delivered twitter instead deal staff disposition may need hone coming years contend kind standing crisis executive seems unlikely abate also notice instance probably case many others trump actually steering toward caution despite bombastic style warnings cautious simply ignored politicians populism frequently form timidity way never straying far intensely engaged voters attitude generally lead way influence way understanding utility trumps instincts unmoored political ideas traditional sense many practical realities yet sensitive certain crucial voter impulses come easily republicans could help make circumstances find seeing trump kind empowered oneman focus group cablenews viewers good bad could help involved might even mitigate dangerous dysfunction period little republican leaders responded trumps statements urgings staff suggesting might include elements replacement early reconciliation bill stressing two parts take effect time even legislated separately cnn town hall january 12 instance house speaker paul ryan said want time cases bill day senate finance committee chairman orrin hatch said statement definitely work making largest possible payment obamacare replacement budget reconciliation bill remains seen decided payment could consist members talked loosening rules governing health savings accounts measures keep insurers bolting exchanges transition returning regulatory power states may open considering whether ambitious steps toward conservative health reform could make early reconciliation beyond adjustment response trumps remarks congressional republicans still unsure work incoming administration trumps style uncertainty charge staff touch resentment vague public criticism strategy left many uneasy committing path fear getting far road toward legislation trump hear criticized morning joe declare twitter hell veto absence real alternative dualreconciliation strategy remains default houses congress passed preliminary budget resolutions needed pave path strategy last week doesnt mean votes early partialrepeal bill means thats plan repeal plus strategy work possible would probably require early reconciliation bill involve robust payment works dualreconciliation strategy actually enable repeal replacement first step would enable ones follow rather undermine means early reconciliation bill would ensure individual insurance markets continue function transition period postobamacare healthcare system would clearly lay policy foundations conservative reforms follow carbon copy 2015 reconciliation bill would achieve goals might take achieve many steps new administration could take smooth transition trumps healthcare team good sense need sharpened detailed discussions major insurers since election congressional republicans might take key steps legislatively instance appropriating funds obamacares costsharing reductions transition period might wise early reconciliation delay termination individual mandate new system takes effect rather ending mandate immediately would also significantly improve cbo score early reconciliation bills effect uninsured rate meanwhile lay groundwork replace republicans could include early reconciliation bill provision one two years new funding stream whether available credit individuals per capita payment states develop new insurance rules would help people individual market access coverage would take effect termination obamacares subsidies taxes mandates two three years enactment early reconciliation bill could used purchase stateapproved insurance coverage would provide bridge new system without yet fully defining approach might also help republicans root obamacares federal insurance regulations otherwise probably undone reconciliation creating alternative funding stream applies insurance purchased alternative rules republicans could effectively repeal heart obamacare process replacing would render irrelevant insurance regulations yet repeal reconciliation vehicle available republican reformers repeal simply might possible without replace piling quick early reconciliation bill would enormous challenge perhaps congressional committees handle short order ultimately therefore advice may add arguing republicans put aside dualreconciliation approach rather expand separating much repeal obamacare replacement dualreconciliation strategy would risks preventing full repeal real replacement year action early reconciliation bill developed scored many congressional republicans probably come recognize danger may find reasons political practical grow uneasy dualreconciliation approach could drive push robust payment replacement might undermine strategy send republicans searching another would end world momentum argument early action strong one need decisive republicans consider steps carefully avoid obvious mistakes including democrats made enacting obamacare dualreconciliation strategy falls first fallback would need involve including key elements repeal replace later fuller reconciliation bill 2018 budget year would course also wise pursue elements replacement might achievable outside reconciliation process enough democratic support reach 60 votes democrats little incentive cooperate republican health reforms republicans seek support willing make real concessions expect gain point danger trialanderror approach finding legislative strategy health care lead inaction fallback status quo rather unusually total inaction option case status quo sustainable economics obamacare exchange system untenable many parts country republicans articulate vision health policy including competitive individual insurance market regulated states approach medicaid reform find readily justify reforms provide greater stability help reduce insurance costs give people options make coverage attractive young healthy whether alone democrats act point intrarepublican healthcare debate chaotic uneasy unanimity substance much margin internal dissent still unclear whether new administration help steer congress toward particular path major legislative efforts always chaotic uneasy proceed fits starts frequently seem verge collapse difference success failure often depends upon combination strategy luck willingness take action health care republicans long lacked latter particular respect least time could well different gop preparing opportunity years faces party electorate healthcare system allow endless indecision soon know final product look like whether series reconciliation bills uneasy combination partisan bipartisan measures emerge seem likely year intense action health care beginning yuval levin editor national affairs fellow ethics public policy center contributing editor national review | 2,509 |
<p>You can't kill and face death and return unchanged to a world in which you are expected to refrain from all violence and relax.</p>
<p>In <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h0/xYQd8oRHKvN8imhiuM98pA8GHJHZPhBf1T4YIZqP-2Fa2A0PvcSvSLCArAG3k0hVQTOhrVcA-2B9f4H3VSIXWFGFpAhSiD1aHiigu1rGdlTlLAY29Vilq0B6f1A1Jt6Hp77qjUidDzk2W3SjFm2ih-2FtvYCFSdHtBibo8HxHCBJypEqlPXk-2FIYLBIqE1KJaAg1wu-2FDM8GeHyp3emJXm27bnS01E3TzgFwHFiBPT74aZWdyt88TIu-2Bpn74CNcfKfuCfBlPwamalQQqkzXm-2BvJ-2FwndjSouzi-2BnhTCqX-2BfiDIW2YcmoHvlJzrRMyx4kjov4bWkkijjSsaJ0HAL5G5z1zsMxzS9TcA2UI9rOhsNcMJ-2Bn0FnNtY9vOIJyzjS69kKEL7n326c6rOVcygiWixQMERRducg-3D-3D" type="external">two</a> recent <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h1/xYQd8oRHKvN8imhiuM98pA8GHJHZPhBf1T4YIZqP-2Fa2A0PvcSvSLCArAG3k0hVQToZ2tjnFliXp46fgMvmKdurGdp1p3yve-2Brl-2FJ-2B00A0XXGlIz6Xcn3DMSg3Xn1vCqO7KGoTA15Vy3A6SbcaFVaK0r3UULnXiqphQaIzgs6rX93HRJfZI9yj-2FAkmfcpRkZpKndwSyp4tN3ZC895wDs8BL6Alcn2-2F6HIMmlpKU3JOh5ZJdg3K3r37Zzw4H44zPj7AGMoExTbfWcy95RPAu9Ap2Y6Tc6mMsybVNfrv04JSr-2F6vvay-2B2TlL-2BQ9r23AQ1uBwpcSsKBoU7fvO01ZyS0s4t-2Fw1tm5IeD0jmqUh6NztC-2BY1EtLBkX4zsnk3G7mZU5A" type="external">articles</a> in the Los Angeles Times and <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h2/lwfw8DfOrdpcLkl6gN9BkUU3j-2B88l15jJLVPPjk8EfdoZxZNCT8M4ylnfymbPwqffuzTvUBpW4eRoWSeeEqiEPy2ZOp5PWyvZiTLRob3ZROfW-2FwuI8TkG0OLsLhc2Ht-2F-2Bx7VHMFFUO8TRDnbuxhkwbWnpXdW7EZoT6hrvNaKTDS2PobC3X3KG2rWicttRyRBuGOcuSCMVZFll78lCYz9iVY-2F-2FmxuT08rWYmfUfE9gColAeIfl-2BQHZpgpq0XeyWzDFSiccLXBWbSZT166AXkJhlLRsYnyp84tcpquJ2UFQ-2F1M3zXvau2D-2BGLcy-2B9SobKp4Y-2B6YAULGpMKOF2B0HupcN6DhAxc4O3TeTLEx6xgWTuc-2BU4yX7UC1-2Bax-2Bm356xvM-2FXhlwkUJxqdq-2FwK6Ws89T4QhCZr0RjYSXfFmCNcKoY4-3D" type="external">the</a> academic <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h3/0RRekgREaSQJm84OKFY-2B1Lspu0LVFWot4-2B-2BRZLDeutr50Qd4N43yeiwI57F7epLZPBAgHderqBM9BaFOqkiVnblrg-2BP1Q2E1hqcE1SlvhKV08f7Q16NLjrizeoM-2F1TwvMKSu2esbjwSlFodJddwuSUEqVGe7Oqev-2BiXCvO4d9UQ6e6C5dnKTAxvUcH9wb2PN13nbjRA8uYNA0orP261GimsZYwnFu9Ra6PcBM-2BfL1vUW9TBmf4nst5UBZOjsT33Ge12fcdLXPjxsrfE1BYMZ8joa7-2BSNJnrUs27AOhyaBlziAJT-2FmJhUoW0gGvYrj4d-2BtxQFUSyHQO2CYPgIhVaCHg-3D-3D" type="external">studies</a> that inspired them, the authors investigate the question of which war veterans are most likely to commit suicide or violent crimes. Remarkably, the subject of war, their role in war, their thoughts about the supposed justifications (or lack thereof) of a war, never come up.</p>
<p>The factors that take the blame are - apart from the unbearably obvious "prior suicidality," "prior crime," "weapons possession," and "mental disorder treatment" - the following breakthrough discoveries: maleness, poverty, and "late age of enlistment." In other words, the very same factors that would be found in the (less-suicidal and less-murderous) population at large. That is, men are more violent than women, both among veterans and non-veterans; the poor are more violent (or at least more likely to get busted for it) among veterans and non-veterans; and the same goes for "unemployed" or "dissatisfied with career" or other near-equivalents of "joined the military at a relatively old age."</p>
<p>In other words, these reports tell us virtually nothing. Perhaps their goal isn't to tell us something factual so much as to shift the conversation away from why war causes murder and suicide, to the question of what was wrong with these soldiers before they enlisted.</p>
<p>The reason for studying the violence of veterans, after all, is that violence, as well as PTSD, are <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h4/-2BgG2Axp9Q5O6CwaCfGvIKus-2B7wnWXurLk77aJrWwB6c-2FQ0-2FZHKZPSwLW2wfCC0WfgczISTD3-2BRaFtgSdkYtcwyAgro-2BQvjI86wV6EXKcMH8wz3Gd9Xpaxmbh-2FkonCEJCSGDLKEbKvncLjyg4H1o3648eF-2BLwOAtPnSrX5oLzSRj-2Bfjb1Dd4xAgXfsI5fwCCZ4KQymeXXXqkcVWOwuV18gvMfNPE2BxuPWDCyb7Cy0z0-2Bf3Up-2FHe-2FSCkb-2F6AXWXZhIxEHdZmi1lggd7UT8IaUTF4fqqzE-2Fd071Ti80uyymfy5kmAigvioLrA9fdoEKsaRkSdRd1M4jre0PBBqTVVNm4veiSLu3DITxy-2BghYqWnqc-3D" type="external">higher</a> than among non-veterans, and the <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h5/xE9xEY-2FaPDx8aHXofvG4yKdohXPoM18DCHImv1NEMdbPmDBtZSt5ZQpGXzcrDwasgfHbUK66jZOH9gwM2chYn7wS6yRl6rDDgo9fu8Zd1M-2B8TWVLCuwFp82kSA4HRlz2vo-2FbFv-2F0jYpRW6CcqAID0kEultu470BrZ3ewrQOEfz0ZA6qNLwcGaQ2I7scG9lRgmOIqNQ5X6aggd06B5aFNIvld5phWH70ZMB4Q-2FVp4B1l4qXiNkxF3KItY4bTqZvMUfL0hsR-2FMIb5m7YW3nji-2FDEAIQ9mnwSRsugtWHKhXS6bJNUOnTiXuQ9x4nAr-2F7rf0ky-2FZ0ZijZNxBS-2BHIVLFGuhEXhV2gjHWi3GJQXhTnRGsfbGYqAboO4i4xAsVROTIy16hSPbT7jdUC6JS7C6UESM0Ln3VlNw3irZbJKQuSv0EQE2ZQ9oy9DWztZ0NUw3VlO52-2Bl4v8CMhdmrFmJyxH2w-3D-3D" type="external">two</a> (PTSD and violence) are <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h6/dq5YnZm20Z8flOqARKh1-2FjuP0H-2FLg9naeQhCl7nJoo7TCj0GdIICSk3QpS6H-2F4Wd1SPfnJIpBq0dwrCjbktz96GSnylCfUv6o9IVpcKvk2H3bNJ2g3MhJXDMUzH9VfRFEStLyG7V5gsdbnpVnTgdojFfkqB3oVi2fzmKSXJolhnpNEa2cRvuNbvUgLv4yZ-2FWwqnOXlsrVk1aTSDShBLOQ7bjWEc4pah-2FB9YBFDbRdsWkDtO4mrf-2FC5Hdjb1NhRW1n0imvGdnuFe6OXi-2BOu5qLGUhKGMM7Q9IEbFBoAQmHueqnksQS219bc-2Fw40L7kexaszyAUQ1yjt23E-2F6XKrklq7XOYgSHQTfTXKJHiscQ9Kk-3D" type="external">linked</a>. They are higher (or at least most studies over many years have said so; there are exceptions) for those who've been in combat than for those who've been in the military without combat. They are even higher for those who've been in even more combat. They are higher for ground troops than for pilots. There are mixed reports on whether they are higher for drone pilots or traditional pilots.</p>
<p>The fact that war participation, which itself consists of committing murder in a manner sanctioned by authorities, increases criminal violence afterwards, in a setting where it is no longer sanctioned, ought of course to direct our attention to <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h7/Jb9ZUZ-2BHBLFAkQw-2FQ1kTOhkxB0htLj4DwWrPry3iX5pOta0fYnHt4fiDKEyWCFgfZt-2BYIICibwzdnXHpogbEpN1sse-2B3nY-2ByIt04ppR-2BxGeKqAcpWiwKCErIzlOht47RCed3h4dUuMKVsyYFkglEPScgjCQB69l0Lqpc-2BauafpYmTNUerRF7WKuRAshS-2BaRo-2BQRtOak-2BBjYvxpHKHxJr1CztztWfvIh21MQhlAfHlD8hP2Sce-2BM82JxcaW1CyyjCgNCIw9CTsT7jdH1oOTqMmnmGhO1-2FEuo30ofpwpqLzHE-3D" type="external">the problem of war</a>, not the problem of which fraction of returning warriors to offer some modicum of reorientation into nonviolent life. But if you accept that war is necessary, and that most of the funding for it must go into profitable weaponry, then you're going to want to both identify which troops to help and shift the blame to those troops.</p>
<p>The same reporter of the above linked articles also <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h8/xYQd8oRHKvN8imhiuM98pBC99EO52zhQHFQis87hlYvL3OqkGLajJUHLxOPrPmx9PFsBX4I-2BxyQO2RyZgfFiq-2Fn4m5Ji062mGzJPO-2BnQl6eeEnxuRpHYF3aD0-2FfGZl-2Fh1bsI1RAbmyGFtuD7-2FVl7oW69hraOYz3sfTIBfERogx9iv5JVVGnu0sfjZ2ZFLxa4fE8Llyh-2FRy3NYaS-2FfdJJ2r2BCTq1FjQS28Dfp41-2B9yZ8Gabuz-2Bpfz-2F9Ifj9-2Ftl-2FDTTQGFMZT9w5pAGBcn0bv-2BVUSAHdEQSqFBxNDcuqXey5c-2Bz9CyC6ctsCI3osjXjFeIgJUppq13xk4fEh3WNvhVHybM0vVEkc6elIgYv-2Fp4r8-3D" type="external">wrote one</a> that documents what war participation does to suicide. The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs says that out of 100,000 male veterans 32.1 commit suicide in a year, compared to 28.7 female veterans. But out of 100,000 male non-veterans, 20.9 commit suicide, compared to only 5.2 female non-veterans. And "for women ages 18 to 29, veterans kill themselves at nearly 12 times the rate of nonveterans." Here's how the article begins:</p>
<p>"New government research shows that female military veterans commit suicide at nearly six times the rate of other women, a startling finding that experts say poses disturbing questions about the backgrounds and experiences of women who serve in the armed forces."</p>
<p>Does it really? Is their background really the problem? It's not a totally crazy idea. It could be that men and women inclined toward violence are more likely to join the military as well as more likely to engage in violence afterward, and more likely to be armed when they do so. But these reports don't focus primarily on that question. They try to distinguish which of the men and women are the (unacceptable, back home-) violence-prone ones. Yet something causes the figure for male suicides to jump from 20.9 to 32.1. Whatever it is gets absolutely disregarded, as differences between male and female military experiences are examined (specifically, the increased frequency of female troops being raped).</p>
<p>Suppose for a moment that what is at work in the leap in the male statistic has something to do with war. Sexism and sexual violence may indeed be an enormous factor for female (and some male) troops, and it may be far more widespread than the military says or knows. But those women who do not suffer it, probably have experiences much more like men's in the military, than the two groups' experiences out of the military are alike. And the word for their shared experience is war.</p>
<p>Looking at the youngest age group, "among men 18 to 29 years old, the annual number of suicides per 100,000 people were 83.3 for veterans and 17.6 for nonveterans. The numbers for women in that age group: 39.6 and 3.4." Women who've been in the military are, in that age group, 12 times more likely to kill themselves, while men are five times more likely. But that can also be looked at this way: among non-veterans, men are 5 times as likely to kill themselves as women, while among veterans men are only 2 times as likely to kill themselves as women. When their experience is the same one - organized approved violence - men's and women's rates of suicide are more similar.</p>
<p>The same <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h9/xYQd8oRHKvN8imhiuM98pBC99EO52zhQHFQis87hlYvnS1Lq3QJ-2FIIMLPzXM9C112py5KfbbaJu6-2BuxCE4HpU9OhoKN9k9D6QE-2BkLdOU1Ax3Dcg7dvCWNipIeBCWgIlvgB3eKpWraHyHl4D6J71xibrto-2B9WFTx7J7231kL2DRM1iUo8YOX1q5TcFOr7tfPuiFc6bzMMMaVkc9hCpkV4g-2F7-2F98YjArM3KpgAy5bQUJ3phWDE7P8OcwPxaVgD7EE7t9EWF0S8IiaUDWPljS1dPTBXPA1s-2Fljh7-2BguKNd9uoeoQ0WHE39igjk9M0o-2BYD-2FfAqPSoSR26mZSCOG-2Fv8f1bw-3D-3D" type="external">LA Times</a> reporter also has an article simply on the fact that veteran suicides are higher than non-veteran. But he manages to brush aside the idea that war has anything to do with this:</p>
<p>"?People's natural instinct is to explain military suicide by the war-is-hell theory of the world," said Michael Schoenbaum, an epidemiologist and military suicide expert at the National Institute of Mental Health who was not involved in the study. "But it's more complicated.'"</p>
<p>Judging by that article it's not more complicated, it's entirely something else. The impact of war on mental state is never discussed. Instead, we get this sort of enlightening finding:</p>
<p>"Veterans who had been enlisted in the rank-and-file committed suicide at nearly twice the rate of former officers. Keeping with patterns in the general population, being white, unmarried and male were also risk factors."</p>
<p>Yes, but among veterans the rates are higher than in the general population. Why?</p>
<p>The answer is, I think, the same as the answer to the question of why the topic is so studiously avoided. The answer is <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h10/OCyNDn9i98-2BOopV0K0WrPgruAzrtVjCnMaeNxq-2Ba15KxWNhdpi2-2FqBvBRgm1X4zPRpAw2-2B2HO8PjHZ-2BCtgTTsWLnL9vgdJjrFsrv4fl8gkVaejowD5O-2FxOT62lqS2Ag48eXb2fpsRlpicgZVV4ezO6igBaDohSvgJI0SnZUL-2FYiMoSqeTqx1YIXf3b4H8PuozHUEzVXAAxmRLdJve-2FE7YESf4usKT7xeYwi2UHzK3ePEzz3syzidIlUCQLGGIYjqI4DNW4myDM5hW7EyyuPP0J3zAO0HxLWVeVKUxWGytmcfF5XQ00dUCF5RaEcnCa6-2B9pV-2BR7UOpwG-2FrWXnlWFFt0IPIsGYIVq3yO9HXrvtW1o-3D" type="external">summed up</a> in the recent term: <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/0AA/ni0YAA/t.1rv/CuIP8Hu8SSWbGg82XbAwdg/h11/OCyNDn9i98-2BOopV0K0WrPmc948k0TUg9mSXC3NJN0SptvPc2qcGa1psbLwr92Odqgz-2F5TJS4x5nmnacf27Wfpi4Ri986hwcpRrEXB7VnPJRqBtd-2BEBAK7Ogf4QhDeHL0l5n5z51gPy8lZZMYQuUMK7RcQpfjIvunh1O0cm8Fb4yQHmfWsBIXpeD3C92DEuLxWGsrS-2BWyADQ36YlgOSjmKC4ay2pLFBpGZqB5AG8TkChCaD2V4m38IbhqHqRVCZIqXE-2FZNKbp3BnTMtnCt4ZGweML75DDqlJl-2FgIKeXyjQ4l5BHDrStpcZX5gsQms6Bg0RRjY3xlBM0GAeFkWfAIpFQ-3D-3D" type="external">moral injury</a>. You can't kill and face death and return unchanged to a world in which you are expected to refrain from all violence and relax.</p>
<p>And returning to a world kept carefully oblivious to what you're going through, and eager to blame your demographic characteristics, must make it all the more difficult.</p>
<p>This article was originally published at <a href="http://warisacrime.org/content/why-do-war-veterans-commit-suicide-or-murder" type="external">WarIsACrime.org</a> and has been used here with permission.</p> | false | 1 | cant kill face death return unchanged world expected refrain violence relax two recent articles los angeles times academic studies inspired authors investigate question war veterans likely commit suicide violent crimes remarkably subject war role war thoughts supposed justifications lack thereof war never come factors take blame apart unbearably obvious prior suicidality prior crime weapons possession mental disorder treatment following breakthrough discoveries maleness poverty late age enlistment words factors would found lesssuicidal lessmurderous population large men violent women among veterans nonveterans poor violent least likely get busted among veterans nonveterans goes unemployed dissatisfied career nearequivalents joined military relatively old age words reports tell us virtually nothing perhaps goal isnt tell us something factual much shift conversation away war causes murder suicide question wrong soldiers enlisted reason studying violence veterans violence well ptsd higher among nonveterans two ptsd violence linked higher least studies many years said exceptions whove combat whove military without combat even higher whove even combat higher ground troops pilots mixed reports whether higher drone pilots traditional pilots fact war participation consists committing murder manner sanctioned authorities increases criminal violence afterwards setting longer sanctioned ought course direct attention problem war problem fraction returning warriors offer modicum reorientation nonviolent life accept war necessary funding must go profitable weaponry youre going want identify troops help shift blame troops reporter linked articles also wrote one documents war participation suicide us department veterans affairs says 100000 male veterans 321 commit suicide year compared 287 female veterans 100000 male nonveterans 209 commit suicide compared 52 female nonveterans women ages 18 29 veterans kill nearly 12 times rate nonveterans heres article begins new government research shows female military veterans commit suicide nearly six times rate women startling finding experts say poses disturbing questions backgrounds experiences women serve armed forces really background really problem totally crazy idea could men women inclined toward violence likely join military well likely engage violence afterward likely armed reports dont focus primarily question try distinguish men women unacceptable back home violenceprone ones yet something causes figure male suicides jump 209 321 whatever gets absolutely disregarded differences male female military experiences examined specifically increased frequency female troops raped suppose moment work leap male statistic something war sexism sexual violence may indeed enormous factor female male troops may far widespread military says knows women suffer probably experiences much like mens military two groups experiences military alike word shared experience war looking youngest age group among men 18 29 years old annual number suicides per 100000 people 833 veterans 176 nonveterans numbers women age group 396 34 women whove military age group 12 times likely kill men five times likely also looked way among nonveterans men 5 times likely kill women among veterans men 2 times likely kill women experience one organized approved violence mens womens rates suicide similar la times reporter also article simply fact veteran suicides higher nonveteran manages brush aside idea war anything peoples natural instinct explain military suicide warishell theory world said michael schoenbaum epidemiologist military suicide expert national institute mental health involved study complicated judging article complicated entirely something else impact war mental state never discussed instead get sort enlightening finding veterans enlisted rankandfile committed suicide nearly twice rate former officers keeping patterns general population white unmarried male also risk factors yes among veterans rates higher general population answer think answer question topic studiously avoided answer summed recent term moral injury cant kill face death return unchanged world expected refrain violence relax returning world kept carefully oblivious youre going eager blame demographic characteristics must make difficult article originally published warisacrimeorg used permission | 592 |
<p>By Mark Miller</p>
<p>CHICAGO (Reuters) – Next month, Oregon will become the first U.S. state to start automatically signing up workers to save for retirement if they do not already have a workplace 401(k).</p>
<p>Eight other states are getting ready to launch state-sponsored auto-IRA programs, and it is an idea whose time has come. Fewer employees have access to workplace retirement plans and 47 percent of U.S. households say their total household savings and investments are less than $25,000, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute. (http://reut.rs/2z3Sr45).</p>
<p>States started taking up the cause five years ago when it became clear that a Republican Congress would not approve the Obama administration’s proposal to set up a national auto-IRA program to address the coverage shortfall.</p>
<p>But now that the first state plans are under construction, an unfortunate reality is coming into view: These retirement accounts are not going to be cheap for account holders, at least not in the early going.</p>
<p>In Oregon, savers initially will pay a fee equivalent to 1 percent of the total amount invested in their accounts, or 100 basis points. That is much lower than the fees charged by many small-business 401(k) plans, which often exceed 200 basis points. But it is much higher than what a saver would pay in a large plan – which is exactly what the state auto-IRA plans aim to become.</p>
<p>But like other states, Oregon is launching its auto-IRA program without the support of taxpayer dollars. In most cases, employers above a certain size will be required to set up automatic payroll deduction for workers, who will be enrolled by default unless they opt out. Initial contribution levels range from 3 to 5 percent, with contributions invested in low-cost target date funds.</p>
<p>The largest expense is creating the network for automatic payroll deductions by employers. In Oregon, for example, 85 basis points of the fee will go to the third-party administrator selected to build and operate the plan, Ascensus. Just 5 basis points will go to the state to cover its overhead; the mutual funds will cost from 6 to 13 basis points, according to a representative of Oregon State Treasury.</p>
<p>Other states hope to launch with somewhat lower costs as learning advances on what goes into creating a new structure like this. “If a few of the early ones get a good start, there will be even more competitive interest from vendors, and others will come in with lower expenses,” said John Scott, director of the retirement savings project at the Pew Charitable Trusts.</p>
<p>California and Illinois will launch pilot programs next year. Illinois will charge 75 basis points; California has not yet determined its initial fees. Other states with plans in the pipeline include Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, Vermont and Washington state.</p>
<p>CALIFORNIA AIMS LOWER</p>
<p>The track record of 529 college savings plans points toward a drop in fees over time. Ascensus administers 529 plans in 18 states; many launched 15 years ago charging account holders 150 basis points, with additional fees for enrollment and disbursement transactions, said Scott Morrison, chief product officer at Ascensus. Those fees have plunged as the market expanded and reached scale; many now charge less than 30 basis points, he said.</p>
<p>“We think the same thing will happen in the auto-IRA market,” he added. “But everyone needs to realize that early on, expenses have to be around 100 basis points.”</p>
<p>Meanwhile, California hopes to launch with low costs due to the sheer size and scale of its planned program. Roughly 6.8 million workers are potentially eligible to participate in the California Secure Choice program, according to a market analysis prepared for the program’s board last year. After the pilot phase next year, employers with 100 or more workers who lack their own retirement plans will be brought online in 2019.</p>
<p>California’s enabling statute caps total expenses at 100 basis points – but that limit does not take effect until after the program’s sixth year. California also has the option of providing a loan to offset startup costs, but so far has used loan funding only for limited staff and consultant support costs.</p>
<p>“Our size and scale here makes it a different situation,” said Katie Selenski, executive director of the California Secure Choice Retirement Savings Investment Board. “That will make it interesting to watch what happens here, especially as the program comes to substantial scale in the first few years.”</p>
<p>Illinois expects that its initial expense ratio will drop “precipitously,” according to a representative for Illinois state Treasurer Michael Frerichs. Maryland’s enabling legislation caps administrative costs at 50 basis points; all-in costs will be “less than 50 basis points, but we will need to charge more initially to pay back startup loans from the state,” said Joshua Gotbaum, chair of the Maryland Small Business Retirement Security Board.</p>
<p>The decision by states to force savers to bear all the startup costs reflects difficult political realities. Many states are facing major budget pressures and are under fire for problems with the funding status of their defined benefit pension programs for public workers. Using state funds to launch auto-IRA programs would have been a non-starter.</p>
<p>But placing the startup costs entirely on savers is an unfortunate political outcome – and it raises a fairness question, since early savers will effectively be subsidizing those who join the program later with lower costs.</p>
<p>“That’s a real issue,” said Selenski. “We’re going to do everything we can to get fees as low as possible.”</p> | false | 1 | mark miller chicago reuters next month oregon become first us state start automatically signing workers save retirement already workplace 401k eight states getting ready launch statesponsored autoira programs idea whose time come fewer employees access workplace retirement plans 47 percent us households say total household savings investments less 25000 according employee benefit research institute httpreutrs2z3sr45 states started taking cause five years ago became clear republican congress would approve obama administrations proposal set national autoira program address coverage shortfall first state plans construction unfortunate reality coming view retirement accounts going cheap account holders least early going oregon savers initially pay fee equivalent 1 percent total amount invested accounts 100 basis points much lower fees charged many smallbusiness 401k plans often exceed 200 basis points much higher saver would pay large plan exactly state autoira plans aim become like states oregon launching autoira program without support taxpayer dollars cases employers certain size required set automatic payroll deduction workers enrolled default unless opt initial contribution levels range 3 5 percent contributions invested lowcost target date funds largest expense creating network automatic payroll deductions employers oregon example 85 basis points fee go thirdparty administrator selected build operate plan ascensus 5 basis points go state cover overhead mutual funds cost 6 13 basis points according representative oregon state treasury states hope launch somewhat lower costs learning advances goes creating new structure like early ones get good start even competitive interest vendors others come lower expenses said john scott director retirement savings project pew charitable trusts california illinois launch pilot programs next year illinois charge 75 basis points california yet determined initial fees states plans pipeline include connecticut massachusetts maryland new jersey vermont washington state california aims lower track record 529 college savings plans points toward drop fees time ascensus administers 529 plans 18 states many launched 15 years ago charging account holders 150 basis points additional fees enrollment disbursement transactions said scott morrison chief product officer ascensus fees plunged market expanded reached scale many charge less 30 basis points said think thing happen autoira market added everyone needs realize early expenses around 100 basis points meanwhile california hopes launch low costs due sheer size scale planned program roughly 68 million workers potentially eligible participate california secure choice program according market analysis prepared programs board last year pilot phase next year employers 100 workers lack retirement plans brought online 2019 californias enabling statute caps total expenses 100 basis points limit take effect programs sixth year california also option providing loan offset startup costs far used loan funding limited staff consultant support costs size scale makes different situation said katie selenski executive director california secure choice retirement savings investment board make interesting watch happens especially program comes substantial scale first years illinois expects initial expense ratio drop precipitously according representative illinois state treasurer michael frerichs marylands enabling legislation caps administrative costs 50 basis points allin costs less 50 basis points need charge initially pay back startup loans state said joshua gotbaum chair maryland small business retirement security board decision states force savers bear startup costs reflects difficult political realities many states facing major budget pressures fire problems funding status defined benefit pension programs public workers using state funds launch autoira programs would nonstarter placing startup costs entirely savers unfortunate political outcome raises fairness question since early savers effectively subsidizing join program later lower costs thats real issue said selenski going everything get fees low possible | 568 |
<p>By Philip Blenkinsop</p>
<p>BRUSSELS (Reuters) – A battle over beef between the European Union and Argentina and Brazil could push trade talks beyond a year-end deadline and lead to further years of delay.</p>
<p>On-off trade talks between the EU and the Mercosur group of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay have spanned 17 years.</p>
<p>But it is not clear the end-2017 deadline for a deal to set out how each market will open to the other – from EU cars and machinery to South American farm products – will be met.</p>
<p>Talks were suspended once before in 2004 and officials say missing the current window of political opportunity could lead to more delays.</p>
<p>The latest round of talks on Nov 6-10 between negotiators in Brasilia did not even address market access, the key part of any trade deal.</p>
<p>Beef is the main sticking point. Mercosur countries want their farmers to sell more of their beef in Europe to compensate for a rise in industrial imports. EU farming nations such as Ireland and France are worried their farmers will lose out.</p>
<p>Both sides say they would like a deal signed during a World Trade Organization meeting in Buenos Aires on Dec 10-13.</p>
<p>“We are not shadow-boxing or shuffling our feet. We want this agreement,” European Commission vice president Jyrki Katainen said last Monday after visiting Argentinian and Brazilian presidents during the talks the previous week.</p>
<p>A Mercosur official said there was a 50 percent chance of meeting the deadline.</p>
<p>But he also said: “There are still many threats that can derail the negotiations… It’s not only a question of substance but also a question of timing.”</p>
<p>Brazil holds presidential and general elections in October 2018 and failure to do the deal before campaigning gets underway could make it harder to conclude. A trans-Pacific trade alliance was scrapped after it became part of the political debate in the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign.</p>
<p>“There’s still work to be done… There is a window of opportunity which doesn’t go far beyond New Year,” EU trade chief Cecilia Malmstrom said after EU trade ministers met in Brussels earlier this month.</p>
<p>For the EU, the reduction in import duties could produce its most lucrative trade deal to date. It could also highlight the EU’s commitment to multilateral partnerships compared to the more protectionist stance of U.S. President Donald Trump.</p>
<p>But there are also concerns that if the deal is not done now, Mercosur negotiations could get pushed to one side to make way for EU trade talks with Britain before its leaves the bloc.</p>
<p>UNACCEPTABLE OFFER</p>
<p>Mercosur officials say potential beef imports represent about half of the export gains they sees from any deal and say the current EU offer is unacceptable.</p>
<p>They are unhappy that Europe has gradually reduced the proposed amount of beef it would accept from Mercosur – from 100,000 tonnes per year in 2004 to 78,000 tonnes in 2016 to 70,000 tonnes in 2017.</p>
<p>Brazil’s chief negotiator, Ambassador Ronaldo Costa Filho, said in October the European offer was far from what Mercosur members were expecting and would make the goal of reaching a deal by December more difficult.</p>
<p>The Mercosur countries are waiting for the EU to improve on the latest beef offer.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, France, Ireland and a number of other beef-producing countries have said that offer was already too high.</p>
<p>French Trade Minister Jean-Baptiste Lemoyne said negotiators should take their time to get the right deal.</p>
<p>“The message is clear. Yes, we want an agreement, but… if we need a few more weeks or months, it’s not a drama. We’ve been talking for 15 years,” Lemoyne said.</p>
<p>France wants the EU to recognize that the market has evolved since talks began. Lemoyne said France’s views were shared by others including Belgium, Romania and Slovenia.</p>
<p>He said Europe must first determine the total potential size of beef imports including deals that could be struck with other countries. Trade talks with Mexico are underway and are due to start with Australia, both beef exporters.</p>
<p>“We need to know what is the maximum we can go to in total. Afterwards we can give up to this or that partner relative to what we get back,” Lemoyne said.</p>
<p>A diplomat from a different EU country said he could not see the offer to Mercosur on beef being increased.</p>
<p>“I think everything would explode,” the diplomat said.</p>
<p>BREXIT COMPLICATION</p>
<p>Europe’s beef industry says it is already facing a squeeze as consumers shift from red meat. Consumption has fallen 10 percent in the past decade and is seen 16 percent lower than 2007 levels in 2026, according to a European Commission report.</p>
<p>Angus Woods, the Irish Farmers Association’s national livestock chairman and a farmer with 60 beef cattle, said the EU market was broadly balanced now, with imports and exports roughly equal.</p>
<p>However, Britain’s exit from the EU could wreck that balance if were to impose import duties on EU beef or if it struck its own deals for cheaper meat from elsewhere. The EU would then have a 16 percent surplus of beef. This would be particularly tough for Ireland as half of its beef exports to go Britain.</p>
<p>“On top of that you would have the Mercosur deal. Even with the UK in (the EU) there isn’t room for those kind of volumes,” Woods said.</p>
<p>Woods also said that South American beef does not meet EU standards, which include a system to track meat right back to the birth of the cow and rules on transporting live animals.</p>
<p>A spokesman for Brazil’s Ministry of Agriculture said its meat-tracking system is up to EU standards. He said the national beef-tracking system SISBOV is mandatory for producers who export to the EU and the data base follows each cow for the minimum period required by the EU.</p>
<p>If there is a deal, it may fall short of the ambitions both sides had when talks began.</p>
<p>“We don’t get everything we want, they don’t get everything they want, but hopefully together we get a deal which improves our export opportunities and gives our consumers more choice,” Katainen said.</p> | false | 1 | philip blenkinsop brussels reuters battle beef european union argentina brazil could push trade talks beyond yearend deadline lead years delay onoff trade talks eu mercosur group argentina brazil paraguay uruguay spanned 17 years clear end2017 deadline deal set market open eu cars machinery south american farm products met talks suspended 2004 officials say missing current window political opportunity could lead delays latest round talks nov 610 negotiators brasilia even address market access key part trade deal beef main sticking point mercosur countries want farmers sell beef europe compensate rise industrial imports eu farming nations ireland france worried farmers lose sides say would like deal signed world trade organization meeting buenos aires dec 1013 shadowboxing shuffling feet want agreement european commission vice president jyrki katainen said last monday visiting argentinian brazilian presidents talks previous week mercosur official said 50 percent chance meeting deadline also said still many threats derail negotiations question substance also question timing brazil holds presidential general elections october 2018 failure deal campaigning gets underway could make harder conclude transpacific trade alliance scrapped became part political debate 2016 us presidential election campaign theres still work done window opportunity doesnt go far beyond new year eu trade chief cecilia malmstrom said eu trade ministers met brussels earlier month eu reduction import duties could produce lucrative trade deal date could also highlight eus commitment multilateral partnerships compared protectionist stance us president donald trump also concerns deal done mercosur negotiations could get pushed one side make way eu trade talks britain leaves bloc unacceptable offer mercosur officials say potential beef imports represent half export gains sees deal say current eu offer unacceptable unhappy europe gradually reduced proposed amount beef would accept mercosur 100000 tonnes per year 2004 78000 tonnes 2016 70000 tonnes 2017 brazils chief negotiator ambassador ronaldo costa filho said october european offer far mercosur members expecting would make goal reaching deal december difficult mercosur countries waiting eu improve latest beef offer meanwhile france ireland number beefproducing countries said offer already high french trade minister jeanbaptiste lemoyne said negotiators take time get right deal message clear yes want agreement need weeks months drama weve talking 15 years lemoyne said france wants eu recognize market evolved since talks began lemoyne said frances views shared others including belgium romania slovenia said europe must first determine total potential size beef imports including deals could struck countries trade talks mexico underway due start australia beef exporters need know maximum go total afterwards give partner relative get back lemoyne said diplomat different eu country said could see offer mercosur beef increased think everything would explode diplomat said brexit complication europes beef industry says already facing squeeze consumers shift red meat consumption fallen 10 percent past decade seen 16 percent lower 2007 levels 2026 according european commission report angus woods irish farmers associations national livestock chairman farmer 60 beef cattle said eu market broadly balanced imports exports roughly equal however britains exit eu could wreck balance impose import duties eu beef struck deals cheaper meat elsewhere eu would 16 percent surplus beef would particularly tough ireland half beef exports go britain top would mercosur deal even uk eu isnt room kind volumes woods said woods also said south american beef meet eu standards include system track meat right back birth cow rules transporting live animals spokesman brazils ministry agriculture said meattracking system eu standards said national beeftracking system sisbov mandatory producers export eu data base follows cow minimum period required eu deal may fall short ambitions sides talks began dont get everything want dont get everything want hopefully together get deal improves export opportunities gives consumers choice katainen said | 602 |
<p>NEW YORK — Mark Cuban isn’t ready to launch a formal campaign to challenge President Donald Trump.</p>
<p>Yet Cuban, an outspoken Texas billionaire who describes himself as “fiercely independent” politically, sees an opportunity for someone to take down the Republican president, who is increasingly viewed as divisive and incompetent even within his own party.</p>
<p>“His base won’t turn on him, but if there is someone they can connect to and feel confident in, they might turn away from him,” Cuban told The Associated Press. “The door is wide open. It’s just a question of who can pull it off.”</p>
<p>Indeed, just seven months into the Trump presidency, Republicans and right-leaning independents have begun to contemplate the possibility of an organized bid to take down the sitting president in 2020. It is a herculean task, some say a fantasy: No president in the modern era has been defeated by a member of his own party, and significant political and practical barriers stand in the way.</p>
<p>The Republican National Committee, now run by Trump loyalists, owns the rulebook for nominating the party’s standard-bearer and is working with the White House to ensure a process favorable to the president.</p>
<p>Yet Trump’s muddled response to a deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, this month has emboldened his critics to talk about the once unthinkable.</p>
<p>GOP officials from New Hampshire to Arizona have wondered aloud in recent days about the possibility of a 2020 primary challenge from a fellow Republican or right-leaning independent. No one has stepped forward yet, however, and the list of potential prospects remains small.</p>
<p>Ohio’s GOP Gov. John Kasich has not ruled out a second run in 2020. Another Republican and frequent Trump critic, Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse, last month visited Iowa, which hosts the nation’s first presidential caucuses. And a handful of wealthy outsiders including Cuban and wrestler-turned-actor Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, are being encouraged to join the fray.</p>
<p>Trump’s comments about Charlottesville “frightened” many Republicans in New Hampshire, said Tom Rath, a veteran Republican strategist in the state that traditionally hosts the nation’s first presidential primary election.</p>
<p>“While he has support from his people, the party itself is not married to him,” Rath said of his party’s president.</p>
<p>Trump denounced bigotry after the Virginia protests, but he also said “very fine people” were on “both sides” of the demonstrations, which drew neo-Nazis, white nationalists and members of the Ku Klux Klan. One woman was killed when a man drove his car into a crowd of counter-protesters.</p>
<p>Even before the divisive remarks, Trump’s public approval ratings were bad. Gallup found in mid-August that the president earned the approval of just 34 percent of all adults and 79 percent of Republicans. Both numbers marked personal lows. And as he lashes out at members of his own party with increasing frequency, frustrated Republican officials have raised questions about the first-term president’s political future.</p>
<p>On Monday, Maine Sen. Susan Collins said it’s “too early to tell” whether Trump would be the GOP presidential nominee in 2020. On Wednesday, Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake said Trump’s divisive governing style was “inviting” a primary challenge. And on Thursday night, former Sen. John Danforth, of Missouri, called Trump “the most divisive president in our history” in a Washington Post op-ed.</p>
<p>“There hasn’t been a more divisive person in national politics since George Wallace,” Danforth wrote.</p>
<p>Trump has also disappointed “The Rock,” a former Republican-turned-independent, who told Vanity Fair in May that he’d “like to see a better leadership” from the Republican president.</p>
<p>Trump’s response to Charlottesville “felt like a turning point” among those thinking about 2020, said Kenton Tilford, a West Virginia political consultant who founded “Run The Rock 2020.” He said the group has already organized volunteers in Iowa and New Hampshire.</p>
<p>“He’s vulnerable,” Tilford said of the president.</p>
<p>Yet there is good reason why no sitting president since Franklin Pierce in 1852 has been defeated by a member of his own party. As is almost always the case, the most passionate voters in the president’s party remain loyal. And in Trump’s case, activists across the country are starting to come around.</p>
<p>The president has personally installed his own leadership team at the Republican National Committee and in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, where new GOP chairmen are more devout Trump supporters than their predecessors.</p>
<p>As RNC members from across the country gathered in Tennessee this week, leaders had already begun focusing on protecting Trump in 2020.</p>
<p>RNC co-chairman Bob Paduchik, who ran Trump’s winning campaign for Ohio last year, was named to lead an RNC effort to review the presidential nominating process in conjunction with White House political advisers.</p>
<p>One possibility, last invoked during President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election, would allow party officials in some states to decide primary contests in closed caucuses without voter input. Such a change could make it all but impossible for another Republican to run a successful nationwide primary challenge.</p>
<p>Two members of the RNC rules committee, Bill Palatucci of New Jersey and Henry Barbour of Mississippi, said they’ve heard nothing of such an effort.</p>
<p>RNC chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel suggested that the blowback for Trump’s Charlottesville comments only reminded his hardcore supporters what they like most about him.</p>
<p>“He’s not filtered. He’s not poll-testing everything. That’s part of the appeal he has,” McDaniel said. “He has a great understanding of the pulse of the grassroots Republicans right now.”</p>
<p>Other RNC members seemed more concerned about the president’s statement there were “very fine people” on both sides of the white supremacist rally.</p>
<p>Palatucci said Trump “got it wrong” in his initial comments, but he stands by the president’s agenda, especially business deregulation and his recent decision to send more troops to Afghanistan.</p>
<p>Barbour said the confusion following Trump’s response to Charlottesville was “a huge distraction.” The president’s future will brighten, he said, if the GOP-controlled Congress overhauls the tax code and approves sweeping public building projects.</p>
<p>“If he doesn’t get those done, we’re going to have trouble,” Barbour said.</p>
<p>Yet few predicted a significant primary challenge in the most important early voting states.</p>
<p>New Hampshire RNC member Steve Duprey said he’s heard no serious talk of one. Said Iowa RNC committeewoman Tamara Scott, “I firmly stand behind my president.”</p> | false | 1 | new york mark cuban isnt ready launch formal campaign challenge president donald trump yet cuban outspoken texas billionaire describes fiercely independent politically sees opportunity someone take republican president increasingly viewed divisive incompetent even within party base wont turn someone connect feel confident might turn away cuban told associated press door wide open question pull indeed seven months trump presidency republicans rightleaning independents begun contemplate possibility organized bid take sitting president 2020 herculean task say fantasy president modern era defeated member party significant political practical barriers stand way republican national committee run trump loyalists owns rulebook nominating partys standardbearer working white house ensure process favorable president yet trumps muddled response deadly white supremacist rally charlottesville virginia month emboldened critics talk unthinkable gop officials new hampshire arizona wondered aloud recent days possibility 2020 primary challenge fellow republican rightleaning independent one stepped forward yet however list potential prospects remains small ohios gop gov john kasich ruled second run 2020 another republican frequent trump critic nebraska sen ben sasse last month visited iowa hosts nations first presidential caucuses handful wealthy outsiders including cuban wrestlerturnedactor dwayne rock johnson encouraged join fray trumps comments charlottesville frightened many republicans new hampshire said tom rath veteran republican strategist state traditionally hosts nations first presidential primary election support people party married rath said partys president trump denounced bigotry virginia protests also said fine people sides demonstrations drew neonazis white nationalists members ku klux klan one woman killed man drove car crowd counterprotesters even divisive remarks trumps public approval ratings bad gallup found midaugust president earned approval 34 percent adults 79 percent republicans numbers marked personal lows lashes members party increasing frequency frustrated republican officials raised questions firstterm presidents political future monday maine sen susan collins said early tell whether trump would gop presidential nominee 2020 wednesday arizona sen jeff flake said trumps divisive governing style inviting primary challenge thursday night former sen john danforth missouri called trump divisive president history washington post oped hasnt divisive person national politics since george wallace danforth wrote trump also disappointed rock former republicanturnedindependent told vanity fair may hed like see better leadership republican president trumps response charlottesville felt like turning point among thinking 2020 said kenton tilford west virginia political consultant founded run rock 2020 said group already organized volunteers iowa new hampshire hes vulnerable tilford said president yet good reason sitting president since franklin pierce 1852 defeated member party almost always case passionate voters presidents party remain loyal trumps case activists across country starting come around president personally installed leadership team republican national committee states like ohio pennsylvania new hampshire new gop chairmen devout trump supporters predecessors rnc members across country gathered tennessee week leaders already begun focusing protecting trump 2020 rnc cochairman bob paduchik ran trumps winning campaign ohio last year named lead rnc effort review presidential nominating process conjunction white house political advisers one possibility last invoked president george w bushs 2004 reelection would allow party officials states decide primary contests closed caucuses without voter input change could make impossible another republican run successful nationwide primary challenge two members rnc rules committee bill palatucci new jersey henry barbour mississippi said theyve heard nothing effort rnc chairwoman ronna romney mcdaniel suggested blowback trumps charlottesville comments reminded hardcore supporters like hes filtered hes polltesting everything thats part appeal mcdaniel said great understanding pulse grassroots republicans right rnc members seemed concerned presidents statement fine people sides white supremacist rally palatucci said trump got wrong initial comments stands presidents agenda especially business deregulation recent decision send troops afghanistan barbour said confusion following trumps response charlottesville huge distraction presidents future brighten said gopcontrolled congress overhauls tax code approves sweeping public building projects doesnt get done going trouble barbour said yet predicted significant primary challenge important early voting states new hampshire rnc member steve duprey said hes heard serious talk one said iowa rnc committeewoman tamara scott firmly stand behind president | 645 |
<p>First, let me say that I am prepared for the backlash that I will receive from certain groups of people&#160;regarding my views on this topic.&#160; That’s ok, because it has to be said. Whether people want to think openly about it or not doesn’t make it less true.&#160; As a society we do a great job of taking one group of people’s bad situation, slapping legislation behind it to make it better, while simultaneously leaving out the rights of other groups. Some people I have talked to would&#160;answer that with “Well, they had all the rights for this long, so now they can see how we felt.”&#160; Balancing the rights of all INDIVIDUALS is what we are supposed to be doing.&#160; We put people into categories and then get mad when they put us into categories.&#160; Although law enforcement does use the concept of “profiling.” This is to give them a jumping board of where to start brainstorming when investigating something.&#160; We see all too often how “profiling” or “categorizing” people is not an exact science.&#160;With my job experience I have&#160;witnessed many times where there were&#160;blatant and even purposeful&#160;false assumptions based on stereotypes or biases.&#160; The viewpoints that I express below are not about ALL WOMEN or ALL MEN.&#160; I do not condone grouping any people into a category with blanket assumptions.&#160; This is my viewpoint on how SOME WOMEN think/act&#160;and SOME MEN&#160;experience the consequences of an&#160;imbalance that has become&#160;far too leaning to the rights of others and leaving theirs out.&#160;&#160;</p>
<p>Women have long had the upper hand when it comes to Family Court.&#160; There, I said it.&#160; Why has this happened?&#160; There has been a long standing view of society that women are the better nurturers/caregivers.&#160; It has also been a view that it was even the “woman’s job to raise the children”, even in instances where she either clearly wasn’t in a position to care for the children due to lack of housing, education, job, or drug abuse or other situations.&#160; Often times if the woman is in these types of situations, the court and Child Protective Services is still willing and forceful in making sure that the woman obtain government assistance in regards to funding so that they can get an apartment and food so that they and the child(ren) can remain together.&#160; All the while, while she is getting the assistance to get it together, the father, already having it together, gets told that the mother is the necessary “nurturer” in the co parenting relationship.&#160; To me, the entire thing is very ridiculous and backwards when you think about it.&#160; Feminists push that they be seen as an individual and equal to men as far as their rights are concerned with pay, obtaining a job, reproductive rights and more.&#160; However, in family court they don’t want to be seen as equal.&#160; They -and the family court buys into this- want to be seen as the&#160;better parent&#160;because they are the “nurturer” and you know, men can’t be nurturing or caregivers.&#160;/sarcasm.&#160; If women can have jobs, work on cars, become anything that a man can, why can’t a man evolve from the provider into carrying a dual role of provider and nurturer?&#160; To say that no man has this capability is a lie and an assumption based on biases or sexist profiling.</p>
<p>Some women have even gone as far as to not only want the father to not have full custody, but also not to have joint custody of the child(ren).&#160; This stems from their hurt over what they experienced in the relationship with the father of the kids.&#160; The woman has a right to feel the feelings that she has over whatever occurred in the relationship, but she doesn’t have the right to portray those feelings in trying to grab control over the shared children that they both were a part in making and even raising together for a period of time.&#160; Also, some women become very jealous or bitter when the father moves onto a new relationship and they aren’t able to wrap their head around their feelings.&#160; They don’t want to see him coming by with another women to pick up or drop off the children for visitations.&#160; They don’t want to hear the children, as children will do, start to like the person that they are spending time around; this may cause the mother to have feelings of “what does she have that I don’t” and always having to hear the children reminding her how she just wasn’t good enough.&#160; Learning to accept the end of a relationship is something that has to be a process for some people. Some women have even gone to the extent of fabricating abuse of herself or her children in order to pull law enforcement or Child Protective Services into the situation so that all it takes is some convincing and sales techniques and the system is on her side.</p>
<p>Some women have 50/50 custody of the child(ren) where the father has the kids half of the week and she has them the other half of the week.&#160; Some co-parents are lucky enough to live in the same school district where they can both experience having the children in the home with them, even if only for part of the week.&#160; Often times, if the woman was a stay at home mother or didn’t go to college, or simply works a lesser paying job that the man, the man still has to pay child support to the woman even though he has the child (ren) for half of the week.&#160; Logic would tell most people that both parents are responsible for the children’s well being 100% of the time.&#160; However, let’s think about this completely objective here.&#160; If a man has the children in his home half of the week, paying for their rent, utilities, food, clothing, etc when the children are with them, how come they would have to give money to the woman to pay for their rent, utilities, food, clothing, etc when the child (ren) are with the mother?&#160; Aren’t women equal?&#160; I can understand if the parents were married, she agreed to be a stay at home mother while he worked, and he suddenly left her.&#160; That is the idea of alimony to help bridge that gap.&#160; But an equal woman, who can do what a man can do, should still be able to stand on her own two feet. If she is not disabled in the physical or mental sense, she should be able to obtain a job, an apartment, and feed and clothe the children.&#160; It may not be the same exact situation that they have at the father’s house if he is making 100k a year and she is making 30k a year, but how do we feel that it is our right to punish a man for succeeding in life?&#160; What if the woman cheated on him or left HIM? This makes for a disgusting situation when you see a man who has worked his butt off to provide for his family and the woman cheats, leaves and is still a stay at home mom getting enough financial support from him that she doesn’t even have to work.&#160; It has been a long standing thought of mine that the woman should have to have some kind of job in order to allow the court to even consider allowing her to receive child support.&#160; Think if this was the other way around.&#160; The woman made a bunch of money, and the man was a stay at home dad or he lost his job.&#160; If the man was receiving money from the woman and wasn’t even attempting to support himself, he would be called a bum, mooch, lazy, loser.&#160; What we are doing to these men is completely unfair.</p>
<p>We also need to consider men’s rights when speaking about abortion.&#160; Men are not able to “opt out” if a woman becomes pregnant and decides to keep the child.&#160; In many states even if a father were to voluntarily give up his parental rights, he still has the obligation to pay through child support.&#160; For fathers that do want to have a connection with their child (ren), family court has become very difficult for many of them.&#160; There are biases against fathers.&#160; In divorces, it has been said that up to 83% of women receive custody of their children in divorces.&#160; Why does this happen? This happens because of gender roles.&#160; We need to do better as a society when encouraging father’s to nuture, encouraging women to have careers.&#160; Both sexes should be able to provide emotionally and financially to their children.&#160; Some families may choose to have the mother be a full time caregiver, and that is just fine! Whatever works for them.&#160; However, the mother will still need help with caregiving.</p>
<p>Women cannot ask for equal rights when men don’t have equal rights.&#160; We have to consider both sides.</p>
<p />
<p /> | false | 1 | first let say prepared backlash receive certain groups people160regarding views topic160 thats ok said whether people want think openly doesnt make less true160 society great job taking one group peoples bad situation slapping legislation behind make better simultaneously leaving rights groups people talked would160answer well rights long see felt160 balancing rights individuals supposed doing160 put people categories get mad put us categories160 although law enforcement use concept profiling give jumping board start brainstorming investigating something160 see often profiling categorizing people exact science160with job experience have160witnessed many times were160blatant even purposeful160false assumptions based stereotypes biases160 viewpoints express women men160 condone grouping people category blanket assumptions160 viewpoint women thinkact160and men160experience consequences an160imbalance become160far leaning rights others leaving out160160 women long upper hand comes family court160 said it160 happened160 long standing view society women better nurturerscaregivers160 also view even womans job raise children even instances either clearly wasnt position care children due lack housing education job drug abuse situations160 often times woman types situations court child protective services still willing forceful making sure woman obtain government assistance regards funding get apartment food children remain together160 getting assistance get together father already together gets told mother necessary nurturer co parenting relationship160 entire thing ridiculous backwards think it160 feminists push seen individual equal men far rights concerned pay obtaining job reproductive rights more160 however family court dont want seen equal160 family court buys want seen the160better parent160because nurturer know men cant nurturing caregivers160sarcasm160 women jobs work cars become anything man cant man evolve provider carrying dual role provider nurturer160 say man capability lie assumption based biases sexist profiling women even gone far want father full custody also joint custody children160 stems hurt experienced relationship father kids160 woman right feel feelings whatever occurred relationship doesnt right portray feelings trying grab control shared children part making even raising together period time160 also women become jealous bitter father moves onto new relationship arent able wrap head around feelings160 dont want see coming another women pick drop children visitations160 dont want hear children children start like person spending time around may cause mother feelings dont always hear children reminding wasnt good enough160 learning accept end relationship something process people women even gone extent fabricating abuse children order pull law enforcement child protective services situation takes convincing sales techniques system side women 5050 custody children father kids half week half week160 coparents lucky enough live school district experience children home even part week160 often times woman stay home mother didnt go college simply works lesser paying job man man still pay child support woman even though child ren half week160 logic would tell people parents responsible childrens well 100 time160 however lets think completely objective here160 man children home half week paying rent utilities food clothing etc children come would give money woman pay rent utilities food clothing etc child ren mother160 arent women equal160 understand parents married agreed stay home mother worked suddenly left her160 idea alimony help bridge gap160 equal woman man still able stand two feet disabled physical mental sense able obtain job apartment feed clothe children160 may exact situation fathers house making 100k year making 30k year feel right punish man succeeding life160 woman cheated left makes disgusting situation see man worked butt provide family woman cheats leaves still stay home mom getting enough financial support doesnt even work160 long standing thought mine woman kind job order allow court even consider allowing receive child support160 think way around160 woman made bunch money man stay home dad lost job160 man receiving money woman wasnt even attempting support would called bum mooch lazy loser160 men completely unfair also need consider mens rights speaking abortion160 men able opt woman becomes pregnant decides keep child160 many states even father voluntarily give parental rights still obligation pay child support160 fathers want connection child ren family court become difficult many them160 biases fathers160 divorces said 83 women receive custody children divorces160 happen happens gender roles160 need better society encouraging fathers nuture encouraging women careers160 sexes able provide emotionally financially children160 families may choose mother full time caregiver fine whatever works them160 however mother still need help caregiving women ask equal rights men dont equal rights160 consider sides | 695 |
<p>Sometimes, what makes Hollywood so confusing but also fascinating is how simultaneously surreal and mundane it can be, and how those two realities can coexist in such tight juxtaposition. Case in point: this year’s Emmy Awards, where one minute Sean Spicer turns up as a surprise guest on stage, eliciting a collective gasp in the audience, and the next, Keri Russell gallops into the bathroom, hiking up the hem of her dress so as not to get it dirty while waiting for an empty stall, and exclaims to nobody in particular, “Holy moly, this is nuts!”</p>
<p>What Russell was referring to is anybody’s guess — perhaps just the overwhelming stimuli present at any awards show — but there were a few not-televised, behind-the-scenes moments that might have been deemed “nuts” by any account.</p>
<p>When Spicer first popped onstage during host Stephen Colbert’s opening monologue, some Emmy guests rolled their eyes, a lot of people laughed — mostly out of sheer nerves and incredulity, the way one would at a funeral — but after the initial shock wore off, the general consensus seemed to be: Was it OK to laugh at that? Was that actually funny?</p>
<p>Dee Dee Myers, former White House press secretary under President Bill Clinton and current executive vice president of corporate communications and pubic affairs for Warner Bros. seemed to think it was a joke that worked.</p>
<p>“He was a very good sport about it,” said Myers, milling about the lobby of the Microsoft Theater. “He was very brave to do it and I thought the audience responded warmly. I would love to meet him. I hope he’ll be at the Governor’s Ball.”</p>
<p>It was an unexpected response given Myers’ association with the Clintons — and Spicer’s disastrous affiliation with Donald Trump — but, then again, Washington D.C. can be just as strange a place as Hollywood.</p>
<p>“People not in politics might not know this, but Sean Spicer had a good reputation before Trump,” she said. “He was really well-liked and was known about town as a really good guy.”</p>
<p>The onslaught of Trump jokes during Colbert’s opener drew tepid, if in some cases, blasé reactions. “I’m so sick of hearing about Trump,” one audience member sighed. “There’s nothing fresh about these jokes anymore,” yawned another. “And I hate Trump more than anything. Can’t we just ever get away from him?”</p>
<p>Throughout the night bored (or just hungry) celebrities and civilians alike took to the lobby—that is, if they were able to finagle their way out of their row, which was especially difficult if you were seated up front. “The problem is if I get up a seat filler takes my seat, and then it’s awkward trying to get them up again since we are in the middle of the row,” said Kira Lewis, whose husband is Brian Morewitz, senior vice president of drama development at ABC. “I need champagne and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.” (Seats in the back presented their own fair share of setbacks. “Even though I’m at the <a href="http://variety.com/t/emmys/" type="external">Emmys</a> I still feel like I’m watching it at home on TV because I’m still watching it on the monitor,” said one invited guest.)</p>
<p>During once commercial break, Kathryn Hahn, nominated for her supporting role in “Transparent,” was hanging out by the concession stand while husband, actor-producer Ethan Sandler, placed an order for drinks, including three glasses of white wine. “I’m so dehydrated,” she said. “I can’t believe there’s no water in [the theater.]” Soon after, Russell joined the line, along with on-and off-screen husband Matthew Rhys. An enthusiastic fan of the critically touted series “The Americans” approached the couple and they happily posed for photos. Nearby, “Beverly Hills 90210” alumna and SAG-AFTRA president Gabrielle Carteris posed for selfies with fans. Then at one point, “Better Call Saul” star Bob Odenkirk somehow became trapped inside the concession stand’s security rope stanchions. “How do you exit this thing?” he asked. (Pro tip: when the line for drinks at the Emmys gets too long, just use the soda machine like some guests eventually did.)</p>
<p>Back in the theater, audience members went absolutely gaga over many of the night’s awards, including Lena Waithe’s and Aziz Ansari’s historic joint win for outstanding writing for a comedy series. When Waithe, the first American-American woman to win the award, delivered her speech — during which she quoted Maxine Waters’ infectiously viral “reclaiming my time” line — several audience members fist-bumped. When cinematographer-cum-helmer Reed Morano took home the award for best director for “The Handmaid’s Tale” so many women cheered and raised their fists into the air, the hailed Hulu series, and Morano’s win, a clarion call for female empowerment.</p>
<p>Later, a jittery silence spread wide across the theater as legendary “Roots” actress Cicely Tyson struggled to forms the words when presenting the award for best limited series — “I’m so nervous, I don’t know why,” she said to co-presenter Anika Noni Rose. But that couldn’t keep the entire theater, including Oprah, from leaping to their feet and giving Tyson an emotion-filled standing ovation.</p>
<p>Moments later, women and men in the audience ate up Reese Witherspoon’s plug for gender diversity in the biz during her acceptance speech for “Big Little Lies.” They also loved Nicole Kidman’s passionate speech about the challenges of being a working mom. When Kidman thanked her two young daughters, Sunday and Faith, and relayed plans to put her Emmy in their room so they could see it everyday and be inspired even though “mommy” wasn’t always them it tuck them in at night, a few women in the audience quipped they, too, would follow suit, but with workplace items such as staplers and pens.</p>
<p>Similarly, people in the audience seemed genuinely thrilled for Julia Louis-Dreyfus, whose record-breaking win for best actress in a comedy series further cements her position as on of the most formidable actors — male or female — working today.</p>
<p>During the In Memoriam segment, which is usually everybody’s favorite bit at awards shows, there was the expected applause for such adored industry favorites as Bill Paxton, Carrie Fisher and Debbie Reynolds, and Mary Tyler Moore — but there was not a clap to be had for Fox New founder Roger Ailes. For several minutes following the In Memoriam slideshow, an odd, eerie silence settled over the crowd, ostensibly because watching these things one can’t help but acknowledge the fact that someday we’re all going to die.</p>
<p>The mood was lifted as soon as presenter Sarah Paulson took the stage, even though the general consensus among the women in the audience was, per the words of one loud woman, shaking her head repeatedly, “Her dress is not good.”</p>
<p>Following another commercial break during which dancers decked out in fringed 1920s flapper dresses entertained the crowd, Sterling K. Brown took home the Emmy for his lead role on monster hit “This is Us.” There was wild applause for the Stanford-and NYU-educated actor and, when the music played him off mid-speech, a succession of Boos erupted in the audience. “Let him finish!” said one Emmy guest. “We want more!” hollered another. As the music continued to play, audience members drowned it out with even more applause for Brown.</p>
<p>The zeal for best drama series “The Handmaid’s Tale” was likewise palpable, especially when world-renowned writer Margaret Atwood joined the cast and crew to accept their award for best drama series. “Oh, they’re bringing more handmaids up on stage!” squealed a fan. “I love that. I love the show so much!” “Have you read the book?” asked another. “No,” said the squealing fan. “But I can’t imagine it’s better than the TV series!”</p>
<p>And on that Hollywood note, they exited the theater for the Governors Ball.</p> | false | 1 | sometimes makes hollywood confusing also fascinating simultaneously surreal mundane two realities coexist tight juxtaposition case point years emmy awards one minute sean spicer turns surprise guest stage eliciting collective gasp audience next keri russell gallops bathroom hiking hem dress get dirty waiting empty stall exclaims nobody particular holy moly nuts russell referring anybodys guess perhaps overwhelming stimuli present awards show nottelevised behindthescenes moments might deemed nuts account spicer first popped onstage host stephen colberts opening monologue emmy guests rolled eyes lot people laughed mostly sheer nerves incredulity way one would funeral initial shock wore general consensus seemed ok laugh actually funny dee dee myers former white house press secretary president bill clinton current executive vice president corporate communications pubic affairs warner bros seemed think joke worked good sport said myers milling lobby microsoft theater brave thought audience responded warmly would love meet hope hell governors ball unexpected response given myers association clintons spicers disastrous affiliation donald trump washington dc strange place hollywood people politics might know sean spicer good reputation trump said really wellliked known town really good guy onslaught trump jokes colberts opener drew tepid cases blasé reactions im sick hearing trump one audience member sighed theres nothing fresh jokes anymore yawned another hate trump anything cant ever get away throughout night bored hungry celebrities civilians alike took lobbythat able finagle way row especially difficult seated front problem get seat filler takes seat awkward trying get since middle row said kira lewis whose husband brian morewitz senior vice president drama development abc need champagne peanut butter jelly sandwich seats back presented fair share setbacks even though im emmys still feel like im watching home tv im still watching monitor said one invited guest commercial break kathryn hahn nominated supporting role transparent hanging concession stand husband actorproducer ethan sandler placed order drinks including three glasses white wine im dehydrated said cant believe theres water theater soon russell joined line along onand offscreen husband matthew rhys enthusiastic fan critically touted series americans approached couple happily posed photos nearby beverly hills 90210 alumna sagaftra president gabrielle carteris posed selfies fans one point better call saul star bob odenkirk somehow became trapped inside concession stands security rope stanchions exit thing asked pro tip line drinks emmys gets long use soda machine like guests eventually back theater audience members went absolutely gaga many nights awards including lena waithes aziz ansaris historic joint win outstanding writing comedy series waithe first americanamerican woman win award delivered speech quoted maxine waters infectiously viral reclaiming time line several audience members fistbumped cinematographercumhelmer reed morano took home award best director handmaids tale many women cheered raised fists air hailed hulu series moranos win clarion call female empowerment later jittery silence spread wide across theater legendary roots actress cicely tyson struggled forms words presenting award best limited series im nervous dont know said copresenter anika noni rose couldnt keep entire theater including oprah leaping feet giving tyson emotionfilled standing ovation moments later women men audience ate reese witherspoons plug gender diversity biz acceptance speech big little lies also loved nicole kidmans passionate speech challenges working mom kidman thanked two young daughters sunday faith relayed plans put emmy room could see everyday inspired even though mommy wasnt always tuck night women audience quipped would follow suit workplace items staplers pens similarly people audience seemed genuinely thrilled julia louisdreyfus whose recordbreaking win best actress comedy series cements position formidable actors male female working today memoriam segment usually everybodys favorite bit awards shows expected applause adored industry favorites bill paxton carrie fisher debbie reynolds mary tyler moore clap fox new founder roger ailes several minutes following memoriam slideshow odd eerie silence settled crowd ostensibly watching things one cant help acknowledge fact someday going die mood lifted soon presenter sarah paulson took stage even though general consensus among women audience per words one loud woman shaking head repeatedly dress good following another commercial break dancers decked fringed 1920s flapper dresses entertained crowd sterling k brown took home emmy lead role monster hit us wild applause stanfordand nyueducated actor music played midspeech succession boos erupted audience let finish said one emmy guest want hollered another music continued play audience members drowned even applause brown zeal best drama series handmaids tale likewise palpable especially worldrenowned writer margaret atwood joined cast crew accept award best drama series oh theyre bringing handmaids stage squealed fan love love show much read book asked another said squealing fan cant imagine better tv series hollywood note exited theater governors ball | 749 |
<p>The collapse of marriage —&#160;combined with high rates of unwed birth —&#160;has given liberals an opening to push long-term, “temporary” sterilization as the “default” approach for low- and middle-income young women and minorities.</p>
<p>Marriage rates have hit their <a href="http://www.bgsu.edu/content/dam/BGSU/college-of-arts-and-sciences/NCFMR/documents/FP/FP-13-13.pdf" type="external">lowest point</a> in a century. Today, according to a recent <a href="http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/" type="external">Pew report</a>, one-in-five adults fall into the never-married category. (By comparison, in 1960, never-marrieds numbered about one-in-ten.) Falling marriage rates have given rise to another problem: unwed births. Forty years ago, when the trend towards later or delayed marriage took hold, American women generally <a href="http://twentysomethingmarriage.org/summary/" type="external">postponed</a> childbearing until marriage. Not so today. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) <a href="http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2013/04/04/more-us-couples-living-together-instead-of-marrying-cdc-finds" type="external">reports</a> that “nearly half of women aged 15- to 44-years-old ‘cohabited’ outside of marriage between 2006 and 2010,” and about “20 percent became pregnant” and gave birth during the first year of a cohabiting relationship.</p>
<p>The latest figures from the CDC reveal that <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr62/nvsr62_09.pdf" type="external">40</a>&#160;percent of all U.S. births and 48 percent of first-time births are to unmarried women, chiefly twenty-somethings. As a result, <a href="http://twentysomethingmarriage.org/summary/" type="external">marriage experts</a> say, American society is at a tipping point, “on the verge of … a new demographic reality where the majority of first births in the United States precede marriage.”</p>
<p>The unmarried mom trend has taken hold not only among poor women, but also among the largest demographic group of young women —&#160;“ <a href="http://twentysomethingmarriage.org/summary/" type="external">Middle American”</a>&#160;women —&#160;that is, moderately educated women with a high-school diploma and perhaps a year or two of college.” As these women continue to forego marriage in favor of cohabitation, the number of unmarried mothers will remain high.</p>
<p>Should we be worried?</p>
<p>Yes, for two reasons. First, because real women and real children suffer when marriages don’t happen and “ <a href="http://www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/" type="external">fragile families</a>”&#160;result. “Births to unmarried women” is not just a statistical category. &#160;It’s the first page in the troubling life stories that unfold over decades for many of the children born to these single moms.</p>
<p>You’ve met these women.</p>
<p>They’re nurse’s aides in your grandpa’s assisted living facility, clerks at your local grocery store, and nighttime cleaners in your office building. They’re the women shivering at bus stops in the chilly dawn, toddlers in tow, headed to daycare or work. They have jobs, not careers, and often have low-commitment, unreliable, sometimes abusive men as partners —&#160;but not husbands. Many of these women find joy and meaning in their children, and the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Promises-Can-Keep-Motherhood-Marriage/dp/0520241134" type="external">promise</a> of a better life to come. But all too often, that promise never materializes, for them or their children.</p>
<p>The children suffer most. In spite of often-heroic parental efforts, children raised by unmarried mothers typically endure the disadvantages that come from too little parental time and money. They also tend to suffer from what scholar Isabel Sawhill calls “household churning”&#160;—&#160;the “family instability” that results from “a series of cohabiting relationships with different partners.” Children raised by an unmarried parent <a href="http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=births-to-unmarried-women" type="external">fare worse</a> than children raised by two married parents on almost every measure of wellbeing. <a href="http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=births-to-unmarried-women" type="external">More likely</a> to drop out, do poorly in school, abuse alcohol or drugs, engage in teen sex, be incarcerated, and suffer abuse at the hands of their mother’s sexual partner, their troubles continue well into adulthood.</p>
<p>Data proves what ideology disputes: the <a href="http://www.aei.org/publication/for-richer-for-poorer-how-family-structures-economic-success-in-america/" type="external">two-parent</a>, married family provides the <a href="http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=births-to-unmarried-women" type="external">ideal context</a> for raising children. Everything else is second-best, or worse.</p>
<p>Family instability and the attendant disadvantages for mothers and children are problematic enough. &#160;But there’s another reason to worry.</p>
<p>The combination of the collapsing marriage culture and the stunningly high birthrates among unmarried women has smoked out the eugenics enthusiasts on the left. Masquerading as benevolent policy-makers or fiscally-prudent guardians of the public treasury, eugenics-minded liberals have found a socially palatable reason to campaign for the long-term “temporary” sterilization of America’s young women, on a massive scale.</p>
<p>Recall how this all started.</p>
<p>More than fifty years ago, the sex-with-no-consequences philosophy washed over the culture, cheered on by feminists, radicals, and lusty college students. Out-of-wedlock births began to climb. As the Pill, backed by legal abortion, became widely available, liberals exclaimed that a new day had dawned —&#160;a new era of freedom for women. Freedom from unintended pregnancy would allow women (and adolescents) to shape their lives according to their own desires. Brookings Institute scholars George Akerlof and Janet Yellen <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/1996/08/childrenfamilies-akerlof" type="external">summed</a> it up in 1996, “The legalization of abortion and dramatic increase in the availability of contraception gave women the tools to control the number and timing of their children.”</p>
<p>And so, grownups quit frowning at premarital sex, “living in sin” became a joke on late-night TV, and getting pregnant outside of marriage lost its stigma. But in spite of the Pill’s popularity, more sex begat more babies. Both teen pregnancies and <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB20001424052748704458204576074251590376210?mg=reno64-wsj&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB20001424052748704458204576074251590376210.html" type="external">abortions</a> hit record levels around <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html" type="external">1990-1991</a>.</p>
<p>So liberals campaigned to “end” teen pregnancy and the crisis of “babies-having-babies” by convincing legislators, school boards, doctors, and parents that “the problem” was lack of access to condoms and contraceptives. Teens are going to have sex anyway, they said, so the best way to reduce unwed childbearing was to ensure that young people were “protected,” armed with latex, pills, and directions to Planned Parenthood for an abortion (“just in case”). Unwed pregnancy? As Sawhill, who serves as President of the National <a href="http://thenationalcampaign.org/about/leadership" type="external">Campaign</a> to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, wrote in her book, Generation Unbound: Drifting Into Sex and Parenthood Without Marriage (2014): “The pill was supposed to change all of that. It was supposed to usher in a world of children by choice, not chance.” But, Sawhill astutely observes, “That hasn’t happened.”</p>
<p>It turns out (surprise, surprise) that young women, especially teens, aren’t so great at using contraception correctly and consistently. Furthermore, women typically <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=discontinue+OCP+1+year" type="external">discontinue</a> their chosen contraceptive methods within a year or less (most often due to unpleasant or dangerous side effects), sometimes switching to another method —&#160;or maybe not. Even when women receive contraceptives for free, roughly <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=discontinue+OCP+1+year" type="external">half</a> discontinue their use within a year (58% of contraceptive patch users, 47% of Pill users, and 49% of vaginal ring users discontinue use within 12 months.)</p>
<p>Still, teen pregnancy rates have <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html" type="external">declined</a>, significantly, over the past few decades. More teens are abstinent or waiting longer to become sexually active. And if they have sex, they’re more likely to use contraceptives.</p>
<p>Overall, however, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/unmarried-motherhood-increases-sharply/2013/05/01/ef77c4ba-b26e-11e2-9a98-4be1688d7d84_story.html" type="external">unwed pregnancies</a> remain high, driven by young women in their 20’s. Their pregnancy rates, according to the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/unmarried-motherhood-increases-sharply/2013/05/01/ef77c4ba-b26e-11e2-9a98-4be1688d7d84_story.html" type="external">U.S. Census Bureau</a>, reflect “changing norms for sexual behavior and a decrease in marriage rates.” Put differently, these are women who, in decades past, would have shopped for a wedding dress before they shopped for cribs and carseats. No longer.</p>
<p>So, what’s a liberal to do?</p>
<p>Sawhill’s <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Unbound-Drifting-Parenthood-Marriage/dp/0815725582" type="external">book</a> captures well the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Unbound-Drifting-Parenthood-Marriage/dp/081572635X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1415069006&amp;sr=1-1" type="external">approach</a> of reproductive rights advocates, the political left, and Obama’s Health and Human Services Department. She acknowledges that marriage benefits children, but thinks it’s too late to “to put the marriage genie back in the bottle.” Although she worries about the wellbeing of children born to unwed mothers, she&#160; <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Unbound-Drifting-Parenthood-Marriage/dp/0815725582" type="external">concedes</a> that, “very few of us … want to turn back the clock. I certainly do not.”</p>
<p>Instead, she envisions marriage as an “evolving” institution, a“ <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/09/25-marriage-coming-back-sawhill" type="external">commitment device</a>” flexible enough to support same-sex pairings, childfree marriages, and whatever comes next. Rather than reviving traditional marriage, she believes it’s time to create a “new ethic of responsible parenthood” that says, ironically, “it’s O.K. not to be a parent.” (Perhaps that’s personal regret talking. A mother of one, she <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Generation-Unbound-Drifting-Parenthood-Marriage/dp/0815725582" type="external">describes</a> herself as an “indifferent parent.”)</p>
<p>Sawhill’s core idea, however, is less about marriage and more about babies and how to keep most people from having them. Forget the <a href="http://www.encounterbooks.com/books/what-to-expect-when-no-ones-expecting/" type="external">coming demographic disaster</a>. Sawhill’s utopia depends on reducing fertility and encouraging “quality” parenting, so that America will have “fewer children to be raised, more resources to devote per child, and higher-quality parenting all at the same time.”</p>
<p>She urges a “new norm” of “childbearing by design” that “chang[es] the default from having children to not having children.” The “default” mechanism is a tangible device —&#160;an IUD or implant —&#160;paid for by our taxes, courtesy of the Affordable Care Act. “Sex is safe” because sex and pregnancy have been “decoupled,” backed by the “99% success rate” of LARC (long-acting reversible contraceptives) methods like the IUD. Under Sawhill’s scheme, a would-be-parent doesn’t “opt out of pregnancy” because, under the new “default” scheme, she’s already “temporarily” sterilized —&#160;and probably has been for years. “An IUD implanted as soon as a woman becomes sexually active,” writes Sawhill, “would make her virtually infertile until such time as she explicitly chose to become a mother.” She’s all in favor of that.</p>
<p>Here’s the catch. Women can’t remove LARC methods by themselves. Having a child requires not only “a conscious choice,” but also an appointment with her doctor in order to get the IUD or implant out. Nor are they particularly safe for women. IUDs can migrate, perforating the uterine wall and sometimes the colon, resulting in sepsis and death. Implants and IUDs also increase the risk of ectopic pregnancy, the number one cause of maternal mortality in the first trimester of pregnancy.</p>
<p>The reality is that Sawhill and friends are not trying to discourage births among their elite peers. They’re bent on heading off births by the masses who don’t meet their standard of “readiness” to give “quality” parenting. Even though she <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/12/iud-implant-birth-control/16857523/" type="external">insists</a> that, “Nobody is talking about anything other than voluntary programs,” how much pressure does it take before a woman has lost her ability to decide for herself?</p>
<p>International <a href="http://www.acquireproject.org/archive/files/2.0_invest_in_fp_and_lapms/2.2_resources/2.2.3_studies/ER_Study_8.pdf" type="external">research</a>, for example, warns that doctors and medical practitioners sometimes <a href="http://www2.gre.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/793179/D8153-13_LARC_Full_Report_WEB.pdf" type="external">fail to comply</a> with patient requests for removal of LARC methods. They dismiss patient complaints about side effects, or insist that it’s “too early” to remove the contraceptive and that the women must persevere. For example, a 2013 study in the U.K. found that, ”The young women felt that their desire to have the implant removed at their request (when they had reached their own ‘tipping point’) often conflicted with practitioners’ advice that they should persevere with the implant for varying lengths of time.” Coercion is <a href="http://arhp.org/publications-and-resources/contraception-journal/april-2014" type="external">coercion</a>, even when liberals think they really do know what’s best.</p>
<p>I’m not the only person raising these issues. Several researchers from within the reproductive rights community also have voiced <a href="http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/17/3/gpr170308.html" type="external">concern</a> that aggressive LARC promotion fails to respect a woman’s “ <a href="http://go.nationalpartnership.org/site/News2?abbr=daily3_&amp;page=NewsArticle&amp;id=45968&amp;security=1381&amp;news_iv_ctrl=-1" type="external">reproductive autonomy</a>.” The current marriage crisis and increasing rates of unwed pregnancy have provided liberals with “cover” to go on the offensive against fertility and life.</p>
<p>As we work to rebuild a marriage culture —&#160;based on the foundations of life-giving love, personal commitment, and sexual restraint —&#160;we must be prepared to do battle as well. We must fight fiercely against the “benevolent solutions” that liberal policy-makers impose, particularly on low-income women of color, stripping them of their dignity and their freedom to have the children they desire.</p>
<p>In the end, however, I agree with Isabel Sawhill about this: She writes, “If marriage is to be revived, it will only be because civic and religious institutions are successful in encouraging more young people to marry before having children or because young people themselves see its value and act on these aspirations.”</p>
<p>And perhaps that’s our biggest task: to give witness to the truth about marriage and the joy of each new human life.</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Mary Rice Hasson</a> is a fellow at&#160;the Ethics &amp; Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | collapse marriage 160combined high rates unwed birth 160has given liberals opening push longterm temporary sterilization default approach low middleincome young women minorities marriage rates hit lowest point century today according recent pew report oneinfive adults fall nevermarried category comparison 1960 nevermarrieds numbered oneinten falling marriage rates given rise another problem unwed births forty years ago trend towards later delayed marriage took hold american women generally postponed childbearing marriage today centers disease control cdc reports nearly half women aged 15 44yearsold cohabited outside marriage 2006 2010 20 percent became pregnant gave birth first year cohabiting relationship latest figures cdc reveal 40160percent us births 48 percent firsttime births unmarried women chiefly twentysomethings result marriage experts say american society tipping point verge new demographic reality majority first births united states precede marriage unmarried mom trend taken hold among poor women also among largest demographic group young women 160 middle american160women 160that moderately educated women highschool diploma perhaps year two college women continue forego marriage favor cohabitation number unmarried mothers remain high worried yes two reasons first real women real children suffer marriages dont happen fragile families160result births unmarried women statistical category 160its first page troubling life stories unfold decades many children born single moms youve met women theyre nurses aides grandpas assisted living facility clerks local grocery store nighttime cleaners office building theyre women shivering bus stops chilly dawn toddlers tow headed daycare work jobs careers often lowcommitment unreliable sometimes abusive men partners 160but husbands many women find joy meaning children promise better life come often promise never materializes children children suffer spite oftenheroic parental efforts children raised unmarried mothers typically endure disadvantages come little parental time money also tend suffer scholar isabel sawhill calls household churning160160the family instability results series cohabiting relationships different partners children raised unmarried parent fare worse children raised two married parents almost every measure wellbeing likely drop poorly school abuse alcohol drugs engage teen sex incarcerated suffer abuse hands mothers sexual partner troubles continue well adulthood data proves ideology disputes twoparent married family provides ideal context raising children everything else secondbest worse family instability attendant disadvantages mothers children problematic enough 160but theres another reason worry combination collapsing marriage culture stunningly high birthrates among unmarried women smoked eugenics enthusiasts left masquerading benevolent policymakers fiscallyprudent guardians public treasury eugenicsminded liberals found socially palatable reason campaign longterm temporary sterilization americas young women massive scale recall started fifty years ago sexwithnoconsequences philosophy washed culture cheered feminists radicals lusty college students outofwedlock births began climb pill backed legal abortion became widely available liberals exclaimed new day dawned 160a new era freedom women freedom unintended pregnancy would allow women adolescents shape lives according desires brookings institute scholars george akerlof janet yellen summed 1996 legalization abortion dramatic increase availability contraception gave women tools control number timing children grownups quit frowning premarital sex living sin became joke latenight tv getting pregnant outside marriage lost stigma spite pills popularity sex begat babies teen pregnancies abortions hit record levels around 19901991 liberals campaigned end teen pregnancy crisis babieshavingbabies convincing legislators school boards doctors parents problem lack access condoms contraceptives teens going sex anyway said best way reduce unwed childbearing ensure young people protected armed latex pills directions planned parenthood abortion case unwed pregnancy sawhill serves president national campaign prevent teen unplanned pregnancy wrote book generation unbound drifting sex parenthood without marriage 2014 pill supposed change supposed usher world children choice chance sawhill astutely observes hasnt happened turns surprise surprise young women especially teens arent great using contraception correctly consistently furthermore women typically discontinue chosen contraceptive methods within year less often due unpleasant dangerous side effects sometimes switching another method 160or maybe even women receive contraceptives free roughly half discontinue use within year 58 contraceptive patch users 47 pill users 49 vaginal ring users discontinue use within 12 months still teen pregnancy rates declined significantly past decades teens abstinent waiting longer become sexually active sex theyre likely use contraceptives overall however unwed pregnancies remain high driven young women 20s pregnancy rates according us census bureau reflect changing norms sexual behavior decrease marriage rates put differently women decades past would shopped wedding dress shopped cribs carseats longer whats liberal sawhills book captures well approach reproductive rights advocates political left obamas health human services department acknowledges marriage benefits children thinks late put marriage genie back bottle although worries wellbeing children born unwed mothers she160 concedes us want turn back clock certainly instead envisions marriage evolving institution commitment device flexible enough support samesex pairings childfree marriages whatever comes next rather reviving traditional marriage believes time create new ethic responsible parenthood says ironically ok parent perhaps thats personal regret talking mother one describes indifferent parent sawhills core idea however less marriage babies keep people forget coming demographic disaster sawhills utopia depends reducing fertility encouraging quality parenting america fewer children raised resources devote per child higherquality parenting time urges new norm childbearing design changes default children children default mechanism tangible device 160an iud implant 160paid taxes courtesy affordable care act sex safe sex pregnancy decoupled backed 99 success rate larc longacting reversible contraceptives methods like iud sawhills scheme wouldbeparent doesnt opt pregnancy new default scheme shes already temporarily sterilized 160and probably years iud implanted soon woman becomes sexually active writes sawhill would make virtually infertile time explicitly chose become mother shes favor heres catch women cant remove larc methods child requires conscious choice also appointment doctor order get iud implant particularly safe women iuds migrate perforating uterine wall sometimes colon resulting sepsis death implants iuds also increase risk ectopic pregnancy number one cause maternal mortality first trimester pregnancy reality sawhill friends trying discourage births among elite peers theyre bent heading births masses dont meet standard readiness give quality parenting even though insists nobody talking anything voluntary programs much pressure take woman lost ability decide international research example warns doctors medical practitioners sometimes fail comply patient requests removal larc methods dismiss patient complaints side effects insist early remove contraceptive women must persevere example 2013 study uk found young women felt desire implant removed request reached tipping point often conflicted practitioners advice persevere implant varying lengths time coercion coercion even liberals think really know whats best im person raising issues several researchers within reproductive rights community also voiced concern aggressive larc promotion fails respect womans reproductive autonomy current marriage crisis increasing rates unwed pregnancy provided liberals cover go offensive fertility life work rebuild marriage culture 160based foundations lifegiving love personal commitment sexual restraint 160we must prepared battle well must fight fiercely benevolent solutions liberal policymakers impose particularly lowincome women color stripping dignity freedom children desire end however agree isabel sawhill writes marriage revived civic religious institutions successful encouraging young people marry children young people see value act aspirations perhaps thats biggest task give witness truth marriage joy new human life mary rice hasson fellow at160the ethics amp public policy center | 1,134 |
<p />
<p>TUESDAY, Aug. 29, 2017 — A large, 18-country study may turn current nutritional thinking on its head.</p>
<p>The new research suggests that it’s not the fat in your diet that’s raising your risk of premature death, it’s too many carbohydrates — especially the refined, processed kinds of carbs — that may be the real killer.</p>
<p>The research also found that eating fruits, vegetables and legumes can lower your risk of dying prematurely. But three or four servings a day seemed to be plenty. Any additional servings didn’t appear to provide more benefit.</p>
<p>What does all this mean to you? Well, a cheeseburger may be OK to eat, and adding lettuce and tomato to the burger is still good for you, but an excess of white flour burger buns may boost your risk of dying early.</p>
<p>People with a high fat intake — about 35 percent of their daily diet — had a 23 percent lower risk of early death and 18 percent lower risk of stroke compared to people who ate less fat, said lead author Mahshid Dehghan. She’s an investigator with the Population Health Research Institute at McMaster University in Ontario.</p>
<p>The researchers also noted that a very low intake of saturated fats (below 3 percent of daily diet) was associated with a higher risk of death in the study, compared to diets containing up to 13 percent daily.</p>
<p>At the same time, high-carb diets — containing an average 77 percent carbohydrates — were associated with a 28 percent increased risk of death versus low-carb diets, Dehghan said.</p>
<p>“The study showed that contrary to popular belief, increased consumption of dietary fats is associated with a lower risk of death,” Dehghan said.</p>
<p>“We found no evidence that below 10 percent of energy by saturated fat is beneficial, and going below 7 percent may even be harmful. Moderate amounts, particularly when accompanied with lower carbohydrate intake, are probably optimal,” she said.</p>
<p>These results suggest that leading health organizations might need to reconsider their dietary guidelines, Dehghan noted.</p>
<p>But not everyone is ready to throw out current dietary guidelines.</p>
<p>Dr. Christopher Ramsden is a clinical investigator with the U.S. National Institute on Aging. “There’s a lot more information that’s needed. They did a great job and they’re going to have a lot more coming out of it for years to come, but it’s hard to get it down to recommendations regarding food at this point,” he said.</p>
<p>“It really highlights the need for well-designed randomized controlled trials to answer some of these questions,” Ramsden added.</p>
<p>The researchers noted that their study did not look at the specific types of food from which nutrients were derived. And, that, said Bethany O’Dea, constitutes a “major flaw from a nutrition standpoint.” O’Dea is a cardiothoracic dietitian with Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.</p>
<p>“For example, eating a healthy carb like an apple is more nutrient dense and better for you than eating a bag of processed potato chips,” O’Dea said.</p>
<p>“Furthermore, the study did not take trans fats into account, which hold heavy evidence of being unhealthy and contributing to cardiovascular disease,” she pointed out.</p>
<p>Current global guidelines recommend that 50 percent to 65 percent of a person’s daily calories come from carbohydrates, and less than 10 percent from saturated fats, the researchers said.</p>
<p>Dehghan suggested that “the best diets will include a balance of carbohydrates and fats, approximately 50 to 55 percent carbohydrates and around 35 percent total fat, including both saturated and unsaturated fats.”</p>
<p>All foods contain three major macronutrients essential for life — fat, carbohydrate and protein. The optimum amounts a person should eat has been the focus of debate for decades, with the pendulum swinging from low-fat to low-carb diets over time.</p>
<p>For this study, Dehghan and her colleagues tracked the diet and health of more than 135,000 people, aged 35 to 70, from 18 countries around the world, to gain a global perspective on the health effects of diet.</p>
<p>Participants provided detailed information on their social and economic status, lifestyle, medical history and current health. They also completed a questionnaire on their regular diet, which researchers used to calculate their average daily calories from fats, carbohydrates and proteins.</p>
<p>The research team then tracked the participants’ health for about seven years on average, with follow-up visits at least every three years.</p>
<p>The investigators found that high-carbohydrate diets are common, with more than half of the people deriving 70 percent of their daily calories from carbs.</p>
<p>High-carbohydrate diets have been linked with increases in both blood cholesterol and in the chemical building blocks of cholesterol, Dehghan said.</p>
<p>While the experts continue debating what’s the best diet, what should you be eating?</p>
<p>O’Dea said, “Your diet should consist of healthy carbs, lean protein, and plenty of fruits and vegetables. Remember to avoid processed snacks that contain trans and saturated fats, and opt for a healthy carb source.”</p>
<p>The study was scheduled to be presented Tuesday at the European Society of Cardiology annual meeting in Barcelona, Spain. The research was being published online as two studies on Aug. 29 in The Lancet.</p>
<p>More information</p>
<p>For more on a healthy diet, visit the <a href="https://www.choosemyplate.gov/" type="external">U.S. Department of Agriculture</a>.</p>
<p>Copyright © 2017 HealthDay. All rights reserved.</p> | false | 1 | tuesday aug 29 2017 large 18country study may turn current nutritional thinking head new research suggests fat diet thats raising risk premature death many carbohydrates especially refined processed kinds carbs may real killer research also found eating fruits vegetables legumes lower risk dying prematurely three four servings day seemed plenty additional servings didnt appear provide benefit mean well cheeseburger may ok eat adding lettuce tomato burger still good excess white flour burger buns may boost risk dying early people high fat intake 35 percent daily diet 23 percent lower risk early death 18 percent lower risk stroke compared people ate less fat said lead author mahshid dehghan shes investigator population health research institute mcmaster university ontario researchers also noted low intake saturated fats 3 percent daily diet associated higher risk death study compared diets containing 13 percent daily time highcarb diets containing average 77 percent carbohydrates associated 28 percent increased risk death versus lowcarb diets dehghan said study showed contrary popular belief increased consumption dietary fats associated lower risk death dehghan said found evidence 10 percent energy saturated fat beneficial going 7 percent may even harmful moderate amounts particularly accompanied lower carbohydrate intake probably optimal said results suggest leading health organizations might need reconsider dietary guidelines dehghan noted everyone ready throw current dietary guidelines dr christopher ramsden clinical investigator us national institute aging theres lot information thats needed great job theyre going lot coming years come hard get recommendations regarding food point said really highlights need welldesigned randomized controlled trials answer questions ramsden added researchers noted study look specific types food nutrients derived said bethany odea constitutes major flaw nutrition standpoint odea cardiothoracic dietitian lenox hill hospital new york city example eating healthy carb like apple nutrient dense better eating bag processed potato chips odea said furthermore study take trans fats account hold heavy evidence unhealthy contributing cardiovascular disease pointed current global guidelines recommend 50 percent 65 percent persons daily calories come carbohydrates less 10 percent saturated fats researchers said dehghan suggested best diets include balance carbohydrates fats approximately 50 55 percent carbohydrates around 35 percent total fat including saturated unsaturated fats foods contain three major macronutrients essential life fat carbohydrate protein optimum amounts person eat focus debate decades pendulum swinging lowfat lowcarb diets time study dehghan colleagues tracked diet health 135000 people aged 35 70 18 countries around world gain global perspective health effects diet participants provided detailed information social economic status lifestyle medical history current health also completed questionnaire regular diet researchers used calculate average daily calories fats carbohydrates proteins research team tracked participants health seven years average followup visits least every three years investigators found highcarbohydrate diets common half people deriving 70 percent daily calories carbs highcarbohydrate diets linked increases blood cholesterol chemical building blocks cholesterol dehghan said experts continue debating whats best diet eating odea said diet consist healthy carbs lean protein plenty fruits vegetables remember avoid processed snacks contain trans saturated fats opt healthy carb source study scheduled presented tuesday european society cardiology annual meeting barcelona spain research published online two studies aug 29 lancet information healthy diet visit us department agriculture copyright 2017 healthday rights reserved | 522 |
<p>Below is NRO editor-at-large Kathryn Jean Lopez’s introduction, followed by her conversation with EPPC Distinguished Senior Fellow George Weigel:</p>
<p>In about three weeks, Pope Francis will head to Krakow for World Youth Day, a biannual event begun by Pope John Paul II for the youth of the world. It’s always an event infused with a sense of home, drawing young Catholic pilgrims from around the world. This year, it takes on additional significance with the pontiff visiting sites where freedom triumphed in contemporary times and where his predecessor, now included among the recognized saints of the Church, demonstrated courage and leadership during a time of tremendous evil and oppression.</p>
<p>The programming will be aimed at helping the assembled pilgrims find their vocations and understand the fullness of freedom for their lives and the communities to which they will return. For all of the West, it can be a reminder of the witness of courage in our time — both in recent decades and in the world today, among the persecuted. George Weigel, who wrote about John Paul II, has a new book, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/City-Saints-Pilgrimage-John-Krak%C3%B3w/dp/0553418904/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1467823486&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=city+of+saints" type="external">City of Saints</a>, on Krakow, and talks a bit about the importance of the city and what will happen there later this month. – KJL</p>
<p>KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ: What was Krakow like in the 20th&#160;century? Why is that relevant today? We’ve got a disaster of a presidential election and many other things to concern ourselves with.</p>
<p>GEORGE WEIGEL: Krakow&#160;experienced&#160;the worst of the 20th century — Nazism and communism — as well as the answer to that lethal awfulness, which is the divine mercy envisioned by Saint&#160;Faustina and proclaimed to the world by John Paul II. John Paul was able to resist the “tyranny of the possible” — things just are the way they are and there’s nothing you can do about it — because of his confidence in God’s providential guidance of history and his faith in the power of truth to cut through the impermeable and the impossible. We&#160;could do with some of that&#160;faith-inspired and morally&#160;driven truth-telling today, not least in this election cycle.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: In what ways was John Paul II’s father his early spiritual guide?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: John Paul called his widower-father’s example of manliness and prayer “my first seminary,” which rather says it all.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: Why is Pope Francis going there now? Is there some message he is driving by his very action of going there?</p>
<p>WEIGEL:&#160;Pope Francis is going to Krakow because World Youth Day is in Krakow and the pope&#160;attends World Youth Day.</p>
<p>My hope is that it challenges all of those attending WYD to never, ever lower the bar of expectation that they hold up for themselves, but to aim high — knowing that we all fail and should&#160;then seek reconciliation and forgiveness. But don’t lower the bar. That was John Paul II’s challenging message to young people; it was why they loved him, and it had an electrifying effect.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: Pope Francis, as you note, has referred to John Paul II as the “pope of the family.” How can we better unpack this legacy to help the renewal of the traditional family during these confusing times?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: The times&#160;aren’t so much confused as people are confused, not least because of false notions of tolerance and&#160;fairness that boil down to “Well, whatever.” People of faith must re-learn how to talk about the family by living genuine family life in&#160;such a compelling way that it attracts the attention of all those confused&#160;souls who imagine that a “marriage” is any configuration of adults sharing body-parts and tax benefits and a “family” is anything we want it to mean.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: What can Poland uniquely teach us about religious liberty?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: That as bad as we may think we have it here — and things are going to get worse — what we face is nothing compared with what they faced. And they won.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: You write,</p>
<p>Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the early twenty-first century world, and that persecution is largely, although not exclusively, at the hands of radical Islamists and jihadists. This twenty-first century persecution, in turn, comes hard on the heels of the greatest century of persecution in Christian history.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;Yet this omnipresence of martyrdom in the life of the contemporary Church barely registers on the consciousness of most Catholics in the West.</p>
<p>Why is that? How can World Youth Day help?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: World Youth Day in Toronto in 2002 lifted up the example of young martyrs. I don’t think that will be so much the case in Krakow, where the focus will be on St. John Paul II and St.&#160;Faustina, but it would help if all the main masses at WYD-2016 included intercessory prayers for the persecuted Church, if the pope stressed this crisis (especially in the Middle East) in his remarks, and if the&#160;bishop-catechists reminded their young audiences that persecution is likely to be the lot of any serious Christian in those parts of the world increasingly dominated by the dictatorship of relativism.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: Could we westerners afford to know St. Stanislaw — the “Polish Becket” — better?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: Poles would rightly say that Becket was the “Polish Stanislaw,” as the Pole came a hundred years before. In both cases, the bishop-martyrs demonstrated with their lives that religious freedom is the first of civil rights because it establishes the limits beyond which the state can’t go. That’s a lesson they need to learn at the Department of&#160;Justice and the&#160;Department of Health and Human Services — and in both the Clinton and Trump campaigns.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: How is World Youth Day more than a summer vacation with Masses? Why does it matter?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: It’s a&#160;religiously grounded experience of&#160;solidarity, and — as we know from the 1980s — from experiences of&#160;solidarity, previously unimaginable and seemingly impossible things can be made to happen.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: People have said to me things like “It’s clear Pope Francis has no love for or use for John Paul II.” Might people find themselves surprised this summer?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: World Youth Day was John Paul I’s idea, against the skepticism of the Curia and many bishops. Divine mercy was the great theme of the last five years of John Paul II’s pontificate.&#160;Francis will be&#160;walking in John Paul II’s shoes.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: In a year Pope Francis has set aside for an uptick on devotion to mercy, how can this St. Maria Faustina Kowalska become more accessible to Americans? Would any of us really know about her if we had not wound up with a Polish pope?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: The divine mercy&#160;devotion of which Faustina was the “vehicle” was already spreading throughout the Church before there was a Polish pope. It’s a devotion that meets the obvious need that people feel today for a lifting of the burden of guilt that lays over the world and over culture like a thick, choking fog. John Paul II “extended’ the devotion because he understood that this was what the world needed, pastorally, at&#160;this moment in history.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: How can we all — not only priests — learn from John Paul II’s pastoral approach of “accompaniment”?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: By being good listeners who learn how to encourage others to aim high without crushing the spirit of the burdened.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: What is the “Christian humanism and&#160;.&#160;.&#160;.&#160;humanistic dimension of” John Paul II’s soul we might benefit from today?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: Confidence in the&#160;human capacity to know the truth of things and to act on that truth through good decisions was at the heart of John Paul II’s Christian humanism, and it’s exactly what post-modern skepticism and relativism deny. To encounter John Paul’s Christian humanism is to be&#160;lifted up, not cast down into the sandbox of solipsism.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: What made him so effective a diocesan bishop?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: He knew his people, their history, their trials,&#160;and their aspirations; he knew what he could and&#160;couldn’t do; he wasn’t afraid to ask for help; and he wasn’t afraid of&#160;offending power.</p>
<p>&#160;</p>
<p>LOPEZ: What was it of the Rhapsodic Theater that was so important? Do we need something similar today?</p>
<p>WEIGEL: In terms of&#160;John Paul II’s life, the Rhapsodic Theater gave him an experience of the word of truth cutting through the static of a world of lies. You didn’t have to raise your voice, rant, send nasty tweets (if such existed then), or&#160;pretend to laugh with a kind of weird cackle to do that; you just had to articulate the truth clearly and winsomely. We could do with a good dose of calm truth-telling&#160;these days.</p>
<p>— George Weigel is the Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Kathryn Jean Lopez is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and editor-at-large of NRO. She is co-author of the updated <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Defend-Faith-Without-Raising-Voice/dp/1612788815?ie=UTF8&amp;redirect=true&amp;tag=nationalreviewon" type="external">How to Defend the Faith without Raising Your Voice</a>.</p> | false | 1 | nro editoratlarge kathryn jean lopezs introduction followed conversation eppc distinguished senior fellow george weigel three weeks pope francis head krakow world youth day biannual event begun pope john paul ii youth world always event infused sense home drawing young catholic pilgrims around world year takes additional significance pontiff visiting sites freedom triumphed contemporary times predecessor included among recognized saints church demonstrated courage leadership time tremendous evil oppression programming aimed helping assembled pilgrims find vocations understand fullness freedom lives communities return west reminder witness courage time recent decades world today among persecuted george weigel wrote john paul ii new book city saints krakow talks bit importance city happen later month kjl kathryn jean lopez krakow like 20th160century relevant today weve got disaster presidential election many things concern george weigel krakow160experienced160the worst 20th century nazism communism well answer lethal awfulness divine mercy envisioned saint160faustina proclaimed world john paul ii john paul able resist tyranny possible things way theres nothing confidence gods providential guidance history faith power truth cut impermeable impossible we160could that160faithinspired morally160driven truthtelling today least election cycle 160 lopez ways john paul iis father early spiritual guide weigel john paul called widowerfathers example manliness prayer first seminary rather says 160 lopez pope francis going message driving action going weigel160pope francis going krakow world youth day krakow pope160attends world youth day hope challenges attending wyd never ever lower bar expectation hold aim high knowing fail should160then seek reconciliation forgiveness dont lower bar john paul iis challenging message young people loved electrifying effect 160 lopez pope francis note referred john paul ii pope family better unpack legacy help renewal traditional family confusing times weigel times160arent much confused people confused least false notions tolerance and160fairness boil well whatever people faith must relearn talk family living genuine family life in160such compelling way attracts attention confused160souls imagine marriage configuration adults sharing bodyparts tax benefits family anything want mean 160 lopez poland uniquely teach us religious liberty weigel bad may think things going get worse face nothing compared faced 160 lopez write christians persecuted religious group early twentyfirst century world persecution largely although exclusively hands radical islamists jihadists twentyfirst century persecution turn comes hard heels greatest century persecution christian history160160160160yet omnipresence martyrdom life contemporary church barely registers consciousness catholics west world youth day help weigel world youth day toronto 2002 lifted example young martyrs dont think much case krakow focus st john paul ii st160faustina would help main masses wyd2016 included intercessory prayers persecuted church pope stressed crisis especially middle east remarks the160bishopcatechists reminded young audiences persecution likely lot serious christian parts world increasingly dominated dictatorship relativism 160 lopez could westerners afford know st stanislaw polish becket better weigel poles would rightly say becket polish stanislaw pole came hundred years cases bishopmartyrs demonstrated lives religious freedom first civil rights establishes limits beyond state cant go thats lesson need learn department of160justice the160department health human services clinton trump campaigns 160 lopez world youth day summer vacation masses matter weigel a160religiously grounded experience of160solidarity know 1980s experiences of160solidarity previously unimaginable seemingly impossible things made happen 160 lopez people said things like clear pope francis love use john paul ii might people find surprised summer weigel world youth day john paul idea skepticism curia many bishops divine mercy great theme last five years john paul iis pontificate160francis be160walking john paul iis shoes 160 lopez year pope francis set aside uptick devotion mercy st maria faustina kowalska become accessible americans would us really know wound polish pope weigel divine mercy160devotion faustina vehicle already spreading throughout church polish pope devotion meets obvious need people feel today lifting burden guilt lays world culture like thick choking fog john paul ii extended devotion understood world needed pastorally at160this moment history 160 lopez priests learn john paul iis pastoral approach accompaniment weigel good listeners learn encourage others aim high without crushing spirit burdened 160 lopez christian humanism and160160160160humanistic dimension john paul iis soul might benefit today weigel confidence the160human capacity know truth things act truth good decisions heart john paul iis christian humanism exactly postmodern skepticism relativism deny encounter john pauls christian humanism be160lifted cast sandbox solipsism 160 lopez made effective diocesan bishop weigel knew people history trials160and aspirations knew could and160couldnt wasnt afraid ask help wasnt afraid of160offending power 160 lopez rhapsodic theater important need something similar today weigel terms of160john paul iis life rhapsodic theater gave experience word truth cutting static world lies didnt raise voice rant send nasty tweets existed or160pretend laugh kind weird cackle articulate truth clearly winsomely could good dose calm truthtelling160these days george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center kathryn jean lopez senior fellow national review institute editoratlarge nro coauthor updated defend faith without raising voice | 779 |
<p>J.P. Morgan chief James Dimon said this week that tax reform is doomed, at least for this year. Last week Sen. Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, took to the Senate floor to attack a pillar of House Speaker Paul Ryan’s tax reform plan, the border-adjustment tax, as “stupid.” Politico described the House tax reform’s prospects as “ominous.”</p>
<p>To which Ronald Reagan might have said, “Well, there you go again.”</p>
<p>Tax-reform plans are always attacked viciously at first. When the president ultimately signs the bill, however, those who once declared it “dead on arrival” often end up next to him on the platform, trying to score a pen. It is tough for Republicans to vote against a plan that helps both labor and capital—or, as Nobel economics laureate Theodore Schultz called them, “human and nonhuman capital.”</p>
<p>We were involved in the successful 1981 and 1986 tax-reform efforts. In both cases, designing tax policy was not pretty. Elbows flew. Yet in both instances, the pessimistic conventional wisdom proved incorrect.</p>
<p>Consider how events unfolded. In the year leading up to the enactment of the 1981 Reagan tax program, GOP tax-policy makers, like today, were at each other’s throats. President Reagan and Rep. Jack Kemp (R., N.Y.) presented the outward image of a close father-son team. Actually, on tax policy, Kemp was a constant thorn in Reagan’s side.</p>
<p>As for 1986, people forget that tax reform came about as a kind of fluke. GOP negotiators shrewdly took advantage of what seemed initially a disastrous development. In the two years leading up to its enactment, the conventional wisdom was that tax reform was dead. On Capitol Hill, a House controlled by Democrats and a Senate controlled by Republicans, each with intraparty divisions, had reached a stalemate on tax reform. But something unexpected happened that turned out to be a positive catalytic force.</p>
<p>At the time, former Merrill Lynch chairman Donald Regan was Reagan’s (sometimes politically deaf) Treasury secretary. At Treasury a group of mostly nonpolitical tax strategists cobbled together a radical tax-reform plan that skewered special interests and reduced the top personal income-tax rate to 35% from 50%.</p>
<p>Both the corporate lobbying community and the Reagan White House were furious. Adding to the confusion, around that time White House Chief of Staff James Baker and Regan switched jobs. It was now Mr. Baker’s responsibility as Treasury secretary to sell Regan’s controversial plan.</p>
<p>Sounds like a recipe for disaster. It wasn’t. Republican tax strategists used the new radical plan as a wedge to break the ideological and partisan logjam. After a fair amount of jockeying for position, a bipartisan group of congressional tax writers hammered out a compromise, which knocked off the Regan plan’s rough edges, cut the top tax rate to 28% from 50%, and taxed investment income the same as wages (eliminating what some now call the “Warren Buffett’s Secretary Problem”—taxing Main Street at much higher rates than Wall Street).</p>
<p>If history is any guide, it would be wise for the pessimists to hold off on signing tax reform’s death notice. That’s because Republicans risk dire consequences if they don’t achieve the promised 3% to 4% economic growth by fall 2018.</p>
<p>It is unlikely that deregulation alone can accomplish this goal. The huge gains in the U.S. stock market since the election are based largely on investors’ anticipation that bold tax reform is coming—and soon. If the GOP can’t deliver on tax reform, ObamaCare replacement and economic growth, there’s the real definition of “stupid.”</p>
<p>True, the border-adjustment tax is complicated. The proposal, which would eliminate the corporate income tax and place a 20% tax on imports, assumes that a stronger dollar will counter any effect of rising consumer prices. Executives of <a href="http://quotes.wsj.com/WMT" type="external">Wal-Mart</a> and other retailers hate the tax because of the risk that the cost of imports could rise. But if you don’t have a job, you can’t buy much. And no one denies that the structure of the U.S. corporate tax code has put American companies at a global disadvantage.</p>
<p>The border-adjustment tax has its pros and cons. One downside is that the world could retaliate if the U.S. taxes imports. Its upside is that the new tax would allow the broader rate-cutting tax-reform package to be revenue neutral, like the successful 1986 reform.</p>
<p>The border-adjustment tax would raise more than $1 trillion in revenue over 10 years, according to the Tax Foundation. If rejected, what will replace it to assure revenue neutrality? Without a substitute, any incentive from cutting marginal income-tax rates would be tiny. And remember, there is no free lunch if the Republican Congress and the administration expand the deficit. Because the current account balance equals the excess of national saving over investment, a tax-reform stimulus that busts the budget deficit would make the president’s promise to reduce the trade deficit impossible.</p>
<p>Successful tax reform often begins with a catalyst, even a controversial one, which stirs up debate and brings the relevant parties to the table. House Republicans should insist on the border-adjustment tax until opponents offer an acceptable alternative. In Washington, rhetoric is cheap, but a plan beats no plan. And a continuation of the tax status quo would be bad news for congressional Republicans, the Trump administration and Main Street.</p>
<p>Mr. Smick, the author of “The Great Equalizer: How Main Street Capitalism Can Create an Economy for Everyone” (PublicAffairs, 2017), was Rep. Jack Kemp’s chief of staff from 1979-84. Mr. Mueller, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., was Kemp’s staff economist from 1979-88.</p> | false | 1 | jp morgan chief james dimon said week tax reform doomed least year last week sen tom cotton arkansas republican took senate floor attack pillar house speaker paul ryans tax reform plan borderadjustment tax stupid politico described house tax reforms prospects ominous ronald reagan might said well go taxreform plans always attacked viciously first president ultimately signs bill however declared dead arrival often end next platform trying score pen tough republicans vote plan helps labor capitalor nobel economics laureate theodore schultz called human nonhuman capital involved successful 1981 1986 taxreform efforts cases designing tax policy pretty elbows flew yet instances pessimistic conventional wisdom proved incorrect consider events unfolded year leading enactment 1981 reagan tax program gop taxpolicy makers like today others throats president reagan rep jack kemp r ny presented outward image close fatherson team actually tax policy kemp constant thorn reagans side 1986 people forget tax reform came kind fluke gop negotiators shrewdly took advantage seemed initially disastrous development two years leading enactment conventional wisdom tax reform dead capitol hill house controlled democrats senate controlled republicans intraparty divisions reached stalemate tax reform something unexpected happened turned positive catalytic force time former merrill lynch chairman donald regan reagans sometimes politically deaf treasury secretary treasury group mostly nonpolitical tax strategists cobbled together radical taxreform plan skewered special interests reduced top personal incometax rate 35 50 corporate lobbying community reagan white house furious adding confusion around time white house chief staff james baker regan switched jobs mr bakers responsibility treasury secretary sell regans controversial plan sounds like recipe disaster wasnt republican tax strategists used new radical plan wedge break ideological partisan logjam fair amount jockeying position bipartisan group congressional tax writers hammered compromise knocked regan plans rough edges cut top tax rate 28 50 taxed investment income wages eliminating call warren buffetts secretary problemtaxing main street much higher rates wall street history guide would wise pessimists hold signing tax reforms death notice thats republicans risk dire consequences dont achieve promised 3 4 economic growth fall 2018 unlikely deregulation alone accomplish goal huge gains us stock market since election based largely investors anticipation bold tax reform comingand soon gop cant deliver tax reform obamacare replacement economic growth theres real definition stupid true borderadjustment tax complicated proposal would eliminate corporate income tax place 20 tax imports assumes stronger dollar counter effect rising consumer prices executives walmart retailers hate tax risk cost imports could rise dont job cant buy much one denies structure us corporate tax code put american companies global disadvantage borderadjustment tax pros cons one downside world could retaliate us taxes imports upside new tax would allow broader ratecutting taxreform package revenue neutral like successful 1986 reform borderadjustment tax would raise 1 trillion revenue 10 years according tax foundation rejected replace assure revenue neutrality without substitute incentive cutting marginal incometax rates would tiny remember free lunch republican congress administration expand deficit current account balance equals excess national saving investment taxreform stimulus busts budget deficit would make presidents promise reduce trade deficit impossible successful tax reform often begins catalyst even controversial one stirs debate brings relevant parties table house republicans insist borderadjustment tax opponents offer acceptable alternative washington rhetoric cheap plan beats plan continuation tax status quo would bad news congressional republicans trump administration main street mr smick author great equalizer main street capitalism create economy everyone publicaffairs 2017 rep jack kemps chief staff 197984 mr mueller fellow ethics public policy center washington dc kemps staff economist 197988 | 573 |
<p>ST. JOSEPH, Mo. — When the entire <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Kansas-City-Chiefs/" type="external">Kansas City Chiefs</a> team gathered for the first time Thursday, the first task was to settle down and get comfortable.</p>
<p>First the players will meet new general Brett Veach. The 39-year-old former co-director of player personnel takes the reins from John Dorsey, who was fired June 22 less than an hour after the team announced a new contract extension for head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Andy_Reid/" type="external">Andy Reid</a>.</p>
<p>The team also announced other changes to the personnel department. At the top of the list was naming Mike Borgonzi as the director of player personnel, which the team described as a promotion, although it appears to be a modification as much as anything. Borgonzi and Veach were co-directors of player personnel before Veach was promoted to general manager, so he should be up to speed on things related to his new title.</p>
<p>The Chiefs also hired <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Michael_Davis/" type="external">Michael Davis</a> as a personnel executive and David Hinson as an area scout. Davis previously worked for the Eagles and Jets while Hinson worked for both those teams as well as the Browns, Saints and Bills.</p>
<p>Players and coaches will also seek a comfort level with linebacker <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tamba-Hali/" type="external">Tamba Hali</a>, who used social media to rant about wanting more playing time, which was minimal in the playoffs last season. Many thought he was going to hold out of training camp. Then on Tuesday he went on Facebook Live and said he will show up on time.</p>
<p>“I’m all in,” Hali said. “All the guys at the Chiefs understand that I’m one of those guys who loves to compete, and I will continue to compete at a high level. … I don’t feel like I’m done. I just want to know where we’re going.”</p>
<p>So, while that may be settled, the right cornerback job opposite All-Pro <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marcus-Peters/" type="external">Marcus Peters</a> is not.</p>
<p>Last season, veteran corner <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Phillip-Gaines/" type="external">Phillip Gaines</a> struggled in his recovery from a torn ACL sustained in September 2015, and the Chiefs tested a variety of young defensive backs before journeyman Terrance Mitchell stabilized the position late in the season.</p>
<p>Both Gaines and Mitchell return in a battle for the starting role. Nickel back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Steven/" type="external">Steven</a> Nelson joins the pair for the team’s most competitive battle for a starting spot.</p>
<p>The Chiefs leaned on Nelson mostly in the slot last season and showed a willingness in offseason workouts to use the third-year pass defender as the right corner in their traditional 3-4 look. Nelson then moves back to the slot when Mitchell or Gaines enters at right corner.</p>
<p>Mitchell enters camp with a slight edge over Gaines. The 26-year-old Gaines served as an observer at the end of offseason practices, hampered again by his balky knee.</p>
<p>THE FACTS:</p>
<p>TRAINING CAMP: Missouri Western State University; St. Joseph, Mo.</p>
<p>COACH: Andy Reid</p>
<p>5th season with Chiefs</p>
<p>44-24 overall; 1-3 postseason</p>
<p>19th season as NFL head coach</p>
<p>184-126-1 overall; 11-12 postseason</p>
<p>THE BREAKDOWN</p>
<p>2016 finish: T-1st AFC West (12-4)</p>
<p>STATISTICS</p>
<p>TOTAL OFFENSE: 343.0 (20th)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 109.3 (15th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 233.8 (19th)</p>
<p>TOTAL DEFENSE: 368.5 (24th)</p>
<p>RUSHING: 121.1 (26th)</p>
<p>PASSING: 247.4 (18th)</p>
<p>2017 PRESEASON SCHEDULE</p>
<p>All times Central</p>
<p>Aug. 11, SAN FRANCISCO (Fri.), 8:00</p>
<p>Aug. 19, at Cincinnati (Sat.), 6:00</p>
<p>Aug. 25, at Seattle (Fri.), 7:00</p>
<p>Aug. 31, TENNESSEE (Thu.), 7:30</p>
<p>UNIT-BY-UNIT ANALYSIS</p>
<p>QUARTERBACKS: Starter – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alex_Smith/" type="external">Alex Smith</a>. Backups – Tyler Bray, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Patrick-Mahomes/" type="external">Patrick Mahomes</a>, Joel Stave.</p>
<p>Make no mistake, the 2017 Chiefs belong to Smith. The future belongs to first-round draft pick Mahomes, however. The team needs Smith and backup Bray ready for the season’s Thursday night opener at New England, but prepping Mahomes to take the reins sooner the later remains the next priority. It remains difficult to paint a scenario where Mahomes gets significant playing time this season barring injury or a total team collapse. A year ago the Chiefs stood ready to enter the season with Bray as the backup but picked up free agent Nick Foles during training camp. It seems unlikely the Chiefs do the same this year with Mahomes on board and needing practice reps.</p>
<p>RUNNING BACKS: Starter – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Spencer-Ware/" type="external">Spencer Ware</a>, FB Anthony Sherman. Backups – <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Charcandrick-West/" type="external">Charcandrick West</a>, Kareem Hunt, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/C.J._Spiller/" type="external">C.J. Spiller</a>, Devine Redding.</p>
<p>One of the underrated positions battle for the Chiefs is at running back. Ware enters camp as the incumbent starter, but third-round draft pick Hunt impressed during offseason practices and expects to get playing time, perhaps as a third-down back who can run as well as catch out of the backfield. West provides an experienced hand at backup, but Spiller stands out as the wild card. The 29-year-old veteran has not had a full healthy season since 2013. If Spiller can regain his old form, he could provide a powerful punch in the team’s run game, which ranked 15th in the league a year ago.</p>
<p>TIGHT ENDS: Starter – Travis Kelce. Backups – Demetrius Harris, Gavin Escobar, Ross Travis, Orson Charles, Emanuel Byrd.</p>
<p>Kelce posted his breakout season in 2016, catching 85 passes for 1,125 yards. The Chiefs need more of the same from the 27-year-old All-Pro, who is recovering from off-season shoulder surgery. The team added free agent Escobar from Dallas as insurance and backup. Escobar along with the athletic 6-foot-7 Harris could provide a dangerous trio for head coach Andy Reid, who loves three-tight end sets. Travis hold an edge over Charles and Byrd for the fourth slot entering camp.</p>
<p>WIDE RECEIVERS: Starters – Chris Conley, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tyreek-Hill/" type="external">Tyreek Hill</a>, Albert Wilson. Backups – De’Anthony Thomas, Demarcus Robinson, Seantavius Jones, Jehu Chesson, Alonzo Moore, Gehrig Dieter, Marcus Kemp, Tevin Jones, Tony Stevens.</p>
<p>The Chiefs need Conley and Hill to thrive in the absence of departed veteran <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jeremy_Maclin/" type="external">Jeremy Maclin</a>. The battle for backup roles could be intense with 2016 fourth-round pick Robinson and journeyman Jones impressing in offseason workouts. Fourth-round pick Chesson expects to make the roster, which means veterans Wilson and Thomas facing competition for the final roster spot.</p>
<p>OFFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters – LT Eric Fisher, LG Zach Fulton, C Mitch Morse, RG Laurent Duvernay-Tardif, RT Mitchell Schwartz. Backups – LG Parker Ehinger, T Jah Reid, T Bryan Witzmann, G Mike Person, G Jordan Devey, G Joseph Cheek, G Damien Mama, T Josh James, G Andrew Tiller, T Donald Hawkins, T Isaiah Battle.</p>
<p>The biggest question mark for the Chiefs entering camp focuses on the right knee of Ehinger. The left guard sustained a torn ACL in week eight last season against Indianapolis and missed all of the team’s offseason workouts. Fulton steps into the left guard role until Ehinger returns, which removes the team’s most versatile lineman from the bench. Reid holds the lead for the swing tackle role, with veterans Witzmann, Person and Devey competing for any vacancy that arises. Among undrafted rookies in camp, the mountainous guard Mama stands out. Mama caught the eye of Andy Reid during offseason practices, and could be a sleeper to make the roster.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE LINEMEN: Starters – DLE Allen Bailey, NT Bennie Logan, DRE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chris-Jones/" type="external">Chris Jones</a>. Backups – DE Tanoh Kpassagnon, DE Rakeem Nunez-Roches, DE Jarvis Jenkins, DT Cam Thomas, DT Montori Hughes, DE <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/David_King/" type="external">David King</a>, DE Ricky Ali’fua.</p>
<p>Logan steps into the hole left by free agent Dontari Poe, and the team hopes Logan can shore up the team’s leaky run defense. Bailey returns from a season-ending injury a year ago, but most of the defensive line’s hopes rest on Jones. The second-year defensive end shined as a rookie, and a slimmer Jones hopes to prove more elusive in the pass rush and tracking down the rush. Second-round draft pick Kpassagnon expects to make an impact in a limited role as a rookie. Nunez-Roches showed signs of breaking through last season, improving his pass rush skills while remaining a strong run defender. Veterans Thomas and Hughes expect to compete as Logan’s primary backup.</p>
<p>LINEBACKERS: Starters – LOLB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin-Houston/" type="external">Justin Houston</a>, WILB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Derrick_Johnson/" type="external">Derrick Johnson</a>, SILB Ramik Wilson, ROLB Dee Ford. Backups – OLB Tamba Hali, ILB Justin March-Lillard, OLB Frank Zombo, ILB D.J. Alexander, ILB Ukeme Eligwe, ILB Josh Mauga, OLB Dadi Nicolas, OLB Marcus Rush, ILB Terrance Smith, OLB Earl Okine, OLB Reshard Cliett.</p>
<p>A healthy linebacker corps may be all that stands between the Chiefs and an elite defensive unit in 2017. The position group suffered numerous setbacks last season, with Houston, Johnson and Ford all missing playing time. Injuries to March-Lillard and Mauga also limited the team’s depth. Houston, Ford and Hali provide a ferocious pass rush when all three are healthy. Johnson looks ready to return from a ruptured Achilles tendon last December, and the team needs his veteran presence. Wilson and March-Lillard expect to compete for the starting role alongside Johnson, but the return of Mauga on a free-agent contract intrigues. Mauga appeared the leader at SILB at camp a year ago until hip injury ended his season. Alexander remains one of the league’s best special teams players, and fifth-round pick Eligwe offers big upside for the future.</p>
<p>DEFENSIVE BACKS: Starters – LCB Marcus Peters, RCB Steven Nelson, FS Ron Parker, SS <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Eric-Berry/" type="external">Eric Berry</a>. Backups – SS Daniel Sorensen, CB Terrance Mitchell, CB Phillip Gaines, S Eric Murray, DB Leon McQuay. CB Kenneth Acker, CB <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/D.J._White/" type="external">D.J. White</a>, CB De’Vante Bausby, S Jordan Sterns, S Steven Terrell, CB Ashton Lampkin, CB J.R. Nelson, CB Keith Baxter, S Trevon Hartfield.</p>
<p>Berry and Peters lead a ball-hawking Chiefs secondary that ranked tops in the league in taking away the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/John_Walker/" type="external">football</a> last season. Finding a reliable running mate for Peters at right corner is the only weakness in the defensive backfield. Steven Nelson showed a knack for playing the slot last season, and could see more time at right corner. Mitchell shined down the stretch as a late-season roster addition, and hopes to prove his strong finish was not a fluke. Sorensen provides hard-hitting punch off the bench and on special teams. Gaines, in the final year of his rookie contract, hopes to show he’s fully recovered from a knee injury that hampered throughout last season.</p>
<p>SPECIAL TEAMS: K Cairo Santos, P Dustin Colquitt, LS James Winchester, KOR Tyreek Hill, PR Tyreek Hill.</p>
<p>The Chiefs special teams unit led by coordinator Dave Toub ranks among the best in the league in all phases. Hill proved an impact player in the return game as a rookie, returning three kicks for touchdowns and leading the league with 13.3 yards per touch. The Chiefs will search for a reliable backup for Hill during training camp and preseason, hoping to limit Hill’s special teams play as his offensive contributions rise. Santos connected on 89 percent of his field goal tries a year ago, and Colquitt gives the Chiefs ability to flip the field and pin opponents inside the 20-yard-line with regularity.</p> | false | 1 | st joseph mo entire kansas city chiefs team gathered first time thursday first task settle get comfortable first players meet new general brett veach 39yearold former codirector player personnel takes reins john dorsey fired june 22 less hour team announced new contract extension head coach andy reid team also announced changes personnel department top list naming mike borgonzi director player personnel team described promotion although appears modification much anything borgonzi veach codirectors player personnel veach promoted general manager speed things related new title chiefs also hired michael davis personnel executive david hinson area scout davis previously worked eagles jets hinson worked teams well browns saints bills players coaches also seek comfort level linebacker tamba hali used social media rant wanting playing time minimal playoffs last season many thought going hold training camp tuesday went facebook live said show time im hali said guys chiefs understand im one guys loves compete continue compete high level dont feel like im done want know going may settled right cornerback job opposite allpro marcus peters last season veteran corner phillip gaines struggled recovery torn acl sustained september 2015 chiefs tested variety young defensive backs journeyman terrance mitchell stabilized position late season gaines mitchell return battle starting role nickel back steven nelson joins pair teams competitive battle starting spot chiefs leaned nelson mostly slot last season showed willingness offseason workouts use thirdyear pass defender right corner traditional 34 look nelson moves back slot mitchell gaines enters right corner mitchell enters camp slight edge gaines 26yearold gaines served observer end offseason practices hampered balky knee facts training camp missouri western state university st joseph mo coach andy reid 5th season chiefs 4424 overall 13 postseason 19th season nfl head coach 1841261 overall 1112 postseason breakdown 2016 finish t1st afc west 124 statistics total offense 3430 20th rushing 1093 15th passing 2338 19th total defense 3685 24th rushing 1211 26th passing 2474 18th 2017 preseason schedule times central aug 11 san francisco fri 800 aug 19 cincinnati sat 600 aug 25 seattle fri 700 aug 31 tennessee thu 730 unitbyunit analysis quarterbacks starter alex smith backups tyler bray patrick mahomes joel stave make mistake 2017 chiefs belong smith future belongs firstround draft pick mahomes however team needs smith backup bray ready seasons thursday night opener new england prepping mahomes take reins sooner later remains next priority remains difficult paint scenario mahomes gets significant playing time season barring injury total team collapse year ago chiefs stood ready enter season bray backup picked free agent nick foles training camp seems unlikely chiefs year mahomes board needing practice reps running backs starter spencer ware fb anthony sherman backups charcandrick west kareem hunt cj spiller devine redding one underrated positions battle chiefs running back ware enters camp incumbent starter thirdround draft pick hunt impressed offseason practices expects get playing time perhaps thirddown back run well catch backfield west provides experienced hand backup spiller stands wild card 29yearold veteran full healthy season since 2013 spiller regain old form could provide powerful punch teams run game ranked 15th league year ago tight ends starter travis kelce backups demetrius harris gavin escobar ross travis orson charles emanuel byrd kelce posted breakout season 2016 catching 85 passes 1125 yards chiefs need 27yearold allpro recovering offseason shoulder surgery team added free agent escobar dallas insurance backup escobar along athletic 6foot7 harris could provide dangerous trio head coach andy reid loves threetight end sets travis hold edge charles byrd fourth slot entering camp wide receivers starters chris conley tyreek hill albert wilson backups deanthony thomas demarcus robinson seantavius jones jehu chesson alonzo moore gehrig dieter marcus kemp tevin jones tony stevens chiefs need conley hill thrive absence departed veteran jeremy maclin battle backup roles could intense 2016 fourthround pick robinson journeyman jones impressing offseason workouts fourthround pick chesson expects make roster means veterans wilson thomas facing competition final roster spot offensive linemen starters lt eric fisher lg zach fulton c mitch morse rg laurent duvernaytardif rt mitchell schwartz backups lg parker ehinger jah reid bryan witzmann g mike person g jordan devey g joseph cheek g damien mama josh james g andrew tiller donald hawkins isaiah battle biggest question mark chiefs entering camp focuses right knee ehinger left guard sustained torn acl week eight last season indianapolis missed teams offseason workouts fulton steps left guard role ehinger returns removes teams versatile lineman bench reid holds lead swing tackle role veterans witzmann person devey competing vacancy arises among undrafted rookies camp mountainous guard mama stands mama caught eye andy reid offseason practices could sleeper make roster defensive linemen starters dle allen bailey nt bennie logan dre chris jones backups de tanoh kpassagnon de rakeem nunezroches de jarvis jenkins dt cam thomas dt montori hughes de david king de ricky alifua logan steps hole left free agent dontari poe team hopes logan shore teams leaky run defense bailey returns seasonending injury year ago defensive lines hopes rest jones secondyear defensive end shined rookie slimmer jones hopes prove elusive pass rush tracking rush secondround draft pick kpassagnon expects make impact limited role rookie nunezroches showed signs breaking last season improving pass rush skills remaining strong run defender veterans thomas hughes expect compete logans primary backup linebackers starters lolb justin houston wilb derrick johnson silb ramik wilson rolb dee ford backups olb tamba hali ilb justin marchlillard olb frank zombo ilb dj alexander ilb ukeme eligwe ilb josh mauga olb dadi nicolas olb marcus rush ilb terrance smith olb earl okine olb reshard cliett healthy linebacker corps may stands chiefs elite defensive unit 2017 position group suffered numerous setbacks last season houston johnson ford missing playing time injuries marchlillard mauga also limited teams depth houston ford hali provide ferocious pass rush three healthy johnson looks ready return ruptured achilles tendon last december team needs veteran presence wilson marchlillard expect compete starting role alongside johnson return mauga freeagent contract intrigues mauga appeared leader silb camp year ago hip injury ended season alexander remains one leagues best special teams players fifthround pick eligwe offers big upside future defensive backs starters lcb marcus peters rcb steven nelson fs ron parker ss eric berry backups ss daniel sorensen cb terrance mitchell cb phillip gaines eric murray db leon mcquay cb kenneth acker cb dj white cb devante bausby jordan sterns steven terrell cb ashton lampkin cb jr nelson cb keith baxter trevon hartfield berry peters lead ballhawking chiefs secondary ranked tops league taking away football last season finding reliable running mate peters right corner weakness defensive backfield steven nelson showed knack playing slot last season could see time right corner mitchell shined stretch lateseason roster addition hopes prove strong finish fluke sorensen provides hardhitting punch bench special teams gaines final year rookie contract hopes show hes fully recovered knee injury hampered throughout last season special teams k cairo santos p dustin colquitt ls james winchester kor tyreek hill pr tyreek hill chiefs special teams unit led coordinator dave toub ranks among best league phases hill proved impact player return game rookie returning three kicks touchdowns leading league 133 yards per touch chiefs search reliable backup hill training camp preseason hoping limit hills special teams play offensive contributions rise santos connected 89 percent field goal tries year ago colquitt gives chiefs ability flip field pin opponents inside 20yardline regularity | 1,213 |
<p>[This article is the second in a two-part series. To read part one, <a href="" type="internal">click here</a>.]</p>
<p>Yesterday I explored the concepts of human and social ecology as fitting <a href="http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/01/18444/" type="external">analogues to natural ecology</a>. Today, I offer three practical suggestions for reviving our social ecology.</p>
<p>Like threats to our natural habitat, threats to our moral environment are multifarious. And because we are dealing with even more complexity in human beings who possess both free will and concupiscence, we are most often left with a complex picture without obvious solutions, at least at the level of law and policy. So I offer the following in the spirit of Mary Ann Glendon’s characteristically ecological approach that we first do no harm, and then by our actions seek, as Glendon puts it, to “create conditions and shift probabilities” in favor of the full flourishing of the human person.</p>
<p>To create such conditions in our current circumstances, we ought to prioritize our support of three important segments of society: first, child-rearing families, which are in themselves an education in virtue, both for children and for their parents; second, schools that intentionally cultivate the intellectual and moral virtues; and third, local churches as centers of ecological revitalization.</p>
<p>Families: Raising Children, Instilling Virtue</p>
<p>In a lengthy 1998 article on “moral ecology,” political scientist Allen Hertzke insightfully writes,</p>
<p>Family lies at the center of the moral ecological nexus, both shaping and being shaped . . . both a cause and effect of ecological disruptions. The extent to which children resist moral toxins from the outside environment depends largely on how well their families have inoculated them. In turn, the ability of families to do so can be undermined by larger ecological forces. The interactions are dynamic and interactive—in a word, ecological.</p>
<p>The work of the formation of children in the home—that work that is so essential for both the children who receive formation and their parents who, in taking seriously their parental duties, are <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-0297.00288/abstract" type="external">transformed</a> by them—is deeply devalued in our culture today. With the movement of women en masse into the workforce over the last half century, the <a href="https://www.aei.org/multimedia/banter-243-nick-eberstadt-on-men-without-work/" type="external">staggering</a> unemployment and underemployment among working class men, the growing dependence on two incomes for middle and working class families, the sheer number of single mothers rearing children alone, and the valuable and often distinctive contributions women make beyond the private sphere, we can no longer simply point to the traditional breadwinner-husband and homemaker-wife as the obvious fix for our current ecological crisis, as much as some of us may like to. We can no longer take for granted the family and community sustenance that women provided as a matter of course—and gratis—for centuries. If the work of the family, that essential work of caring for the dependent and vulnerable, of forming the minds and hearts of both child and parent, was once regarded as among the most essential of all labors, it no longer is.</p>
<p>Today&#160;we need to take strong, affirmative steps to manifest far more cultural regard for the family’s essential work: to inspire and incentivize fathers to devote themselves to their families; to counter the financial and professional pressures mothers especially feel as many now seek to work while prioritizing caregiving; and to think creatively about how technology and business <a href="http://blog.business.cua.edu/2016/12/for-immediate-release-dec.html" type="external">ingenuity</a> can help create an economy that is on the side of child-rearing families, especially those that are struggling.</p>
<p>Religious believers understand better than most that both children and the work of the family are indispensable public goods. Thus it is religious believers and others of good will in the business world and in politics who must be the ones thinking creatively about how to publicly support, endorse, affirm, and celebrate the work of care and formation that takes place in the home. By seeking <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443018/ohio-white-working-class-voters-american-dream-feels-out-reach" type="external">ways</a> to offset the real financial sacrifices parents make to rear their children well, we recognize that the service parents render is not just to their children or themselves but to the whole of society. Political thinkers such as Ramesh Ponnuru and Yuval Levin have promoted reform&#160; <a href="http://conservativereform.com/roomtogrow/" type="external">agendas</a> that place support for child-rearing families at the very center; let us hope they get a better hearing in the new Trump administration.</p>
<p>While we yet await a new opening for public policy solutions, businesses and other private institutions must be on the cutting edge of finding ways to encourage and support family life. As Glendon reminds us, “The market, like our democratic experiment, requires a certain kind of citizen, with certain skills and certain virtues . . . it depends on culture, which in turn depends on nurture and education, which in turn depends on families.” Familial support includes ensuring that working parents, and especially mothers who continue to take on a disproportionate share of the caregiving, are not penalized professionally for dedicating some portion of their energies to the culturally essential care of children, and increasingly elderly parents. As John Paul II writes in <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_14091981_laborem-exercens.html" type="external">Laborem Exercens</a>, “The&#160;true advancement of women&#160;requires that labour should be structured in such a way that women do not have to pay for their advancement . . . at the expense of the family, in which women as mothers have an irreplaceable role.”</p>
<p>Finding innovative ways to accommodate the needs of the family would not only serve children and marriages well but would also benefit the workplace and the culture at large. It could serve to rewire the world of work so that persons were attended to as a matter of priority, both as the subjects of their work, but also in the broader decision-making of an enterprise, ensuring that the drive for efficiency and profits does not supersede the more human quest to serve the person above all. More practically, greater flexibility and respect for the demands of the family could translate into decreased rates of burnout, higher morale, and, some studies have shown, greater profits over the long run.</p>
<p>The Renaissance of Classical Education</p>
<p>But family-encouraging policies on the part of the government and the business sector are certainly not all that is needed to restore our social ecology. Mothers and fathers need other support institutions—vibrant schools, churches, and other cells of civil society—to help them form their children in the virtues they need to use their freedom well. So, my second challenge is that we get behind the renaissance of classical education that is now taking place across our country. By steeping children in the very best Western civilization has to offer and by intentionally inculcating in them the moral and intellectual virtues children need to flourish, classical schools are, one by one, recreating the ecosystem of moral support parents need for their children and for themselves.</p>
<p>These schools, like the <a href="http://stbenedictelementary.com/about/" type="external">one</a> I helped to found in 2013 in Natick, Massachusetts, are self-conscious in their awareness that self-government requires self-government. In an age increasingly bound to the idea that man can enjoy technological control over nature, over even his own body, these schools instead teach children that it is they who must be the masters of their own passions, and that they need God’s grace to achieve such mastery. These communities strive together for the common good and encourage each other to think more about their social duties and less about their rights. They rekindle the habits of mind and heart needed for good citizenship both in our country and, one hopes, in the hereafter. Classical schools have eager students and parents, they provide an unrivaled curriculum, and the best of them teach character education that instructs children in both the language and the practice of virtue. They often even possess buildings left abandoned by <a href="http://pioneerinstitute.org/common_core/study-finds-common-core-incompatible-catholic-education/" type="external">failed</a> parochial schools. But they need more funding—and they need an entree into poorer communities.</p>
<p>If the work of social theorists such as Charles Murray and Robert Putnam and the ascendancy of political leaders like Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have taught us anything about what ails our country today, it is that the turmoil wrought by the deterioration of social ecology is so deep in some communities that it threatens the very fiber of our republic. The causes of this ecological deterioration are complex, yet they clearly include eruptions that are both economic (e.g., globalization) and cultural (e.g., the sexual revolution). It is now indisputable that the poor and working classes have been the hardest hit by both.</p>
<p>Revitalizing Local Churches</p>
<p>Local churches and other places of worship have long been the social organisms to which people turn in times of need and that once served as anchoring institutions, integrating individuals from diverse backgrounds. It is high time to rediscover in our churches the unique capacity they have to create, in Glendon’s phrase, communities of&#160;“mutual aid and memory,” upon which our republic depends for its liberty and vitality, and upon which we all may well depend for our eternal salvation.</p>
<p>Of course, churches must always and primarily be vehicles of spiritual and moral formation and sacramental grace; as such, churches have the capacity to restore communities through revitalizing the individuals within them. Brad Wilcox and Nicholas Wolfinger have <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/soul-mates-black-church-marriage/470760/?utm_source=twb" type="external">shown</a>, for instance, how churchgoing African American and Latino men are significantly more likely to <a href="https://www.aei.org/events/faith-family-life-among-african-americans-latinos-america/" type="external">flourish</a> personally and professionally than their non-religious peers. But even beyond this, Jonathan Reyes at the USCCB believes that <a href="http://steincenter.avemaria.edu/conferences-2/fall-2015/" type="external">churches</a> could serve as centers of ecological revitalization through more effectively matching those in need with those who need to give, from the parishes themselves and wealthier sister parishes, but also through a more effective and intentional engagement with private, public, and business resources throughout the broader community.</p>
<p>Our social ecology is ailing right now. Those of us living in wealthier communities have a grave responsibility toward those languishing in our poorest not only to give of our funds but also our lives—to discover “mutuality at the margins,” as <a href="http://academics.avemaria.edu/post/133009641628/david-lapp-a-poor-church-for-the-poor" type="external">David Lapp</a> has put it. And to be quite clear: this is not just to assist and accompany the poor and marginalized. It is also for the good of the souls of the rich, tempted as we may be to resign ourselves to the decadence of our age. If we are to shore up the social conditions for human flourishing—our own and those around us—it will take each of us setting about that interior struggle, day by day, teaching our children how to live lives of generosity, and eschewing our own comfort to help others.</p>
<p>Erika Bachiochi is a Visiting Fellow at the Ethics &amp; Public Policy Center. This essay was adapted from the luncheon presentation she gave at the Human Ecology Conference at the Busch School of Business and Economics at CUA last spring. Her remarks were recently aired on EWTN.</p> | false | 1 | article second twopart series read part one click yesterday explored concepts human social ecology fitting analogues natural ecology today offer three practical suggestions reviving social ecology like threats natural habitat threats moral environment multifarious dealing even complexity human beings possess free concupiscence often left complex picture without obvious solutions least level law policy offer following spirit mary ann glendons characteristically ecological approach first harm actions seek glendon puts create conditions shift probabilities favor full flourishing human person create conditions current circumstances ought prioritize support three important segments society first childrearing families education virtue children parents second schools intentionally cultivate intellectual moral virtues third local churches centers ecological revitalization families raising children instilling virtue lengthy 1998 article moral ecology political scientist allen hertzke insightfully writes family lies center moral ecological nexus shaping shaped cause effect ecological disruptions extent children resist moral toxins outside environment depends largely well families inoculated turn ability families undermined larger ecological forces interactions dynamic interactivein word ecological work formation children homethat work essential children receive formation parents taking seriously parental duties transformed themis deeply devalued culture today movement women en masse workforce last half century staggering unemployment underemployment among working class men growing dependence two incomes middle working class families sheer number single mothers rearing children alone valuable often distinctive contributions women make beyond private sphere longer simply point traditional breadwinnerhusband homemakerwife obvious fix current ecological crisis much us may like longer take granted family community sustenance women provided matter courseand gratisfor centuries work family essential work caring dependent vulnerable forming minds hearts child parent regarded among essential labors longer today160we need take strong affirmative steps manifest far cultural regard familys essential work inspire incentivize fathers devote families counter financial professional pressures mothers especially feel many seek work prioritizing caregiving think creatively technology business ingenuity help create economy side childrearing families especially struggling religious believers understand better children work family indispensable public goods thus religious believers others good business world politics must ones thinking creatively publicly support endorse affirm celebrate work care formation takes place home seeking ways offset real financial sacrifices parents make rear children well recognize service parents render children whole society political thinkers ramesh ponnuru yuval levin promoted reform160 agendas place support childrearing families center let us hope get better hearing new trump administration yet await new opening public policy solutions businesses private institutions must cutting edge finding ways encourage support family life glendon reminds us market like democratic experiment requires certain kind citizen certain skills certain virtues depends culture turn depends nurture education turn depends families familial support includes ensuring working parents especially mothers continue take disproportionate share caregiving penalized professionally dedicating portion energies culturally essential care children increasingly elderly parents john paul ii writes laborem exercens the160true advancement women160requires labour structured way women pay advancement expense family women mothers irreplaceable role finding innovative ways accommodate needs family would serve children marriages well would also benefit workplace culture large could serve rewire world work persons attended matter priority subjects work also broader decisionmaking enterprise ensuring drive efficiency profits supersede human quest serve person practically greater flexibility respect demands family could translate decreased rates burnout higher morale studies shown greater profits long run renaissance classical education familyencouraging policies part government business sector certainly needed restore social ecology mothers fathers need support institutionsvibrant schools churches cells civil societyto help form children virtues need use freedom well second challenge get behind renaissance classical education taking place across country steeping children best western civilization offer intentionally inculcating moral intellectual virtues children need flourish classical schools one one recreating ecosystem moral support parents need children schools like one helped found 2013 natick massachusetts selfconscious awareness selfgovernment requires selfgovernment age increasingly bound idea man enjoy technological control nature even body schools instead teach children must masters passions need gods grace achieve mastery communities strive together common good encourage think social duties less rights rekindle habits mind heart needed good citizenship country one hopes hereafter classical schools eager students parents provide unrivaled curriculum best teach character education instructs children language practice virtue often even possess buildings left abandoned failed parochial schools need fundingand need entree poorer communities work social theorists charles murray robert putnam ascendancy political leaders like donald trump bernie sanders taught us anything ails country today turmoil wrought deterioration social ecology deep communities threatens fiber republic causes ecological deterioration complex yet clearly include eruptions economic eg globalization cultural eg sexual revolution indisputable poor working classes hardest hit revitalizing local churches local churches places worship long social organisms people turn times need served anchoring institutions integrating individuals diverse backgrounds high time rediscover churches unique capacity create glendons phrase communities of160mutual aid memory upon republic depends liberty vitality upon may well depend eternal salvation course churches must always primarily vehicles spiritual moral formation sacramental grace churches capacity restore communities revitalizing individuals within brad wilcox nicholas wolfinger shown instance churchgoing african american latino men significantly likely flourish personally professionally nonreligious peers even beyond jonathan reyes usccb believes churches could serve centers ecological revitalization effectively matching need need give parishes wealthier sister parishes also effective intentional engagement private public business resources throughout broader community social ecology ailing right us living wealthier communities grave responsibility toward languishing poorest give funds also livesto discover mutuality margins david lapp put quite clear assist accompany poor marginalized also good souls rich tempted may resign decadence age shore social conditions human flourishingour around usit take us setting interior struggle day day teaching children live lives generosity eschewing comfort help others erika bachiochi visiting fellow ethics amp public policy center essay adapted luncheon presentation gave human ecology conference busch school business economics cua last spring remarks recently aired ewtn | 941 |
<p>Monday would have been Ronald Reagan’s 106th birthday. President Trump’s election has caused many observers to bemoan Reagan’s supposedly waning influence on today’s Republican Party. But these people start from the same flawed assumption, that Trump’s election means the United States and Republicans have rejected Reagan’s legacy.</p>
<p>Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, Trump’s election does not represent the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-de-reaganization-of-the-republican-party/2016/10/05/7de9462e-8b2e-11e6-bff0-d53f592f176e_story.html?utm_term=.50276c7ab4d0" type="external">de-Reaganization</a> of the Republican Party; it presents Republicans with their last, best hope to re-Reaganize it.</p>
<p>This flawed common wisdom flows from a flawed understanding of Reagan’s philosophy that accepts the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2016/10/02/myths-and-truths-about-ronald-reagan/?utm_term=.527cedfa8647" type="external">myth</a> that Reagan was an anti-government ideologue. But to paraphrase Reagan himself, it’s not that the common wisdom is wrong, it’s that so much of what it knows just isn’t so.</p>
<p>Reagan’s conservatism was not a more attractive version of Barry Goldwater’s <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/05/02/ST2008050202934.html" type="external">anti-statist ideology</a>. From the moment Reagan started speaking out as a conservative in the late 1950s, he endorsed an active role for government. He believed that government should care for those who could not care for themselves, build public housing for the poor and expand public universities. Where Goldwater attacked Republican President Dwight Eisenhower and Vice President Richard Nixon for supporting Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, Reagan enthusiastically backed both men in their presidential campaigns.</p>
<p>Reagan’s conservatism even supported the idea of universal health coverage. He opposed Medicare only because he felt it unnecessary in light of another federal bill, the <a href="https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Research/HealthCareFinancingReview/downloads/05-06Winpg45.pdf" type="external">Kerr-Mills Act</a>. That long-forgotten program gave federal funds to states to construct programs that paid health-care bills for poor seniors. He believed deeply, as he said in 1962, that “any person in the United States who requires medical attention and cannot provide for himself should have it provided for him.”</p>
<p>Reagan did not shrink from endorsing government action when needed as governor or as president. He raised the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1983/01/07/us/reagan-signs-bill-on-5-gas-tax-rise.html" type="external">gas tax</a> in 1983 to fund road construction and repair. He also imposed <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1987-03-28/news/mn-698_1_tariffs" type="external">sanctions</a> on Japanese industries and companies for what he believed were unfair trade practices even as he sought to extend free-trade agreements throughout the world.</p>
<p>Even Reagan’s support for immigration was limited by a belief in protecting U.S. workers. He supported taking in genuine refugees fleeing communism or dictators, but he opposed open borders. He <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=MAJGPGqOJ8oC&amp;pg=PA369&amp;lpg=PA369&amp;dq=reagan+there+is+no+way+we+could,+without+limit,+take+all+who+want+to+come+here+simply+for+the+opportunity+this+country+offers&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=HW5ncnHYGs&amp;sig=esiUqZA9AqTIKHGOaJbPbiEPq9M&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiU7I7D1_TRAhXGOCYKHW9LAE0Q6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&amp;q=reagan%20there%20is%20no%20way%20we%20could%2C%20without%20limit%2C%20take%20all%20who%20want%20to%20come%20here%20simply%20for%20the%20opportunity%20this%20country%20offers&amp;f=false" type="external">wrote</a> one correspondent in 1981 that he favored immigration quotas because “there is no way that we could, without limit, take all who want to come here simply for the opportunity this country offers.”</p>
<p>Each of these positions has a clear analogue in Trump’s early acts or statements. Trump’s position that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-vows-insurance-for-everybody-in-obamacare-replacement-plan/2017/01/15/5f2b1e18-db5d-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_term=.1fdeb47781e4" type="external">everyone</a> should have some sort of health insurance finds its counterpart in Reagan’s long-expressed beliefs. Trump’s belief in building more <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/an-early-look-at-the-sweep-of-a-trump-infrastructure-plan/2017/01/25/f6a76a98-e338-11e6-a453-19ec4b3d09ba_story.html?utm_term=.2a2051c54d36" type="external">public infrastructure</a> could be funded by a gas tax hike just like Reagan’s was. His belief that free trade should be fair trade was Reagan’s, and his belief that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/03/can-president-trumps-immigration-ban-survive/?utm_term=.7c506325b9c1" type="external">immigration controls</a> to protect U.S. workers are just also was Reagan’s.</p>
<p>That’s not to say Reagan would have agreed with everything Trump says or does. But the overlap in their views on these issues stems from a broader overlap in philosophy. Trump seems to believe the federal government should act forcefully to protect the interest of the U.S. worker. Reagan’s philosophy was broader and deeper, but it stemmed from the same source: that enhancement of the life, dignity and freedom of the ordinary American was the proper role for the government.</p>
<p>Republicans have too often forgotten this principle in the years since Reagan’s presidency. They have tended to shy away from forceful action to help ordinary Americans in limited circumstances in favor of a more purist free-market ideology that can overlook the genuine suffering markets can create. Too often the person who loses his or her factory job has been treated as collateral damage in the march toward globalization. Reagan never believed government alone or even primarily was the solution, but he also didn’t believe it was never the answer. Republicans have lost that belief, and with it have lost the presidency for most of the post-Reagan era.</p>
<p>It’s no coincidence that Trump’s biggest popular vote gains over prior Republicans came where Reagan also excelled. Throughout the Midwest, the areas where Reagan in 1980 surpassed Gerald Ford in 1976 are usually the same places where Trump overperformed Mitt Romney. Northern and western Wisconsin, the automobile-building and rural regions of Michigan, industrial Ohio and Pennsylvania – many of those who are today’s Trump Democrats were Reagan Democrats first.</p>
<p>A re-Reaganized Republican Party would, like Reagan, meld this belief in limited but forceful government action with the traditional belief in the private sector. Like Reagan, it would reduce burdens on private economic activity while ensuring that the government did not stand idly by when average Americans were hurt. It would finally bring into being that “ <a href="http://reagan2020.us/speeches/The_New_Republican_Party.asp" type="external">New Republican Party</a>” Reagan spoke of in 1977, a party that would give “working men and women of this country . . . a say in what goes on in the party.”</p>
<p>That New Republican Party would finally make the GOP something it has not been since before the Great Depression: America’s majority party. And giving birth to that party would be the best birthday present the GOP could possibly give to the Gipper.</p>
<p>Henry Olsen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. His book “ <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0062475266/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=slatmaga-20&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=9325&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;creativeASIN=0062475266&amp;linkId=7da79d7f2297f555aae7be19aace2b5f" type="external">Ronald Reagan: New Deal Republican</a>” is scheduled to be published in June.</p> | false | 1 | monday would ronald reagans 106th birthday president trumps election caused many observers bemoan reagans supposedly waning influence todays republican party people start flawed assumption trumps election means united states republicans rejected reagans legacy nothing could truth fact trumps election represent dereaganization republican party presents republicans last best hope rereaganize flawed common wisdom flows flawed understanding reagans philosophy accepts myth reagan antigovernment ideologue paraphrase reagan common wisdom wrong much knows isnt reagans conservatism attractive version barry goldwaters antistatist ideology moment reagan started speaking conservative late 1950s endorsed active role government believed government care could care build public housing poor expand public universities goldwater attacked republican president dwight eisenhower vice president richard nixon supporting franklin roosevelts new deal reagan enthusiastically backed men presidential campaigns reagans conservatism even supported idea universal health coverage opposed medicare felt unnecessary light another federal bill kerrmills act longforgotten program gave federal funds states construct programs paid healthcare bills poor seniors believed deeply said 1962 person united states requires medical attention provide provided reagan shrink endorsing government action needed governor president raised gas tax 1983 fund road construction repair also imposed sanctions japanese industries companies believed unfair trade practices even sought extend freetrade agreements throughout world even reagans support immigration limited belief protecting us workers supported taking genuine refugees fleeing communism dictators opposed open borders wrote one correspondent 1981 favored immigration quotas way could without limit take want come simply opportunity country offers positions clear analogue trumps early acts statements trumps position everyone sort health insurance finds counterpart reagans longexpressed beliefs trumps belief building public infrastructure could funded gas tax hike like reagans belief free trade fair trade reagans belief immigration controls protect us workers also reagans thats say reagan would agreed everything trump says overlap views issues stems broader overlap philosophy trump seems believe federal government act forcefully protect interest us worker reagans philosophy broader deeper stemmed source enhancement life dignity freedom ordinary american proper role government republicans often forgotten principle years since reagans presidency tended shy away forceful action help ordinary americans limited circumstances favor purist freemarket ideology overlook genuine suffering markets create often person loses factory job treated collateral damage march toward globalization reagan never believed government alone even primarily solution also didnt believe never answer republicans lost belief lost presidency postreagan era coincidence trumps biggest popular vote gains prior republicans came reagan also excelled throughout midwest areas reagan 1980 surpassed gerald ford 1976 usually places trump overperformed mitt romney northern western wisconsin automobilebuilding rural regions michigan industrial ohio pennsylvania many todays trump democrats reagan democrats first rereaganized republican party would like reagan meld belief limited forceful government action traditional belief private sector like reagan would reduce burdens private economic activity ensuring government stand idly average americans hurt would finally bring new republican party reagan spoke 1977 party would give working men women country say goes party new republican party would finally make gop something since great depression americas majority party giving birth party would best birthday present gop could possibly give gipper henry olsen senior fellow ethics public policy center book ronald reagan new deal republican scheduled published june | 515 |
<p>GLENDALE, Ariz. — <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jared-Goff/" type="external">Jared Goff</a> passed for two touchdowns, linebacker Alec Ogletree returned an interception for a score and the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/los-angeles-rams/" type="external">Los Angeles Rams</a> pinned a 32-16 loss on the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Arizona-Cardinals/" type="external">Arizona Cardinals</a> Sunday at University of Phoenix Stadium.</p>
<p>With their sixth victory in seven games, the Rams (9-3) strengthened their hold on first place in the NFC West and all but assured the Cardinals (5-7) of missing the playoffs for a second consecutive season.</p>
<p>Goff threw a 1-yard touchdown to tight end Gerald Everett and an 11-yarder to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Sammy-Watkins/" type="external">Sammy Watkins</a>, giving the second-year quarterback 11 touchdown passes in his last five games. Goff was 21 of 31 for 220 yards and was intercepted once.</p>
<p>The Rams picked off <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Blaine_Gabbert/" type="external">Blaine Gabbert</a> twice, converting both picks into scores. Gabbert, who began the season as Arizona’s third-string quarterback but was pressed into starting action following injuries to both <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carson_Palmer/" type="external">Carson Palmer</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Drew_Stanton/" type="external">Drew Stanton</a>, finished the game 18 of 32 for 221 yards and one touchdown.</p>
<p>Gabbert’s lone scoring pass was a 15-yarder to veteran wide receiver <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Larry_Fitzgerald/" type="external">Larry Fitzgerald</a>, who had 10 catches for 98 yards and surpassed <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Isaac_Bruce/" type="external">Isaac Bruce</a> (15,206) for fourth place on the NFL’s all-time receiving yards list. Fitzgerald now has 176 receptions in his career against the Rams, the most catches any player has ever had against any team in NFL history.</p>
<p>Greg Zuerlein kicked field goals of 56, 20, 24 and 41 yards for the Rams. The 24-yarder gave Los Angeles a 29-16 lead with 6:18 left to play.</p>
<p>Rams running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Todd-Gurley/" type="external">Todd Gurley</a> combined for 158 yards from scrimmage, rushing 19 times for 74 yards and catching a team-high six passes for an additional 84 yards.</p>
<p>The Cardinals were playing without running back <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Adrian_Peterson/" type="external">Adrian Peterson</a> after he sustained a neck injury during last week’s win over Jacksonville. Peterson’s primary backup, Kerwynn Williams, was questionable after suffering two cracked ribs against the Jaguars, but he responded with a big game.</p>
<p>Williams rushed 16 times for 97 yards, although most of that came in the first half during which he rushed for 86 yards. That was one of the few bright spots for Arizona, which hasn’t been able to post consecutive wins this year.</p>
<p>Right from the start on Sunday, nothing went right for the Cardinals.</p>
<p>Head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bruce-Arians/" type="external">Bruce Arians</a> lost a challenge on the opening kickoff when he thought his coverage team had stripped the ball away from returner Pharoh Cooper. The replay review proved otherwise, and the Cardinals lost a timeout. Six plays later, which included a dropped interception by Arizona linebacker Karlos Dansby, the Rams led 3-0 on Zuerlein’s 56-yard field goal.</p>
<p>Zuerlein has connected on six of seven attempts this season from 50 yards or longer.</p>
<p>On the Cardinals’ first possession and first offensive snap, Gabbert rolled out of the pocket to his right and heaved a pass downfield off one leg. Lamarcus Joyner made an easy interception and returned the pick 46 yards to help set up another Rams’ score — a 1-yard touchdown pass from Goff to Everett. Zuerlein missed the extra point and it was 9-0.</p>
<p>Goff was intercepted on the Rams’ next possession, but Gabbert gave it right back to Los Angeles when Ogletree picked him off and returned the interception 41 yards for a touchdown, extending the Rams’ lead to 16-0.</p>
<p>Ogletree would leave the game with an elbow injury and he did not return.</p>
<p>Things were looking so bleak for the Cardinals, it had to bring back memories of their 33-0 loss to the Rams earlier this season in London. The Rams must have been smelling blood, too.</p>
<p>But that’s when Williams broke things open. He had five runs of seven yards or longer as the Cardinals mounted a nine-play, 67-yard touchdown drive, capped by a 1-yard scoring plunge by Elijhaa Penny. That closed the gap to 16-7, but the Cardinals weren’t done.</p>
<p>After forcing the Rams to punt, Williams rattled off a 25-yard gain. Gabbert went deep, connecting with <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/JJ-Nelson/" type="external">J.J. Nelson</a> on a 26-yard pass completion. Then Gabbert found Fitzgerald for a 15-yard touchdown with 3:25 left in the first half. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Phil_Dawson/" type="external">Phil Dawson</a>‘s extra-point attempt was blocked.</p>
<p>Dawson, who was successful on a 54-yard field goal at the start of the fourth quarter that made it a 10-point game, also had a 45-yard attempt blocked later in the game by Michael Brockers.</p>
<p>The Rams ended the first half by driving 78 yards and settling for a 20-yard field goal from Zuerlein to pad their lead to 19-13.</p>
<p>NOTES: Former Cardinals quarterback Jim Hart was inducted into the team’s Ring of Honor during halftime ceremonies. Hart spent 18 seasons with the Cardinals from 1966-1983 when the team played in St. Louis and becomes the 17th person to be awarded the honor. … The Rams’ receivers entered Sunday’s game ranked tied for third with a drop percentage of just 3.4 on catchable balls. … With his second-quarter touchdown catch on Sunday, Fitzgerald (214 games) became the fastest player to 1,200 career receptions, surpassing the record once held by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jerry_Rice/" type="external">Jerry Rice</a> (221).</p> | false | 1 | glendale ariz jared goff passed two touchdowns linebacker alec ogletree returned interception score los angeles rams pinned 3216 loss arizona cardinals sunday university phoenix stadium sixth victory seven games rams 93 strengthened hold first place nfc west assured cardinals 57 missing playoffs second consecutive season goff threw 1yard touchdown tight end gerald everett 11yarder sammy watkins giving secondyear quarterback 11 touchdown passes last five games goff 21 31 220 yards intercepted rams picked blaine gabbert twice converting picks scores gabbert began season arizonas thirdstring quarterback pressed starting action following injuries carson palmer drew stanton finished game 18 32 221 yards one touchdown gabberts lone scoring pass 15yarder veteran wide receiver larry fitzgerald 10 catches 98 yards surpassed isaac bruce 15206 fourth place nfls alltime receiving yards list fitzgerald 176 receptions career rams catches player ever team nfl history greg zuerlein kicked field goals 56 20 24 41 yards rams 24yarder gave los angeles 2916 lead 618 left play rams running back todd gurley combined 158 yards scrimmage rushing 19 times 74 yards catching teamhigh six passes additional 84 yards cardinals playing without running back adrian peterson sustained neck injury last weeks win jacksonville petersons primary backup kerwynn williams questionable suffering two cracked ribs jaguars responded big game williams rushed 16 times 97 yards although came first half rushed 86 yards one bright spots arizona hasnt able post consecutive wins year right start sunday nothing went right cardinals head coach bruce arians lost challenge opening kickoff thought coverage team stripped ball away returner pharoh cooper replay review proved otherwise cardinals lost timeout six plays later included dropped interception arizona linebacker karlos dansby rams led 30 zuerleins 56yard field goal zuerlein connected six seven attempts season 50 yards longer cardinals first possession first offensive snap gabbert rolled pocket right heaved pass downfield one leg lamarcus joyner made easy interception returned pick 46 yards help set another rams score 1yard touchdown pass goff everett zuerlein missed extra point 90 goff intercepted rams next possession gabbert gave right back los angeles ogletree picked returned interception 41 yards touchdown extending rams lead 160 ogletree would leave game elbow injury return things looking bleak cardinals bring back memories 330 loss rams earlier season london rams must smelling blood thats williams broke things open five runs seven yards longer cardinals mounted nineplay 67yard touchdown drive capped 1yard scoring plunge elijhaa penny closed gap 167 cardinals werent done forcing rams punt williams rattled 25yard gain gabbert went deep connecting jj nelson 26yard pass completion gabbert found fitzgerald 15yard touchdown 325 left first half phil dawsons extrapoint attempt blocked dawson successful 54yard field goal start fourth quarter made 10point game also 45yard attempt blocked later game michael brockers rams ended first half driving 78 yards settling 20yard field goal zuerlein pad lead 1913 notes former cardinals quarterback jim hart inducted teams ring honor halftime ceremonies hart spent 18 seasons cardinals 19661983 team played st louis becomes 17th person awarded honor rams receivers entered sundays game ranked tied third drop percentage 34 catchable balls secondquarter touchdown catch sunday fitzgerald 214 games became fastest player 1200 career receptions surpassing record held jerry rice 221 | 523 |
<p>SELLER: <a href="http://variety.com/t/ryan-tedder/" type="external">Ryan Tedder</a>BUYERS: <a href="http://variety.com/t/cindy-crawford/" type="external">Cindy Crawford</a> and <a href="http://variety.com/t/rande-gerber/" type="external">Rande Gerber</a>LOCATION: Beverly Hills, CAPRICE: $11,625,000SIZE: 5,386 square feet, 5 bedrooms, 5.5 bathrooms</p>
<p>YOUR MAMA’S NOTES: While 16-year-old Kaia Gerber follows in her supermodel mother’s footsteps and <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4882638/Cindy-Crawford-Rande-Gerber-support-Kaia-Marc-Jacobs.html" type="external">stormed the runways</a> at New York Fashion Week, her famous parents, Cindy Crawford and Rande Gerber, were <a href="http://www.tmz.com/2017/09/13/cindy-crawford-rande-gerber-buy-ridiculously-baller-beverly-hills-estate/" type="external">identified</a> as the buyers who paid $11.625 million for a sexy contemporary in the trendy and tremendously expensive Trousdale Estates area of Beverly Hills listed at <a href="http://variety.com/2017/dirt/real-estalker/ryan-tedder-trousdale-estates-house-onerepublic-1202474297/" type="external">$12.75 million</a> and sold by pop song writer/producer Ryan Tedder. Mister Tedder, co-founder and frontman for the band OneRepublic and a prolific songwriter who’s penned hit songs for pop cynosures like Madonna, Taylor Swift, Beyoncé and Adele, purchased the property as an investment in late 2014 for <a href="http://variety.com/2015/dirt/real-estalker/gregory-goodman-sells-house-ryan-tedder-1201457977/" type="external">$7.485 million</a> from powerhouse movie producer Gregory Goodman (“8 Mile,” “Captain Phillips”) and his garden-designer husband Paul Langh. Built in 1959 on&#160;nearly an acre that borders Jeffrey Katzenberg’s multi-acre hilltop estate, the low-slung residence was expanded and renovated for Mister Tedder by Denver-based Alvarez Morris Architectural Studio and is currently configured with five bedrooms and 5.5 bathrooms in 5,386-square-feet.</p>
<p>A slatted wood driveway gate slides open to a huge motor court, three-car garage and double front doors that open directly into a meandering, open-plan living space that orbits around an amorphous and asymmetrically fluted freestanding volume that houses a fireplace and a walk-in wet bar. Sliding floor-to-ceiling filigree panels divide the lounging areas of the living room from the formal dining room that features elegant chevron pattern wood floors and a huge picture window with a sub-optimal view of the motor court’s vast concrete expanse. Flooded with natural light through a couple of large sky lights, the almost entirely white kitchen has a double wide center island with integrated snack counter and a mix of slab marble and stainless steel counter tops. The adjoining informal dining area and family room, with a fireplace set into a graphically tiled wall, has two walls of glass sliders that open to the backyard.</p>
<p>The residence’s five bedrooms include an en suite guest bedroom with private patio, two more guest/family bedrooms that share a Jack ‘n’ Jill-style bathroom, a discrete staff bedroom or home office and a glass-walled master suite with private patio, fitted walk-in closet and compartmentalized bathroom with garden tub and steam shower. Broad banks of accordion fold and sliding glass doors open the backside of the U-shaped house to a grassy courtyard shaded by a massive coral tree and beyond the courtyard there’s an outdoor dining pavilion, a built-in fire pit and a swimming pool with inset spa surrounded by concrete terracing.</p>
<p>Mister Tedder and his wife Genevieve continue to own another home in the Trousdale Estates ‘hood they scooped up in 2015 for $11.9 million along with a gated compound they custom-built inside a gated enclave in Denver’s ritzy Belclaro neighborhood that includes a large main residence, a sizable pool house and a state-of-the-art recording studio.</p>
<p>As for the deep-pocketed Crawford-Gerbers, who recently inked a deal to sell the <a href="https://casamigostequila.com/age-gate/?ajax=true" type="external">Casamigos tequilla</a> brand they co-own with George Clooney and real estate mogul Mike Meldman in a deal worth a bank account filling <a href="http://people.com/food/george-clooney-rande-gerber-sell-casamigos-tequila-one-billion/" type="external">$1 billion</a>, have long made their home base a customized multi structure oceanfront compound on Malibu’s fashionable Encinal Bluffs near El Pescador State Beach that they bought in 1999 for $4.8 million. Vogue magazine got a nice peep of the comfortably luxurious property when Miz Crawford responded to their “ <a href="https://video.vogue.com/watch/cindy-crawford-73-questions" type="external">73 Questions</a>” video series earlier this year.</p>
<p>The prodigiously if unfairly comely couple also own another, far more modest if hardly affordable beachfront home about two miles down the coast that was acquired in 1998 for $1.85 million and in early 2015 they shelled out a mouth-drying <a href="http://variety.com/2015/dirt/real-estalker/cindy-crawford-rande-gerber-add-to-malibu-spread-1201501065/" type="external">$50.5 million</a> in an off-market deal for a two-parcel estate of nearly six acres right next door to their Malibu compound. Unconfirmed word on the real estate street is the couple plan to incorporate the smaller, 2.76-acre parcel into their existing compound while the larger of the two parcels, 3.18 acres with an approximately 5,200-square-feet residence freshly renovated by the Crawford-Gerbers, was set out for sale about 10 months ago amid much publicity and pearl clutching with a <a href="http://variety.com/2016/dirt/real-estalker/rande-gerber-cindy-crawford-malibu-estate-1201917878/" type="external">$60 million</a> asking price.</p>
<p>Not only did the Crawford-Gerbers and their b.f.f. business partner George Clooney name their Tequilla brand Casamigo they also custom built a shared, two-residence compound in the guard-gated <a href="http://eldoradobeachclub.com/" type="external">El Dorado Golf &amp; Beach Club</a> in Los Cabos, at the southern tip of Mexico’s Baja peninsula, that they dubbed Casamigos, House of Friends. The side-by-side houses, not exactly identical but more like architectural fraternal twins, were designed and built in tandem by the firm of venerated Mexican architect <a href="http://legorretalegorreta.com/en/" type="external">Ricardo Legorreta</a>, featured in the November 2013 issue of <a href="https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/george-clooney-cindy-crawford-rande-gerber-mexico-baja-houses-article" type="external">Architectural Digest</a> and reported in the spring of 2016 to have been sold for around $100 million to an unidentified Mexican billionaire.</p>
<p>Listing photos: Partners Trust</p> | false | 1 | seller ryan tedderbuyers cindy crawford rande gerberlocation beverly hills caprice 11625000size 5386 square feet 5 bedrooms 55 bathrooms mamas notes 16yearold kaia gerber follows supermodel mothers footsteps stormed runways new york fashion week famous parents cindy crawford rande gerber identified buyers paid 11625 million sexy contemporary trendy tremendously expensive trousdale estates area beverly hills listed 1275 million sold pop song writerproducer ryan tedder mister tedder cofounder frontman band onerepublic prolific songwriter whos penned hit songs pop cynosures like madonna taylor swift beyoncé adele purchased property investment late 2014 7485 million powerhouse movie producer gregory goodman 8 mile captain phillips gardendesigner husband paul langh built 1959 on160nearly acre borders jeffrey katzenbergs multiacre hilltop estate lowslung residence expanded renovated mister tedder denverbased alvarez morris architectural studio currently configured five bedrooms 55 bathrooms 5386squarefeet slatted wood driveway gate slides open huge motor court threecar garage double front doors open directly meandering openplan living space orbits around amorphous asymmetrically fluted freestanding volume houses fireplace walkin wet bar sliding floortoceiling filigree panels divide lounging areas living room formal dining room features elegant chevron pattern wood floors huge picture window suboptimal view motor courts vast concrete expanse flooded natural light couple large sky lights almost entirely white kitchen double wide center island integrated snack counter mix slab marble stainless steel counter tops adjoining informal dining area family room fireplace set graphically tiled wall two walls glass sliders open backyard residences five bedrooms include en suite guest bedroom private patio two guestfamily bedrooms share jack n jillstyle bathroom discrete staff bedroom home office glasswalled master suite private patio fitted walkin closet compartmentalized bathroom garden tub steam shower broad banks accordion fold sliding glass doors open backside ushaped house grassy courtyard shaded massive coral tree beyond courtyard theres outdoor dining pavilion builtin fire pit swimming pool inset spa surrounded concrete terracing mister tedder wife genevieve continue another home trousdale estates hood scooped 2015 119 million along gated compound custombuilt inside gated enclave denvers ritzy belclaro neighborhood includes large main residence sizable pool house stateoftheart recording studio deeppocketed crawfordgerbers recently inked deal sell casamigos tequilla brand coown george clooney real estate mogul mike meldman deal worth bank account filling 1 billion long made home base customized multi structure oceanfront compound malibus fashionable encinal bluffs near el pescador state beach bought 1999 48 million vogue magazine got nice peep comfortably luxurious property miz crawford responded 73 questions video series earlier year prodigiously unfairly comely couple also another far modest hardly affordable beachfront home two miles coast acquired 1998 185 million early 2015 shelled mouthdrying 505 million offmarket deal twoparcel estate nearly six acres right next door malibu compound unconfirmed word real estate street couple plan incorporate smaller 276acre parcel existing compound larger two parcels 318 acres approximately 5200squarefeet residence freshly renovated crawfordgerbers set sale 10 months ago amid much publicity pearl clutching 60 million asking price crawfordgerbers bff business partner george clooney name tequilla brand casamigo also custom built shared tworesidence compound guardgated el dorado golf amp beach club los cabos southern tip mexicos baja peninsula dubbed casamigos house friends sidebyside houses exactly identical like architectural fraternal twins designed built tandem firm venerated mexican architect ricardo legorreta featured november 2013 issue architectural digest reported spring 2016 sold around 100 million unidentified mexican billionaire listing photos partners trust | 547 |
<p>The mandate from Jeff Bezos is clear: Bring me “Game of Thrones.”</p>
<p>That’s the word that has the creative community buzzing this week about a major strategy shift underway for <a href="http://variety.com/t/amazon/" type="external">Amazon</a> Studios’ original series efforts.</p>
<p>The CEO of the e-commerce giant is said to have tasked Amazon Studios chief Roy Price with honing the focus on high-end drama series with global appeal. Amazon’s decision this week to <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/z-the-beginning-of-everything-canceled-amazon-1202550213/" type="external">scrap plans for a second season</a> of period drama “Z: The Beginning of Everything” reflects the new marching orders.</p>
<p>On Friday, Amazon confirmed five new projects — series greenlights for a period drama from Paul Attanasio and Wong Kar-wai and a comedy starring Fred Armisen and Maya Rudolph; two comedy pilots; and a Seth Rogen-produced comic book adaptation eyed as a straight-to-series order — that reflect the drive to find shows that deliver sizzle in the water-cooler environs of social media and can travel around the world.</p>
<p>In an interview on Friday, Price told Variety&#160;that there is a new focus on finding “big shows that can make the biggest difference around the world” in growing Amazon Video’s reach and Amazon Prime subscribers. “Tong Wars,” the drama penned by Paul Attanasio and directed by Wong, is a prime example of a period piece that blends the epic history of Chinese immigration to the U.S. with a crime potboiler. “It’s a very compelling show,” he said.</p>
<p>Price said the strategic course has been informed by the wealth of data available to Amazon and is the consensus of senior management, including Bezos.</p>
<p>“It comes out of&#160;analysis of the data and conversations among the leadership team,” Price said. “We’ve been looking at the data for some time, and as a team we’re increasingly focused on the impact of the biggest shows. It’s pretty evident that it takes big shows to move the needle.”</p>
<p>Price cited Amazon’s “Man in the High Castle,” the unscripted “Grand Tour,” and the new comedy “The Tick” as examples of existing shows that fit the bill of having global appeal. And he doesn’t mince words about his interest in finding a show that packs the wallop of HBO’s “Game of Thrones.”</p>
<p>“I do think ‘Game of Thrones’ is to TV as ‘Jaws’ and ‘Star Wars’ was to the movies of the 1970s,” Price said. “It’ll inspire a lot of people. Everybody wants a big hit and certainly that’s the show of the moment in terms of being a model for a hit.”</p>
<p>Price pointed to the move Amazon made in January to recruit former Fox International Channels exec Sharon Tal Yguado to lead a new event series development unit focused specifically on sci-fi, fantasy and genre series. Price pointed to AMC’s “Preacher” and Starz’s “American Gods” as shows that have resonated strongly for Amazon in markets outside the U.S. where it has acquired rerun rights.</p>
<p>“The biggest shows make the biggest difference around the world,” Price said. “If you have one of the top five or 10 shows in the marketplace, it means your show is more valuable because it drives conversations and it drive subscriptions. … We’re a mass-market brand. We have a lot of video customers and we need shows that move the needle at a high level.”</p>
<p>With this focus, Amazon could not justify moving ahead with season 2 of “Z.”&#160;Industry sources said Karl Gajdusek, the showrunner recruited to steer season 2 of “Z,” was plainly told of the shift in strategy when the surprise call came down on Thursday that the show was being shuttered. Gajdusek and his team of writers had been working for several weeks on getting the 10-episode order ready for production. “Z” starred Christina Ricci as Zelda Fitzgerald, the socialite wife of writer F. Scott Fitzgerald and a legendary figure from 1920s Jazz Age lore.</p>
<p>Price said the decision on “Z” came down to a simple matter of priorities. He notes that Amazon has an ongoing development pact on the film side with Killer Films, one of the show’s producers.</p>
<p>“We’re glad we did ‘Z.’ We’re proud of the work done on it and the team we had on it,” Price said. “At the end of the day you only have so many slots. With those slots you have to drive viewership and drive subscriptions. Sometimes there are shows that are a little bit on the bubble in terms of their viewership. We went down the road with it but ultimately decided in light of the full spectrum of opportunities we were looking at we would not be able to proceed with the show.”</p>
<p>Amazon is also expected to cut a significant number of current development prospects off of its plate. The service already has several big-ticket series orders in the works for 2018, including the two-season order for Amy Sherman-Palladino’s “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel,” the John Krasinski-led adaptation of Tom Clancy’s “Jack Ryan” from Carlton Cuse, Matthew Weiner’s “The Romanoffs” anthology series, and David O. Russell’s untitled crime drama starring Robert De Niro and Julianne Moore.</p>
<p>Multiple industry sources who work with Amazon say it is clear there is pressure on Price and his team to deliver. There has been speculation about the prospect of major management changes at Amazon Studios given the number of industry insiders who have complained about what they see has a difficult working environment at the streaming giant.</p>
<p>“It’s not a good sign when Seattle overrules your decision,” said one prominent producer of Amazon’s reversal on “Z.”</p>
<p>The overhaul of priorities comes amid what sources said is some frustration with the fruits of its foray into original TV content during the past few years. Amazon Studios made an early splash with comedy “Transparent” in 2014, which helped propel the national conversation about transgender issues and has collected high-profile Emmy wins for star Jeffrey Tambor and creator Jill Soloway.</p>
<p>But Amazon hasn’t had much traction in pop culture with many other original series, even after comedy “Mozart in the Jungle” was an underdog winner for comedy series at the 2016 Golden Globe Awards. For all of Amazon’s investment in original series, it’s been eclipsed this season by its smaller rival Hulu with the critically praised “The Handmaid’s Tale.”</p>
<p>There’s been speculation about Amazon reining in its development expenditures — something that Price flatly denies. Amazon’s aggregate spending on original content will be up in 2018 versus this year, he said, although he would not cite specific dollar figures. He also noted that Amazon is shelling out big bucks this season for a marquee sports franchise, “Thursday Night Football.”</p>
<p>“We’re very interested in getting those top shows — something that is broadly popular and admired,” he said. “We want to allocate a lot of our attention and resources going forward to that kind of thing.”</p>
<p>There have already been signals of Amazon’s heightened focus on event and spectacle series.&#160;Tal Yguado has been given ample resources to go after big-name talent. In August, she secured an overall deal with “The Walking Dead” creator Robert Kirkman, luring him away from his longtime home AMC. At Fox, Tal Yguado made the savvy decision to help finance and license “The Walking Dead” for the more than 200 Fox-branded international channels. She also worked with Kirkman in developing “Outcast,” which airs across the Fox international channels group and on Cinemax in the U.S. She is said to be targeting other “Walking Dead” talent to make the jump to Amazon.</p>
<p>Tal Yguado came to the streaming service three months after the development team under Price had been reorganized, with comedy head Joe Lewis taking oversight of half-hour and drama series development.&#160;The move has caused some confusion among TV literary agents, who see no clear lines between Lewis’ team and Tal Yguado’s event focus.</p>
<p>Amazon faced another black eye in the creative community this week when reports of strife behind the scenes on another drama series, “Goliath,” emerged along with the news of the show’s third showrunner in two seasons. Clyde Phillips, who took over from creator David E. Kelley for season two, departed the show of his own volition after creative conflicts with star Billy Bob Thornton.</p>
<p>“Goliath” was in production in Los Angeles on its episode five of the 10-episode order at the point when Phillips left last month, according to sources. Lawrence Trilling, a producer on the first season of “Goliath,” has taken over.</p>
<p>Price said he spoke with Thornton on Thursday and was feeling “very hopeful” about the future of the show. He also asserted that Amazon has not had a higher incidence of behind-the-scenes changes on shows than other networks doing comparable volume.</p>
<p>“The reality is it can be a complicated task to create a show. and sometimes it goes smoothly and other times it does not,” Price said.</p>
<p>As for the big-picture of Amazon’s programming focus, Price said there are more deals to be unveiled in the coming weeks that will make the company’s priorities very clear to the creative community. “There are a lot more big, exciting announcements to come, and you’ll see where it’s all going,” he said.</p> | false | 1 | mandate jeff bezos clear bring game thrones thats word creative community buzzing week major strategy shift underway amazon studios original series efforts ceo ecommerce giant said tasked amazon studios chief roy price honing focus highend drama series global appeal amazons decision week scrap plans second season period drama z beginning everything reflects new marching orders friday amazon confirmed five new projects series greenlights period drama paul attanasio wong karwai comedy starring fred armisen maya rudolph two comedy pilots seth rogenproduced comic book adaptation eyed straighttoseries order reflect drive find shows deliver sizzle watercooler environs social media travel around world interview friday price told variety160that new focus finding big shows make biggest difference around world growing amazon videos reach amazon prime subscribers tong wars drama penned paul attanasio directed wong prime example period piece blends epic history chinese immigration us crime potboiler compelling show said price said strategic course informed wealth data available amazon consensus senior management including bezos comes of160analysis data conversations among leadership team price said weve looking data time team increasingly focused impact biggest shows pretty evident takes big shows move needle price cited amazons man high castle unscripted grand tour new comedy tick examples existing shows fit bill global appeal doesnt mince words interest finding show packs wallop hbos game thrones think game thrones tv jaws star wars movies 1970s price said itll inspire lot people everybody wants big hit certainly thats show moment terms model hit price pointed move amazon made january recruit former fox international channels exec sharon tal yguado lead new event series development unit focused specifically scifi fantasy genre series price pointed amcs preacher starzs american gods shows resonated strongly amazon markets outside us acquired rerun rights biggest shows make biggest difference around world price said one top five 10 shows marketplace means show valuable drives conversations drive subscriptions massmarket brand lot video customers need shows move needle high level focus amazon could justify moving ahead season 2 z160industry sources said karl gajdusek showrunner recruited steer season 2 z plainly told shift strategy surprise call came thursday show shuttered gajdusek team writers working several weeks getting 10episode order ready production z starred christina ricci zelda fitzgerald socialite wife writer f scott fitzgerald legendary figure 1920s jazz age lore price said decision z came simple matter priorities notes amazon ongoing development pact film side killer films one shows producers glad z proud work done team price said end day many slots slots drive viewership drive subscriptions sometimes shows little bit bubble terms viewership went road ultimately decided light full spectrum opportunities looking would able proceed show amazon also expected cut significant number current development prospects plate service already several bigticket series orders works 2018 including twoseason order amy shermanpalladinos marvelous mrs maisel john krasinskiled adaptation tom clancys jack ryan carlton cuse matthew weiners romanoffs anthology series david russells untitled crime drama starring robert de niro julianne moore multiple industry sources work amazon say clear pressure price team deliver speculation prospect major management changes amazon studios given number industry insiders complained see difficult working environment streaming giant good sign seattle overrules decision said one prominent producer amazons reversal z overhaul priorities comes amid sources said frustration fruits foray original tv content past years amazon studios made early splash comedy transparent 2014 helped propel national conversation transgender issues collected highprofile emmy wins star jeffrey tambor creator jill soloway amazon hasnt much traction pop culture many original series even comedy mozart jungle underdog winner comedy series 2016 golden globe awards amazons investment original series eclipsed season smaller rival hulu critically praised handmaids tale theres speculation amazon reining development expenditures something price flatly denies amazons aggregate spending original content 2018 versus year said although would cite specific dollar figures also noted amazon shelling big bucks season marquee sports franchise thursday night football interested getting top shows something broadly popular admired said want allocate lot attention resources going forward kind thing already signals amazons heightened focus event spectacle series160tal yguado given ample resources go bigname talent august secured overall deal walking dead creator robert kirkman luring away longtime home amc fox tal yguado made savvy decision help finance license walking dead 200 foxbranded international channels also worked kirkman developing outcast airs across fox international channels group cinemax us said targeting walking dead talent make jump amazon tal yguado came streaming service three months development team price reorganized comedy head joe lewis taking oversight halfhour drama series development160the move caused confusion among tv literary agents see clear lines lewis team tal yguados event focus amazon faced another black eye creative community week reports strife behind scenes another drama series goliath emerged along news shows third showrunner two seasons clyde phillips took creator david e kelley season two departed show volition creative conflicts star billy bob thornton goliath production los angeles episode five 10episode order point phillips left last month according sources lawrence trilling producer first season goliath taken price said spoke thornton thursday feeling hopeful future show also asserted amazon higher incidence behindthescenes changes shows networks comparable volume reality complicated task create show sometimes goes smoothly times price said bigpicture amazons programming focus price said deals unveiled coming weeks make companys priorities clear creative community lot big exciting announcements come youll see going said | 874 |
<p>Historians of religious studies would likely regard the past two centuries as the apogee of biblical scholarship. And it’s certainly true that we know far more about the times, customs, languages, thought patterns, worldviews, and literary styles of the people of the Bible and the people who wrote the Bible than did, say, Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson (two biblically conversant, though deeply skeptical, Founders). Yet all that knowledge has led, not to a renaissance of biblical literacy, but to precisely the opposite.</p>
<p>Outside the thriving worlds of evangelical Protestantism and the rather enclosed world of Orthodoxy, skepticism about the veracity and trustworthiness of the Bible is too often the order of the day among church-going (and even Bible-reading) Christians in the 21st-century West. Two centuries of a historical-critical approach to the Bible, filtered through inept preaching, have led to profound dubieties about what the Bible can tell us. “That didn’t really happen” and “That’s just a myth” — thoughts that simply wouldn’t have occurred to believers of the past – are the skeptical “gotchas” that now pop immediately to mind when many Christians hear the Bible proclaimed in their worship or read the Bible at home.</p>
<p>Joseph Ratzinger, the 265th Bishop of Rome, is a man of the Bible who knows the historical-critical method inside and out — and who has spent the better part of the last three decades trying to repair the damage that an exclusively historical-critical reading of the Old and New Testaments has done to both faith and culture. In the second volume of his trilogy, <a href="" type="external">Jesus of Nazareth</a>, published in 2011, Ratzinger put his intellectual cards on the table, face up: “One thing is clear to me: in two hundred years of exegetical work, historical-critical exegesis has already yielded its essential fruit.” If modern interpretation of the Bible was not to “exhaust itself in constantly new hypotheses,” Ratzinger continued, scholars had to learn to read the Bible again through lenses ground by faith and theology, including the theological reading of Scripture developed in the first Christian centuries and in the Middle Ages. It was necessary, in other words, to practice the ecumenism of time when reading and trying to understand the Bible.</p>
<p>And what is true for biblical scholars is surely true for other believers. We, too, must learn to approach the Bible with what the French philosopher Paul Ricœur once called a “second naïveté”: not the naïveté of the child, but the openness to wonder and mystery that comes from having passed through the purifying fires of modern knowledge without having one’s faith in either revelation or reason reduced to ashes and dust. That is what Joseph Ratzinger has tried to do in his Jesus of Nazareth triptych: to offer 21st-century believers and 21st-century skeptics alike a theologically informed reading of the life of Jesus that is indebted to what can be learned from historical-critical scholarship but that does not treat the Bible the way a coroner treats a cadaver: as something dead to be dissected.</p>
<p>The third panel of the Ratzinger triptych, <a href="" type="external">Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives</a>, was recently published by Image Books. And, in yet another demonstration of the maxim that no good deed goes unpunished, Ratzinger, long caricatured as “God’s Rottweiler” by the more vicious boobies of the world press, quickly morphed into the Papal Grinch Who Stole Christmas, as one journalistic illiterate after another stressed one utterly irrelevant point after another: the pope notingen passantthat the traditional ox and ass of millions of crèche scenes are not in fact mentioned in Luke’s infancy narrative; the pope writing that, according to the text, the angels in the fields above Bethlehem “said” “Glory to God in the highest” rather than singing that salutation. (Nick Squires, Rome correspondent of the London Daily Telegraph, even claimed that Pope Benedict’s hardly surprising acknowledgment that Jesus was probably born in what we know as 6 or 7b.c. — the misdating is owing to a medieval scribal error — could raise “doubts over one of the keystones of Christian tradition”: as if it were a “keystone” of Christian faith that Jesus was born on December 25, 0.)</p>
<p>But this is all froth, and thin froth at that. Those who read Benedict on the infancy narratives without the distorting bifocals of postmodern skepticism and sheer ignorance will find a rich reflection on the meaning of the Christmas story. And in the course of his theologically focused exegesis of these beloved ancient texts, the scholar-pope makes several points of capital importance for our present cultural circumstances, and does so in his typically limpid prose.</p>
<p>The first of those points involves the Jesus genealogies in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, which drive clergy untutored in Hebrew pronunciation to distraction (and which may sound, to the irreverent, like starting line-ups during the NCAA men’s basketball tournament). These genealogies, Benedict insists, are not literary filler. They make the essential, theological point that Jesus is, uniquely, the universal particular: a man born in a specific time and place who nonetheless fulfills the promise that “all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves” by Abraham and his progeny; the son of the Most High who, nevertheless, is legally a son of the house of David, because of Joseph’s righteousness in taking this child of mystery as his own, naming him, and bringing him and his mother into his home; the eternally begotten Son who did not come “with the timelessness of myth” but who belongs, as Ratzinger writes and the gospel of Luke insists, “to a time that can be specifically dated and a geographical area that is precisely defined.” Here, with the child in the manger, “the universal and the concrete converge,” for it was in him that “the Logos, the creative logic behind all things, entered the world,” so that “place and time” are fully participant in the redemption — a redemption anchored in history and geography, not abstracted into mythology.</p>
<p>All of this hinged on an act of human freedom, which is Benedict’s second, crucial point, and the essence of his analysis of the Annunciation story. Following the theological lead of a medieval doctor of the Church, Bernard of Clairvaux, the pope describes the angel Gabriel’s visit to the virgin of Nazareth in these dramatic terms:</p>
<p>After the error of our first parents, the whole world was shrouded in darkness, under the dominion of death. Now God seeks to enter the world anew. He knocks at Mary’s door. He needs human freedom. The only way he can redeem man, who was created free, is by means of a free “yes” to his will. In creating freedom, he made himself in a certain sense dependent upon man. His power is tied to the unenforceable “yes” of a human being.</p>
<p>That “yes,” that “be it done unto me according to your word” (Luke 1:38), is, with the Resurrection, one of the two cornerstones of Christian faith. God does not contradict his creation in the virgin birth or in raising Jesus of Nazareth from death, the pope writes. “But here we are not dealing with the irrational or contradictory, but precisely with the positive — with God’s creative power, embracing the whole of being. . . . If God does not also have power over matter, then he simply is not God. But he does have this power, and through the conception and resurrection of Jesus Christ he has ushered in a new creation.” God has finally gotten, we might say, what he had intended and desired all along. The power of divine love, first poured out in creation, has become the history-defining and cosmos-changing power of redemption.</p>
<p>That cosmic dimension of what an earlier generation, rather too beholden t o Teutonic exegetical neologisms, called the “Christ event” is underscored in Benedict’s charming handling of the magi story. Always the theologian, preacher, and catechist, Benedict is, of course, far less interested in who the mysterious “wise men” from the east were than in what their adventure meant — and means.</p>
<p>First, that these visitors were gentiles means that the promise noted above, that all nations would be blessed in Abraham and his seed, is being fulfilled in this “newborn king of the Jews.” And second, the “star rising in the east” (Matthew 2:2), which leads to the Christ child in Bethlehem, puts an end to astrology and gives us an important indicator of the truth about humanity and its destiny. The ancient belief in the stars as divine powers who shaped, even determined, the fate of men and nations is supplanted by the truth of the matter: as the pope writes, “it is not the star that determines the child’s destiny, it is the child” (and his Father, whose will is to reveal the truth about man to man) who “directs the star.” And here, for the skeptical and the cynical, is the truth about that Self that postmodernity puts at the center of everything. Here is what the pope calls the true “anthropological revolution”: “human nature assumed by God — as revealed in God’s only-begotten Son — is greater than all the powers of the material world, greater than the entire universe.”</p>
<p>So: Who takes humanity more seriously: Richard Dawkins, or Benedict XVI?</p>
<p>Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives ends with a brief explication of a gospel passage that has comforted generations of parents dealing with the mysteries of teenagers: the curious episode of the finding of the young Jesus in the Temple. Here, as in the Annunciation, Benedict’s accent is on freedom rightly understood: the kind of freedom that leads to, rather than away from, authentic piety.</p>
<p>In this first recorded exercising of his human freedom, the young Jesus is neither defying his parents nor challenging the Jewish piety of his day. As the pope writes, “Jesus’ freedom is not the freedom of the liberal,” the freedom of the imperial, autonomous Self. “It is the freedom of the Son, and thus the freedom of the truly devout person. Jesus brings a new freedom: not the freedom of someone with no obligations, but the freedom of someone totally united with the Father’s will, someone who helps mankind to attain the freedom of inner oneness with God.”</p>
<p>Thus the culmination of the Christmas story and the gospels’ infancy narratives offers Americans, through the wisdom of Benedict XVI, something important to ponder as we, and indeed the entire West, consider the true meaning of freedom and the liberating power of obligation on the verge of what seem likely to be challenging years ahead.</p>
<p>George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C. and holds EPPC’s William E. Simon Chair in Catholic Studies.</p> | false | 1 | historians religious studies would likely regard past two centuries apogee biblical scholarship certainly true know far times customs languages thought patterns worldviews literary styles people bible people wrote bible say benjamin franklin thomas jefferson two biblically conversant though deeply skeptical founders yet knowledge led renaissance biblical literacy precisely opposite outside thriving worlds evangelical protestantism rather enclosed world orthodoxy skepticism veracity trustworthiness bible often order day among churchgoing even biblereading christians 21stcentury west two centuries historicalcritical approach bible filtered inept preaching led profound dubieties bible tell us didnt really happen thats myth thoughts simply wouldnt occurred believers past skeptical gotchas pop immediately mind many christians hear bible proclaimed worship read bible home joseph ratzinger 265th bishop rome man bible knows historicalcritical method inside spent better part last three decades trying repair damage exclusively historicalcritical reading old new testaments done faith culture second volume trilogy jesus nazareth published 2011 ratzinger put intellectual cards table face one thing clear two hundred years exegetical work historicalcritical exegesis already yielded essential fruit modern interpretation bible exhaust constantly new hypotheses ratzinger continued scholars learn read bible lenses ground faith theology including theological reading scripture developed first christian centuries middle ages necessary words practice ecumenism time reading trying understand bible true biblical scholars surely true believers must learn approach bible french philosopher paul ricœur called second naïveté naïveté child openness wonder mystery comes passed purifying fires modern knowledge without ones faith either revelation reason reduced ashes dust joseph ratzinger tried jesus nazareth triptych offer 21stcentury believers 21stcentury skeptics alike theologically informed reading life jesus indebted learned historicalcritical scholarship treat bible way coroner treats cadaver something dead dissected third panel ratzinger triptych jesus nazareth infancy narratives recently published image books yet another demonstration maxim good deed goes unpunished ratzinger long caricatured gods rottweiler vicious boobies world press quickly morphed papal grinch stole christmas one journalistic illiterate another stressed one utterly irrelevant point another pope notingen passantthat traditional ox ass millions crèche scenes fact mentioned lukes infancy narrative pope writing according text angels fields bethlehem said glory god highest rather singing salutation nick squires rome correspondent london daily telegraph even claimed pope benedicts hardly surprising acknowledgment jesus probably born know 6 7bc misdating owing medieval scribal error could raise doubts one keystones christian tradition keystone christian faith jesus born december 25 0 froth thin froth read benedict infancy narratives without distorting bifocals postmodern skepticism sheer ignorance find rich reflection meaning christmas story course theologically focused exegesis beloved ancient texts scholarpope makes several points capital importance present cultural circumstances typically limpid prose first points involves jesus genealogies gospels matthew luke drive clergy untutored hebrew pronunciation distraction may sound irreverent like starting lineups ncaa mens basketball tournament genealogies benedict insists literary filler make essential theological point jesus uniquely universal particular man born specific time place nonetheless fulfills promise nations earth shall bless abraham progeny son high nevertheless legally son house david josephs righteousness taking child mystery naming bringing mother home eternally begotten son come timelessness myth belongs ratzinger writes gospel luke insists time specifically dated geographical area precisely defined child manger universal concrete converge logos creative logic behind things entered world place time fully participant redemption redemption anchored history geography abstracted mythology hinged act human freedom benedicts second crucial point essence analysis annunciation story following theological lead medieval doctor church bernard clairvaux pope describes angel gabriels visit virgin nazareth dramatic terms error first parents whole world shrouded darkness dominion death god seeks enter world anew knocks marys door needs human freedom way redeem man created free means free yes creating freedom made certain sense dependent upon man power tied unenforceable yes human yes done unto according word luke 138 resurrection one two cornerstones christian faith god contradict creation virgin birth raising jesus nazareth death pope writes dealing irrational contradictory precisely positive gods creative power embracing whole god also power matter simply god power conception resurrection jesus christ ushered new creation god finally gotten might say intended desired along power divine love first poured creation become historydefining cosmoschanging power redemption cosmic dimension earlier generation rather beholden teutonic exegetical neologisms called christ event underscored benedicts charming handling magi story always theologian preacher catechist benedict course far less interested mysterious wise men east adventure meant means first visitors gentiles means promise noted nations would blessed abraham seed fulfilled newborn king jews second star rising east matthew 22 leads christ child bethlehem puts end astrology gives us important indicator truth humanity destiny ancient belief stars divine powers shaped even determined fate men nations supplanted truth matter pope writes star determines childs destiny child father whose reveal truth man man directs star skeptical cynical truth self postmodernity puts center everything pope calls true anthropological revolution human nature assumed god revealed gods onlybegotten son greater powers material world greater entire universe takes humanity seriously richard dawkins benedict xvi jesus nazareth infancy narratives ends brief explication gospel passage comforted generations parents dealing mysteries teenagers curious episode finding young jesus temple annunciation benedicts accent freedom rightly understood kind freedom leads rather away authentic piety first recorded exercising human freedom young jesus neither defying parents challenging jewish piety day pope writes jesus freedom freedom liberal freedom imperial autonomous self freedom son thus freedom truly devout person jesus brings new freedom freedom someone obligations freedom someone totally united fathers someone helps mankind attain freedom inner oneness god thus culmination christmas story gospels infancy narratives offers americans wisdom benedict xvi something important ponder indeed entire west consider true meaning freedom liberating power obligation verge seem likely challenging years ahead george weigel distinguished senior fellow ethics public policy center washington dc holds eppcs william e simon chair catholic studies | 936 |
<p>In the time between sets at the Hollywood Bowl Sunday night before <a href="http://variety.com/t/solange/" type="external">Solange</a> took the stage to close out a KCRW-sponsored “Cosmic Journey” concert, the house lights remained off, maybe to make the venue feel more like an intimate club than an enormous amphitheater. Stevie Wonder’s weirdo one-off soundtrack for “The Secret Life of Plants” played at length over the PA, a reminder of a headier time when soul music really could evoke the cosmos as well as the street.</p>
<p>And then arrived Solange, and suddenly Stevie’s vintage combination of ethereality and grit didn’t seem so impossibly distant after all. The album she’s still touring behind, “A Seat at the Table” (released a year ago this week), didn’t just completely reinvent the younger Knowles sister; it also set a fantastic course for just how many bases R&amp;B can hit going into the future. Its slow-enveloping sound is loose and ambient enough for the late-night KCRW crowd, but Knowles is less interested in accompanying that with Stevie’s photosynthesis than photorealism. It’s a neo-soul think-piece that’s largely about race — half-sleepy, in its musical dreaminess, yet altogether woke.</p>
<p />
<p>Given that race was very much on America’s mind over the weekend, it seemed like a distinct possibility that someone with views as strong as Solange’s might address current events from the stage. She didn’t, although the more pointed songs from “A Seat at the Table” did the talking, with Solange emerging into the crowd to address the black pride anthem “F.U.B.U.” (standing for “for us, by us”) to a pocket of African American fans in the radically diverse audience; later, she wrapped up the show with the self-explanatory “Don’t Touch My Hair,” a song that manages to be warning and celebration all at once.</p>
<p>But if there was any overt color-coding going on during Sunday’s show, it had to do with the mesmerizing stage design and lighting. Solange’s set started off bathed in a warm, subdued orange, shifting later to red, blue, and back again, never getting as bright as any typical concert’s would. She never moved onto more than one hue at a time, either, with these solitary tones proving that monochrome has been severely underrated in concert design. The set itself consisted partly of a giant, stage-spanning staircase, like something out of an MGM musical, even if Busby Berkeley and Vicente Minnelli would have been utterly puzzled by Solange’s 21st century mood lighting. Solange did make grand entrances and exits on that staircase, though it served mostly as a place for eight additional horn players and eight string players to occasionally loiter.</p>
<p>Related Content&#160; <a href="http://variety.com/2017/music/news/solange-hurricane-harvey-benefit-concerts-1202543987/" type="external">Solange Announces Hurricane Harvey Benefit Concerts</a></p>
<p>All those stairs, and the giant overhead orb and stage-side pyramid, stood as reminders of the arty performance that Solange did at New York’s Guggenheim last year. Unlike the small audience for that one, the crowd at the Bowl was not required to wear all white, although Solange and her musicians obliged in that regard. As the set kicked off with some of the most carefully paced tunes from the latest album, Solange and her two backup singers took choreographic minimalism one step more minimal be executing the slightest moves possible, one leg shift at a time, in unison or sequentially, with sudden jerks or head bangs interrupting the simulation of slow motion, even as the four core musicians put a little more swing into the soundtrack. It was a successful exercise in how little it’s possible do on stage and still be captivating.</p>
<p>Of course, art monster or not, Solange didn’t intend to spend the entire show twitching a single muscle every few bars. A sudden, solitary outburst of twerking a couple of songs in assured the audience that not the entire show would count as a museum piece. The funk eventually started flowing among Solange and her pair of dancers as well as the four core musicians, until the queenly star eventually ended up on her back, legs contorting furiously in the air, like a kid who’d just jumped onto a hotel mattress for the first time. Along the way, as dynamic as the stage became, there were as few stops as possible for anything resembling MTV Awards-era choreography as possible.</p>
<p />
<p>The show’s best moment came during “Some Things Never Seem to F—ing Work,” when Solange picked out a fellow in the front row and sang to him, at length, their noses inches apart, that untouchable hair obscuring her face some as the Bowl cameras moved in for a close-up. Audiences have certainly seen plenty in recent years of superstar divas who invite a dude on-stage and straddle him in a chair, but Solange established that eyeball-to-eyeball intimacy is the most severe straddling a fearless performer can do.</p>
<p>Some attendees might have been happy if the entire set consisted of subdued “Seat at the Table” material, but Solange still has a few too many traditional show-biz instincts in her to quite let an entire live show proceed in that idyllic a lull. So for the second half of her set, she turned to songs from her pre-Raphael Saadiq period, when she was making more conventional R&amp;B/dance-pop — including one song, “Crush,” from her debut, recorded, she pointed out, when she was 15 (she’s now 31), and several from a 2012 EP, “True.” For the latter tunes, she brought out rhythm guitar-playing guest Dev Hynes, who helped craft the ‘80s- and ‘90s-sounding bangers on that mini-LP (and who opened the show as a member of Blood Orange).</p>
<p>The carefully crafted spell of the more cerebral “Seat at the Table” material was broken when Solange busted out the more up-tempo straight-ahead beats and reverted to pre-neo-soul form. At that point, the show evoked cosmic Stevie less than it did SWV. But it was a cathartic break, leaving the exiting crowd on a high from seeing that, beneath the more socially aware and regal persona that’s made Solange a real artist to reckon with, the brattier, booty-shaking princess hasn’t completely gone away.</p> | false | 1 | time sets hollywood bowl sunday night solange took stage close kcrwsponsored cosmic journey concert house lights remained maybe make venue feel like intimate club enormous amphitheater stevie wonders weirdo oneoff soundtrack secret life plants played length pa reminder headier time soul music really could evoke cosmos well street arrived solange suddenly stevies vintage combination ethereality grit didnt seem impossibly distant album shes still touring behind seat table released year ago week didnt completely reinvent younger knowles sister also set fantastic course many bases rampb hit going future slowenveloping sound loose ambient enough latenight kcrw crowd knowles less interested accompanying stevies photosynthesis photorealism neosoul thinkpiece thats largely race halfsleepy musical dreaminess yet altogether woke given race much americas mind weekend seemed like distinct possibility someone views strong solanges might address current events stage didnt although pointed songs seat table talking solange emerging crowd address black pride anthem fubu standing us us pocket african american fans radically diverse audience later wrapped show selfexplanatory dont touch hair song manages warning celebration overt colorcoding going sundays show mesmerizing stage design lighting solanges set started bathed warm subdued orange shifting later red blue back never getting bright typical concerts would never moved onto one hue time either solitary tones proving monochrome severely underrated concert design set consisted partly giant stagespanning staircase like something mgm musical even busby berkeley vicente minnelli would utterly puzzled solanges 21st century mood lighting solange make grand entrances exits staircase though served mostly place eight additional horn players eight string players occasionally loiter related content160 solange announces hurricane harvey benefit concerts stairs giant overhead orb stageside pyramid stood reminders arty performance solange new yorks guggenheim last year unlike small audience one crowd bowl required wear white although solange musicians obliged regard set kicked carefully paced tunes latest album solange two backup singers took choreographic minimalism one step minimal executing slightest moves possible one leg shift time unison sequentially sudden jerks head bangs interrupting simulation slow motion even four core musicians put little swing soundtrack successful exercise little possible stage still captivating course art monster solange didnt intend spend entire show twitching single muscle every bars sudden solitary outburst twerking couple songs assured audience entire show would count museum piece funk eventually started flowing among solange pair dancers well four core musicians queenly star eventually ended back legs contorting furiously air like kid whod jumped onto hotel mattress first time along way dynamic stage became stops possible anything resembling mtv awardsera choreography possible shows best moment came things never seem fing work solange picked fellow front row sang length noses inches apart untouchable hair obscuring face bowl cameras moved closeup audiences certainly seen plenty recent years superstar divas invite dude onstage straddle chair solange established eyeballtoeyeball intimacy severe straddling fearless performer attendees might happy entire set consisted subdued seat table material solange still many traditional showbiz instincts quite let entire live show proceed idyllic lull second half set turned songs preraphael saadiq period making conventional rampbdancepop including one song crush debut recorded pointed 15 shes 31 several 2012 ep true latter tunes brought rhythm guitarplaying guest dev hynes helped craft 80s 90ssounding bangers minilp opened show member blood orange carefully crafted spell cerebral seat table material broken solange busted uptempo straightahead beats reverted preneosoul form point show evoked cosmic stevie less swv cathartic break leaving exiting crowd high seeing beneath socially aware regal persona thats made solange real artist reckon brattier bootyshaking princess hasnt completely gone away | 575 |
<p>Nothing is going to quickly bring peace and prosperity to Syria. But continuing to do what we know makes matters worse has to end.</p>
<p>Statement by David Swanson as Director of World Beyond War at DC press conference August 8, 2017.</p>
<p>I won’t have time to list all the reasons I want U.S. military planes and drones out of Syrian skies much less all the reasons people have noted in comments on our petition, but there’s no question what my first reason is, although it’s not a reason always given much weight here in Washington.</p>
<p>These planes kill a lot of people. The U.S. military’s casualty figures have such a record of error that I would trust them about as far as I could throw a Pentagon contract. Airwars identifies thousands of civilian deaths from U.S. and allied planes (4,734 to 7,337 in Syria and Iraq). And such counts generally turn out to be many times under the counts that comprehensive post-war studies arrive at. On top of which we have the problem of all the people killed who are not counted by virtue of not being labeled civilian — always an empirically and morally iffy labeling process. Then there are the injuries that almost always outnumber the deaths, the homelessness, the extremely longterm effects of the U.S. use of depleted uranium fired from some of those planes we want removed, the starvation that could have been prevented for a fraction of the cost of the planes, and of course the top killer of U.S. troops: suicide.</p>
<p>The primary reason that what would otherwise be considered mass murder is given little heed is that it is understood to serve some higher purpose in both the moral and legal senses. But what purpose is served by U.S. planes over Syria? If longer than most major wars of the past isn’t long enough to figure that out, how about a purpose served by bombing Afghanistan or Iraq or Pakistan or Libya or Yemen? Apart from selling weapons and creating more enemies for the next war, what has been accomplished? Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief Michael Scheuer says the more the U.S. fights terrorism the more it creates terrorism. The CIA’s own July 7, 2009, report “ <a href="https://wikileaks.org/cia-hvt-counterinsurgency/WikiLeaks_Secret_CIA_review_of_HVT_Operations.pdf" type="external">Best Practices in Counterinsurgency</a>,” says drone killing is counterproductive. Admiral Dennis Blair, a former director of National Intelligence, says the same. Gen. James E. Cartwright, a former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says drone strikes could be undermining long-term efforts: “We’re seeing that blowback. If you’re trying to kill your way to a solution, no matter how precise you are, you’re going to upset people even if they’re not targeted.” That’s true whether or not the plane has a pilot.</p>
<p>Maintaining the momentum of permanent war is obviously not a high moral purpose. Jodi Rudoren in the New York Times on September 6 reported that “For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad’s government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadis. ‘This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don’t want one to win — we’ll settle for a tie,’ said Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli consul general in New York. ‘Let them both bleed, hemorrhage to death: that’s the strategic thinking here.’”</p>
<p>This endless war for war’s sake may be done in the name of democracy. And you may be able to get television viewers to cheer momentarily for missiles launched from a ship — which have almost all the same problems as those launched from the air — but people in the very same polls that cheer for those missiles say the U.S. should get out of the war. Public pressure was key to preventing the start of a U.S. air war in Syria in 2013. Never has the public or the Congress advocated for or authorized this war. It is a war destructive of the rule of law. Nowhere does the UN Charter or the <a href="" type="internal">Kellogg-Briand Pact</a> permit this action, from air, ground, or water. Special Operations Command chief Army General Raymond Thomas two weeks ago admitted it was illegal. Claiming to defend U.S. troops in Syria against aggression by Syria is not a legal argument for defensiveness but a declaration of imperial lawlessness.</p>
<p>President Obama’s decision to arm and train proxies was against the law, dramatically against public opinion, and against the report he had commissioned from the CIA on whether such efforts had ever succeeded in the past. President Trump’s announcement that he will cease those efforts and henceforth fight on only one side of this war is a nod to reality, law, and possibly decency — given the account of his decision having followed his viewing a video of CIA-backed fighters killing a child. But the war continues to kill children.</p>
<p>This is all before mentioning the risk of apocalyptic nuclear confrontation with Russia as a result of Russia also fighting an immoral, illegal, and counterproductive war in Syria. That alone is reason to remove every U.S. plane or drone.</p>
<p>This is also without considering the environmental damage done to Syria and to our atmosphere. You can drive your car all year and not pollute the sky like one flight of one military plane.</p>
<p>And then there’s the financial cost. National Priorities Project puts the cost of war on ISIS at $16 billion and counting — more than the UN says would be needed annually to have clean drinking water everywhere on earth, and more than half what the UN says it would take to end hunger, not just in Syria, but globally. And this war serves as the top public justification for military spending that adds up to about $1 trillion a year in the U.S. That choice of how to spend our resources kills more people than all current wars put together because of where that money is not spent.</p>
<p>A fraction of that spending could be invested in diplomacy, aid, disarmament, and unarmed peacekeeping to far better effect. These alternatives have been available since day one and still are. The United States <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/1gA/ni0YAA/t.29p/uUmw5TX0QTKA2lBmhE8qMQ/h2/YlMGS4uvouux62qPzG6LKrv1Q2pnAwoMrZbOEWPCcZXbBm6IfIyQPSt5NrMGc6GeWkU4RfBuQgQJXhHMiSkOcEBcuIGMyQ6q029NaU95FlnoauGnKVwtiQcv2cDSdQJOQ5-2BUqyKEyCrhCfqoEFxvf9nJB2cFrq8sv1ErO7p2lXYY4jLCS9okzx1GPLIOjMhvP3dUj4OGcNtt7NW0ppYFI-2Fv5h0g0-2BoIaPKrMmcKHI9-2FSL67yhLDAJh0AWGX5UJlgq-2FpWqts1pEbTadsu0fbXGTO9pw9b7rZr6urfkWU4gLWDqj8aB2Hu-2B6f7nySj3OsynUa3QsJDYX-2FvDwJTZ0Qwuop8zHFH5YhmmJemVQSq5hyDfEIkhmec8EwLjP6HHrlA" type="external">spent years</a> sabotaging UN attempts at peace in Syria. According to Former Finnish president and Nobel peace prize laureate Martti Ahtisaari, the United States <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/1gA/ni0YAA/t.29p/uUmw5TX0QTKA2lBmhE8qMQ/h3/B9l36O5L8ZSJ5Nvvw9Tvth-2BdSkrpThLV3swDSmKzWerwZIopjbRofHkxgl7tzD9aMW1SP84MBPNEMvA-2FyFc57KUi499hlKJnrcKFoVlYUVIn21Ub6he93Huvc9-2BQiNs5fqyvH5TiUyasSz2jIu8HFWGg-2BJ25716nIMxDNIMpT1ZSQLb-2BcN1agkFw4O2NjV0x18hA2uDM-2FjYgzXi5lmiJGVmZtR7wmFpfX7WM6YSP6yLEa0YJ-2FXoPjyd774Le-2BtSJnk2sEOC-2FV-2BnWnF-2FcHdMIUHOKYmrA1PqQItra2Duq6jypxhUDW8-2BeToIS5J-2Fkquj3xQkyjdP0hii-2BwLic-2FoPv5ICnMg8ScxCEzNZQPH2IZmBPTwhlmFscrdXQ2ETDAgeA" type="external">dismissed</a> out of hand a Russian peace proposal for Syria in 2012. The U.S. ruined last year’s ceasefire by firing on Syrian troops.</p>
<p>Nothing is going to quickly bring peace and prosperity to Syria. But continuing to do what we know makes matters worse has to end. We have to give peace a chance.</p>
<p>­This article was originally published at <a href="http://click.actionnetwork.org/mpss/c/1gA/ni0YAA/t.29p/uUmw5TX0QTKA2lBmhE8qMQ/h0/oOrf4U-2FQJ-2Bbavx96gfibBoaNw8rtg-2FRh-2F3YtAM3KAx1n8Dsc6eFAwmUvEbQJ8OyxreZChL1SDgwLsIa6KSGW2pbab0NTNiWDXjYmAEH-2FF3wu0v3qzXWYmZn48wBsOFoJTxNjmB6TQNM7tZtTea8POQWV21aEp942hiDlmN9viyBTMl5RqHPIBBuIBzFJl03Urgbpq-2BBxDDCKpnYuH2PGhWREUlqPQKnXsYkXe1CMl4Rg4CYB3-2BH8Byz3zSPAuliu-2F0E8L-2BTDAe5H4vpKQYom19DU7iu3-2Bsrce8Hf7TkPQF4-3D" type="external">DavidSwanson.org</a>.</p> | false | 1 | nothing going quickly bring peace prosperity syria continuing know makes matters worse end statement david swanson director world beyond war dc press conference august 8 2017 wont time list reasons want us military planes drones syrian skies much less reasons people noted comments petition theres question first reason although reason always given much weight washington planes kill lot people us militarys casualty figures record error would trust far could throw pentagon contract airwars identifies thousands civilian deaths us allied planes 4734 7337 syria iraq counts generally turn many times counts comprehensive postwar studies arrive top problem people killed counted virtue labeled civilian always empirically morally iffy labeling process injuries almost always outnumber deaths homelessness extremely longterm effects us use depleted uranium fired planes want removed starvation could prevented fraction cost planes course top killer us troops suicide primary reason would otherwise considered mass murder given little heed understood serve higher purpose moral legal senses purpose served us planes syria longer major wars past isnt long enough figure purpose served bombing afghanistan iraq pakistan libya yemen apart selling weapons creating enemies next war accomplished former cia bin laden unit chief michael scheuer says us fights terrorism creates terrorism cias july 7 2009 report best practices counterinsurgency says drone killing counterproductive admiral dennis blair former director national intelligence says gen james e cartwright former vice chairman joint chiefs staff says drone strikes could undermining longterm efforts seeing blowback youre trying kill way solution matter precise youre going upset people even theyre targeted thats true whether plane pilot maintaining momentum permanent war obviously high moral purpose jodi rudoren new york times september 6 reported jerusalem status quo horrific may humanitarian perspective seems preferable either victory mr assads government iranian backers strengthening rebel groups increasingly dominated sunni jihadis playoff situation need teams lose least dont want one win well settle tie said alon pinkas former israeli consul general new york let bleed hemorrhage death thats strategic thinking endless war wars sake may done name democracy may able get television viewers cheer momentarily missiles launched ship almost problems launched air people polls cheer missiles say us get war public pressure key preventing start us air war syria 2013 never public congress advocated authorized war war destructive rule law nowhere un charter kelloggbriand pact permit action air ground water special operations command chief army general raymond thomas two weeks ago admitted illegal claiming defend us troops syria aggression syria legal argument defensiveness declaration imperial lawlessness president obamas decision arm train proxies law dramatically public opinion report commissioned cia whether efforts ever succeeded past president trumps announcement cease efforts henceforth fight one side war nod reality law possibly decency given account decision followed viewing video ciabacked fighters killing child war continues kill children mentioning risk apocalyptic nuclear confrontation russia result russia also fighting immoral illegal counterproductive war syria alone reason remove every us plane drone also without considering environmental damage done syria atmosphere drive car year pollute sky like one flight one military plane theres financial cost national priorities project puts cost war isis 16 billion counting un says would needed annually clean drinking water everywhere earth half un says would take end hunger syria globally war serves top public justification military spending adds 1 trillion year us choice spend resources kills people current wars put together money spent fraction spending could invested diplomacy aid disarmament unarmed peacekeeping far better effect alternatives available since day one still united states spent years sabotaging un attempts peace syria according former finnish president nobel peace prize laureate martti ahtisaari united states dismissed hand russian peace proposal syria 2012 us ruined last years ceasefire firing syrian troops nothing going quickly bring peace prosperity syria continuing know makes matters worse end give peace chance article originally published davidswansonorg | 626 |
<p>By Ron Bousso, Simon Jessop and Susanna Twidale</p>
<p>LONDON (Reuters) – The Norwegian sovereign wealth fund’s proposal to ditch its oil and gas shares, though hugely symbolic in the battle against climate change, is unlikely to cause a rush to the exit by major investors in the sector in the short term.</p>
<p>The move by the $1 trillion fund, the world’s largest, rattled stock markets, exposing what is seen as one of the biggest threats to companies such as Royal Dutch Shell (LON:), Exxon Mobil (NYSE:) and BP (LON:) as the world shifts towards renewable energy such as wind and solar.</p>
<p>But in the meantime, expectations of growing global demand for oil and gas for decades to come mean reliance on these companies is likely to continue.</p>
<p>And although the Norwegian initiative will encourage those seeking to hasten the move to a low-carbon economy, the degree to which other investors can follow the fund’s example, at least in the short term, is less clear.</p>
<p>The European oil and gas index fell on Friday to its lowest since late September, extending declines following the Norwegian fund’s announcement.</p>
<p>For some, it was seen as an opening shot in the decline of the 150-year-old sector in the battle to slow global warming and reduce carbon emissions, reminiscent of the demise of coal.</p>
<p>“The investor exit from oil and gas as a fuel source will be slower than coal, but the emissions reduction maths is clear and so this inevitable transition has started,” said Nathan Fabian, director of policy at Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), a United Nations-backed group that represents asset managers with holdings of over $60 trillion.</p>
<p>But other investors do not draw the same parallels.</p>
<p>“I do not see this as the start of a broader trend among major investors,” said Rohan Murphy, energy analyst at Allianz (DE:), which holds shares in several oil majors.</p>
<p>“Coal is a more obvious SRI (sustainable responsible investment) sell compared to oil and gas – coal is dirtier.”</p>
<p>“Gas, which is a big part of all the big oil businesses today, is the answer for the medium-term energy transition to gas from coal for power generation,” Murphy said.</p>
<p>Petroleum companies see as a cleaner alternative to coal for power generation in the effort to wean the world off fossil fuels by the end of the century.</p>
<p>“Many wish for a quick and revolutionary role reversal between the oil and gas industry, and the renewable and new electric industry. But undue haste and an overly ideological approach could bring great economic and social damage,” Total CEO Patrick Pouyanne said in a speech last month.</p>
<p>Also, demand for oil in transportation and plastics is not expected to decline significantly until 2050, according to many forecasts.</p>
<p>The Norwegian announcement came as more than 195 nations met in Bonn, Germany, to decide how to comply with climate targets agreed in Paris in 2015 to limit a rise in global temperatures.</p>
<p>SCALE</p>
<p>But beyond our dependence on oil and gas, the size of the world’s top oil companies would make mass divestment a huge challenge. The top five publicly traded companies – Exxon, Chevron (NYSE:), Shell, BP and Total – together have a market value of over $1 trillion.</p>
<p>Coal companies, on the other hand, have always been smaller.</p>
<p>For now, there is no viable alternative to oil and gas to meet the world’s demand, several investors said.</p>
<p>“My guess is that after the initial market adjustment … the move may not damage the sector’s long-term performance significantly,” said Kevin Gardiner, global investment strategist at Rothschild Wealth Management.</p>
<p>The Norwegian wealth fund’s move, echoing Saudi Arabia’s plan to list part of its national oil company, was aimed at making Norway less exposed to volatile oil prices and less reliant on revenue from fossil fuels.</p>
<p>If approved, it would most likely take years for the Norwegian fund to unwind its large investments in the sector and find new homes for the money.</p>
<p>And while there is also growing demand from retail investors to invest in ‘responsible’ or ‘sustainable’ funds, oil and gas companies are not commonly excluded and any change here would be gradual.</p>
<p>Dropping oil and gas companies would also mean missing out on a rich source of dividend income, a prized asset at a time of low bond yields.</p>
<p>Three – Shell, Exxon and Gazprom (MCX:) – were among the top-10 dividend payers globally in the third quarter.</p>
<p>In absolute terms, the number of oil and gas companies in leading stock indices varies, with 14 in the index of leading European companies, or 2.3 percent; and 26 in the , or 5.2 percent.</p>
<p>The size of some of the largest can have a disproportionate impact on returns relative to their index peers. While there are just two companies in Britain’s blue-chip , for example, they make up 14 percent of the index’s value.</p>
<p>While the Norwegian fund has long been a trend-setter for issues around socially responsible investing, particularly in Scandinavia, the reason for this decision is relatively unique.</p>
<p>Its desire to make treasury receipts less dependent on the oil price is not a challenge faced by most pension funds, which make up a large slice of the money invested globally.</p>
<p>Any decision to ditch oil and gas would arguably leave them less diversified, not more, said investors, although charitable endowments may have more flexibility to do so.</p> | false | 1 | ron bousso simon jessop susanna twidale london reuters norwegian sovereign wealth funds proposal ditch oil gas shares though hugely symbolic battle climate change unlikely cause rush exit major investors sector short term move 1 trillion fund worlds largest rattled stock markets exposing seen one biggest threats companies royal dutch shell lon exxon mobil nyse bp lon world shifts towards renewable energy wind solar meantime expectations growing global demand oil gas decades come mean reliance companies likely continue although norwegian initiative encourage seeking hasten move lowcarbon economy degree investors follow funds example least short term less clear european oil gas index fell friday lowest since late september extending declines following norwegian funds announcement seen opening shot decline 150yearold sector battle slow global warming reduce carbon emissions reminiscent demise coal investor exit oil gas fuel source slower coal emissions reduction maths clear inevitable transition started said nathan fabian director policy principles responsible investment pri united nationsbacked group represents asset managers holdings 60 trillion investors draw parallels see start broader trend among major investors said rohan murphy energy analyst allianz de holds shares several oil majors coal obvious sri sustainable responsible investment sell compared oil gas coal dirtier gas big part big oil businesses today answer mediumterm energy transition gas coal power generation murphy said petroleum companies see cleaner alternative coal power generation effort wean world fossil fuels end century many wish quick revolutionary role reversal oil gas industry renewable new electric industry undue haste overly ideological approach could bring great economic social damage total ceo patrick pouyanne said speech last month also demand oil transportation plastics expected decline significantly 2050 according many forecasts norwegian announcement came 195 nations met bonn germany decide comply climate targets agreed paris 2015 limit rise global temperatures scale beyond dependence oil gas size worlds top oil companies would make mass divestment huge challenge top five publicly traded companies exxon chevron nyse shell bp total together market value 1 trillion coal companies hand always smaller viable alternative oil gas meet worlds demand several investors said guess initial market adjustment move may damage sectors longterm performance significantly said kevin gardiner global investment strategist rothschild wealth management norwegian wealth funds move echoing saudi arabias plan list part national oil company aimed making norway less exposed volatile oil prices less reliant revenue fossil fuels approved would likely take years norwegian fund unwind large investments sector find new homes money also growing demand retail investors invest responsible sustainable funds oil gas companies commonly excluded change would gradual dropping oil gas companies would also mean missing rich source dividend income prized asset time low bond yields three shell exxon gazprom mcx among top10 dividend payers globally third quarter absolute terms number oil gas companies leading stock indices varies 14 index leading european companies 23 percent 26 52 percent size largest disproportionate impact returns relative index peers two companies britains bluechip example make 14 percent indexs value norwegian fund long trendsetter issues around socially responsible investing particularly scandinavia reason decision relatively unique desire make treasury receipts less dependent oil price challenge faced pension funds make large slice money invested globally decision ditch oil gas would arguably leave less diversified said investors although charitable endowments may flexibility | 532 |
<p>After times of only tepid support for President Donald Trump’s agenda, the billionaire Koch brothers are putting their financial muscle behind the White House’s plan to overhaul U.S. taxes.</p>
<p>Two gatherings in Washington this week mark the start of the push, and the network of conservative advocacy groups controlled by the Kochs has already lined up events in 36 states to make sure members of Congress hear the call for lower taxes when they’re home for their August recess.</p>
<p>The move marks a pivot for the Kochs, who didn’t support Trump in 2016 and have come out against some of his policies. The network — joined by many of the nation’s retailers — scored a kill&#160;last week when Republican leaders abandoned&#160;the so-called border-adjusted tax on domestic sales and imports.&#160;</p>
<p>The proposal had driven a wedge between the Koch-affiliated groups and some of their staunchest allies, including BAT advocate House Speaker Paul Ryan.</p>
<p>“We’re committed to achieving legislation that can get to the president’s desk that he can sign,” Americans for Prosperity President Tim Phillips said in an interview. “We are strongly supportive of the blueprint for tax reform that was laid out by the Trump administration.”</p>
<p>Thus far, the administration has released only a one-page plan that was shy of specifics on how to pay for cutting taxes for businesses and individuals. As details take shape, tensions could re-emerge. While the Kochs tend to favor a more purist view of limited government, Republican lawmakers face a political balancing act, which may become more fraught after having failed to unite behind a measure to repeal the Affordable Care Act.</p>
<p>Charles and David Koch built their fortunes from Koch Industries, a Wichita, Kansas-based conglomerate with interests ranging from oil and ranching to farming and the manufacturing of electrical components. They’ve spent decades building a network of wealthy political donors who pledge money to conservative causes and their advocacy groups.</p>
<p>The new-found unity will be on display Monday in Washington when two Koch-funded groups, Freedom Partners and AFP, host Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and White House Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short for a panel discussion on taxes. Two days later, they’ll hold another tax event showcasing Representative Mark Meadows, a North Carolina Republican and ally who is chairman of the House Freedom Caucus.</p>
<p>Other groups that promote smaller government and lower taxes, including the Club for Growth and U.S. Chamber of Commerce, are&#160;also expected to weigh in. The Business Roundtable, a group of leading chief executives, said late last week it will launch a “multimillion-dollar” campaign on tax reform that will include national cable ads and radio spots on 250 stations across the country.</p>
<p>On the tax fight, the Koch groups have a tiered strategy for targeting lawmakers, according to a memo prepared for donors at a summit in Colorado in late June.</p>
<p>The first pot has been labeled the “Persuadables” and includes lawmakers on key tax committees, including Representative Peter Roskam, an Illinois Republican who presides over the Tax Policy Subcommittee. A second group, “Vulnerables,” includes Democrats in states that sometimes lean Republican,&#160;such as Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, who could face challenging 2018 re-election bids. Finally, a group tagged “Champions” includes House and Senate members the Koch network views as allied on the tax issue.</p>
<p>Trump has promised the largest tax cut in history, including a reduction in the 35 percent corporate rate to 15 percent. He’s also called for reducing the number of individual tax rates to three from seven, and cutting the top rate to 35 percent from 39.6 percent — a change that would represent a major reduction for top earners.</p>
<p>Trump’s White House had been promising a more detailed plan — agreed-upon by House and Senate leaders — by early September. Last week, administration officials and congressional leaders released a joint statement outlining their tax principles.</p>
<p>The Koch-aligned groups also want a corporate rate of 15 percent and three brackets for individuals. They’re arguing for five “pillars for principled tax reform” that include “simplicity,” “efficiency,” “equality,” “predictability,” and “no additional burden on taxpayers.”</p>
<p>“We’re urging the Republicans in Congress to really go big on this,” Phillips said. “We would urge doing even more there to get rid of the carve outs and deductions that benefit people at the top of the pyramid and the most powerful individuals and corporations that have the lobbyists and the lawyers who can help them protect themselves.”</p>
<p>Roughly 50 events are planned at the state level in August and September, ranging from town hall-style meetings to policy discussions to phone banks that will contact voters, AFP spokesman Levi Russell said.</p>
<p>Koch-affiliated groups have spent close to $2 million on the tax issue so far this year, Russell said, with virtually all of it being spent on online ads. That figure will “easily double” in the remaining months of 2017 and could eventually include cable or broadcast television ads.</p>
<p>Phillips has met on the tax issue with Mnuchin and Short,&#160;who is a former Freedom Partners president, as well as Vice President Mike Pence, Russell said. “The dialog with the White House is very good,” he added.</p>
<p>That hasn’t always been the case this year. After not supporting Trump in 2016, the Koch network has criticized administration positions, including the proposed travel ban on some refugees and immigrants. Freedom Partners has also warned that Trump’s call for a $1 trillion infrastructure package could become a “spending boondoggle.” And the president’s tendency to target individual companies for criticism, as well as his talk of new tariffs, also clash with the network’s free-market views.</p>
<p>Phillips dismissed questions about whether there’s enough political will and time on the legislative calendar to complete a tax overhaul still this year by saying conventional wisdom in Washington has been repeatedly proven wrong in the past year.</p>
<p>“We understand that by conventional standards, it’s a herculean lift,” he said. “But we do think it’s possible to get this done and get it done this year.”</p> | false | 1 | times tepid support president donald trumps agenda billionaire koch brothers putting financial muscle behind white houses plan overhaul us taxes two gatherings washington week mark start push network conservative advocacy groups controlled kochs already lined events 36 states make sure members congress hear call lower taxes theyre home august recess move marks pivot kochs didnt support trump 2016 come policies network joined many nations retailers scored kill160last week republican leaders abandoned160the socalled borderadjusted tax domestic sales imports160 proposal driven wedge kochaffiliated groups staunchest allies including bat advocate house speaker paul ryan committed achieving legislation get presidents desk sign americans prosperity president tim phillips said interview strongly supportive blueprint tax reform laid trump administration thus far administration released onepage plan shy specifics pay cutting taxes businesses individuals details take shape tensions could reemerge kochs tend favor purist view limited government republican lawmakers face political balancing act may become fraught failed unite behind measure repeal affordable care act charles david koch built fortunes koch industries wichita kansasbased conglomerate interests ranging oil ranching farming manufacturing electrical components theyve spent decades building network wealthy political donors pledge money conservative causes advocacy groups newfound unity display monday washington two kochfunded groups freedom partners afp host treasury secretary steven mnuchin white house director legislative affairs marc short panel discussion taxes two days later theyll hold another tax event showcasing representative mark meadows north carolina republican ally chairman house freedom caucus groups promote smaller government lower taxes including club growth us chamber commerce are160also expected weigh business roundtable group leading chief executives said late last week launch multimilliondollar campaign tax reform include national cable ads radio spots 250 stations across country tax fight koch groups tiered strategy targeting lawmakers according memo prepared donors summit colorado late june first pot labeled persuadables includes lawmakers key tax committees including representative peter roskam illinois republican presides tax policy subcommittee second group vulnerables includes democrats states sometimes lean republican160such senator tammy baldwin wisconsin could face challenging 2018 reelection bids finally group tagged champions includes house senate members koch network views allied tax issue trump promised largest tax cut history including reduction 35 percent corporate rate 15 percent hes also called reducing number individual tax rates three seven cutting top rate 35 percent 396 percent change would represent major reduction top earners trumps white house promising detailed plan agreedupon house senate leaders early september last week administration officials congressional leaders released joint statement outlining tax principles kochaligned groups also want corporate rate 15 percent three brackets individuals theyre arguing five pillars principled tax reform include simplicity efficiency equality predictability additional burden taxpayers urging republicans congress really go big phillips said would urge even get rid carve outs deductions benefit people top pyramid powerful individuals corporations lobbyists lawyers help protect roughly 50 events planned state level august september ranging town hallstyle meetings policy discussions phone banks contact voters afp spokesman levi russell said kochaffiliated groups spent close 2 million tax issue far year russell said virtually spent online ads figure easily double remaining months 2017 could eventually include cable broadcast television ads phillips met tax issue mnuchin short160who former freedom partners president well vice president mike pence russell said dialog white house good added hasnt always case year supporting trump 2016 koch network criticized administration positions including proposed travel ban refugees immigrants freedom partners also warned trumps call 1 trillion infrastructure package could become spending boondoggle presidents tendency target individual companies criticism well talk new tariffs also clash networks freemarket views phillips dismissed questions whether theres enough political time legislative calendar complete tax overhaul still year saying conventional wisdom washington repeatedly proven wrong past year understand conventional standards herculean lift said think possible get done get done year | 615 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Republicans passed a sweeping tax-cut package Tuesday that slashes rates for businesses and individuals and gives President Donald Trump his first major legislative victory since taking office.</p>
<p>Democrats were united in their opposition to the package, which they said unfairly gives big breaks to businesses and wealthier Americans at the expense of middle- and working-class families. They also criticized the measure for adding a projected $1.5 trillion to the nation’s debt.</p>
<p>But the bill, which will impact Nevada communities, businesses and residents, was pushed through Congress by Republicans who campaigned on tax reform and reducing the corporate rate. Republicans maintain that the tax overhaul will spur economic growth and job creation and increase American wages.</p>
<p>The House passed the bill 227-203, largely along party lines. The Senate followed with a 51-48 vote.</p>
<p>Three items in the bill were taken out after the Senate parliamentarian ruled they violated budget rules. The House has scheduled another vote Wednesday to agree to the changes and move the bill to the president, who is expected to sign it soon.</p>
<p>Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., called the package of tax cuts one that helps people of all incomes, with all seven brackets seeing reductions in rates and the standard deduction nearly doubled to $12,000 for single filers and $24,000 for couples.</p>
<p>“We take money out of the pockets in Washington and put it in the pockets of middle-class Americans,” McConnell said.</p>
<p>Republican leaders touted the measure as one that would make U.S. corporations more competitive, prompting investment to create jobs and raise salaries. They said it was needed following a sluggish economic rebound from the Great Recession.</p>
<p>House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said the tax bill would help the country “get back to real sustained growth.” The corporate tax rate would be permanently reduced from 35 percent to 21 percent.</p>
<p>Nevada delegation votes party line</p>
<p>Tax cuts in the bill for individuals would phase out and households earning less than $75,000 would see an increase in taxes in 2027 if the cuts are not made permanent.</p>
<p>Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., paraphrased the actor Clint Eastwood in describing Republican promises of tax relief for average Americans as “pissing on our boots and calling it rain.”</p>
<p>She said state and local programs would be on the chopping block because of a reduction in revenue.</p>
<p>Nevada’s congressional delegation voted along party lines in the House and the Senate.</p>
<p>Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., and Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., voted with their respective parties.</p>
<p>In a Senate floor speech, Heller said the tax cuts would help those in Nevada, where the median income is $7,000 lower today than in 2007.</p>
<p>“So it’s fair to say that — in Nevada at least — the recession has never really ended,” Heller said.</p>
<p>In the House, Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nev., voted for the measure, while Democrats Titus, Rep. Jacky Rosen and Rep. Ruben Kihuen voted against it.</p>
<p>The bill would repeal the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, eliminating the tax penalty for those who do not purchase health insurance.</p>
<p>While Republicans championed that change as removing a mandate on Americans to purchase a product they may not want, Democrats argued the repeal would fundamentally cripple the system that provides subsidies that allow the most vulnerable to buy insurance plans.</p>
<p>Rosen said that “reckless” repeal would “spike premiums and cause thousands of Nevadans in my district to no longer have health insurance.”</p>
<p>McConnell said the Senate would act on legislation to stabilize the insurance markets, a concession sought by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, for her vote on the bill.</p>
<p>Still, eliminating the mandate is expected to result in 13 million more Americans without insurance coverage by 2027, and a 10 percent increase in premiums on public exchanges each year, according to the Congressional Budget Office.</p>
<p>Entitlement reform next?</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Kihuen said the rising debt would also force cuts in Social Security, Medicare and other social programs. Senate Republicans have vowed to waive rules that would force mandatory cuts in social programs because of the tax bill.</p>
<p>But Ryan and other GOP leaders said the House will eye entitlement reform next year with the aim of reducing federal spending on social programs.</p>
<p>Recent public opinion polls show the majority of Americans disapprove of the GOP tax plan. A Monmouth University poll released Monday showed those surveyed 2-to-1 against the plan. Those that said they disliked the plan characterized it as one that benefits the wealthy.</p>
<p>Democrats said they plan to use the unpopular tax package against Republicans at the polls. GOP lawmakers, however, campaigned on tax reform and cuts, and Senate Republicans said before the vote that delivering on that promise would have a popular result.</p>
<p>Republican lawmakers, and Trump, also see the tax overhaul as a victory following missteps and failure to repeal Obamacare after nine years of promising to do so.</p>
<p>Heller, who faces GOP primary opposition from Las Vegas lawyer Danny Tarkanian, has trumpeted his input from his seat on the Senate Finance Committee, which wrote the Senate version of the bill.</p>
<p>Rosen is seeking the Democratic Party nomination for the Senate seat held by Heller, the only Republican running for re-election in a state that was carried by Hillary Clinton in 2016.</p>
<p>Heller pushed a doubling of the child tax credit to $2,000 and a provision that makes it easier for companies to reward employees with stock options.</p>
<p>The Nevada Republican said he also worked to prevent the final bill from including House language that would have eliminated the tax-exempt status of bonds used to finance sports stadiums, like the $1.9 billion facility in Las Vegas for the NFL Raiders franchise.</p>
<p>Titus also sought to block that House language, despite her opposition to the bill.</p>
<p>Cortez Masto criticized Republicans for failing to consult with tribal leaders when crafting the plan and including tax parity to tribal governments.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at <a href="" type="internal">[email protected]</a> or 202-662-7390. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | washington republicans passed sweeping taxcut package tuesday slashes rates businesses individuals gives president donald trump first major legislative victory since taking office democrats united opposition package said unfairly gives big breaks businesses wealthier americans expense middle workingclass families also criticized measure adding projected 15 trillion nations debt bill impact nevada communities businesses residents pushed congress republicans campaigned tax reform reducing corporate rate republicans maintain tax overhaul spur economic growth job creation increase american wages house passed bill 227203 largely along party lines senate followed 5148 vote three items bill taken senate parliamentarian ruled violated budget rules house scheduled another vote wednesday agree changes move bill president expected sign soon senate majority leader mitch mcconnell rky called package tax cuts one helps people incomes seven brackets seeing reductions rates standard deduction nearly doubled 12000 single filers 24000 couples take money pockets washington put pockets middleclass americans mcconnell said republican leaders touted measure one would make us corporations competitive prompting investment create jobs raise salaries said needed following sluggish economic rebound great recession house speaker paul ryan rwis said tax bill would help country get back real sustained growth corporate tax rate would permanently reduced 35 percent 21 percent nevada delegation votes party line tax cuts bill individuals would phase households earning less 75000 would see increase taxes 2027 cuts made permanent rep dina titus dnev paraphrased actor clint eastwood describing republican promises tax relief average americans pissing boots calling rain said state local programs would chopping block reduction revenue nevadas congressional delegation voted along party lines house senate sen dean heller rnev sen catherine cortez masto dnev voted respective parties senate floor speech heller said tax cuts would help nevada median income 7000 lower today 2007 fair say nevada least recession never really ended heller said house rep mark amodei rnev voted measure democrats titus rep jacky rosen rep ruben kihuen voted bill would repeal individual mandate affordable care act known obamacare eliminating tax penalty purchase health insurance republicans championed change removing mandate americans purchase product may want democrats argued repeal would fundamentally cripple system provides subsidies allow vulnerable buy insurance plans rosen said reckless repeal would spike premiums cause thousands nevadans district longer health insurance mcconnell said senate would act legislation stabilize insurance markets concession sought sen susan collins rmaine vote bill still eliminating mandate expected result 13 million americans without insurance coverage 2027 10 percent increase premiums public exchanges year according congressional budget office entitlement reform next meanwhile kihuen said rising debt would also force cuts social security medicare social programs senate republicans vowed waive rules would force mandatory cuts social programs tax bill ryan gop leaders said house eye entitlement reform next year aim reducing federal spending social programs recent public opinion polls show majority americans disapprove gop tax plan monmouth university poll released monday showed surveyed 2to1 plan said disliked plan characterized one benefits wealthy democrats said plan use unpopular tax package republicans polls gop lawmakers however campaigned tax reform cuts senate republicans said vote delivering promise would popular result republican lawmakers trump also see tax overhaul victory following missteps failure repeal obamacare nine years promising heller faces gop primary opposition las vegas lawyer danny tarkanian trumpeted input seat senate finance committee wrote senate version bill rosen seeking democratic party nomination senate seat held heller republican running reelection state carried hillary clinton 2016 heller pushed doubling child tax credit 2000 provision makes easier companies reward employees stock options nevada republican said also worked prevent final bill including house language would eliminated taxexempt status bonds used finance sports stadiums like 19 billion facility las vegas nfl raiders franchise titus also sought block house language despite opposition bill cortez masto criticized republicans failing consult tribal leaders crafting plan including tax parity tribal governments contact gary martin gmartinreviewjournalcom 2026627390 follow garymartindc twitter | 632 |
<p>Frequent candidate Danny Tarkanian said Tuesday he will challenge fellow Republican Dean Heller, Nevada’s vulnerable incumbent senator, in 2018.</p>
<p>In a statement announcing his candidacy, Tarkanian said Heller “turned his back on us.”</p>
<p>“I think Dean Heller’s changed his position on so many different votes that he’s lost so much credibility with the voters,” Tarkanian said in an interview with the Review-Journal. “He keeps breaking his promise to voters in Nevada. They feel they can’t trust him anymore.”</p>
<p>Heller’s campaign dismissed Tarkanian as a “perennial candidate.”</p>
<p>“Nevada voters have rejected him every time — including less than a year ago against Jacky Rosen,” Heller’s campaign spokesman Tommy Ferraro said in a statement. “He’s wasted conservatives’ time and cost the Republican Party seats up and down the ballot. If he ultimately files for U.S. Senate he will lose in the primary.”</p>
<p>Tough primary ahead</p>
<p>Tarkanian’s announcement sets up a tough primary battle with Heller, who has faced recent pressure from both Democrat and Republican groups. U.S. Rep. Jacky Rosen, a Democrat, <a href="" type="internal">also wants the seat</a>.</p>
<p>Heller was considered vulnerable before Tarkanian announced his intentions, partly due to the Senate’s failed attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also called Obamacare.</p>
<p>After pushing for most of his senate career to repeal the health care law, Heller changed his approach in June, when joined Gov. Brian Sandoval to publicly oppose a proposal to repeal Obamacare. The move sparked the America First Policies super PAC, which is run by President Donald Trump’s former campaign advisers, to launch a $1 million ad campaign against him the next day.</p>
<p>That ad campaign was cut short, but during a July meeting in which Trump attempted to persuade GOP senators to repeal Obamacare, the president issued a not-so-veiled threat to Heller.</p>
<p>Trump, sitting next to Heller, remarked “He wants to remain a senator, doesn’t he?” as Heller grinned.</p>
<p>Despite voting in line with his party for the for the Senate’s so-called “skinny repeal,” Nevada voters are unhappy with Heller, according to recent polls.</p>
<p>A survey by <a href="http://ourlivesontheline.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/NV-July-31-Toplines-1.pdf" type="external">Public Policy Polling</a> showed that 22 percent approve of Heller’s job performance, compared to 55 percent who disapproved.</p>
<p>Strategic National, a Republican-leaning consulting firm, reported that Heller’s approval rating among Nevada Republicans is 31 percent, according to <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/07/exclusive-new-poll-shows-nevadas-dean-heller-is-vulnerable-in-gop-primary/" type="external">The Daily Caller.</a> That poll also found that 43 percent of Nevada GOP voters disapprove of Heller.</p>
<p>The Strategic National poll also pitted Heller and Tarkanian against each other, with 38 percent support to Heller and 34 percent to Tarkanian. The results fell within the poll’s 4.4 percent margin of error.</p>
<p>The Senate GOP’s campaign arm released a statement soon after Tarkanian announced his run, saying it stands firmly with Nevada’s senior senator. Heller was appointed to the Senate in 2011 and won re-election in 2012.</p>
<p>“Time and again, Senator Dean Heller has proven he is unafraid to put Nevadans first,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee spokesman Michael McAdams. “The NRSC fully supports Senator Heller in his primary and general elections, and we are confident he will be re-elected.”</p>
<p>Tarkanian with Trump</p>
<p>In a statement, Tarkanian said he is “proudly on the team of President Trump,” and supports Trump’s policies to repeal Obamacare, end sanctuary cities and defund Planned Parenthood.</p>
<p>Tarkanian accused Heller of helping Hillary Clinton win Nevada last year by being a “Never Trumper,” and blasted him for his stances on the GOP’s multiple pushes to repeal Obamacare.</p>
<p>Tarkanian said he not spoken to any third-party groups about support. A spokeswoman for America First Policies did not respond to requests for comment.</p>
<p>Tarkanian’s history</p>
<p>Tarkanian, the son of the legendary UNLV basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian, is a businessman and attorney who has run unsuccessfully for secretary of state, state senate and the U.S. House and Senate. He won the Republican nomination in four of those five runs.</p>
<p>He did not make the general election in 2011 — when he last ran for U.S. Senate.</p>
<p>Tarkanian lost that GOP primary, coming in third to former state Sen. Sue Lowden and eventual nominee Sharron Angle. Angle went on to lose to Harry Reid in the general election.</p>
<p>But, Tarkanian is coming off the closest election of his career.</p>
<p>He defeated the party-favored Michael Roberson in last year’s GOP primary for Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District before losing to Rosen in the general by less than 1.5 percentage points. Tarkanian’s three previous general election losses were by about 8 percentage points.</p>
<p>If Tarkanian and Rosen face off in November, he said he intends to use a pending defamation lawsuit he filed against her and her campaign.</p>
<p>The lawsuit centers on television and social media ads that used Tarkanian’s past role as the registered agent for companies that acted as fronts for fraudulent charities. One ad, for example, said “seniors lost millions from scams Danny Tarkanian helped set up.” Registered agents typically have a limited role and do not deal in day-to-day operations. Similar ads were used against Tarkanian in his other election bids.</p>
<p>“Jacky Rosen ran her whole campaign against me using defamatory attacks. She went as low as possible to get elected,” Tarkanian said.</p>
<p>Rosen spokeswoman Ivana Brancaccio said the congresswoman is confident the lawsuit will be dismissed.</p>
<p>“While Danny Tarkanian is clearly playing political games, Congresswoman Rosen is serving her constituents and fighting for Nevada,” Brancaccio said.</p>
<p>Contact Colton Lochhead at [email protected] or 702-383-4638. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/ColtonLochhead" type="external">@ColtonLochhead</a> on Twitter. Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley @reviewjournal.com or 775-461-3820. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/seanw801" type="external">@seanw801</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | frequent candidate danny tarkanian said tuesday challenge fellow republican dean heller nevadas vulnerable incumbent senator 2018 statement announcing candidacy tarkanian said heller turned back us think dean hellers changed position many different votes hes lost much credibility voters tarkanian said interview reviewjournal keeps breaking promise voters nevada feel cant trust anymore hellers campaign dismissed tarkanian perennial candidate nevada voters rejected every time including less year ago jacky rosen hellers campaign spokesman tommy ferraro said statement hes wasted conservatives time cost republican party seats ballot ultimately files us senate lose primary tough primary ahead tarkanians announcement sets tough primary battle heller faced recent pressure democrat republican groups us rep jacky rosen democrat also wants seat heller considered vulnerable tarkanian announced intentions partly due senates failed attempts repeal affordable care act also called obamacare pushing senate career repeal health care law heller changed approach june joined gov brian sandoval publicly oppose proposal repeal obamacare move sparked america first policies super pac run president donald trumps former campaign advisers launch 1 million ad campaign next day ad campaign cut short july meeting trump attempted persuade gop senators repeal obamacare president issued notsoveiled threat heller trump sitting next heller remarked wants remain senator doesnt heller grinned despite voting line party senates socalled skinny repeal nevada voters unhappy heller according recent polls survey public policy polling showed 22 percent approve hellers job performance compared 55 percent disapproved strategic national republicanleaning consulting firm reported hellers approval rating among nevada republicans 31 percent according daily caller poll also found 43 percent nevada gop voters disapprove heller strategic national poll also pitted heller tarkanian 38 percent support heller 34 percent tarkanian results fell within polls 44 percent margin error senate gops campaign arm released statement soon tarkanian announced run saying stands firmly nevadas senior senator heller appointed senate 2011 reelection 2012 time senator dean heller proven unafraid put nevadans first said national republican senatorial committee spokesman michael mcadams nrsc fully supports senator heller primary general elections confident reelected tarkanian trump statement tarkanian said proudly team president trump supports trumps policies repeal obamacare end sanctuary cities defund planned parenthood tarkanian accused heller helping hillary clinton win nevada last year never trumper blasted stances gops multiple pushes repeal obamacare tarkanian said spoken thirdparty groups support spokeswoman america first policies respond requests comment tarkanians history tarkanian son legendary unlv basketball coach jerry tarkanian businessman attorney run unsuccessfully secretary state state senate us house senate republican nomination four five runs make general election 2011 last ran us senate tarkanian lost gop primary coming third former state sen sue lowden eventual nominee sharron angle angle went lose harry reid general election tarkanian coming closest election career defeated partyfavored michael roberson last years gop primary nevadas 3rd congressional district losing rosen general less 15 percentage points tarkanians three previous general election losses 8 percentage points tarkanian rosen face november said intends use pending defamation lawsuit filed campaign lawsuit centers television social media ads used tarkanians past role registered agent companies acted fronts fraudulent charities one ad example said seniors lost millions scams danny tarkanian helped set registered agents typically limited role deal daytoday operations similar ads used tarkanian election bids jacky rosen ran whole campaign using defamatory attacks went low possible get elected tarkanian said rosen spokeswoman ivana brancaccio said congresswoman confident lawsuit dismissed danny tarkanian clearly playing political games congresswoman rosen serving constituents fighting nevada brancaccio said contact colton lochhead clochheadreviewjournalcom 7023834638 follow coltonlochhead twitter contact sean whaley swhaley reviewjournalcom 7754613820 follow seanw801 twitter | 581 |
<p>By Dion Rabouin</p>
<p>NEW YORK (Reuters) – In their hunt for yield, some investors have been venturing into offerings as exotic as Tajikistan’s sovereign bond or Iraq’s first sovereign debt sale without U.S. backing in more than a decade only to find out that even those are pricey and hard to get.</p>
<p>Even as emerging markets bonds lost some ground in recent weeks in the secondary market, primary offers from Panamanian bank Multibank Inc , the Bahamas, and a 30-year Nigerian bond have been well oversubscribed, following a trend of lower sovereign and corporate yields.</p>
<p>The sellers’ market is good news for emerging market borrowers, giving them access to funds at rates once afforded only to “investment grade” issuers. But it could lead to mispricing of riskier assets and threaten valuations in the long-term by encouraging borrowers to cut coupons on future issues.</p>
<p>Right now it is forcing some funds to scale back.</p>
<p>Samy Muaddi, a portfolio manager of T Rowe Price’s Emerging Markets Corporate Bond Fund, said he has reduced his purchases of initial bond offerings as 2017 has progressed.</p>
<p>“We have been more selective in our new issue participation rate for single B credit including Latin American airlines and Chinese real estate,” he said.</p>
<p>Fund managers prefer new issues, particularly on corporate debt or debt issued by countries without a solid repayment history, because they typically sell at a discount to the secondary market. That has not been the case recently, Muaddi said, noting that the percentage of new issues in his fund has dropped from about 20 percent of purchases to 12-15 percent.</p>
<p>Asset managers of dedicated emerging markets funds say the mispricing largely has been caused by “tourist” dollars rushing in from passive funds and non-specialized money managers, such as hedge funds or high-yield funds, chasing higher returns.</p>
<p>“It’s frustrating for me as an investor,” said Josephine Shea, portfolio manager at Standish Mellon Asset Management Company LLC. “There seems to be quite a bit of indiscriminate buying without looking into underlying fundamentals.”</p>
<p>The difference between emerging market bonds yields &lt;.JPMEPR&gt; and yields for U.S. Treasuries has widened over the past couple months, most recently touching 339 basis points as the U.S. dollar strengthened and local factors weighed on countries in Latin America and the Middle East.</p>
<p>However, that number is 35 basis points tighter than the 16-year historical average and comes after spreads compressed to their tightest in three years in mid-October.</p>
<p>BELOW FAIR VALUE</p>
<p>Shea said that recently bond deals in India and elsewhere in Asia have been 10 times oversubscribed and that the firm has had to drop out of corporate and even frontier market sovereign bond issues because the final interest rates have fallen well below the firm’s assessment of fair value.</p>
<p>In previous years, Shea said, bonds would typically be two to four times oversubscribed.</p>
<p>Even when they do participate in offerings, some managers say they get less than they want because of high demand. Increasing supply would ease the crunch, but investors say the amounts are already significant for some issuers. For example, Tajikistan sold $500 million in bonds, which is a lot considering the central Asian nation’s annual economic output is about $7 billion.</p>
<p>Jim Barrineau, head of emerging markets debt at Schroders (LON:), said he has been buying “smaller, less well-known” names and boosting emerging market corporate debt, eschewing stalwarts like Brazil, Mexico and Russia. Among his additions are international telecoms company Millicom International Cellular SA (ST:) and mobile provider Digicel Group LTD , which focus on emerging economies.</p>
<p>While portfolio managers talk of “overcrowding,” many still plan to boost their emerging market debt holdings, expecting inflows to keep recovering after worries about the global effects of the U.S. Federal Reserve’s policy tightening kept investment subdued between 2013 and 2016.</p>
<p>This year, emerging market portfolio debt inflows are seen more than doubling to $242 billion from $102 billion in 2016, data from the Institute for International Finance shows. (Graphic: http://tmsnrt.rs/2AlLT2A)</p>
<p>“Any time you have a market that has had the type of performance that EM debt has had over last 18 months there’s going to be some trepidation, but it’s important to look at fundamentals,” said Arif Joshi, emerging markets debt portfolio manager at Lazard Asset Management.</p>
<p>Joshi noted accelerating growth, narrowing current account deficits and a shift to sounder economic policies in several emerging economies.</p>
<p>Similarly, Jan Dehn, head of research at Ashmore Investment Management, said he saw the recent pullback as part of a seasonal pattern and was using it to boost his positions.</p>
<p>“EM is still very, very attractive,” Dehn said. “Our plan is to buy more.”</p>
<p>Such optimism has prompted some managers, including T Rowe’s Muaddi and Paul McNamara, investment director at GAM, to direct funds to some less volatile and more liquid emerging market issuers.</p>
<p>“The sheer enthusiasm with which people are throwing money at EM,” said McNamara, “makes us cautious.”</p> | false | 1 | dion rabouin new york reuters hunt yield investors venturing offerings exotic tajikistans sovereign bond iraqs first sovereign debt sale without us backing decade find even pricey hard get even emerging markets bonds lost ground recent weeks secondary market primary offers panamanian bank multibank inc bahamas 30year nigerian bond well oversubscribed following trend lower sovereign corporate yields sellers market good news emerging market borrowers giving access funds rates afforded investment grade issuers could lead mispricing riskier assets threaten valuations longterm encouraging borrowers cut coupons future issues right forcing funds scale back samy muaddi portfolio manager rowe prices emerging markets corporate bond fund said reduced purchases initial bond offerings 2017 progressed selective new issue participation rate single b credit including latin american airlines chinese real estate said fund managers prefer new issues particularly corporate debt debt issued countries without solid repayment history typically sell discount secondary market case recently muaddi said noting percentage new issues fund dropped 20 percent purchases 1215 percent asset managers dedicated emerging markets funds say mispricing largely caused tourist dollars rushing passive funds nonspecialized money managers hedge funds highyield funds chasing higher returns frustrating investor said josephine shea portfolio manager standish mellon asset management company llc seems quite bit indiscriminate buying without looking underlying fundamentals difference emerging market bonds yields ltjpmeprgt yields us treasuries widened past couple months recently touching 339 basis points us dollar strengthened local factors weighed countries latin america middle east however number 35 basis points tighter 16year historical average comes spreads compressed tightest three years midoctober fair value shea said recently bond deals india elsewhere asia 10 times oversubscribed firm drop corporate even frontier market sovereign bond issues final interest rates fallen well firms assessment fair value previous years shea said bonds would typically two four times oversubscribed even participate offerings managers say get less want high demand increasing supply would ease crunch investors say amounts already significant issuers example tajikistan sold 500 million bonds lot considering central asian nations annual economic output 7 billion jim barrineau head emerging markets debt schroders lon said buying smaller less wellknown names boosting emerging market corporate debt eschewing stalwarts like brazil mexico russia among additions international telecoms company millicom international cellular sa st mobile provider digicel group ltd focus emerging economies portfolio managers talk overcrowding many still plan boost emerging market debt holdings expecting inflows keep recovering worries global effects us federal reserves policy tightening kept investment subdued 2013 2016 year emerging market portfolio debt inflows seen doubling 242 billion 102 billion 2016 data institute international finance shows graphic httptmsnrtrs2allt2a time market type performance em debt last 18 months theres going trepidation important look fundamentals said arif joshi emerging markets debt portfolio manager lazard asset management joshi noted accelerating growth narrowing current account deficits shift sounder economic policies several emerging economies similarly jan dehn head research ashmore investment management said saw recent pullback part seasonal pattern using boost positions em still attractive dehn said plan buy optimism prompted managers including rowes muaddi paul mcnamara investment director gam direct funds less volatile liquid emerging market issuers sheer enthusiasm people throwing money em said mcnamara makes us cautious | 519 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is recommending that six of 27 national monuments <a href="" type="internal">under review by the Trump administration</a> be reduced in size, with changes to several others proposed.</p>
<p>A leaked memo from Zinke to President Donald Trump recommends that two Utah monuments — Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante — be reduced, along with <a href="" type="internal">Southern Nevada’s Gold Butte</a> and Oregon’s Cascade-Siskiyou.</p>
<p>Two marine monuments in the Pacific Ocean also would be reduced under Zinke’s memo, which has not been officially released. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the memo, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.</p>
<p>Trump ordered the review earlier this year after complaining about improper “land grabs” by former presidents, including Barack Obama.</p>
<p>National monument designations add protections for lands revered for their natural beauty and historical significance with the goal of preserving them for future generations. The restrictions aren’t as stringent as national parks, but some policies include limits on mining, timber cutting and recreational activities such as riding off-road vehicles.</p>
<p>The monuments under review were designated by four presidents over the last two decades. Several are about the size of the state of Delaware, including Mojave Trails in California, Grand-Staircase Escalante in Utah and <a href="" type="internal">Bears Ears, which is on sacred tribal land.</a></p>
<p>&lt;img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/stephens-media/image/upload/v1501399003/monumentsweb.jpg" alt="(Las Vegas Review-Journal)"&gt;</p>
<p>Zinke talks boundary adjustments</p>
<p>No other president has tried to eliminate a monument, but some have trimmed and redrawn boundaries 18 times, according to the National Park Service.</p>
<p>Zinke told the AP last month that <a href="" type="internal">unspecified boundary adjustments for some monuments designated over the past four decades</a> will be included in the recommendations submitted to Trump. None of the sites would revert to new ownership, he said, while public access for uses such as hunting, fishing or grazing would be maintained or restored.</p>
<p>He also spoke of protecting tribal interests and historical land grants, pointing to monuments in New Mexico, where Hispanic ranchers have opposed two monuments proclaimed by Obama.</p>
<p>Zinke declined to say whether portions of the monuments would be opened up to oil and gas drilling, mining, logging and other industries for which Trump has advocated. It was not clear from the memo how much energy development would be allowed on the sites recommended for changes, although the memo cites increased public access as a key goal.</p>
<p>A spokeswoman for Zinke referred questions Sunday night to the White House, which did not offer immediate comment.</p>
<p>Eroding Obama’s legacy</p>
<p>If Trump adopts the recommendations, it would quiet some of the worst fears of his opponents, who warned that vast public lands and marine areas could be lost to states or private interests.</p>
<p>But significant reductions in the size of the monuments, especially those created by Obama, would mark the latest in a string of actions where Trump has sought to erode his Democratic predecessor’s legacy.</p>
<p>The recommendations cap an unprecedented four-month review based on Trump’s claim that the century-old Antiquities Act had been misused by past presidents to create oversized monuments that hinder energy development, grazing and other uses.</p>
<p>Reductions may be challenged</p>
<p>The review raised alarm among conservationists who said protections could be lost for areas that are home to ancient cliff dwellings, towering sequoia trees, deep canyons and ocean habitats. They’ve vowed to file lawsuits if Trump attempts any changes that would reduce the size of monuments or rescind their designations.</p>
<p>Zinke had previously announced that no changes would be made at six national monuments — in Montana, Colorado, Idaho, California, Arizona and Washington. He also said that Bears Ears monument in Utah should be downsized.</p>
<p>In addition to shrinking six monuments, Zinke recommends changes at several other sites, including two national monuments in New Mexico: Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and Rio Grande del Norte.</p>
<p>He also recommended changes to Katahdin Woods and Waters in Maine.</p>
<p>Jamie Williams, president of the Wilderness Society, said the recommendations apparently made by Zinke “represent an unprecedented assault on our parks and public lands” by the Trump administration.</p>
<p>“This callous proposal will needlessly punish local, predominantly rural communities that depend on parks and public lands for outdoor recreation, sustainable jobs and economic growth,” Williams said in a statement.</p>
<p>“We believe the Trump administration has no legal authority to alter or erase protections for national treasures. If President Trump acts in support of these recommendations, The Wilderness Society will move swiftly to challenge those actions in court.”</p>
<p>Zinke’s recommendations</p>
<p>Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has completed his review of 22 national monuments, but his full report has not yet been released. Here are his recommendations, according to a leaked copy of the document.</p>
<p>Unspecified boundary reduction</p>
<p>— Bears Ears, Utah</p>
<p>— Gold Butte, Nevada</p>
<p>— Grand Staircase-Escalante, Utah</p>
<p>— Cascade-Siskiyou, Oregon</p>
<p>Change in management</p>
<p>— Katahdin Woods and Waters, Maine</p>
<p>— Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks, New Mexico</p>
<p>— Rio Grande del Norte, New Mexico</p>
<p>No recommended changes</p>
<p>— Canyons of the Ancients, Colorado</p>
<p>— Craters of the Moon, Idaho</p>
<p>— Hanford Reach, Washington</p>
<p>— Grand Canyon-Parashant, Arizona</p>
<p>— Sand to Snow, California</p>
<p>— Upper Missouri River Breaks, Montana</p>
<p>Reviewed but no recommendations made</p>
<p>— Basin and Range, Nevada</p>
<p>— Berryessa Snow Mountain, California</p>
<p>— Carrizo Plain, California</p>
<p>— Giant Sequoia, California</p>
<p>— Ironwood Forest, Arizona</p>
<p>— Mojave Trails, California</p>
<p>— San Gabriel Mountains, California</p>
<p>— Sonoran Desert, Arizona</p>
<p>—Vermilion Cliffs, Arizona</p>
<p>About Nevada’s new monuments</p>
<p>In his proclamation designating Gold Butte National Monument, President Barack Obama called the region “a landscape of contrast and transition, where dramatically chiseled red sandstone, twisting canyons, and tree-clad mountains punctuate flat stretches of the Mojave Desert.”</p>
<p>Gold Butte encompasses nearly 300,000 acres and was created Dec. 28, 2016.</p>
<p>Basin and Range National Monument was designated in July 2015 and covers 704,000 acres in Lincoln and Nye counties.</p>
<p>Obama’s proclamation said, “The vast, rugged landscape redefines our notions of distance and space and brings into sharp focus the will and resolve of the people who have lived here. The unbroken expanse is an invaluable treasure for our Nation and will continue to serve as an irreplaceable resource for archaeologists, historians, and ecologists for generations to come.”</p>
<p>— Review-Journal reporter Henry Brean contributed to this report.</p>
<p />
<p>Related</p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Democrats, environmental groups ready for battle over national monuments</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Review of Nevada’s national monuments chills legislator</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Congressional Republicans want Nevada monuments cut back</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Groups, Senate Democrats urge Trump to keep monuments intact</a></p>
<p><a href="" type="internal">Comments pour in about review of national monuments in Nevada</a></p>
<p />
<p /> | false | 1 | washington interior secretary ryan zinke recommending six 27 national monuments review trump administration reduced size changes several others proposed leaked memo zinke president donald trump recommends two utah monuments bears ears grand staircase escalante reduced along southern nevadas gold butte oregons cascadesiskiyou two marine monuments pacific ocean also would reduced zinkes memo officially released associated press obtained copy memo first reported wall street journal trump ordered review earlier year complaining improper land grabs former presidents including barack obama national monument designations add protections lands revered natural beauty historical significance goal preserving future generations restrictions arent stringent national parks policies include limits mining timber cutting recreational activities riding offroad vehicles monuments review designated four presidents last two decades several size state delaware including mojave trails california grandstaircase escalante utah bears ears sacred tribal land ltimg srchttpsrescloudinarycomstephensmediaimageuploadv1501399003monumentswebjpg altlas vegas reviewjournalgt zinke talks boundary adjustments president tried eliminate monument trimmed redrawn boundaries 18 times according national park service zinke told ap last month unspecified boundary adjustments monuments designated past four decades included recommendations submitted trump none sites would revert new ownership said public access uses hunting fishing grazing would maintained restored also spoke protecting tribal interests historical land grants pointing monuments new mexico hispanic ranchers opposed two monuments proclaimed obama zinke declined say whether portions monuments would opened oil gas drilling mining logging industries trump advocated clear memo much energy development would allowed sites recommended changes although memo cites increased public access key goal spokeswoman zinke referred questions sunday night white house offer immediate comment eroding obamas legacy trump adopts recommendations would quiet worst fears opponents warned vast public lands marine areas could lost states private interests significant reductions size monuments especially created obama would mark latest string actions trump sought erode democratic predecessors legacy recommendations cap unprecedented fourmonth review based trumps claim centuryold antiquities act misused past presidents create oversized monuments hinder energy development grazing uses reductions may challenged review raised alarm among conservationists said protections could lost areas home ancient cliff dwellings towering sequoia trees deep canyons ocean habitats theyve vowed file lawsuits trump attempts changes would reduce size monuments rescind designations zinke previously announced changes would made six national monuments montana colorado idaho california arizona washington also said bears ears monument utah downsized addition shrinking six monuments zinke recommends changes several sites including two national monuments new mexico organ mountainsdesert peaks rio grande del norte also recommended changes katahdin woods waters maine jamie williams president wilderness society said recommendations apparently made zinke represent unprecedented assault parks public lands trump administration callous proposal needlessly punish local predominantly rural communities depend parks public lands outdoor recreation sustainable jobs economic growth williams said statement believe trump administration legal authority alter erase protections national treasures president trump acts support recommendations wilderness society move swiftly challenge actions court zinkes recommendations interior secretary ryan zinke completed review 22 national monuments full report yet released recommendations according leaked copy document unspecified boundary reduction bears ears utah gold butte nevada grand staircaseescalante utah cascadesiskiyou oregon change management katahdin woods waters maine organ mountainsdesert peaks new mexico rio grande del norte new mexico recommended changes canyons ancients colorado craters moon idaho hanford reach washington grand canyonparashant arizona sand snow california upper missouri river breaks montana reviewed recommendations made basin range nevada berryessa snow mountain california carrizo plain california giant sequoia california ironwood forest arizona mojave trails california san gabriel mountains california sonoran desert arizona vermilion cliffs arizona nevadas new monuments proclamation designating gold butte national monument president barack obama called region landscape contrast transition dramatically chiseled red sandstone twisting canyons treeclad mountains punctuate flat stretches mojave desert gold butte encompasses nearly 300000 acres created dec 28 2016 basin range national monument designated july 2015 covers 704000 acres lincoln nye counties obamas proclamation said vast rugged landscape redefines notions distance space brings sharp focus resolve people lived unbroken expanse invaluable treasure nation continue serve irreplaceable resource archaeologists historians ecologists generations come reviewjournal reporter henry brean contributed report related democrats environmental groups ready battle national monuments review nevadas national monuments chills legislator congressional republicans want nevada monuments cut back groups senate democrats urge trump keep monuments intact comments pour review national monuments nevada | 692 |
<p>Members of the House and Senate, seizing on the anti-Russia climate engulfing Washington like a fog, have authorized billions of dollars to enhance US-NATO military assets in Europe. Hundreds of millions more in “security assistance” is to go to Ukraine.</p>
<p>Russophobia is costing American taxpayers a bundle of money, and US politicians and defense contractors couldn’t be happier.</p>
<p>Tucked deep inside the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act, under a category entitled, “Countering Russian Aggression,” $4.6 billion is casually set aside for the so-called European Deterrence Initiative (EDI) to “reassure NATO allies and enhance the U.S. deterrent and defense postures in Europe.”</p>
<p>Further on, the NDAA calls for $350 million to “provide security assistance to Ukraine, including defensive lethal assistance.” The idea of sending lethal arms to Ukraine, where a civil war is smoldering on Russia’s border, could encourage Kiev once again to resort to violence in a further attempt to resolve the standoff.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/news/408019-escalation-nato-russian-borders/" type="external" /></p>
<p>The explanation given for this intense ratcheting-up of military hardware on Russia’s border is the same one that Washington and Brussels have been selling to NATO members for many years: “Russia’s ongoing aggressive actions — including its invasions of Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2014; threats to North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies; rapid military modernization; advanced anti-access and area denial capabilities; increasing military activity in the Arctic region and Mediterranean Sea; evolving nuclear doctrine and capabilities…”</p>
<p>The problem with that explanation is that it is comprised of either bare-faced lies or gross exaggerations, immediately obvious to anyone with a clear picture of the game. Yet that is exactly what so many mainstream news consumers lack – a clear picture. As a result US lawmakers, in cahoots with defense contractors, are able to pursue such dangerous machinations with impunity.</p>
<p>The West relies on the belief that most people would never bother to fact-check the claim that “Russia invaded Ukraine,” for example, which is a patent falsehood. Nor would they discover that the only reason “Russian invaded Georgia” is that Georgia launched a deadly attack on Russian peacekeepers during its offensive on South Ossetia on August 7, 2008. Despite a comprehensive EU investigation that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/30/georgia-attacks-unjustifiable-eu" type="external">concluded</a> former Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili was to blame for starting the war with Russia, EU leaders continue to shamelessly sell the myth of ‘Russian aggression’ to their constituents.</p>
<p>Today, US-Russia relations have deteriorated to levels not seen since the Cold War standoff. And it must be said that for whatever differences there may have been between the Obama and Trump administrations, and there were many, the one thing that both have in common is their willingness to pack the former Eastern Bloc with US military hardware.</p>
<p>Last summer, under Obama, NATO members agreed to the alliance boosting its military footprint in Europe to levels not seen since the Cold War – posting four rotating, multinational battalions to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland.</p>
<p>In January, just before Trump’s inauguration, some 2,800 pieces of US military hardware – including Abrams tanks, Paladin artillery and Bradley fighting vehicles – and 4,000 troops <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/377494-nato-bulgaria-us-troops/" type="external">rolled into</a> Europe as part of the operation.</p>
<p>Even non-NATO member Sweden <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/402919-sweden-military-exercise-russia/" type="external">played host</a> to around 2,000 foreign troops, more than 1,400 of whom are from the US, according to the local Sydöstran newspaper. NATO members Denmark, Estonia, France, Lithuania, and Norway are also participating, as well as non-aligned Finland.&#160;</p>
<p>Trump has done nothing to reverse the trend – in fact, he is encouraging it. Meanwhile Moscow, which has been forced to respond to this swift militarization on its borders, was criticized last month by Western capitals for holding joint Russian-Belarusian ‘Zapad-2017’ drills.</p>
<p>Russian Major General Igor Konashenkov said the US military could easily redeploy its military personnel from the German Ramstein base to Poland within just two hours. He also countered NATO efforts to downplay the amount of hardware accumulating on Russia’s border.</p>
<p>“In contrast to the claims of NATO and the US on the insignificance of the troops approaching the Russian border, in fact now it is not a brigade there but a US mechanized military division,” he said.</p>
<p>Amassing such military power on Russian borders violates the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act, he emphasized.</p>
<p>Read more</p>
<p><a href="https://www.rt.com/news/407775-nato-new-commands-russia-conflict/" type="external" /></p>
<p>NATO officials, however, dismissed the Russian ministry’s claims.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Vladimir Shamanov, head of the Russian State Duma’s Defense Committee and a former Airborne Troops commander, <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/406638-russia-us-troops-poland/" type="external">said</a> Russia has many options – including the deployment of Iskander-M tactical missile systems to the Kaliningrad exclave – as the US-led military bloc continues to push up on its borders, he told TASS.&#160;</p>
<p>Whatever response Russia decides to make, it can be sure that the current wave of Russophobia, echoing through the halls of Washington and now enshrined in America’s NDAA, will not disappear anytime soon.</p>
<p>It can only be hoped that Europe will heed the advice of German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel, who <a href="http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2017-11/sigmar-gabriel-kritik-donald-trump-atomare-aufruestung" type="external">warned</a> in an interview that should Moscow and Washington fail to mend ties, “our children will be growing up in a dangerous and uncertain world increasingly armed with nuclear weapons.”&#160;</p>
<p>If that comment doesn’t make the EU sit up and take notice, nothing will.</p> | false | 1 | members house senate seizing antirussia climate engulfing washington like fog authorized billions dollars enhance usnato military assets europe hundreds millions security assistance go ukraine russophobia costing american taxpayers bundle money us politicians defense contractors couldnt happier tucked deep inside 2018 national defense authorization act category entitled countering russian aggression 46 billion casually set aside socalled european deterrence initiative edi reassure nato allies enhance us deterrent defense postures europe ndaa calls 350 million provide security assistance ukraine including defensive lethal assistance idea sending lethal arms ukraine civil war smoldering russias border could encourage kiev resort violence attempt resolve standoff read explanation given intense ratchetingup military hardware russias border one washington brussels selling nato members many years russias ongoing aggressive actions including invasions georgia 2008 ukraine 2014 threats north atlantic treaty organization nato allies rapid military modernization advanced antiaccess area denial capabilities increasing military activity arctic region mediterranean sea evolving nuclear doctrine capabilities problem explanation comprised either barefaced lies gross exaggerations immediately obvious anyone clear picture game yet exactly many mainstream news consumers lack clear picture result us lawmakers cahoots defense contractors able pursue dangerous machinations impunity west relies belief people would never bother factcheck claim russia invaded ukraine example patent falsehood would discover reason russian invaded georgia georgia launched deadly attack russian peacekeepers offensive south ossetia august 7 2008 despite comprehensive eu investigation concluded former georgian president mikhail saakashvili blame starting war russia eu leaders continue shamelessly sell myth russian aggression constituents today usrussia relations deteriorated levels seen since cold war standoff must said whatever differences may obama trump administrations many one thing common willingness pack former eastern bloc us military hardware last summer obama nato members agreed alliance boosting military footprint europe levels seen since cold war posting four rotating multinational battalions estonia latvia lithuania poland january trumps inauguration 2800 pieces us military hardware including abrams tanks paladin artillery bradley fighting vehicles 4000 troops rolled europe part operation even nonnato member sweden played host around 2000 foreign troops 1400 us according local sydöstran newspaper nato members denmark estonia france lithuania norway also participating well nonaligned finland160 trump done nothing reverse trend fact encouraging meanwhile moscow forced respond swift militarization borders criticized last month western capitals holding joint russianbelarusian zapad2017 drills russian major general igor konashenkov said us military could easily redeploy military personnel german ramstein base poland within two hours also countered nato efforts downplay amount hardware accumulating russias border contrast claims nato us insignificance troops approaching russian border fact brigade us mechanized military division said amassing military power russian borders violates 1997 natorussia founding act emphasized read nato officials however dismissed russian ministrys claims meanwhile vladimir shamanov head russian state dumas defense committee former airborne troops commander said russia many options including deployment iskanderm tactical missile systems kaliningrad exclave usled military bloc continues push borders told tass160 whatever response russia decides make sure current wave russophobia echoing halls washington enshrined americas ndaa disappear anytime soon hoped europe heed advice german foreign minister sigmar gabriel warned interview moscow washington fail mend ties children growing dangerous uncertain world increasingly armed nuclear weapons160 comment doesnt make eu sit take notice nothing | 519 |
<p>The attacks in Delhi, Tbilisi and Bangkok were clearly meant to corner Iran as well as sabotage the growing Iran-India relationship</p>
<p>This is perhaps what the expression ‘setting the cat among the pigeons’ means.&#160; Just when Israel was putting up that little show, going around the world crying about the way Iran was targeting its peaceful diplomats around the world, the ayatollahs come up with their own little performance taking everyone’s breath away.</p>
<p>Not that Ahmadinejad didn’t warn us.&#160; As always, everyone was sufficiently intimated of the glad tidings on the nuclear front were on their way.&#160; Yet it was a master stroke. Give the Iranians their due.&#160; If the Israelis are known for their cunning and craft of obfuscation and manipulation, it’s not easy beating the Persians at mind games either.&#160; After all, they invented the game of chess.</p>
<p>Defying years of Western sanctions and the endless talk of war by Israel, the Iranians seem to have gotten another decisive step closer to their goal. And they have all the players and pawns where they want them to be. And for all their bluff and bluster, Israel and its guardian angels can’t do much about it.</p>
<p>As a former Indian envoy to Iran put it, this is like the classic Persian puzzle.&#160; Iran takes one step forward and waits and watches for the reaction of adversaries before taking the next cautious step. Call it the Persian incrementalism or whatever but it seems to have worked so far.</p>
<p>The calibrated ‘diplomatic incidents’ in New Delhi, Georgia and Bangkok were of course a stroke of brilliance.&#160; They were apparently meant to hit two birds with one stone:&#160; First, pin the blame on Iran, as Netanyahu did within minutes of the Delhi blast calling Tehran ‘the biggest exporter of international terror,’ and create a credible pretext to hit the Islamic republic.</p>
<p>Second, derail the growing Iran-India relationship.&#160; The Israelis and Americans haven’t been too pleased with India’s refusal to stop buying the Iranian oil after recent sanctions.&#160; By the way India isn’t the only one to do so.&#160; China, Japan and South Korea too have refused to toe the Western line.</p>
<p>But Israel has been there and done it all so many times before that these shenanigans do not fool the world anymore.&#160; These attacks purportedly targeting Israeli diplomats are rather too convenient and perfect to be genuine.&#160; Notwithstanding Ahmadinejad’s punch-drunk love of Israel and preoccupation with its past and future, the Iranians are not stupid.</p>
<p>At a time when they are isolated internationally and the West is looking for an excuse to punish it, why would they stick out their neck and resort to something as suicidal as this? As Dr Trita Parsi, the Iran hand at Johns Hopkins University and author of Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Iran, Israel and the United States agues, why would they do something so foolish as this and that too in New Delhi? It’s an insult to the Iranians’ intelligence.</p>
<p>India is, after China, Iran’s biggest trading partner and importer of Iranian oil.&#160; Besides, the two have shared a quiet partnership since Russians left Afghanistan.&#160; It has even survived the Indian vote against Iran in the IAEA.&#160; Incidentally, Thailand is another major trading partner of the Islamic republic.&#160; So why would the Iranians choose the distant tourist paradise to settle scores with the Israelis, hurting their own interests?</p>
<p>Secondly, in both India and Thailand, it’s the Israelis who have been quick to declare that the sticky bombs used in Delhi, Bangkok and Tbilisi are similar to the ones used in killing four Iranian nuclear scientists over the past two years.&#160; Be that as it may, how does that link them to Tehran? Indeed, having repeatedly used the device to deadly effect against the Iranians, why couldn’t the Israelis have used it again in Indian, Georgian and Thai capitals?</p>
<p>The detention of an Iranian, who blew up his legs while handling the explosives, proves nothing.&#160; It’s hardly a secret the Israelis and Americans have been using the Mujahideen-e-Khalq terrorists against Iran.</p>
<p>The Israeli embassy on Aurangzeb Road in New Delhi exists in the sniffing distance of the Prime Minister’s residence. It’s a high security zone with the elite ‘Z’ security force monitoring every inch of the area every minute.&#160; So how come that red bike got so close to the embassy car and got away after sticking that bomb? No wonder Israeli watchers suspect all this is part of a campaign to corner Iran and fortify the case for the war that the world has been waiting with bated breath for some time.</p>
<p>I hate a triumphal I-told-you-so, but this is what many of us have feared and warned about all along.&#160; That Israel and its enablers in the US establishment are hell-bent on sparking another Western war to destroy another oil-rich Muslim country.&#160; This is what happened in the case of Iraq.&#160; Remember the comical claims linking Iraq to 9/11 and Niger uranium, not to mention Tony Blair’s 45-minute strike talk?</p>
<p>As the West turns up the heat on Iran by way of economic sanctions, trade blockade, and crippling of its banks, coupled with the rising chatter of coming war, the region has been on the razor’s edge for months now.&#160; All that is needed is a tiny spark to blow it all up.&#160; A minor skirmish here, a misunderstanding there or a perfect false flag in distant lands could prove excuse enough for a full blown conflagration with catastrophic consequences.</p>
<p>That moment seems to have arrived with the explosions in India, Georgia and Thailand.&#160; Israel is desperately looking for a pretext—or a provocation—to punish Iran.&#160; With the arrival of US poll season and Europe being preoccupied with its economic mess, perhaps there cannot be a better time to do so. But it’s easier said than done. Israel cannot do so on its own without the US help. If it was doable, Israel would have done it by now.&#160; Iran is not Iraq.</p>
<p>Unlike Iraq’s Osirak plant which Israel bombed in 1981, Iranian nuclear installations are heavily fortified, many of them underground and spread all across the country, not to mention the forbidding distance. Besides, an Israeli strike might put back the nuclear clock but wouldn’t stop it, especially now when Tehran appears to be a screw-turn away from going full nuclear if it wants.&#160; Iran’s leaders of course insist it is for ‘peaceful’ purposes and that they aren’t interested in the ‘satanic arms.’</p>
<p>Even though a demonstration of the capacity doesn’t mean willingness, would you be terribly surprised if Tehran indeed goes for the nukes? Given Israel’s terrorizing of the region over the past six decades and West’s hegemonic wars, it’s actually tempting and makes sense to go for the comforting reassurance that a couple of nukes seem to inspire.</p>
<p>More to the point, what right does Israel—and other world powers—have to lord over their nuclear arsenal while the rest of the world has to submit itself to the IAEA scrutiny? If the international community is indeed serious about a nuke-free world, it has to first address this NPT duplicity. Nuclear weapons are a clear and present danger to the Middle East and the world, no matter who owns them.</p> | false | 1 | attacks delhi tbilisi bangkok clearly meant corner iran well sabotage growing iranindia relationship perhaps expression setting cat among pigeons means160 israel putting little show going around world crying way iran targeting peaceful diplomats around world ayatollahs come little performance taking everyones breath away ahmadinejad didnt warn us160 always everyone sufficiently intimated glad tidings nuclear front way160 yet master stroke give iranians due160 israelis known cunning craft obfuscation manipulation easy beating persians mind games either160 invented game chess defying years western sanctions endless talk war israel iranians seem gotten another decisive step closer goal players pawns want bluff bluster israel guardian angels cant much former indian envoy iran put like classic persian puzzle160 iran takes one step forward waits watches reaction adversaries taking next cautious step call persian incrementalism whatever seems worked far calibrated diplomatic incidents new delhi georgia bangkok course stroke brilliance160 apparently meant hit two birds one stone160 first pin blame iran netanyahu within minutes delhi blast calling tehran biggest exporter international terror create credible pretext hit islamic republic second derail growing iranindia relationship160 israelis americans havent pleased indias refusal stop buying iranian oil recent sanctions160 way india isnt one so160 china japan south korea refused toe western line israel done many times shenanigans fool world anymore160 attacks purportedly targeting israeli diplomats rather convenient perfect genuine160 notwithstanding ahmadinejads punchdrunk love israel preoccupation past future iranians stupid time isolated internationally west looking excuse punish would stick neck resort something suicidal dr trita parsi iran hand johns hopkins university author treacherous alliance secret dealings iran israel united states agues would something foolish new delhi insult iranians intelligence india china irans biggest trading partner importer iranian oil160 besides two shared quiet partnership since russians left afghanistan160 even survived indian vote iran iaea160 incidentally thailand another major trading partner islamic republic160 would iranians choose distant tourist paradise settle scores israelis hurting interests secondly india thailand israelis quick declare sticky bombs used delhi bangkok tbilisi similar ones used killing four iranian nuclear scientists past two years160 may link tehran indeed repeatedly used device deadly effect iranians couldnt israelis used indian georgian thai capitals detention iranian blew legs handling explosives proves nothing160 hardly secret israelis americans using mujahideenekhalq terrorists iran israeli embassy aurangzeb road new delhi exists sniffing distance prime ministers residence high security zone elite z security force monitoring every inch area every minute160 come red bike got close embassy car got away sticking bomb wonder israeli watchers suspect part campaign corner iran fortify case war world waiting bated breath time hate triumphal itoldyouso many us feared warned along160 israel enablers us establishment hellbent sparking another western war destroy another oilrich muslim country160 happened case iraq160 remember comical claims linking iraq 911 niger uranium mention tony blairs 45minute strike talk west turns heat iran way economic sanctions trade blockade crippling banks coupled rising chatter coming war region razors edge months now160 needed tiny spark blow up160 minor skirmish misunderstanding perfect false flag distant lands could prove excuse enough full blown conflagration catastrophic consequences moment seems arrived explosions india georgia thailand160 israel desperately looking pretextor provocationto punish iran160 arrival us poll season europe preoccupied economic mess perhaps better time easier said done israel without us help doable israel would done now160 iran iraq unlike iraqs osirak plant israel bombed 1981 iranian nuclear installations heavily fortified many underground spread across country mention forbidding distance besides israeli strike might put back nuclear clock wouldnt stop especially tehran appears screwturn away going full nuclear wants160 irans leaders course insist peaceful purposes arent interested satanic arms even though demonstration capacity doesnt mean willingness would terribly surprised tehran indeed goes nukes given israels terrorizing region past six decades wests hegemonic wars actually tempting makes sense go comforting reassurance couple nukes seem inspire point right israeland world powershave lord nuclear arsenal rest world submit iaea scrutiny international community indeed serious nukefree world first address npt duplicity nuclear weapons clear present danger middle east world matter owns | 655 |
<p>WASHINGTON — The Senate edged closer Thursday to a historic vote on a <a href="" type="internal">sweeping rewrite</a>of the nation’s tax code that includes cuts for corporations, businesses and individuals but would heap $1.4 trillion onto the national debt over 10 years.</p>
<p>“This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., “This is a good bill.”</p>
<p>But Republican leaders continued to work on galvanizing support for the bill among their caucus, tweaking the legislation to address the debt if economic growth projections failed to materialize and to help pay for massive permanent cuts to corporations. A vote could come on Friday.</p>
<p>Several deficit hawks in the GOP such as Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., voiced concern about the debt. They want a “trigger” mechanism that would impose automatic tax increases to provide revenue if growth fails to materialize.</p>
<p>The Joint Committee on Taxation said the bill would cost $1.4 trillion and raise only $458 billion in offsetting revenue, figures that have bothered GOP lawmakers concerned with the debt. It would boost economic growth by just 0.8 percent over the next decade.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, the bill received a boost Thursday when Sen. John McCain, a recalcitrant Republican from Arizona, signaled he would support the legislation despite concerns.</p>
<p>“This is not a perfect bill, but it is one that would deliver much-needed reform to our tax code, grow the economy, and help Americans keep more of their hard-earned money,” McCain said in a statement.</p>
<p>Under the bill, the corporate tax rate would be cut from 35 percent to 20 percent. While the corporate cuts would be permanent, tax cuts for individuals would sunset in 2025 and taxes on some middle-class brackets would increase, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.</p>
<p>The Senate bill would double the standard deduction, and Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., was instrumental in adding a provision to double the child tax credit to $2,000.</p>
<p>“This legislation will literally put thousands of dollars back into the pockets of hardworking Nevadans, allowing them to purchase anything from three months’ worth of groceries to 9,000 diapers,” Heller said.</p>
<p>Democrats are united in their opposition to the legislation. Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., called the GOP plan “smoke and mirrors.”</p>
<p>“While the GOP claims it will help hardworking middle-class families, the fact is they will see their taxes go up over a decade,” Cortez Masto said in a statement on social media.</p>
<p>She said eventual taxes on middle-class families would go to oil companies, banks and the top 1 percent of wealthy individuals.</p>
<p>Senate Republicans are using special budget reconciliation rules to pass the tax bill with a simple majority and avoid a filibuster by Democrats.</p>
<p>Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the way the GOP bill is being “rammed” through the Senate is the reason the American people think the process is broken.</p>
<p>“The Republican tax bill has made a mockery of the Democratic process,” Schumer said.</p>
<p>Despite obstacles the bill still faced late Thursday, expectations that the tax-cut package would pass had stocks soaring, with the Dow Jones industrial average closing above 24,000 for the first time.</p>
<p>Corporations and even small businesses, represented by the National Federation of Independent Businesses, which won a concession to give a mom and pop shops a bigger tax cut, have embraced the bill.</p>
<p>AARP, the retired persons lobby, is opposed the Senate bill, charging that cuts and rising debt will force Congress to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to offset the loss of tax revenue.</p>
<p>Realtors and homebuilders also oppose the bill.</p>
<p>Those groups said provisions that would prevent federal filers from deducting state and local taxes, and eventual tax hikes on middle-class families if the sunset cuts are not extended would cause property values to drop by 10 percent and eliminate an incentive for homebuyers.</p>
<p>President Donald Trump has stumped in Missouri and <a href="" type="internal">met with Republicans</a> on Capitol Hill this week to bolster support for the legislation.</p>
<p>White House spokesman Sarah Sanders said Thursday that progress was being made on the package.</p>
<p>“We think we’re going to get it done by the end of the year,” she said.</p>
<p>The House <a href="" type="internal">passed its version</a>of the bill on Nov. 16, which has major differences from the Senate version.</p>
<p>The Senate bill would eliminate the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, which requires federal filers to buy insurance or pay an IRS penalty.</p>
<p>Eliminating the mandate would defund the ACA system that provides federal subsidies for low-income families to purchase insurance.</p>
<p>The Congressional Budget Office estimates that eliminating the mandate would result in 4 million fewer people with insurance in 2019 and 13 million fewer people insured by 2027.</p>
<p>The House bill does not include that ACA mandate repeal but would eliminate deductions for families on medical expenses and college loan interest.</p>
<p>Differences in the two pieces of legislation would have to be reconciled in a House-Senate conference committee.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at <a href="" type="internal">[email protected]</a> or 202-662-7390. Follow <a href="https://twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | washington senate edged closer thursday historic vote sweeping rewriteof nations tax code includes cuts corporations businesses individuals would heap 14 trillion onto national debt 10 years onceinageneration opportunity said senate majority leader mitch mcconnell rky good bill republican leaders continued work galvanizing support bill among caucus tweaking legislation address debt economic growth projections failed materialize help pay massive permanent cuts corporations vote could come friday several deficit hawks gop sen bob corker rtenn sen jeff flake rariz sen james lankford rokla voiced concern debt want trigger mechanism would impose automatic tax increases provide revenue growth fails materialize joint committee taxation said bill would cost 14 trillion raise 458 billion offsetting revenue figures bothered gop lawmakers concerned debt would boost economic growth 08 percent next decade nonetheless bill received boost thursday sen john mccain recalcitrant republican arizona signaled would support legislation despite concerns perfect bill one would deliver muchneeded reform tax code grow economy help americans keep hardearned money mccain said statement bill corporate tax rate would cut 35 percent 20 percent corporate cuts would permanent tax cuts individuals would sunset 2025 taxes middleclass brackets would increase according joint committee taxation senate bill would double standard deduction sen dean heller rnev instrumental adding provision double child tax credit 2000 legislation literally put thousands dollars back pockets hardworking nevadans allowing purchase anything three months worth groceries 9000 diapers heller said democrats united opposition legislation sen catherine cortez masto dnev called gop plan smoke mirrors gop claims help hardworking middleclass families fact see taxes go decade cortez masto said statement social media said eventual taxes middleclass families would go oil companies banks top 1 percent wealthy individuals senate republicans using special budget reconciliation rules pass tax bill simple majority avoid filibuster democrats senate minority leader charles schumer dny said way gop bill rammed senate reason american people think process broken republican tax bill made mockery democratic process schumer said despite obstacles bill still faced late thursday expectations taxcut package would pass stocks soaring dow jones industrial average closing 24000 first time corporations even small businesses represented national federation independent businesses concession give mom pop shops bigger tax cut embraced bill aarp retired persons lobby opposed senate bill charging cuts rising debt force congress cut social security medicare medicaid offset loss tax revenue realtors homebuilders also oppose bill groups said provisions would prevent federal filers deducting state local taxes eventual tax hikes middleclass families sunset cuts extended would cause property values drop 10 percent eliminate incentive homebuyers president donald trump stumped missouri met republicans capitol hill week bolster support legislation white house spokesman sarah sanders said thursday progress made package think going get done end year said house passed versionof bill nov 16 major differences senate version senate bill would eliminate individual mandate affordable care act requires federal filers buy insurance pay irs penalty eliminating mandate would defund aca system provides federal subsidies lowincome families purchase insurance congressional budget office estimates eliminating mandate would result 4 million fewer people insurance 2019 13 million fewer people insured 2027 house bill include aca mandate repeal would eliminate deductions families medical expenses college loan interest differences two pieces legislation would reconciled housesenate conference committee contact gary martin gmartinreviewjournalcom 2026627390 follow garymartindc twitter | 535 |
<p />
<p>The nauseous protrusion of the on-going rebellion in the Syrian Arab Republic has for some time rendered Lebanon’s Islamic resistance movement, Hezbollah, into overtly countering what it’s always harbored is a deadly connivance aimed at puncturing its regional ‘axis-of-resistance’ alliance.</p>
<p>It’s on this logic that one can gauge the movement’s recent gamble of going all-out to supplement the Syrian army in its quest to liberate the strategically located town of Qusayr, as well as sending specialized units to defend an Islamic shrine south of Damascus.</p>
<p>These measures, in addition to other hazily reported ones, have not only exposed the movement’s stake in the outcome of the conflict, but are also ones which have garnered it a barrage of criticism­–mainly from foreign backers and media outlets supporting the anti-government rebellion.</p>
<p>But yet this very rebellion, ostensibly designed to topple the regime of Bashar Al-Assad, has long resulted in plunging large parts of that country into destruction, homelessness, killing zones, and now a springboard for Jihadist galvanization across the region.</p>
<p>And this in turn has allowed many to speak of the conflict with perhaps the savaging that it deserves.</p>
<p>It begins in Syrian territory itself–but not the now old news that mercenaries who’ve pledged allegiance to Osama Bin Laden’s notorious brainchild <a href="http://www.france24.com/en/20130410-leader-syria-nusra-militants-jawlani-" type="external">Al-Qaeda</a>, &#160;are firmly entrenched at the forefront of the battle.</p>
<p>Rather, it’s about the morbid proportions of savagery that these Jihadists, in collusion with their so-called Free Syrian Army colleagues, have been busy indulging in over the last few weeks–savagery that should be emitting death rays into the eyes of those otherwise backing the crude rebellion.</p>
<p>The world has come to see visual images of notable Jihadists filming themselves opening up the organs of fallen government soldiers and eating them <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEZUraRor1o" type="external">raw,</a>decapitating and then grilling the heads of captured pilots for public <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2309281/Barbaric-image-rebel-holding-pilots-decapitated-head-barbeque-horrifies-Syria--sickening-picture-real.html" type="external">display,</a>&#160;and executing melancholic 14 year old boys for <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-10/islamist-rebels-in-syria-execute-14-year-old-for-blasphemy-sohr.html" type="external">blasphemy.</a></p>
<p>They are clearly the type of people with whom a great deal more than immoderate language needs to be used every now and again.</p>
<p>But for Hezbollah, it’s also the inherent fear that such barbarism could cross the border into Lebanon—where its Shiite community is the largest of the country’s 18 sects and will undoubtedly be the next prey of these anti-Shiite spouting Takfiri’s—that has led many to believe is the primary driving force behind the decision to lock horns with them next door.</p>
<p>Yet for all the measures it may deem as being preventative in Syria, counter-actions by the Jihadist-led rebel opposition seem only to have exacerbated fears of a wider military and sectarian spillover.</p>
<p>One only has to begin with the post-Qusayr situation.</p>
<p>Humiliatingly defeated in an urban battle believed to have been orchestrated by Hezbollah, the rebels resorted to intermittently firing crude rockets at Hezbollah constituent areas in both Lebanon’s Bekaa <a href="http://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2013/June/middleeast_June194.xml&amp;section=middleeast" type="external">valley</a> as well southern suburbs of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/world/middleeast/rockets-strike-hezbollahs-beirut-stronghold.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0" type="external">Beirut</a>—resulting in the deaths and injuries of innocent civilians as well as causing infrastructural damage to homes and businesses.</p>
<p>Then it was the turn of the rebels honcho, Salim idris, and a man who many like to paint as the moderate face of the rebellion, threatening to spread the conflict by invading <a href="https://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Local-News/2013/Jun-05/219538-idriss-syria-rebels-ready-to-move-battles-into-lebanon.ashx#axzz2XEdukgV8" type="external">Lebanese territory</a> in pursuit of Hezbollah itself.</p>
<p>But with the Syrian army currently resurgent and placing the rebels on the back foot, there seems to be no immediate worry of a major flare-up on the porous Lebanese-Syrian border.</p>
<p>The domestic scene in fragile Lebanon itself has also become another victim.</p>
<p>The Syrian conflict has increasingly polarized the already tense Sunni-Shiite political divide – and resulted in the country’s northern and Sunni-dominated city of Tripoli all but becoming a byword for Jihadism.</p>
<p>It’s in this city that radical Sunni groups and even their <a href="http://world.time.com/2012/09/18/syrias-secular-and-islamist-rebels-who-are-the-saudis-and-the-qataris-arming/" type="external">secular counterparts</a> have long been instrumental in supplying arms and facilitating recruits for the rebellion, instigate (sometimes violent) demonstrations against Hezbollah and its allies and use the premise of mosques to articulate scorching anti-Shiite and anti-Alawite rhetoric to followers within the country.</p>
<p>If it wasn’t for the killing of <a href="http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/06/lebanon-sidon-assir-salafists-kill-army.html" type="external">14 Lebanese soldiers</a> a fortnight ago, and the subsequent storming of a radical clerics headquarters, the Sunni-dominated southern Lebanese city of Sidon was on course for becoming another bastion of radical-Islamic recruitment and Jihadism.</p>
<p>Sheikh Ahmad Al-Asir, who’d risen to notoriety on the premise of supposedly being a thorn in the side of Hezbollah and who was synonymous with articulating repulsive rhetoric against the Shiite branch of Islam, finally resorted to confront the nations army when it dared to challenge him.</p>
<p>The self-declared heroic figure is now a fugitive—despite cowardly making so far unheeded calls for Sunni members in the Lebanese army to defect and declare military officials <a href="http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=29d_1372015043" type="external">infidels.</a></p>
<p>The army is leading a desperate manhunt for him and until they capture or kill him, he’s placed their very prestige in a quandary.</p>
<p>Hezbollah has remained largely passive in the prevailing climate—for now.</p>
<p>But in the wake of the cold-blooded killings of tribal notables in the <a href="https://english.al-akhbar.com/node/16149" type="external">Bekaa Valley</a>, suspicion of wider Sunni political and religious collusion in this regard and the country’s being run without a political cabinet; events might force their hand in a manner it has thus far sought to avoid.</p>
<p>Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the politico-religious aspect to the outcome of this war has very diverging interests at stake, and in which Hezbollah is firmly planted at the pendulum.</p>
<p>In a recent televised interview, the American president finally confirmed the open secret.</p>
<p>Namely, and in his words, that there were ‘elements’ in the Middle East who see the conflict through the prism of a Sunni-Shite conflict in which the Americans should back the side of the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkaK-ij5Zd4" type="external">Sunnis.</a></p>
<p>It doesn’t take much to conclude that the President is alluding to Sunni-ruled states like Qatar and Saudi Arabia that have been instrumental in the continual backing of the two-year long rebellion.</p>
<p>The very recent vows by some of these states to increase monetary and military assistance, along with international components led by the United States to those fighting the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/22/us-arms-syria-rebels-assad-hezbollah" type="external">Assad regime</a> only adds to this belief.</p>
<p>This equation has been made worse by Qatar-funded leading Sunni clerics like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYTQTz8g6MA" type="external">Sheikh Qaradawi</a>, as well as Saudi’s Arabia’s <a href="http://www.albawaba.com/news/saudis-grand-mufti-calls-jihad-against-hezbollah-497558" type="external">grand Mufti</a>, referring to Hezbollah as the party of devils—and calling for recruits to join the so-called Jihad in Syria.</p>
<p>Such rhetoric was being relayed just as U.S. and Jordanian troops completed joint military and naval exercises on <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/08/west-training-syrian-rebels-jordan" type="external">Jordanian territory</a>—where reports have been trickling out for some time that militants are secretly being <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/08/west-training-syrian-rebels-jordan" type="external">trained</a> in preparation for opening yet another desperate front in the Syrian war.</p>
<p>But more weapons, more Jihadist recruits and more inflammatory rhetoric leading to increased destabilization is not going to pave the way for any side to reach the optimum result that it wants: the capitulation and destruction of the other.</p>
<p>Hezbollah, which owes its regional pre-eminence to a platform that car-bombed and rocketed Israel and America from a military presence in Lebanon, today sees both their hands in Syria in collusion with a Gulf Arab project.</p>
<p>This project they are convinced, is firmly designed to incrementally eradicate its and Iran’s role in the resisting tide of the region.</p>
<p>It’s certainly wishful thinking on the part of those who assume that such a movement, which has risen on the blood and sweat of thousands of its do-or-die faithful, will ever cut and run from its Syrian involvement in tearing haste.</p>
<p>Although such activity would certainly offer a bracing antidote to the anxieties and vulnerabilities of the combined forces indirectly amassed against it, Hezbollah’s ethos is not one that allows itself to be rendered to a life of retreat, destitution and dependence—at the mercy of their combined enemy’s rage.</p>
<p>Considering the timing and locations of their sporadic involvement, the movement’s strategists have obviously conducted a thought experiment about the potential stretching of the conflicts boundaries long ago.</p>
<p>The war-gaming of this bigger picture has today resulted in them going on the offensive—in line with the secretive guerrilla nature of their almost legendary military application.</p>
<p>Their expertise, reputation and cohesiveness are about to undergo the biggest test to date.</p>
<p>The movement finds itself almost enveloped by litany of enemies, local and afar, who use the pretext of the conflict in Syria with an unlimited supply of money and weapons, as a precursor to gun for their downfall.</p>
<p>In Hezbollah’s eyes, it can only mean a zero sum game.</p>
<p>In order for them and their allies to succeed in Syria, their combined enemies have to lose—and lose decisively.</p> | false | 1 | nauseous protrusion ongoing rebellion syrian arab republic time rendered lebanons islamic resistance movement hezbollah overtly countering always harbored deadly connivance aimed puncturing regional axisofresistance alliance logic one gauge movements recent gamble going allout supplement syrian army quest liberate strategically located town qusayr well sending specialized units defend islamic shrine south damascus measures addition hazily reported ones exposed movements stake outcome conflict also ones garnered barrage criticismmainly foreign backers media outlets supporting antigovernment rebellion yet rebellion ostensibly designed topple regime bashar alassad long resulted plunging large parts country destruction homelessness killing zones springboard jihadist galvanization across region turn allowed many speak conflict perhaps savaging deserves begins syrian territory itselfbut old news mercenaries whove pledged allegiance osama bin ladens notorious brainchild alqaeda 160are firmly entrenched forefront battle rather morbid proportions savagery jihadists collusion socalled free syrian army colleagues busy indulging last weekssavagery emitting death rays eyes otherwise backing crude rebellion world come see visual images notable jihadists filming opening organs fallen government soldiers eating rawdecapitating grilling heads captured pilots public display160and executing melancholic 14 year old boys blasphemy clearly type people great deal immoderate language needs used every hezbollah also inherent fear barbarism could cross border lebanonwhere shiite community largest countrys 18 sects undoubtedly next prey antishiite spouting takfiristhat led many believe primary driving force behind decision lock horns next door yet measures may deem preventative syria counteractions jihadistled rebel opposition seem exacerbated fears wider military sectarian spillover one begin postqusayr situation humiliatingly defeated urban battle believed orchestrated hezbollah rebels resorted intermittently firing crude rockets hezbollah constituent areas lebanons bekaa valley well southern suburbs beirutresulting deaths injuries innocent civilians well causing infrastructural damage homes businesses turn rebels honcho salim idris man many like paint moderate face rebellion threatening spread conflict invading lebanese territory pursuit hezbollah syrian army currently resurgent placing rebels back foot seems immediate worry major flareup porous lebanesesyrian border domestic scene fragile lebanon also become another victim syrian conflict increasingly polarized already tense sunnishiite political divide resulted countrys northern sunnidominated city tripoli becoming byword jihadism city radical sunni groups even secular counterparts long instrumental supplying arms facilitating recruits rebellion instigate sometimes violent demonstrations hezbollah allies use premise mosques articulate scorching antishiite antialawite rhetoric followers within country wasnt killing 14 lebanese soldiers fortnight ago subsequent storming radical clerics headquarters sunnidominated southern lebanese city sidon course becoming another bastion radicalislamic recruitment jihadism sheikh ahmad alasir whod risen notoriety premise supposedly thorn side hezbollah synonymous articulating repulsive rhetoric shiite branch islam finally resorted confront nations army dared challenge selfdeclared heroic figure fugitivedespite cowardly making far unheeded calls sunni members lebanese army defect declare military officials infidels army leading desperate manhunt capture kill hes placed prestige quandary hezbollah remained largely passive prevailing climatefor wake coldblooded killings tribal notables bekaa valley suspicion wider sunni political religious collusion regard countrys run without political cabinet events might force hand manner thus far sought avoid finally perhaps importantly politicoreligious aspect outcome war diverging interests stake hezbollah firmly planted pendulum recent televised interview american president finally confirmed open secret namely words elements middle east see conflict prism sunnishite conflict americans back side sunnis doesnt take much conclude president alluding sunniruled states like qatar saudi arabia instrumental continual backing twoyear long rebellion recent vows states increase monetary military assistance along international components led united states fighting assad regime adds belief equation made worse qatarfunded leading sunni clerics like sheikh qaradawi well saudis arabias grand mufti referring hezbollah party devilsand calling recruits join socalled jihad syria rhetoric relayed us jordanian troops completed joint military naval exercises jordanian territorywhere reports trickling time militants secretly trained preparation opening yet another desperate front syrian war weapons jihadist recruits inflammatory rhetoric leading increased destabilization going pave way side reach optimum result wants capitulation destruction hezbollah owes regional preeminence platform carbombed rocketed israel america military presence lebanon today sees hands syria collusion gulf arab project project convinced firmly designed incrementally eradicate irans role resisting tide region certainly wishful thinking part assume movement risen blood sweat thousands doordie faithful ever cut run syrian involvement tearing haste although activity would certainly offer bracing antidote anxieties vulnerabilities combined forces indirectly amassed hezbollahs ethos one allows rendered life retreat destitution dependenceat mercy combined enemys rage considering timing locations sporadic involvement movements strategists obviously conducted thought experiment potential stretching conflicts boundaries long ago wargaming bigger picture today resulted going offensivein line secretive guerrilla nature almost legendary military application expertise reputation cohesiveness undergo biggest test date movement finds almost enveloped litany enemies local afar use pretext conflict syria unlimited supply money weapons precursor gun downfall hezbollahs eyes mean zero sum game order allies succeed syria combined enemies loseand lose decisively | 768 |
<p>A few years ago, I started to realize something. Whenever I was less than five minutes early for Mass, I had to go to the overflow room, and I would typically have to step over people sitting on the floor to get there. The church was filled to the gills every Sunday, with young families and children most of the time. But we had a compelling priest, and we were in one of the poshest areas in Paris, the kind of place that has historically been conspicuously Catholic—comparable to the mainline Protestant tradition in some of the most affluent neighborhoods in older American cities.</p>
<p>Then I moved. And I saw the same thing. I live in a very different neighborhood now, one that is “upwardly mobile,” as real estate agencies coyly say. But on Sunday morning the church is packed. There are upscale Catholics and the senior citizens you see everywhere, but also immigrant families, mostly from sub-Saharan Africa and Indian Ocean countries. There are the kinds of hipsters you might not expect to be religious. There are children everywhere.</p>
<p>I have started going to other, random parishes on Sundays, just to see if this is a real trend. And indeed, Sunday high Mass is packed in most parishes in Paris. This is also true in Lyon, the second biggest city in the country.</p>
<p>If there is a Catholic revival in France—the evidence is still mostly anecdotal in a nation where 53 percent of citizens identify as Catholic but only 5 percent regularly attend Mass, according to <a href="https://international.la-croix.com/news/the-sociology-of-french-catholics/4491" type="external">a recent poll</a> conducted by Ipsos and reported by the Catholic newspaper La Croix—it may be starting in the cities, with the highly educated and, as the presidential campaign to be decided on May 7 may prove, with those highly attuned to politics. Now this is fine. You need a mustard seed. The French Revolution was originally an elite phenomenon, and historians like <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/search?index=books&amp;linkCode=qs&amp;keywords=9780520222021" type="external">Rodney Stark</a> have shown that for all the talk of early Christianity in Rome as “a religion of slaves,” it also appealed early and consistently to the elite. But now I have seen something I never expected. I think that in my entire life I had never seen more than a dozen people in the church in the village that my family hails from on any day other than Christmas and Easter. When I returned recently, it was about two-thirds full. There are also more activities outside of weekly Mass than I remember; the parish is now caring for a family of Iraqi Christians, and local teenagers have started a project with a local crafts school to beautify the church.</p>
<p>At first, the revival of Catholicism in France was something you could fleetingly smell in the air. I would notice more and more of my Easter-and-Christmas Catholic college friends posting Facebook updates about going to church, raising money for Christians in the Middle East or handing out food to the homeless with some a Catholic charity. I have two previously irreligious friends who, out of nowhere, dropped their high-status careers and walked the road to Compostela, still one of the most active pilgrimage destinations in the world, had a religious experience when they got there and changed their lives when they returned.</p>
<p>The rise of the ‘zombie Catholic’</p>
<p>True, vocations to the priesthood, perhaps the ultimate criterion of the church’s health, are not palpably growing, but it is significant that they have finally plateaued after a multi-decade decline. The number of priests in the Archdiocese of Paris has already showed <a href="http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dpars.html#stats" type="external">an uptick</a>, something than can only help attract people to the pews.</p>
<p>The Ipsos survey also suggested that Mass attendance may not be the only measure of the strength of Catholicism. It estimated that 23 percent of the French population are “involved Catholics” who “feel attached to the Church by means of their donations, their family lives or their commitments” and who “live their lives differently” than less engaged Catholics.</p>
<p>Another category of church members, with a less flattering name, has been much discussed lately: “ <a href="http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/why-frances-zombie-catholics-are-so-powerful-85256/" type="external">zombie Catholics</a>,” who may not attend Mass but have proven highly influential in this year’s presidential campaign. The historian Robert Zaretsky described them in the journal Foreign Policy as such: “Highly educated and meritocratic…[with] a strong attachment to social, community and family activities; and a general wariness over the role of the state in private and community affairs, including [Catholic schools].”</p>
<p>The resurgent Catholic bloc was foreshadowed by the backlash in the 1980s to the Socialist government’s unsuccessful plan to merge public and private schools, and by the opposition to same-sex marriage in 2013.</p>
<p>Then, last Nov. 20, something happened in French politics that made the world raise an eyebrow. That was when France’s Republican (conservative) Party held the first round of its first-ever primary for a presidential nominee and a previously written-off candidate named François Fillon smashed all his competitors, coming in 15 points ahead&#160;of Alain Juppé, the frontrunner in most polls. (One week later he beat Juppé in the run-off election almost exactly two to one.)</p>
<p>What made Fillon stand out was his pride in his Catholicism and his friendliness toward socially conservative causes in a country so secular and so libertine that this makes one an odd duckling even in a conservative party’s primary. (Juppé described himself as an “ <a href="https://www.ncronline.org/news/world/conservative-francois-fillon-wins-french-primary-strong-appeal-catholics" type="external">agnostic Catholic</a>.”) During a primetime interview in January, Fillon put his hand on his heart and <a href="http://www.france24.com/en/20170106-fillons-christian-faith-back-french-election-issue" type="external">said</a>: “I am a Gaullist and furthermore a Christian. It means that I will never take a decision that would run counter to the respect of human dignity, the respect of the individual and solidarity.” To millions of devout Catholics, this was like milk and honey. He had broken a powerful French taboo: mentioning religion in public. As a left-wing friend of mine put it: “He has a right to be Catholic, but he doesn’t have the right to say it and run for president.”</p>
<p>No one believes committed Catholics provided all of Fillon’s margin of victory in the primary, but they provided a crucial measure of support. According to a poll conducted for the news site Atlantico in late November, 83 percent of “practicing” Catholics were planning to vote for Fillon in the Republican Party run-off.</p>
<p>Campaign shenanigans are froth, but they can establish as incontrovertible something that could be glimpsed only through a glass, darkly. I first wrote about the French “ <a href="http://theweek.com/articles/531469/there-christianrevival-starting-france" type="external">Christian revival</a>” for the American edition of The Week in early 2015. When the piece filtered back across the Atlantic to the world of French Catholicism, the main piece of feedback I got from most of my Catholic acquaintances boiled down to, “I’ve been seeing it too, but couldn’t believe it’s real.”</p>
<p>The reversal of May 1968 France is known as one of the most fiercely secular countries on earth. A <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/02/01/faith-few-strong-links-to-national-identity/" type="external">Pew Research Center survey</a> released in February found that only 10 percent of French citizens considered “being a Christian” a “very important” part of French identity–compared with 30 percent in Italy and 32 percent in the United States responding affirmatively to the same question about their own countries. The French Revolution was a rebellion against altar as much as against the throne—the Reign of Terror was an orgy of anticlerical violence—and the struggle between progressive forces and the church played out over centuries.</p>
<p>That struggle seemed to have ended in a complete and permanent victory for the secular side. The 1905 law establishing the separation of church and state is an obvious marker, but the May 1968 student and worker protests proved almost as important. The cultural heights of the country were seized by those who were shaped by the 1968 spirit of libertarian free love—and who, Steve Jobs-like, added a love of money to its love of sex and its patina of counterculture. The result was laws liberalizing divorce and abortion, and a secularism so harsh that nobody outside the country can understand why banning the Islamic veil from schools is supposed to make sense.</p>
<p>The resurgence of Catholicism as a political force in France in fact began in 2013 with the startling intensity of La Manif Pour Tous(“Protest for All”), the movement formed to oppose France’s same-sex marriage bill. Why this issue, more than abortion or contraception, suddenly got Catholics off their behinds is a bit of a mystery; there has not been a comparable backlash against same-sex marriage among Catholics in the United States. Laurent Bouvet, a political-science professor at Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University, speculated to the <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/ee4bf05e-944f-11e6-a80e-bcd69f323a8b" type="external">Financial Times</a> last fall that traditional Catholics in France “never really accepted the Revolutionary notion that individual freedom should supersede the moral authority of the priest or the family head. They are…wary of the concept of equality.”</p>
<p>Whatever the reason, La Manif—officially a secular, nonpartisan nonprofit, but in reality almost completely a Catholic phenomenon—moved <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-21004322" type="external">hundreds of thousands to take to the streets</a> in protest of the government’s policy, over several weeks&#160;in 2013. The marches <a href="https://thetablet.org/french-rally-defends-traditional-marriage/" type="external">included</a> pink, baby blue and white balloons, along with signs with such messages as “Father + Mother = nothing better for a child.” For years, the question about La Manif and the energy it unleashed was whether this newfound political intensity would produce results at the polls; Fillon—who is not vowing to overturn same-sex marriage but <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-election-fillon-idUSKBN13D259" type="external">remains opposed</a> to the adoption of children by gay couples—may have showed that it can.</p>
<p>More interesting is La Manif’s potential as a kind of “ <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/2013/04/23/kahn-mai-68-envers-mariage-gay_n_3138065.html" type="external">May ’68 in reverse</a>,” in the words of commentators like Jean-François Kahn, or as a touchstone for a decisive shift in mores, as well as an incubator of leaders, social networks and experiments that end up pollinating across the culture.</p>
<p>Indeed, many movements and ideas have arisen thanks to La Manif. On one end of the spectrum is Les Veilleurs(“The Watchmen”), a leaderless movement of youngsters who, after the same-sex marriage bill was passed, spent nights standing in front of government buildings holding candles, reading poems and protesting government’s encroachment on Christian society, with a few of them getting arrested. The movement seemed to be made up mostly of idealistic youngsters who got the adrenaline rush of their life during the Manif protests and didn’t want to quit it.</p>
<p>While La Manif remained scrupulously nonpartisan—even though no one was oblivious that its appeal was to the right—some of its alumni founded Sens Commun (“Common Sense”), a group affiliated with France’s Republican Party with the avowed goal of playing a role similar to that of the Christian right in strengthening America’s Republican Party. Still, many of France’s newly observant Catholics are, like most French people, jaded about politics. Catholic social teaching appeals to them precisely because, though it commands engagement in the public square, it transcends any partisan platform. These are not conservatives in either the American or traditional French, soil-and-tradition mold. They are just as likely to bang on about Pope Francis’s environmental encyclical, “Laudato Si’,” or his calls for solidarity with migrants as they are to wax enthusiastic about John Paul II’s theology of the body. One of La Manif’s most prominent spokesmen, Tugdual Derville, promotes the concept of “integral ecology,” or “ <a href="http://www.tugdualderville.fr/mots-clefs/ecologie-humaine-2" type="external">écologie humaine</a>,” a term that tries to signify that care for the environment, care for the poor and care for the unborn go together. It seems that the vast majority have never been to a traditional Latin Mass.</p>
<p>Strengthening the arguments of Catholics who are wary of becoming too partisan, François Fillon’s campaign is turning out like something out of a Biblical morality tale. The shining knight of the new French Catholic Right has become enmeshed in a scandal relating to an alleged fake job held by his wife, a devastating blow for the man whose appeal in the Republican primary was largely based on his probity. As of late March, he was running third in <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-election-poll-idUSKBN16V0HH" type="external">public opinion polls</a>, behind an independent centrist candidate, Emmanuel Macron, and the leader of the far-right National Front party, Marine Le Pen (who has been making a late bid for Catholic votes, though she <a href="http://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/03/24/french-presidential-candidates-are-breaking-tradition-playing-religion" type="external">admits</a>, “I only go to church for weddings, funerals and baptisms.”) The election may turn out to be a warning from Providence about what happens when Christians put their faith in political leaders.</p>
<p>The Catholic social network So, while many new Catholics are politically active, some talk about being “meta-political,” as the popular Catholic lawyer and <a href="http://www.koztoujours.fr/lauteur" type="external">blogger</a> (and author of <a href="http://www.koztoujours.fr/identitaire-le-mauvais-genie-du-christianisme" type="external">Identity: The Evil Genius of Christianity</a>) put it. They understand not only that the magisterium transcends political boundaries; they understand a fundamental lesson of May 1968: Politics is downstream from culture.</p>
<p>These new Catholics have identified the enemy as “liberalism,” in the French sense of a drive for ever-greater individual liberty. Liberalism, in this view, is responsible for sexual depravity and the culture of death, and for the excesses of globalized capitalism red-in-tooth-and-claw. Pope Francis’ warnings about a “throwaway culture” that leads both to abortions and to quasi-slaves in third world factories making disposable consumer items of questionable worth are tailor-made for them.</p>
<p>Some exponents of this doctrine have started an intellectual review called Limite (“Limits”), marrying a scathing critique of capitalism to excoriation of progressive dogmas regarding sexuality. The inaugural issue featured an article criticizing artificial contraception for going against the philosophy of consuming organic, locally sourced products. It is hard to tell how much of this is genuine and how much of it is artful trolling of a French left that likes to think of itself as the opponent to “liberalism.”</p>
<p>And in Lyon, new Catholics opened a “cooperative café” named after Simone Weil, the mystical Jewish-born philosopher who had a lifelong love affair with Catholicism. Young people gather there to hear speakers on the evils of globalization, environmental degradation and the culture of death.</p>
<p>Protest movements and intellectual reviews are well and good, but if a tree must be judged by its fruits, then the true criterion of whether the new Catholicism is for real will be the Beatitudes. One reason to be optimistic is the story of a nonprofit named Entourage.</p>
<p>Entourage is an iPhone app that bills itself as a “social network for those who don’t have a social network.” It helps volunteers for organizations that help the homeless coordinate and share information. But it is also a public-facing app that helps anyone help the homeless around them. Someone can post about a person on the corner of such-and-such streets who needs a blanket, and someone else can bring it to them.</p>
<p>Jean-Marc Potdevin, the founder of Entourage, is as earnest as anyone you will meet. An engineer by training, he became wealthy by working in several internet startups before undergoing what he calls a mid-life crisis: Why was he working so hard when he didn’t need to, and what for? Although raised Catholic, he had stopped believing, praying or attending church. One day, Potdevin decided to walk the road to Compostela, and he says that during his trip he had an encounter with Christ. In his earlier career as a scientist, “I worked in a cognitive science research lab, so I know the mind can play tricks on you,” he quickly adds after describing how he believes the Lord spoke to him. After two years of working out his mystical experience under spiritual guidance, he got the idea for Entourage after spending more time with homeless people. Some who work at Entourage used to live in the streets, and the nonprofit has an advisory group made up of homeless people. More and more homeless people can now find smartphones, get online through free Wi-Fi hotspots and are now on Entourage making requests.</p>
<p>In a first world country, he explains, homeless people can find ways to feed themselves or get emergency health care or shelter: “I’m not saying things are good, they’re not, but that’s not [addressing] what kills homeless people. What kills homeless people is loneliness.” Behind the practical good that Entourage can do, he unfurls a vision that goes beyond hot meals to enabling social connections. “Look at this society, where it’s a permanent rat race, where we’re all divided,” he says. “What are we missing? We’re missing the face of Christ, which is in the poor.”</p>
<p>Potdevin makes it clear that even though he does not hide his faith, Entourage is a secular group, with that status enshrined in the nonprofit’s by-laws, and that he works with everyone. He seeks to partner with as many groups that help the homeless as possible, whether secular, Christian, Jewish or Muslim. But some groups refuse to work with him because he doesn’t hide his faith, he says.</p>
<p>But this isn’t about Entourage. After all, in every era and country Catholics are coming up with worthy initiatives to help the needy. The French government recently launched a contest called “La France s’engage,” awarding grants to the innovative nonprofits that received the most online votes. Voters could vote again each day, and every Catholic I knew on Facebook and Twitter kept pestering their followers to vote for Entourage repeatedly. As the app vied for first place, a story came out trying to trigger bien-pensant outrage at Potdevin for appearing at an event where a spokesman for La Manif had been featured, but Entourage nevertheless <a href="http://www.associations.gouv.fr/annonce-des-laureats-la-france-s-engage-session-2017.html" type="external">triumphed</a>. The victory cannot be credited wholly to Catholic networks, as Potdevin’s friends in the startup world also beat their drums. Nonetheless, the fact that an app like Entourage could win is a sign of serious engagement by Catholics, and engagement for the right causes.</p>
<p>The new Catholics comprise a movement that is still young and small, and which faces many pitfalls. It is still, sociologically, an elite movement. It might be lured by the temptations of politicization. It might still frizzle out. But I don’t think so. I believe this is a real movement of the Spirit—one that could change the country in my daughter’s lifetime.</p>
<p>This article also appeared in print, under the headline “Religion is playing an unexpectedly large role in this spring’s presidential election,” in the April 17, 2017 issue.</p>
<p>Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry, who lives in Paris, is a contributing writer to America, a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., and a columnist at TheWeek.com.</p> | false | 1 | years ago started realize something whenever less five minutes early mass go overflow room would typically step people sitting floor get church filled gills every sunday young families children time compelling priest one poshest areas paris kind place historically conspicuously catholiccomparable mainline protestant tradition affluent neighborhoods older american cities moved saw thing live different neighborhood one upwardly mobile real estate agencies coyly say sunday morning church packed upscale catholics senior citizens see everywhere also immigrant families mostly subsaharan africa indian ocean countries kinds hipsters might expect religious children everywhere started going random parishes sundays see real trend indeed sunday high mass packed parishes paris also true lyon second biggest city country catholic revival francethe evidence still mostly anecdotal nation 53 percent citizens identify catholic 5 percent regularly attend mass according recent poll conducted ipsos reported catholic newspaper la croixit may starting cities highly educated presidential campaign decided may 7 may prove highly attuned politics fine need mustard seed french revolution originally elite phenomenon historians like rodney stark shown talk early christianity rome religion slaves also appealed early consistently elite seen something never expected think entire life never seen dozen people church village family hails day christmas easter returned recently twothirds full also activities outside weekly mass remember parish caring family iraqi christians local teenagers started project local crafts school beautify church first revival catholicism france something could fleetingly smell air would notice easterandchristmas catholic college friends posting facebook updates going church raising money christians middle east handing food homeless catholic charity two previously irreligious friends nowhere dropped highstatus careers walked road compostela still one active pilgrimage destinations world religious experience got changed lives returned rise zombie catholic true vocations priesthood perhaps ultimate criterion churchs health palpably growing significant finally plateaued multidecade decline number priests archdiocese paris already showed uptick something help attract people pews ipsos survey also suggested mass attendance may measure strength catholicism estimated 23 percent french population involved catholics feel attached church means donations family lives commitments live lives differently less engaged catholics another category church members less flattering name much discussed lately zombie catholics may attend mass proven highly influential years presidential campaign historian robert zaretsky described journal foreign policy highly educated meritocraticwith strong attachment social community family activities general wariness role state private community affairs including catholic schools resurgent catholic bloc foreshadowed backlash 1980s socialist governments unsuccessful plan merge public private schools opposition samesex marriage 2013 last nov 20 something happened french politics made world raise eyebrow frances republican conservative party held first round firstever primary presidential nominee previously writtenoff candidate named françois fillon smashed competitors coming 15 points ahead160of alain juppé frontrunner polls one week later beat juppé runoff election almost exactly two one made fillon stand pride catholicism friendliness toward socially conservative causes country secular libertine makes one odd duckling even conservative partys primary juppé described agnostic catholic primetime interview january fillon put hand heart said gaullist furthermore christian means never take decision would run counter respect human dignity respect individual solidarity millions devout catholics like milk honey broken powerful french taboo mentioning religion public leftwing friend mine put right catholic doesnt right say run president one believes committed catholics provided fillons margin victory primary provided crucial measure support according poll conducted news site atlantico late november 83 percent practicing catholics planning vote fillon republican party runoff campaign shenanigans froth establish incontrovertible something could glimpsed glass darkly first wrote french christian revival american edition week early 2015 piece filtered back across atlantic world french catholicism main piece feedback got catholic acquaintances boiled ive seeing couldnt believe real reversal may 1968 france known one fiercely secular countries earth pew research center survey released february found 10 percent french citizens considered christian important part french identitycompared 30 percent italy 32 percent united states responding affirmatively question countries french revolution rebellion altar much thronethe reign terror orgy anticlerical violenceand struggle progressive forces church played centuries struggle seemed ended complete permanent victory secular side 1905 law establishing separation church state obvious marker may 1968 student worker protests proved almost important cultural heights country seized shaped 1968 spirit libertarian free loveand steve jobslike added love money love sex patina counterculture result laws liberalizing divorce abortion secularism harsh nobody outside country understand banning islamic veil schools supposed make sense resurgence catholicism political force france fact began 2013 startling intensity la manif pour tousprotest movement formed oppose frances samesex marriage bill issue abortion contraception suddenly got catholics behinds bit mystery comparable backlash samesex marriage among catholics united states laurent bouvet politicalscience professor versailles saintquentinenyvelines university speculated financial times last fall traditional catholics france never really accepted revolutionary notion individual freedom supersede moral authority priest family head arewary concept equality whatever reason la manifofficially secular nonpartisan nonprofit reality almost completely catholic phenomenonmoved hundreds thousands take streets protest governments policy several weeks160in 2013 marches included pink baby blue white balloons along signs messages father mother nothing better child years question la manif energy unleashed whether newfound political intensity would produce results polls fillonwho vowing overturn samesex marriage remains opposed adoption children gay couplesmay showed interesting la manifs potential kind may 68 reverse words commentators like jeanfrançois kahn touchstone decisive shift mores well incubator leaders social networks experiments end pollinating across culture indeed many movements ideas arisen thanks la manif one end spectrum les veilleursthe watchmen leaderless movement youngsters samesex marriage bill passed spent nights standing front government buildings holding candles reading poems protesting governments encroachment christian society getting arrested movement seemed made mostly idealistic youngsters got adrenaline rush life manif protests didnt want quit la manif remained scrupulously nonpartisaneven though one oblivious appeal rightsome alumni founded sens commun common sense group affiliated frances republican party avowed goal playing role similar christian right strengthening americas republican party still many frances newly observant catholics like french people jaded politics catholic social teaching appeals precisely though commands engagement public square transcends partisan platform conservatives either american traditional french soilandtradition mold likely bang pope franciss environmental encyclical laudato si calls solidarity migrants wax enthusiastic john paul iis theology body one la manifs prominent spokesmen tugdual derville promotes concept integral ecology écologie humaine term tries signify care environment care poor care unborn go together seems vast majority never traditional latin mass strengthening arguments catholics wary becoming partisan françois fillons campaign turning like something biblical morality tale shining knight new french catholic right become enmeshed scandal relating alleged fake job held wife devastating blow man whose appeal republican primary largely based probity late march running third public opinion polls behind independent centrist candidate emmanuel macron leader farright national front party marine le pen making late bid catholic votes though admits go church weddings funerals baptisms election may turn warning providence happens christians put faith political leaders catholic social network many new catholics politically active talk metapolitical popular catholic lawyer blogger author identity evil genius christianity put understand magisterium transcends political boundaries understand fundamental lesson may 1968 politics downstream culture new catholics identified enemy liberalism french sense drive evergreater individual liberty liberalism view responsible sexual depravity culture death excesses globalized capitalism redintoothandclaw pope francis warnings throwaway culture leads abortions quasislaves third world factories making disposable consumer items questionable worth tailormade exponents doctrine started intellectual review called limite limits marrying scathing critique capitalism excoriation progressive dogmas regarding sexuality inaugural issue featured article criticizing artificial contraception going philosophy consuming organic locally sourced products hard tell much genuine much artful trolling french left likes think opponent liberalism lyon new catholics opened cooperative café named simone weil mystical jewishborn philosopher lifelong love affair catholicism young people gather hear speakers evils globalization environmental degradation culture death protest movements intellectual reviews well good tree must judged fruits true criterion whether new catholicism real beatitudes one reason optimistic story nonprofit named entourage entourage iphone app bills social network dont social network helps volunteers organizations help homeless coordinate share information also publicfacing app helps anyone help homeless around someone post person corner suchandsuch streets needs blanket someone else bring jeanmarc potdevin founder entourage earnest anyone meet engineer training became wealthy working several internet startups undergoing calls midlife crisis working hard didnt need although raised catholic stopped believing praying attending church one day potdevin decided walk road compostela says trip encounter christ earlier career scientist worked cognitive science research lab know mind play tricks quickly adds describing believes lord spoke two years working mystical experience spiritual guidance got idea entourage spending time homeless people work entourage used live streets nonprofit advisory group made homeless people homeless people find smartphones get online free wifi hotspots entourage making requests first world country explains homeless people find ways feed get emergency health care shelter im saying things good theyre thats addressing kills homeless people kills homeless people loneliness behind practical good entourage unfurls vision goes beyond hot meals enabling social connections look society permanent rat race divided says missing missing face christ poor potdevin makes clear even though hide faith entourage secular group status enshrined nonprofits bylaws works everyone seeks partner many groups help homeless possible whether secular christian jewish muslim groups refuse work doesnt hide faith says isnt entourage every era country catholics coming worthy initiatives help needy french government recently launched contest called la france sengage awarding grants innovative nonprofits received online votes voters could vote day every catholic knew facebook twitter kept pestering followers vote entourage repeatedly app vied first place story came trying trigger bienpensant outrage potdevin appearing event spokesman la manif featured entourage nevertheless triumphed victory credited wholly catholic networks potdevins friends startup world also beat drums nonetheless fact app like entourage could win sign serious engagement catholics engagement right causes new catholics comprise movement still young small faces many pitfalls still sociologically elite movement might lured temptations politicization might still frizzle dont think believe real movement spiritone could change country daughters lifetime article also appeared print headline religion playing unexpectedly large role springs presidential election april 17 2017 issue pascalemmanuel gobry lives paris contributing writer america fellow ethics public policy center washington dc columnist theweekcom | 1,659 |
<p />
<p />
<p>The U.S. is supposed to withdraw all its troops from Afghanistan by the end of this new year. But despite public opinion polls to the contrary, President Obama is seeking to leave several thousand Special Forces troops, military trainers, CIA personnel, “contractors” and surveillance listening posts for 10 more years in Afghanistan until the end of 2024.</p>
<p>The CNN/ORC International survey released Dec. 30 shows that 75% of the American people oppose keeping any U.S. military troops in Afghanistan after the scheduled pullout Dec. 31. Indeed, “a majority of Americans would like to see U.S. troops pull out of Afghanistan before the December 2014 deadline.”</p>
<p>The poll’s most important statistic is that “Just 17% of those questioned say they support the 12-year-long war, down from 52% in December 2008. Opposition to the conflict now stands at 82%, up from 46% five years ago. CNN Polling Director Keating Holland suggested the17% support was the lowest for any U.S. ongoing war.</p>
<p>A majority of Americans turned against the war against Afghanistan a few years go, but according to an Associated Press-GfK poll released Dec. 18 — these days 57% say that even attacking and invading Afghanistan in 2001was probably the “wrong thing to do.”</p>
<p>Clearly, the American people are truly fed up, but do not have a viable electoral alternative to a continuing military presence in Afghanistan. The era of the mass antiwar movement, which was supported by the great majority of Democrats, collapsed when Democrat Obama was elected. Democrats may acknowledge their views to pollsters but they rarely attend protests against Obama’s Afghan adventure or drone attacks in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere.</p>
<p>President Obama is sticking to his original schedule of withdrawing “all ground troops” by the end of 2014, but the Special Forces, et al., are not technically “ground troops.” His intention to deploy a smaller but vital military presence is related to larger policy goals connected to the “pivot” to Asia.</p>
<p>The White House has been bargaining with the Kabul government for years to keep military forces in Afghanistan for another 10 years. In return, the U.S. would pay multi-billions for the training and upkeep of the Afghan army and police and help finance the government at great expense until 2024.</p>
<p>It recently seemed an agreement was reached, but President Hamid Karzai says it cannot be signed until after a new president takes office after elections in April — a delay that upset the Oval Office.</p>
<p>According to Mara Tchalakov of the Institute for the Study of War: “With deep divisions in Afghanistan over the right of legal immunity for American soldiers and contractors, as well as the right to conduct night raids in private Afghan homes, Karzai is trying to buy time to build political support…. Waiting until after the election would buy time and leave open the possibility of renegotiating issues that could prove problematic as the election nears.”</p>
<p>At this stage, it is not known who will win in April. Two-term Karzai cannot run for reelection, a blessing as far as the Obama Administration is concerned. He may be a puppet but he knows how to kick back on his own, especially about civilian deaths, night house invasions by U.S. troops, and Washington’s efforts to completely dominate the Kabul government.</p>
<p>The White House has a year to obtain a signed agreement and seems confident it will do so either before or soon after Karzai steps down, particularly if the anti-Taliban, pro-U.S. Northern Alliance and friendly political parties such as the Tajik-dominated Jamiat-e Islami, gain more influence.</p>
<p>Obama sought a similar arrangement in Iraq when U.S. troops were set to withdraw in December 2011, but a deal was rejected in the last months by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, much to the administration’s chagrin.</p>
<p>In a sense, Obama was lucky. If the several thousand American troops he sought had remained in Iraq, they would have become embroiled in the al-Qaeda and jihadist Sunni uprising against the majority Shi’ite regime led by Maliki. In 2013 alone, over 7,300 civilians and 1,000 Iraqi security forces — overwhelmingly Shia —were slaughtered. Most of the deaths were from executions and bomb attacks.</p>
<p>The White House may be extremely worried about closer ties between Shi’ite Iraq and Iran — an unintended consequence of the U.S. invasion and overthrow of the secular regime of Saddam Hussein — but it is now even more worried about Sunni jihadist gains in Iraq, particularly since jihadist elements began to dominate the rebel fighting in neighboring Syria. The al-Qaeda affiliate ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria) is making significant gains in both countries.</p>
<p>According to the New York Times Dec. 26, Washington “is quietly rushing dozens of Hellfire missiles and low-tech surveillance drones to Iraq to help government forces combat an explosion of violence by a Qaeda-backed insurgency that is gaining territory in both western Iraq and neighboring Syria.”</p>
<p>On Jan. 3, the same newspaper reported: “Radical Sunni militants aligned with Al Qaeda threatened on Thursday to seize control of Fallujah and Ramadi, two of the most important cities in Iraq, setting fire to police stations, freeing prisoners from jail and occupying mosques, as the government rushed troop reinforcements to the areas.”</p>
<p>Afghanistan is especially important to Washington for two main reasons.</p>
<p>The obvious first reason is to have smaller but elite forces and surveillance facilities in Afghanistan to continue the fighting when necessary to protect U.S. interests, which include maintaining a powerful influence within the country. Those interests will become jeopardized if, as some suspect, armed conflict eventually breaks out among various forces contending for power in Kabul since the mid-1990s, including, of course, the Taliban, which held power from 1996 until the 2001 U.S. invasion.</p>
<p>The more understated second reason is that Afghanistan is an extremely important geopolitical asset for the U.S., particularly because it is the Pentagon’s only military base in Central Asia, touching Iran to the west, Pakistan to the east, China to the northeast, and various resource-rich former Soviet republics to the northwest, as well as Russia to the north.</p>
<p>A Dec. 30 report in Foreign Policy by Louise Arbour noted: “Most countries in [Central Asia] are governed by aging leaders and have no succession mechanisms — in itself&#160;potentially a recipe for chaos. All have young, alienated populations and decaying infrastructure… in a corner of the world too long cast as a pawn in someone else’s game.”</p>
<p>At this point, a continued presence in Afghanistan dovetails with Washington’s so-called New Silk Road policy first announced by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two years ago. The objective over time is to sharply increase U.S. economic, trade, and political power in strategic Central and South Asia to strengthen U.S. global hegemony and to impede China’s development into a regional hegemon.</p>
<p>As the State Department’s Robert O. Blake Jr. put it March 23: “The dynamic region stretching from Turkey, across the Caspian Sea to Central Asia, to Afghanistan and the massive South Asian economies, is a region where greater cooperation and integration can lead to more prosperity, opportunity, and stability.</p>
<p>“But for all of this progress and promise, we’re also clear-eyed about the challenges. Despite real gains in Afghan stability, we understand the region is anxious about security challenges. That’s why we continue to expand our cooperation with Afghanistan and other countries of the region to strengthen border security and combat transnational threats.”</p>
<p>Blake did not define what “security challenges” he had in mind. But both China and Russia are nearby seeking greater trade and influence in Central Asia — their adjacent backyard, so to speak — and the White House, at least, may consider this a security challenge of its own.</p> | false | 1 | us supposed withdraw troops afghanistan end new year despite public opinion polls contrary president obama seeking leave several thousand special forces troops military trainers cia personnel contractors surveillance listening posts 10 years afghanistan end 2024 cnnorc international survey released dec 30 shows 75 american people oppose keeping us military troops afghanistan scheduled pullout dec 31 indeed majority americans would like see us troops pull afghanistan december 2014 deadline polls important statistic 17 questioned say support 12yearlong war 52 december 2008 opposition conflict stands 82 46 five years ago cnn polling director keating holland suggested the17 support lowest us ongoing war majority americans turned war afghanistan years go according associated pressgfk poll released dec 18 days 57 say even attacking invading afghanistan 2001was probably wrong thing clearly american people truly fed viable electoral alternative continuing military presence afghanistan era mass antiwar movement supported great majority democrats collapsed democrat obama elected democrats may acknowledge views pollsters rarely attend protests obamas afghan adventure drone attacks pakistan yemen somalia elsewhere president obama sticking original schedule withdrawing ground troops end 2014 special forces et al technically ground troops intention deploy smaller vital military presence related larger policy goals connected pivot asia white house bargaining kabul government years keep military forces afghanistan another 10 years return us would pay multibillions training upkeep afghan army police help finance government great expense 2024 recently seemed agreement reached president hamid karzai says signed new president takes office elections april delay upset oval office according mara tchalakov institute study war deep divisions afghanistan right legal immunity american soldiers contractors well right conduct night raids private afghan homes karzai trying buy time build political support waiting election would buy time leave open possibility renegotiating issues could prove problematic election nears stage known win april twoterm karzai run reelection blessing far obama administration concerned may puppet knows kick back especially civilian deaths night house invasions us troops washingtons efforts completely dominate kabul government white house year obtain signed agreement seems confident either soon karzai steps particularly antitaliban prous northern alliance friendly political parties tajikdominated jamiate islami gain influence obama sought similar arrangement iraq us troops set withdraw december 2011 deal rejected last months prime minister nouri almaliki much administrations chagrin sense obama lucky several thousand american troops sought remained iraq would become embroiled alqaeda jihadist sunni uprising majority shiite regime led maliki 2013 alone 7300 civilians 1000 iraqi security forces overwhelmingly shia slaughtered deaths executions bomb attacks white house may extremely worried closer ties shiite iraq iran unintended consequence us invasion overthrow secular regime saddam hussein even worried sunni jihadist gains iraq particularly since jihadist elements began dominate rebel fighting neighboring syria alqaeda affiliate isis islamic state iraq greater syria making significant gains countries according new york times dec 26 washington quietly rushing dozens hellfire missiles lowtech surveillance drones iraq help government forces combat explosion violence qaedabacked insurgency gaining territory western iraq neighboring syria jan 3 newspaper reported radical sunni militants aligned al qaeda threatened thursday seize control fallujah ramadi two important cities iraq setting fire police stations freeing prisoners jail occupying mosques government rushed troop reinforcements areas afghanistan especially important washington two main reasons obvious first reason smaller elite forces surveillance facilities afghanistan continue fighting necessary protect us interests include maintaining powerful influence within country interests become jeopardized suspect armed conflict eventually breaks among various forces contending power kabul since mid1990s including course taliban held power 1996 2001 us invasion understated second reason afghanistan extremely important geopolitical asset us particularly pentagons military base central asia touching iran west pakistan east china northeast various resourcerich former soviet republics northwest well russia north dec 30 report foreign policy louise arbour noted countries central asia governed aging leaders succession mechanisms itself160potentially recipe chaos young alienated populations decaying infrastructure corner world long cast pawn someone elses game point continued presence afghanistan dovetails washingtons socalled new silk road policy first announced secretary state hillary clinton two years ago objective time sharply increase us economic trade political power strategic central south asia strengthen us global hegemony impede chinas development regional hegemon state departments robert blake jr put march 23 dynamic region stretching turkey across caspian sea central asia afghanistan massive south asian economies region greater cooperation integration lead prosperity opportunity stability progress promise also cleareyed challenges despite real gains afghan stability understand region anxious security challenges thats continue expand cooperation afghanistan countries region strengthen border security combat transnational threats blake define security challenges mind china russia nearby seeking greater trade influence central asia adjacent backyard speak white house least may consider security challenge | 756 |
<p>Deborah Nucatola—the Planned Parenthood doc with the stone-cold heart and the lucrative skill of “crushing” babies in just the right spot—has been advising the Obama administration on family planning policy since 2010.</p>
<p>From April 2010 through April 2014, Nucatola was one of several experts the U.S. Health and Human Services Office of Population Affairs (OPA) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Division of Reproductive Health tasked with creating federal <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6304.pdf" type="external">guidelines</a> for “quality family planning services.” A member of the “Expert Work Group” and the “Technical Panel on Clinical Women’s Services,” Nucatola was actively engaged in the “ <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6304.pdf" type="external">multistage process</a>” that produced the government’s 2014&#160; <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6304a1.htm" type="external">report</a>, “Providing Quality Family Planning Services” (QFP).</p>
<p>Her responsibilities as a “technical” consultant and an “expert” included analyzing research summaries and professional advisories, providing “individual feedback” on the government’s initial recommendations, “reviewing” the CDC-OPA staff’s “core recommendations,” giving her expert “opinion,” and then approving the recommendations. (See the <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6304.pdf" type="external">report</a>’s appendices for the names of Expert Work Group members and technical experts, and detailed descriptions of the experts’ involvement in formulating the report’s recommendations.)</p>
<p>What’s the goal of those government recommendations? To help “clients…achieve their desired number and spacing of children and increase the likelihood that those children are born healthy.”</p>
<p>Leave it to the Obama administration to tap an abortionist for “expert” advice on ensuring that children are “born healthy”—an abortionist, mind you, who relishes butchering a “ <a href="http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/cmp/investigative-footage/" type="external">17-weeker</a>” and bagging up a tiny infant’s&#160; “ <a href="http://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/cmp/investigative-footage/" type="external">heart, lung, liver</a>” to sell for a few extra bucks.</p>
<p>But there’s more. Nucatola is not the only abortionist in the government’s family-planning “ <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6304.pdf" type="external">Expert Work Group</a>”: Dr. Michael Policar literally <a href="http://prochoice.org/resources/principles-of-abortion-care-a-curriculum-for-physician-assistants-and-advanced-practice-nurses/" type="external">wrote the book</a> on “abortion care.” Others, including Dr. <a href="http://www.arhp.org/Publications-and-Resources/Contraception-Journal/March-2009-1" type="external">Beth Jordan</a>, Dr. <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pub/mark-hathaway/48/584/825" type="external">Mark Hathaway</a>, and Dr. <a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/572907/posts" type="external">Pablo Rodriguez</a> are long-time abortion advocates and veteran providers. Another member of the group, Dr. Vanessa Cullins, is the vice-president of medical affairs for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the country’s largest abortion business. (Only in the delusional land of Obama can rabid abortionists “self-identify” as <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/planned-parenthood-president-criticizes-gop-candidates/" type="external">compassionate</a>&#160;caregivers and “pass” as health “experts” on women and children.)</p>
<p>Nucatola seems to like this whole government consulting thing quite a bit. Turns out she’s done it before—numerous times. (Chopping, crushing, and dismembering really tiny little people doesn’t take that much time, you know.) In addition to her work on the 2014 family planning recommendations, Nucatola has been a consultant on several other CDC initiatives. She was a “ <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6403a1.htm" type="external">Liaison Participant</a>” in the 2015 work group that helped shape the 2015 “ <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/std/tg2015/tg-2015-print.pdf" type="external">Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines</a>” the CDC released on June 5, 2015.&#160; She&#160; <a href="http://www.docstoc.com/docs/159564628/MMWR-Recommendations-and-Reports-/-Vol.-62-/-No.-5" type="external">consulted</a> in 2011 on revisions to the “U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use,” released in 2013. She was an ad hoc <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6124a4.htm" type="external">reviewer</a> for the CDC’s 2012 updated <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6124a4.htm" type="external">guidelines</a> on contraception for HIV-infected women and an ad hoc <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6124a4.htm" type="external">reviewer</a> for the CDC’s 2011 updated <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6026a3.htm" type="external">guidelines</a>&#160;on contraception for post-partum women.</p>
<p>Her steady stream of consulting work for the CDC and other government offices raises an important question: How much are we, America’s taxpayers, paying Nucatola for her “expert opinion”? It’s not clear.</p>
<p>The barbaric nature of Nucatola’s chosen work, however, is all too clear.</p>
<p>Her detached, chilling descriptions of harvesting “ <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/planned-parenthood-doctor-appears-discuss-organ-sales-article-1.2292550" type="external">extremities</a>,” “hearts,” and “ <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/planned-parenthood-doctor-appears-discuss-organ-sales-article-1.2292550" type="external">livers</a>” from unborn babies she killed stirred an old childhood memory of mine. My parents raised chickens when I was young—chickens were cheap, easy, and nutritious—important considerations for a big family. We kids would welcome the baby chicks, feed them, and later collect their eggs. Months down the road, my dad would load the chickens into crates and take them to the women who ran a nearby slaughterhouse.</p>
<p>No doubt, the woman who unflinchingly killed our squawking chickens, dispassionately dismembered them, and deftly bagged the prized chicken livers was a very nice person—perhaps even someone to share a glass of wine with over lunch. But to us, her role as executioner—of chickens—earned her the nickname “Wicked Witch.”</p>
<p>If children intuitively call a woman who butchers chickens&#160;and bags up their livers a&#160; “wicked witch,” what should we call a woman who butchers tiny babies—human beings—and bags up their livers? The Obama administration calls her a “government consultant.”</p>
<p>That’s reprehensible. Sen. Rand Paul and others have announced plans to <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/248307-paul-vows-to-defund-planned-parenthood-next-week" type="external">defund</a>&#160;Planned Parenthood in light of the Nucatola debacle. Good, but not enough.</p>
<p>We need to delegitimize Planned Parenthood and delegitimize the cruel doctors whose expertise consists in knowing which parts of the unborn baby to “ <a href="https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ppfatranscript072514_final.pdf" type="external">crush</a>” in order to to harvest the money-producing parts “ <a href="https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/ppfatranscript072514_final.pdf" type="external">intact</a>.” We need to insist that&#160;being an expert in baby dismemberment disqualifies instead of qualifies a doctor from being an “expert” consultant for the government—an expert on making sure children are “born healthy,” no less.</p>
<p>Planned Parenthood runs a bloody business. Many Americans are seeing, for the first time, the chilling, violent reality of abortion—and the insatiable greed driving America’s abortion business. Now, the question is: What is Congress willing to do about it?</p>
<p>Mary Hasson is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.</p> | false | 1 | deborah nucatolathe planned parenthood doc stonecold heart lucrative skill crushing babies right spothas advising obama administration family planning policy since 2010 april 2010 april 2014 nucatola one several experts us health human services office population affairs opa us centers disease control prevention cdc division reproductive health tasked creating federal guidelines quality family planning services member expert work group technical panel clinical womens services nucatola actively engaged multistage process produced governments 2014160 report providing quality family planning services qfp responsibilities technical consultant expert included analyzing research summaries professional advisories providing individual feedback governments initial recommendations reviewing cdcopa staffs core recommendations giving expert opinion approving recommendations see reports appendices names expert work group members technical experts detailed descriptions experts involvement formulating reports recommendations whats goal government recommendations help clientsachieve desired number spacing children increase likelihood children born healthy leave obama administration tap abortionist expert advice ensuring children born healthyan abortionist mind relishes butchering 17weeker bagging tiny infants160 heart lung liver sell extra bucks theres nucatola abortionist governments familyplanning expert work group dr michael policar literally wrote book abortion care others including dr beth jordan dr mark hathaway dr pablo rodriguez longtime abortion advocates veteran providers another member group dr vanessa cullins vicepresident medical affairs planned parenthood federation america countrys largest abortion business delusional land obama rabid abortionists selfidentify compassionate160caregivers pass health experts women children nucatola seems like whole government consulting thing quite bit turns shes done beforenumerous times chopping crushing dismembering really tiny little people doesnt take much time know addition work 2014 family planning recommendations nucatola consultant several cdc initiatives liaison participant 2015 work group helped shape 2015 sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines cdc released june 5 2015160 she160 consulted 2011 revisions us selected practice recommendations contraceptive use released 2013 ad hoc reviewer cdcs 2012 updated guidelines contraception hivinfected women ad hoc reviewer cdcs 2011 updated guidelines160on contraception postpartum women steady stream consulting work cdc government offices raises important question much americas taxpayers paying nucatola expert opinion clear barbaric nature nucatolas chosen work however clear detached chilling descriptions harvesting extremities hearts livers unborn babies killed stirred old childhood memory mine parents raised chickens youngchickens cheap easy nutritiousimportant considerations big family kids would welcome baby chicks feed later collect eggs months road dad would load chickens crates take women ran nearby slaughterhouse doubt woman unflinchingly killed squawking chickens dispassionately dismembered deftly bagged prized chicken livers nice personperhaps even someone share glass wine lunch us role executionerof chickensearned nickname wicked witch children intuitively call woman butchers chickens160and bags livers a160 wicked witch call woman butchers tiny babieshuman beingsand bags livers obama administration calls government consultant thats reprehensible sen rand paul others announced plans defund160planned parenthood light nucatola debacle good enough need delegitimize planned parenthood delegitimize cruel doctors whose expertise consists knowing parts unborn baby crush order harvest moneyproducing parts intact need insist that160being expert baby dismemberment disqualifies instead qualifies doctor expert consultant governmentan expert making sure children born healthy less planned parenthood runs bloody business many americans seeing first time chilling violent reality abortionand insatiable greed driving americas abortion business question congress willing mary hasson fellow ethics public policy center | 517 |
<p />
<p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1844673669?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=forepolijour-20&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=1844673669" type="external">Israel and Palestine – Reappraisals, Revisions, Refutations. Avi Shlaim. Verso, London, 2009.</a></p>
<p>This is a thought provoking if not fully developed work on the ongoing situation in Palestine/Israel. Avi Shlaim has compiled a set of his writings from previous publications that in a broad way cover the events of the region, with a brief look at the Balfour Declaration before jumping forward to look at the UN Partition Plan of 1947 and its resulting sequence of events.</p>
<p>Avi Shlaim self professes to be of the school of revisionist historians and his writing fully supports that claim. Throughout the writing one of the themes is the Israeli use of military power to solve its problems, a solution much preferred to negotiations and compromise. A corollary of this is that when negotiations were used, they were mainly as a mask to delay a solution while the ongoing status quo built more settlements and evicted more Palestinians from their homes and farms, especially after the 1967 war.</p>
<p>Another thematic reminder that reiterates throughout the work is that of the asymmetric power – mainly military – that reinforces the previous idea, but also adds the knowledge that there is no balance in the situation, that Israel holds all the power, to the point that “a voluntary agreement between the parties is simply unattainable;” and as seen within the Oslo agreement the Palestinians would have been “subject to the provisions of Israeli law…and military orders… rather than international law.”</p>
<p />
<p>International Law</p>
<p />
<p>One of the more thought provoking themes raised by Shlaim is that of international law and its place within the creation of Israel/Palestine and its place within the ongoing torments of the Palestinian people. Shlaim clearly identifies the occupation as the most significant component of Israel’s defiance of international law. Under this rubric falls all the defiance of international law that refers to annexation, settlement, attacks on civilians, torture, imprisonment, land confiscation et al. That Israel is in defiance of international law is well supported, and especially since the attack on Gaza in 2008, wherein “Israel’s disdain for international norms involves America in a pattern of hypocrisy and makes a mockery of its claim to moral leadership.” At the end of his examination of Israel’s attack on Gaza, Shlaim states that Israel “has become a rogue state with ‘an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders.’ A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction [also against international law] and practices terrorism – the use of violence against civilians for political purposes [ditto].”</p>
<p>Where I have questions – and they are truly more questions than arguments as I am no authority on international law – is with his support of the state of Israel under international law by way of the slim trail of paperwork from the Balfour Declaration through to the UN Partition Plan of 1947.</p>
<p>Shlaim “accept[s] the legitimacy of the State of Israel within its pre-1967 borders” based on the “inescapable fact that something on a titanic scale had to be done for them [European holocaust survivors] and there was nothing titanic enough except Palestine,” as the “moral case for a Jewish state became unassailable.” These positions are arguable, as are any arguments stated in absolutes and written from a singular perspective of Western guilt for atrocities against the Jewish people in World War II.</p>
<p>Having questioned the statements, I cannot argue with the fact of Israel: it exists albeit in a somewhat ill-defined manner suiting the pro-settlement, apartheid, right wing religious nationalists; and it will continue to exist in spite of its manufactured fears and presentations of itself being the victim of Palestinian intransigence and under threat from any of a number of self-perceived enemies.</p>
<p>But is it all ‘legal’? Shlaim argues that “a resolution passed by the UN General Assembly by a large majority cannot be illegal.” Okay, fine. The vote was 33 in favour, 13 against and 10 abstentions, with a requirement for a 2/3 majority. Is that a large majority? Abstentions obviously were not counted, but why and under what pressure of ideals were those abstentions made? And what about the other countries, more than the fifty-six voting within the UN, and probably more including the many colonies that were probably excluded at the time? Still, Israel exists and the vote is irrelevant, except perhaps for arguing about where the boundaries of Israel should be under international law.</p>
<p />
<p>1947 Partition</p>
<p />
<p>The UN Partition Plan of 1947 is of dubious validity – I would be glad to receive arguments on the pros and cons of it – based as it was on a limited and perhaps contrived vote count. But even accepting its validity, further questions arise from the Plan itself in which it recommends:</p>
<p>From all the materials I have read, there was a large “attempt to alter by force the settlement envisaged by this resolution,” and there certainly has been a “situation in Palestine [note the name] [that] constitutes a threat to the peace.” Israeli historians of the propaganda ilk will argue yes, there certainly were “threats to peace,” and there were attempts to “alter by force” with the blame applied to the Arab armies and the indigenous population, yet much of this force and threat occurred well before the Arab states intervened.</p>
<p>The reality that has more recently been uncovered by the revisionist historians listed by Shlaim (and many others) demonstrates that force and peace threats rose immediately from the Israeli ‘defence’ forces who quickly set about the ethnic cleansing of over 400 towns using tactics which today would be considered terror. Perhaps then the arguable line of a two state settlement should be the original boundaries of the UN partition plan with Jerusalem as an international city?</p>
<p>Reality says that Israel exists in a much larger form than the original intended plan, and it will not surrender – arguably – any territory in a settlement with the Palestinians. Again, Israel exists and the Partition Plan is essentially irrelevant to moving forward within the current world situation.</p>
<p>Much farther back along the time line, the Balfour Declaration is simply that, a declaration of purpose, and has absolutely no validity in international law, or should not have. One governments belief about making a new state on already populated territory should have no validity in international law. This of course raises huge questions about many countries that were colonies set up with arbitrary boundaries by the imperial forces of the day extending throughout Asia, Africa, and the Americas (did any of the indigenous populations have a say in the establishment of their country and its boundaries?) and which have been partial cause if not major cause of many international problems today.</p>
<p>These concerns can be argued back and forth without changing much. What is clear is that Israel today is in a clear breach of international law along with its accomplice, the U.S. Shlaim covers much territory and significant time, but the two strongest hitting chapters from my perspective were the ones on Ariel Sharon in “Ariel Sharon’s War Against the Palestinians” and on Gaza “Israel’s War Against Hamas: Rhetoric and Reality.”</p>
<p />
<p>Back to the basics I – Sharon</p>
<p />
<p>Sharon is viewed as an ultimate warrior, in which “diplomacy…is the extension of war by other means,” with convictions based on Ze’ev Jabotinsky’s strategy “to enable the Zionist movement to deal with its local opponents from a position of unassailable strength.” His “iron wall” was “not an end in itself but a means to an end,” in order “to compel the Arabs to abandon any hope of destroying the Jewish state. Despair was expected to promote pragmatism.” His career was hallmarked with “mendacity, the most savage brutality towards the Arab civilians, and a persistent preference for force over diplomacy,” he remained “the champion of violent solutions.”</p>
<p>Apart from his “habitual violation of UN resolutions to the systematic abuse of international humanitarian law,” one of Sharon’s most disturbing aspects “was the commencement of the construction of the so called ‘security barrier’ or wall on the West Bank.” According to Shlaim, “it is clear that the wall is paving the way to the de facto annexation of a substantial part of the West Bank to Israel. Jabotinsky’s iron wall metaphor “fast became a hideous and horrendous concrete reality, and an environmental catastrophe,” not to mention the International Court of Justice “declared Construction of the barrier is contrary to international law.”</p>
<p />
<p>Back to the basics II – Gaza.</p>
<p />
<p>Gaza receives the denouement position within this series of articles, as it is the most recent, most aggressive, and most obvious violation of international law. When a massively armed force attacks what is essentially a large outdoor prison, having previously broken a truce sustained by Hamas, there can be no doubt about Israel’s culpability in breaking international law.</p>
<p>While introducing the background to this chapter, Shlaim says “the aftermath of the June 1967 war had very little to do with security and everything to do with territorial expansion….and the result has been on of the most prolonged and brutal military occupations of modern times.” At first, economic control of Gaza (and the West Bank), a control that “did incalculable damage to the economy of the Gaza Strip,” is discussed. The ongoing Israeli activities made it so “The development of local industry was actively impeded so as to make it impossible for the Palestinians to end their subordination to Israel and to establish the economic underpinnings essential for real political independence.”</p>
<p>When the Gaza settlers were withdrawn it served two purposes. The first was propaganda for the western media, but “the real purpose behind the move was to redraw unilaterally the borders of Greater Israel by incorporating the main settlement blocs on the West Bank into the [State] of Israel.” Shlaim’s history continues with strong condemnatory notes. After the withdrawal “Gaza was converted overnight into an open-air prison.” As for democracy, “Israel likes to portray itself as an island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. Yet it has never in its entire history done anything to promote democracy.” Turning to the Palestinian side, he says, “the Palestinian people succeeded in building the only genuine democracy in the Arab world with the possible exception of Lebanon and Morocco.” These are impressively strong statements that speak clearly of the reality in the Arab/Israeli conflict.</p>
<p>Shlaim notes the irony of “The international community imposing economic sanctions not against the occupier but against the occupied, not against the oppressor, but against the oppressed.” He also notes the reaction of Hamas, as “it began to move towards pragmatic accommodation of a two-state solution,” a voice Israel continually denies credibility to.</p>
<p>His language continues accusing and strong: “Killing civilians is a gross violation of international humanitarian law….Israel’s record is one of unbridled and unremitting brutality towards the inhabitants of Gaza.” The ongoing economic blockade is seen as immoral and also “a form of collective punishment that is strictly forbidden by international humanitarian law.” Beyond the economy, war crimes are listed that “alone sweep away any moral or legal justification for the war.” Shlaim ends the chapter with the passage quoted above about Israel becoming a rogue state that “habitually violates international law.”</p>
<p />
<p>Highlights</p>
<p />
<p>Shlaim’s work is not necessarily a good place to start for someone wanting an overview of the whole of the Palestine/Israel question from its historical inception through to today. It is however a powerfully stated series of descriptions and commentaries that highlight the Israeli disregard for international law and some of the complicity of the U.S. Without equivocation and with clear language that is accessible to all readers, Shlaim provides ample evidence of the international intransigence of Israel towards what are commonly expressed principles of international law and commonly held expectations of humanitarian behaviour. As a dissident historical perspective (becoming more and more mainstream, especially after the Gaza war), Israel and Palestine is a welcome and strongly worded addition to the library of material on the core threat to peace in the Middle East.</p> | false | 1 | israel palestine reappraisals revisions refutations avi shlaim verso london 2009 thought provoking fully developed work ongoing situation palestineisrael avi shlaim compiled set writings previous publications broad way cover events region brief look balfour declaration jumping forward look un partition plan 1947 resulting sequence events avi shlaim self professes school revisionist historians writing fully supports claim throughout writing one themes israeli use military power solve problems solution much preferred negotiations compromise corollary negotiations used mainly mask delay solution ongoing status quo built settlements evicted palestinians homes farms especially 1967 war another thematic reminder reiterates throughout work asymmetric power mainly military reinforces previous idea also adds knowledge balance situation israel holds power point voluntary agreement parties simply unattainable seen within oslo agreement palestinians would subject provisions israeli lawand military orders rather international law international law one thought provoking themes raised shlaim international law place within creation israelpalestine place within ongoing torments palestinian people shlaim clearly identifies occupation significant component israels defiance international law rubric falls defiance international law refers annexation settlement attacks civilians torture imprisonment land confiscation et al israel defiance international law well supported especially since attack gaza 2008 wherein israels disdain international norms involves america pattern hypocrisy makes mockery claim moral leadership end examination israels attack gaza shlaim states israel become rogue state utterly unscrupulous set leaders rogue state habitually violates international law possesses weapons mass destruction also international law practices terrorism use violence civilians political purposes ditto questions truly questions arguments authority international law support state israel international law way slim trail paperwork balfour declaration un partition plan 1947 shlaim accepts legitimacy state israel within pre1967 borders based inescapable fact something titanic scale done european holocaust survivors nothing titanic enough except palestine moral case jewish state became unassailable positions arguable arguments stated absolutes written singular perspective western guilt atrocities jewish people world war ii questioned statements argue fact israel exists albeit somewhat illdefined manner suiting prosettlement apartheid right wing religious nationalists continue exist spite manufactured fears presentations victim palestinian intransigence threat number selfperceived enemies legal shlaim argues resolution passed un general assembly large majority illegal okay fine vote 33 favour 13 10 abstentions requirement 23 majority large majority abstentions obviously counted pressure ideals abstentions made countries fiftysix voting within un probably including many colonies probably excluded time still israel exists vote irrelevant except perhaps arguing boundaries israel international law 1947 partition un partition plan 1947 dubious validity would glad receive arguments pros cons based limited perhaps contrived vote count even accepting validity questions arise plan recommends materials read large attempt alter force settlement envisaged resolution certainly situation palestine note name constitutes threat peace israeli historians propaganda ilk argue yes certainly threats peace attempts alter force blame applied arab armies indigenous population yet much force threat occurred well arab states intervened reality recently uncovered revisionist historians listed shlaim many others demonstrates force peace threats rose immediately israeli defence forces quickly set ethnic cleansing 400 towns using tactics today would considered terror perhaps arguable line two state settlement original boundaries un partition plan jerusalem international city reality says israel exists much larger form original intended plan surrender arguably territory settlement palestinians israel exists partition plan essentially irrelevant moving forward within current world situation much farther back along time line balfour declaration simply declaration purpose absolutely validity international law one governments belief making new state already populated territory validity international law course raises huge questions many countries colonies set arbitrary boundaries imperial forces day extending throughout asia africa americas indigenous populations say establishment country boundaries partial cause major cause many international problems today concerns argued back forth without changing much clear israel today clear breach international law along accomplice us shlaim covers much territory significant time two strongest hitting chapters perspective ones ariel sharon ariel sharons war palestinians gaza israels war hamas rhetoric reality back basics sharon sharon viewed ultimate warrior diplomacyis extension war means convictions based zeev jabotinskys strategy enable zionist movement deal local opponents position unassailable strength iron wall end means end order compel arabs abandon hope destroying jewish state despair expected promote pragmatism career hallmarked mendacity savage brutality towards arab civilians persistent preference force diplomacy remained champion violent solutions apart habitual violation un resolutions systematic abuse international humanitarian law one sharons disturbing aspects commencement construction called security barrier wall west bank according shlaim clear wall paving way de facto annexation substantial part west bank israel jabotinskys iron wall metaphor fast became hideous horrendous concrete reality environmental catastrophe mention international court justice declared construction barrier contrary international law back basics ii gaza gaza receives denouement position within series articles recent aggressive obvious violation international law massively armed force attacks essentially large outdoor prison previously broken truce sustained hamas doubt israels culpability breaking international law introducing background chapter shlaim says aftermath june 1967 war little security everything territorial expansionand result prolonged brutal military occupations modern times first economic control gaza west bank control incalculable damage economy gaza strip discussed ongoing israeli activities made development local industry actively impeded make impossible palestinians end subordination israel establish economic underpinnings essential real political independence gaza settlers withdrawn served two purposes first propaganda western media real purpose behind move redraw unilaterally borders greater israel incorporating main settlement blocs west bank state israel shlaims history continues strong condemnatory notes withdrawal gaza converted overnight openair prison democracy israel likes portray island democracy sea authoritarianism yet never entire history done anything promote democracy turning palestinian side says palestinian people succeeded building genuine democracy arab world possible exception lebanon morocco impressively strong statements speak clearly reality arabisraeli conflict shlaim notes irony international community imposing economic sanctions occupier occupied oppressor oppressed also notes reaction hamas began move towards pragmatic accommodation twostate solution voice israel continually denies credibility language continues accusing strong killing civilians gross violation international humanitarian lawisraels record one unbridled unremitting brutality towards inhabitants gaza ongoing economic blockade seen immoral also form collective punishment strictly forbidden international humanitarian law beyond economy war crimes listed alone sweep away moral legal justification war shlaim ends chapter passage quoted israel becoming rogue state habitually violates international law highlights shlaims work necessarily good place start someone wanting overview whole palestineisrael question historical inception today however powerfully stated series descriptions commentaries highlight israeli disregard international law complicity us without equivocation clear language accessible readers shlaim provides ample evidence international intransigence israel towards commonly expressed principles international law commonly held expectations humanitarian behaviour dissident historical perspective becoming mainstream especially gaza war israel palestine welcome strongly worded addition library material core threat peace middle east | 1,079 |
<p>President Donald Trump says it’s probably time to “just let Obamacare fail” after the latest humiliating heath bill collapse in the Senate. Still, he’s making a last-ditch effort to find some way to revive his party’s seemingly failed efforts on the bill.</p>
<p>Trump stayed largely on the sidelines as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell struggled unsuccessfully to round up support to make good on the GOP’s years of promises to repeal and replace former President Barack Obama’s healthcare law.</p>
<p>But with McConnell’s third and final effort — on a repeal-only bill — looking like it, too, had collapsed, Trump urged McConnell to delay a make-or-break vote until early next week.</p>
<p>And the president invited all GOP senators to the White House for lunch Wednesday to discuss a path forward.</p>
<p>Trump pulled a similar move in June after McConnell fell short on his first health care effort, and it yielded no apparent results. Indeed Trump seated himself between two GOP senators — Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — who announced Tuesday they would oppose McConnell’s efforts to move forward with the latest bill.</p>
<p>Along with opposition from a third GOP senator, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, that was enough to kill the legislation. McConnell can lose only two votes and still move forward in the closely divided Senate.</p>
<p>It looked like after seven years of campaigning on the issue, Republicans had discovered once in power that their own divisions would prevent them from delivering. McConnell was ready to hold the showdown vote Wednesday, to get senators on record on the issue and move on to other priorities like overhauling the tax code.</p>
<p>But in a closed-door GOP lunch, fellow Republican senators urged him to wait, according to Republicans present who demanded anonymity to discuss the private issue. McConnell announced late Tuesday that the vote would occur early next week, “at the request of the president and vice president and after consulting with our members.”</p>
<p>Yet with Murkowski, Collins and Capito already on record as “no” votes, and others harboring private reservations, it’s not clear what can change over the next several days. Trump himself earlier Tuesday sounded ready to move to other issues.</p>
<p>“I think we’re probably in that position where we’ll just let Obamacare fail,” the president said. “We’re not going to own it. I’m not going to own it. I can tell you that the Republicans are not going to own it. We’ll let Obamacare fail and then the Democrats are going to come to us and they’re going to say, ‘How do we fix it?'”</p>
<p>Despite the current law’s problems, most health care experts do not believe it is at immediate risk of outright failure, and Democratic cooperation to adjust the law is far from assured.</p>
<p>Nor does it appear likely that Republicans can escape owning the problems with the law and the health care system overall, now that they control the House, Senate and White House, partly on the strength of campaigning against the law.</p>
<p>“They seem to have this notion that they can be a majority party, and have control of the White House, and not be responsible for bringing down the health care system,” said Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois. “It doesn’t work that way.”</p>
<p>McConnell had been hunting for votes to open debate on a revived version of legislation Congress sent to Obama’s desk in 2015 that would have repealed major portions of Obamacare, with a two-year delay built in. Many Republicans support the repeal-only approach, and they questioned how senators who voted for the legislation two years ago could oppose it now.</p>
<p>But for others, the implications were too severe now that the bill could actually become law with a Republican president in the White House ready to sign it. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that more than 30 million people would lose insurance over a decade under the legislation.</p>
<p>Collins voted against the legislation in 2015 while Murkowski and Capito both supported it. Murkowski told reporters that repealing the Affordable Care Act without the promise of a replacement would cause uncertainty and chaos.</p>
<p>“To just say repeal and ‘Trust us, we’re going to fix it in a couple of years,’ that’s not going to provide comfort to the anxiety that a lot of Alaskan families are feeling right now,” she said.</p>
<p>What’s next? Go back to the committee room and work on a bipartisan basis “in a way that the public feels that we are really working toward their best interests,” Murkowski said.</p>
<p>Indeed Sen. Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, chairman of a Senate health panel, subsequently announced he planned hearings on the issue in the next few weeks, a step Senate Republicans have not taken to date.</p>
<p>The GOP’s struggles over the latest measures came down to differences between moderates who feared the implications of a full-blown repeal, and conservatives who wanted nothing less. Speaker Paul Ryan managed to bridge those divides in the House in May, barely passing a bill that would have eliminated the coverage mandates and tax hikes in the Affordable Care Act, while unwinding the Medicaid expansion and removing insurance coverage for millions.</p>
<p>But the GOP bills polled poorly, and Trump never tried to sell them to the country. Meanwhile, Obama’s law grew steadily more popular, and Republicans learned anew that a benefit, once given, is hard to take away.</p> | false | 1 | president donald trump says probably time let obamacare fail latest humiliating heath bill collapse senate still hes making lastditch effort find way revive partys seemingly failed efforts bill trump stayed largely sidelines majority leader mitch mcconnell struggled unsuccessfully round support make good gops years promises repeal replace former president barack obamas healthcare law mcconnells third final effort repealonly bill looking like collapsed trump urged mcconnell delay makeorbreak vote early next week president invited gop senators white house lunch wednesday discuss path forward trump pulled similar move june mcconnell fell short first health care effort yielded apparent results indeed trump seated two gop senators susan collins maine lisa murkowski alaska announced tuesday would oppose mcconnells efforts move forward latest bill along opposition third gop senator shelley moore capito west virginia enough kill legislation mcconnell lose two votes still move forward closely divided senate looked like seven years campaigning issue republicans discovered power divisions would prevent delivering mcconnell ready hold showdown vote wednesday get senators record issue move priorities like overhauling tax code closeddoor gop lunch fellow republican senators urged wait according republicans present demanded anonymity discuss private issue mcconnell announced late tuesday vote would occur early next week request president vice president consulting members yet murkowski collins capito already record votes others harboring private reservations clear change next several days trump earlier tuesday sounded ready move issues think probably position well let obamacare fail president said going im going tell republicans going well let obamacare fail democrats going come us theyre going say fix despite current laws problems health care experts believe immediate risk outright failure democratic cooperation adjust law far assured appear likely republicans escape owning problems law health care system overall control house senate white house partly strength campaigning law seem notion majority party control white house responsible bringing health care system said democratic sen dick durbin illinois doesnt work way mcconnell hunting votes open debate revived version legislation congress sent obamas desk 2015 would repealed major portions obamacare twoyear delay built many republicans support repealonly approach questioned senators voted legislation two years ago could oppose others implications severe bill could actually become law republican president white house ready sign congressional budget office estimated 30 million people would lose insurance decade legislation collins voted legislation 2015 murkowski capito supported murkowski told reporters repealing affordable care act without promise replacement would cause uncertainty chaos say repeal trust us going fix couple years thats going provide comfort anxiety lot alaskan families feeling right said whats next go back committee room work bipartisan basis way public feels really working toward best interests murkowski said indeed sen sen lamar alexander tennessee chairman senate health panel subsequently announced planned hearings issue next weeks step senate republicans taken date gops struggles latest measures came differences moderates feared implications fullblown repeal conservatives wanted nothing less speaker paul ryan managed bridge divides house may barely passing bill would eliminated coverage mandates tax hikes affordable care act unwinding medicaid expansion removing insurance coverage millions gop bills polled poorly trump never tried sell country meanwhile obamas law grew steadily popular republicans learned anew benefit given hard take away | 519 |
<p>Americans are fighting among themselves over “civil war” statues, while “their” government invites nuclear armageddon.</p>
<p>The United States shows the world such a ridiculous face that the world laughs at us.</p>
<p>The latest spin on “Russia stole the election” is that Russia used Facebook to influence the election. The NPR women yesterday were breathless about it.</p>
<p>We have been subjected to ten months of propaganda about Trump/Putin election interference and still not a scrap of evidence. It is past time to ask an unasked question: If there were evidence, what is the big deal? All sorts of interest groups try to influence election outcomes including foreign governments. Why is it OK for Israel to influence US elections but not for Russia to do so? Why do you think the armament industry, the energy industry, agribusiness, Wall Street and the banks, pharmaceutical companies, etc., etc., supply the huge sum of money to finance election campaigns if their intent is not to influence the election? Why do editorial boards write editorials endorsing one candidate and damning another if they are not influencing the election?</p>
<p>What is the difference between influencing the election and influencing the government? Washington is full of lobbyists of all descriptions, including lobbyists for foreign governments, working round the clock to influence the US government. It is safe to say that the least represented in the government are the citizens themselves who don’t have any lobbyists working for them.</p>
<p>The orchestrated hysteria over “Russian influence” is even more absurd considering the reason Russia allegedly interfered in the election. Russia favored Trump because he was the peace candidate who promised to reduce the high tensions with Russia created by the Obama regime and its neocon nazis—Hillary Clinton, Victoria Nuland, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power. What’s wrong with Russia preferring a peace candidate over a war candidate? The American people themselves preferred the peace candidate. So Russia agreed with the electorate.</p>
<p>Those who don’t agree with the electorate are the warmongers—the military/security complex and the neocon nazis. These are democracy’s enemies who are trying to overturn the choice of the American people. It is not Russia that disrespects the choice of the American people; it is the utterly corrupt Democratic National Committee and its divisive Identity Politics, the military/security complex, and the presstitute media who are undermining democracy.</p>
<p>I believe it is time to change the subject. The important question is who is it that is trying so hard to convince Americans that Russian influence prevails over us?</p>
<p>Do the idiots pushing this line realize how impotent this makes an alleged “superpower” look? How can we be the hegemonic power that the Zionist neocons say we are when Russia can decide who is the president of the United States?</p>
<p>The US has a massive spy state that even intercepts the private cell phone conversations of the Chancellor of Germany, but his massive spy organization is unable to produce one scrap of evidence that the Russians conspired with Trump to steal the presidential election from Hillary. When will the imbeciles realize that when they make charges for which no evidence can be produced they make the United States look silly, foolish, incompetent, stupid beyond all belief?</p>
<p>Countries are supposed to be scared of America’s threat that “we will bomb you into the stone age,” but the President of Russia laughs at us. Putin recently described the complete absence of any competence in Washington:</p>
<p>“It is difficult to talk to people who confuse Austria and Australia. But there is nothing we can do about this; this is the level of political culture among the American establishment. As for the American people, America is truly a great nation if the Americans can put up with so many politically uncivilized people in their government.”</p>
<p>These words from Putin were devastating, because the world understands that they are accurate.</p>
<p>Consider the idiot Nikki Haley, appointed by Trump in a fit of mindlessness as US Ambassador to the United Nations. &#160;This stupid person is forever shaking her fist at the Russians while mouthing yet another improbable accusation. She might want to read Mario Puzo’s book, The Godfather. Everyone knows the movie, but if memory serves somewhere in the book Puzo reflects on the practice of the irate American motorist who shakes a fist and gives the bird to other drivers. What if the driver receiving the insult is a Mafia capo? Does the idiot shaking his fist know who he is accosting? No. Does the moron know that the result might be a brutal beating or death? No.</p>
<p>Does the imbecile Nikki Haley understand what can be the result of her inability to control herself? No. Every knowledgeable person I know wonders if Trump appointed the imbecile Nikki Haley US ambassador to the world for the purpose of infuriating the Russians.</p>
<p>Ask Napoleon and the German Wehrmacht the consequence of infuriating the Russians.</p>
<p>After 16 years the US “superpower” has been unable to defeat a few thousand lightly armed Taliban, who have no air force, no Panzer divisions, no worldwide intelligence service, and the crazed US government in Washington is courting war with Russia and China and North Korea and Iran.</p>
<p>The American people are clearly out to lunch in their insouciance. Americans are <a href="" type="internal">fighting among themselves over “civil war” statues</a>, while “their” government invites nuclear armageddon.</p>
<p>The United States has an ambassador to the world who shows no signs of intelligence, who behaves as if she is Mike Tyson or Bruce Lee to the 5th power, and who is the total antithesis of a diplomat. What does this tell about the United States?</p>
<p>It reveals that the US is in the Roman collapse stage when the emperor appoints horses to the Senate.</p>
<p>The United States has a horse, an uncivilized horse, as its diplomat to the world. The Congress and executive branch are also full of horses and horse excrement. The US government is completely devoid of intelligence. There is no sign of intelligence anywhere in the U.S. government. Of or morality. As Hugo Chavez said: Satan is there; you can smell the sulphur.</p>
<p>America is a joke with nuclear weapons, the prime danger to life on earth.</p>
<p>How can this danger be corralled?</p>
<p>The American people would have to realize that they are being led to their deaths by the Zionist neocon nazis who, together with the military/security complex and Wall Street, control US foreign policy, by the complicity of Europe and Great Britain desperate to retain their CIA subsidies, and by the harlots that comprise the Western media.</p>
<p>Are Americans capable of comprehending this? Only a few have escaped The Matrix.</p>
<p>The consequence is that America is being locked into conflict with Russia and China. There is no possibility whatsoever of Washington invading either country, much less both, so war would be nuclear.</p>
<p>Do the American people want Washington to bring us this result? If not, why are the American people sitting there sucking their thumbs, doing nothing? Why are Europe and Great Britain sitting there permitting the unfolding of nuclear armageddon? Who murdered the peace movement?</p>
<p>The World and the American people need desperately to rein in the warmonger United States, or the world will cease to exist.</p>
<p>An International Court To Preserve Life On Earth needs to be assembled. The US government and the war interests it serves need to be indicted and prosecuted and disarmed before their evil destroys life on earth.</p>
<p>­</p>
<p>­</p> | false | 1 | americans fighting among civil war statues government invites nuclear armageddon united states shows world ridiculous face world laughs us latest spin russia stole election russia used facebook influence election npr women yesterday breathless subjected ten months propaganda trumpputin election interference still scrap evidence past time ask unasked question evidence big deal sorts interest groups try influence election outcomes including foreign governments ok israel influence us elections russia think armament industry energy industry agribusiness wall street banks pharmaceutical companies etc etc supply huge sum money finance election campaigns intent influence election editorial boards write editorials endorsing one candidate damning another influencing election difference influencing election influencing government washington full lobbyists descriptions including lobbyists foreign governments working round clock influence us government safe say least represented government citizens dont lobbyists working orchestrated hysteria russian influence even absurd considering reason russia allegedly interfered election russia favored trump peace candidate promised reduce high tensions russia created obama regime neocon nazishillary clinton victoria nuland susan rice samantha power whats wrong russia preferring peace candidate war candidate american people preferred peace candidate russia agreed electorate dont agree electorate warmongersthe militarysecurity complex neocon nazis democracys enemies trying overturn choice american people russia disrespects choice american people utterly corrupt democratic national committee divisive identity politics militarysecurity complex presstitute media undermining democracy believe time change subject important question trying hard convince americans russian influence prevails us idiots pushing line realize impotent makes alleged superpower look hegemonic power zionist neocons say russia decide president united states us massive spy state even intercepts private cell phone conversations chancellor germany massive spy organization unable produce one scrap evidence russians conspired trump steal presidential election hillary imbeciles realize make charges evidence produced make united states look silly foolish incompetent stupid beyond belief countries supposed scared americas threat bomb stone age president russia laughs us putin recently described complete absence competence washington difficult talk people confuse austria australia nothing level political culture among american establishment american people america truly great nation americans put many politically uncivilized people government words putin devastating world understands accurate consider idiot nikki haley appointed trump fit mindlessness us ambassador united nations 160this stupid person forever shaking fist russians mouthing yet another improbable accusation might want read mario puzos book godfather everyone knows movie memory serves somewhere book puzo reflects practice irate american motorist shakes fist gives bird drivers driver receiving insult mafia capo idiot shaking fist know accosting moron know result might brutal beating death imbecile nikki haley understand result inability control every knowledgeable person know wonders trump appointed imbecile nikki haley us ambassador world purpose infuriating russians ask napoleon german wehrmacht consequence infuriating russians 16 years us superpower unable defeat thousand lightly armed taliban air force panzer divisions worldwide intelligence service crazed us government washington courting war russia china north korea iran american people clearly lunch insouciance americans fighting among civil war statues government invites nuclear armageddon united states ambassador world shows signs intelligence behaves mike tyson bruce lee 5th power total antithesis diplomat tell united states reveals us roman collapse stage emperor appoints horses senate united states horse uncivilized horse diplomat world congress executive branch also full horses horse excrement us government completely devoid intelligence sign intelligence anywhere us government morality hugo chavez said satan smell sulphur america joke nuclear weapons prime danger life earth danger corralled american people would realize led deaths zionist neocon nazis together militarysecurity complex wall street control us foreign policy complicity europe great britain desperate retain cia subsidies harlots comprise western media americans capable comprehending escaped matrix consequence america locked conflict russia china possibility whatsoever washington invading either country much less war would nuclear american people want washington bring us result american people sitting sucking thumbs nothing europe great britain sitting permitting unfolding nuclear armageddon murdered peace movement world american people need desperately rein warmonger united states world cease exist international court preserve life earth needs assembled us government war interests serves need indicted prosecuted disarmed evil destroys life earth | 658 |
<p />
<p>&lt;img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-18131" alt="NATO" src="https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/nato-summit-470x318.jpg" width="470" height="318" /&gt;</p>
<p>The distance between Cairo’s Tahrir Square and Istanbul’s Taksim Square is impossibly long. There can be no roadmap sufficient enough to use the popular experience of the first in order to explicate the circumstances that lead to the other.</p>
<p>Many have tried to insist on the similarities between the two since it is fashionable these days to link newsworthy events, however worlds apart, to other events. Following the popular revolt that gripped Egypt in early 2011, deemed with the ever inclusive title ‘the Arab Spring’, intellectual jugglers began envisaging ‘springs’ popping up all over the region and beyond. In recent weeks, when protesters took to the streets of several Turkish cities, comparisons ensued once again.</p>
<p>Intellectual opportunism, however, is not a distinct phenomenon, but a reflection of a wider western conception of political opportunism. Once the ‘Arab Spring’ was recognized as an opportunity of sorts, the US, Britain and France were quick to capitalize on it, either to politically reshape the Middle East region or to ensure that the outcome of the revolutionary fervor was to their liking.</p>
<p>While Arab dictators brutalized mostly peaceful protesters, wars, in the full sense of the word, didn’t actualize until the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries began meddling. In Libya, they guided an uprising with a limited armed component to a full-fledged war that resulted in the death, wounding, and disappearance of thousands. The war in Libya had changed the very demographic landscape of parts of the country. Entire communities have been ethnically cleansed. Benghazi, whose fate British Prime Minister David Cameron seemed particularly worried about, is now savaged by numerous militias vying for influence. Following recent clashes in the city, the interim head of the Libyan army, Salem Konidi, warned on state Television on June 15, of a ‘bloodbath’. But this time, such a warning barely registered on NATO’s radar.</p>
<p>While selective ‘humanitarian interventions’ is a well-known western political style, the recent protests in Turkey demonstrate that western countries’ appetite to exploit any country’s misfortunes to its advantage is insatiable. The Turkish government however has itself to blame for providing such an opportunity in the first place.</p>
<p>When confronted with the Middle East high-stakes political game resulting from the violent upheaval in the last two years or so, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, hesitant at first, adopted a political style that was consistent with NATO’s, of which Turkey is a member. For nearly a decade, Turkey had angled for a different role in the Arab and Muslim worlds, a choice that was compelled by the European Union’s refusal to grant Turkey a membership. Germany and France led the crusade against Turkey’s determined efforts to join the growing union.</p>
<p>As the bloodletting reached Syria, the so-called Arab Spring posed a threat to Turkey’s own southern regions and thus forced a hurried Turkish policy realignment, back to the very western camp that precluded Turkey for so long.</p>
<p>It was a peculiar position in which Turkey placed itself, posing as a champion of ‘awakened’ Arabs, yet operating with the traditional NATO paradigm, itself grounded in interventionist agendas. The inconsistencies of Turkish policies are too palpable and growing: as it settled its dispute with Israel over the latter’s murder of nine Turkish activists on their way to Gaza in May 2010, it was hosting top Hamas leaders for high level talks. It is facilitating the work of Syrian opposition that are operating both politically and militarily from Turkish territories, while warning against any plots to destabilize Turkey. At the same time it is paying little heed to the sovereignty of northern Iraq, as it chased after its own armed opposition in the war-torn Arab country for years.</p>
<p>Turkish behavior was ignored, justified or sanctioned by western powers as long as Ankara did so in tandem with the existing NATO policies. European countries however become particularly charged if Turkey stepped over its boundaries, as was the case during the Turkish-Israeli dispute. And it appears that no matter how hard Turkish leaders try to impress, they will always fall short from fulfilling Europe’s selective definition of democracy, human rights, and other useful concepts.</p>
<p>NATO’s hypocrisy even among its own members is too obvious. Compare, for example, European responses to the police crackdown on the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement protests starting September 17, 2011 and the massive campaign of arrests, beatings and humiliation of protesters. It turned out that both the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security monitored the movement jointly through their terrorism task forces. This is what Naomi Wolf revealed in the Guardian newspaper on December 29 of last year.</p>
<p>Where was the outcry by the US European ally over such unwarranted practices including the most recent scandal of US National Security Agency (NSA) spying on millions of people using social media and internet technology in the name of trying to catch terrorists? Such practices have become so routine that they rarely compel outrage or serious calls for accountability, aside from such inane concerns as Bloomberg Business Week headlines: “Spying for the NSA Is Bad for U.S. Business.” (June 18)</p>
<p>While Arab nations are the most affected parties by the wars and upheavals that have destabilized the region, destroyed Syria, and threaten the future of entire generations, they seem to stand as cheerleaders on the sidelines as David Cameron, François Hollande of France and Barack Obama, among others, illustrate the path by which Syria’s future is determined, in ways consistent with their interests, and of course, that of Israel’s ‘security’.</p>
<p>But the response of some EU leaders to the anti-government protests in Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir in recent weeks was most sobering. Even Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s best efforts are simply not enough to sway Europe from capitalizing on Turkey’s misfortunes. German Chancellor Angela Merkel quickly took a stance to block “moves to open a new chapter in Ankara’s EU membership talks”, reported Reuters on June 20, supposedly because of her concern regarding the Turkish police crackdown on protesters. Of course the Chancellor is often forgiving when extreme violence is applied by Israel against Palestinians, since no political capital can be attained from such unwise moves.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, western powers will continue to play a most detrimental role in the Middle East, engendering and exploiting further chaos with the help of various regional powers, in the most brazen of ways in order to serve their interests. Not even Turkey, despite proving an irreplaceable asset in NATO’s political and military drive, is invulnerable.</p>
<p>Perhaps, Europe’s double face will compel a rethink among Turkey’s political circles as they calculate their next move. Will Turkey end its role as an outlet for NATO’s policies in the Middle East? This is a question that Turkey must address before they too are engulfed by endless turmoil and inundated by western intervention, as the results are always lethal. Always.</p> | false | 1 | ltimg classaligncenter sizelarge wpimage18131 altnato srchttpswwwforeignpolicyjournalcomwpcontentuploads201306natosummit470x318jpg width470 height318 gt distance cairos tahrir square istanbuls taksim square impossibly long roadmap sufficient enough use popular experience first order explicate circumstances lead many tried insist similarities two since fashionable days link newsworthy events however worlds apart events following popular revolt gripped egypt early 2011 deemed ever inclusive title arab spring intellectual jugglers began envisaging springs popping region beyond recent weeks protesters took streets several turkish cities comparisons ensued intellectual opportunism however distinct phenomenon reflection wider western conception political opportunism arab spring recognized opportunity sorts us britain france quick capitalize either politically reshape middle east region ensure outcome revolutionary fervor liking arab dictators brutalized mostly peaceful protesters wars full sense word didnt actualize north atlantic treaty organization nato countries began meddling libya guided uprising limited armed component fullfledged war resulted death wounding disappearance thousands war libya changed demographic landscape parts country entire communities ethnically cleansed benghazi whose fate british prime minister david cameron seemed particularly worried savaged numerous militias vying influence following recent clashes city interim head libyan army salem konidi warned state television june 15 bloodbath time warning barely registered natos radar selective humanitarian interventions wellknown western political style recent protests turkey demonstrate western countries appetite exploit countrys misfortunes advantage insatiable turkish government however blame providing opportunity first place confronted middle east highstakes political game resulting violent upheaval last two years turkish prime minister tayyip erdogan hesitant first adopted political style consistent natos turkey member nearly decade turkey angled different role arab muslim worlds choice compelled european unions refusal grant turkey membership germany france led crusade turkeys determined efforts join growing union bloodletting reached syria socalled arab spring posed threat turkeys southern regions thus forced hurried turkish policy realignment back western camp precluded turkey long peculiar position turkey placed posing champion awakened arabs yet operating traditional nato paradigm grounded interventionist agendas inconsistencies turkish policies palpable growing settled dispute israel latters murder nine turkish activists way gaza may 2010 hosting top hamas leaders high level talks facilitating work syrian opposition operating politically militarily turkish territories warning plots destabilize turkey time paying little heed sovereignty northern iraq chased armed opposition wartorn arab country years turkish behavior ignored justified sanctioned western powers long ankara tandem existing nato policies european countries however become particularly charged turkey stepped boundaries case turkishisraeli dispute appears matter hard turkish leaders try impress always fall short fulfilling europes selective definition democracy human rights useful concepts natos hypocrisy even among members obvious compare example european responses police crackdown occupy wall street ows movement protests starting september 17 2011 massive campaign arrests beatings humiliation protesters turned fbi department homeland security monitored movement jointly terrorism task forces naomi wolf revealed guardian newspaper december 29 last year outcry us european ally unwarranted practices including recent scandal us national security agency nsa spying millions people using social media internet technology name trying catch terrorists practices become routine rarely compel outrage serious calls accountability aside inane concerns bloomberg business week headlines spying nsa bad us business june 18 arab nations affected parties wars upheavals destabilized region destroyed syria threaten future entire generations seem stand cheerleaders sidelines david cameron françois hollande france barack obama among others illustrate path syrias future determined ways consistent interests course israels security response eu leaders antigovernment protests istanbul ankara izmir recent weeks sobering even prime minister tayyip erdogans best efforts simply enough sway europe capitalizing turkeys misfortunes german chancellor angela merkel quickly took stance block moves open new chapter ankaras eu membership talks reported reuters june 20 supposedly concern regarding turkish police crackdown protesters course chancellor often forgiving extreme violence applied israel palestinians since political capital attained unwise moves meanwhile western powers continue play detrimental role middle east engendering exploiting chaos help various regional powers brazen ways order serve interests even turkey despite proving irreplaceable asset natos political military drive invulnerable perhaps europes double face compel rethink among turkeys political circles calculate next move turkey end role outlet natos policies middle east question turkey must address engulfed endless turmoil inundated western intervention results always lethal always | 672 |
<p>Human dignity has long been a contentious subject in American bioethics. A frequently employed if ill-defined concept in European political life, in international law, and in the ethical tradition of the West, dignity has had a particularly hard time finding its precise meaning and place in the Anglo-American sphere. Is it just a synonym for equality or autonomy, or does it describe something else — a concept foreign to our political vocabulary? And either way, does it belong in an American bioethics, or is it best left safely across the pond? Different scholars and observers through the years have taken for granted quite different definitions of the term, while others have simply denied its utility altogether.</p>
<p>To try to organize the dispute and help to make sense of the term, the President's Council on Bioethics — <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/about/executive.html" type="external">established</a> by President Bush in 2001 to, among other things, “provide a forum for a national discussion of bioethical issues” — recently produced a <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/human_dignity/index.html" type="external">collection of essays</a> laying out the range of views on human dignity for public examination. The council (which I served as executive director during part of the president's first term) invited two dozen experts, including members of the council itself as well as outside academics and writers, to offer their thoughts on human dignity and bioethics.</p>
<p>The volume has so far drawn a modest response from bioethicists and others, some applauding the effort to lay out the range of opinions, and some bemoaning the lack of agreement on so seemingly basic a concept. But this week, in the latest issue of The New Republic, the volume has also elicited a bizarre and astonishing display of paranoid vitriol from an academic celebrity. Steven Pinker, the Harvard psychologist and best-selling author of books on language, cognition, and evolutionary biology, seems to have decided that the concept of human dignity is not only “stupid” but is a weapon of aggression in the arsenal of a religious crusade intent on crushing American liberty and “imposing a Catholic agenda on a secular democracy.”</p>
<p>Pinker's <a href="http://www.tnr.com/story_print.html?id=d8731cf4-e87b-4d88-b7e7-f5059cd0bfbd" type="external">essay</a> is a striking exhibit of a set of attitudes toward religion and the West's moral tradition that has become surprisingly common among America's intellectual elite. It is a mix of fear, suspicion, and disgust that has a lot to do, for instance, with the Left's intense paranoia about the Bush administration, and with the peculiar notion that American conservatives have declared a “war on science”; and it involves more generally an inclination to reject any idea drawn in any way from a religiously inspired tradition — which unfortunately includes just about everything in the humanities.</p>
<p>These elements are all powerfully evident in Pinker's screed. After briefly introducing the subject, his essay manages almost entirely to ignore the substance of the volume under consideration (taking up no particular essay in the book, for instance) and addresses itself instead to what the author imagines is a sinister Catholic conspiracy to subject the nation to a papist theology of death. With deep alarm Pinker informs his readers that some of the contributors to the volume make their living at such “Christian institutions” as Georgetown University and that some of the essays even mention the Bible, which leads him to conclude that the work of the bioethics council, in this book and in general, “springs from a movement to impose a radical political agenda, fed by fervent religious impulses, onto American biomedicine.”</p>
<p>This is, to begin with, patent nonsense. Even a cursory review of the council's <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/" type="external">reports</a> and <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/" type="external">deliberations</a> will demonstrate it has spent significantly less time than even its Clinton administration predecessor considering any explicitly religious views or discussing religious issues, and has in no way sought to ground any positions, arguments, or recommendations in religion. Huffing in his panicked flight from an imaginary inquisition, Pinker seems unable to distinguish between an openness to learning from the insights of the Western tradition and an assertion of sectarian theology. He even rejects the pedagogical value of literature (hectoring one contributor to the volume who has dared mention a novel), and seems to treat as a noxious pollutant any artifact of our civilization that has not been peer-reviewed by a committee of tenured biologists.&#160;This leaves Pinker in the peculiar position of denying the grounds for even his own standards of ethics, though he is blissfully blind to the difficulty. Rather than human dignity, he wants to lean for support upon “personal autonomy — the idea that, because all humans have the same minimum capacity to suffer, prosper, reason, and choose, no human has the right to impinge on the life, body, or freedom of another.” But why not? Why should minimum capacities demand maximal protections if not for reasons rooted in the very traditions and sources he declares out of bounds, or a Popish cabal?</p>
<p>But Pinker will not wait to hear the answer. He rushes on to paint the bioethics council as a committee of pious executioners, arguing that “this government-sponsored bioethics does not want medical practice to maximize health and flourishing; it considers that quest to be a bad thing, not a good thing,” and asserting without basis that the council (which, more than all of its <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/reports/past_commissions/index.html" type="external">predecessors</a> in previous administrations, was designed to provide a diversity of opinion and not merely support for the positions of the president who appointed it) was “packed” with “conservative scholars and pundits, advocates of religious (particularly Catholic) principles in the public sphere, and writers with a paper trail of skittishness toward biomedical advances, together with a smattering of scientists (mostly with a reputation for being religious or politically conservative).” Pinker might have examined the record of the council's discussions (including its devastating <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/march03/session3.html" type="external">grilling</a> of him in 2003, which may help explain some of his vehemence), its reports, and the backgrounds of its <a href="http://www.bioethics.gov/about/members.html" type="external">members</a>, especially the scientist members, for a sense of how absurdly misinformed is this diatribe.</p>
<p>He is not much better informed about the book he claims to have read, asserting, for instance, that no one was given an opportunity to defend the view that dignity means essentially nothing more than autonomy or is a useless or pernicious concept, though several of the essays in the volume (most notably <a href="http://bioethics.gov/reports/human_dignity/chapter5.html" type="external">Patricia Churchland's contribution</a>, and elements of <a href="http://bioethics.gov/reports/human_dignity/chapter3.html" type="external">Daniel Dennett's</a>, among others) do just that.</p>
<p>But Pinker saves his most brazenly venomous and disingenuous assault for one of the volume's contributors in particular: Leon Kass, the council's former chairman. He begins with a sweepingly inaccurate survey of Kass's views and w orks, and misleadingly implies that a passage he quotes from Kass's 1994 book about eating is from Kass's essay on dignity in the volume being reviewed, later referring again to the passage while never offering any context. He says Kass has “pro-death anti-freedom views,” and asserts that Kass is a “vociferous advocate of a central role for religion in morality and public life.” A vociferous person is publicly insistent — can Pinker point to a single instance of Kass calling for a central role for religion in public life? Pinker concludes by repeating the scurrilous lie that Kass “fired” two members of the bioethics council who disagreed with him “on embryonic stem-cell research, on therapeutic cloning (which Kass was in favor of criminalizing), and on the distortions of science that kept finding their way into Council reports.” Disagreement on stem cell research and therapeutic cloning were an intentional function of the original design of the council's membership, as about half its members disagreed with President Bush's views on one or another of those issues, and were chosen with that disagreement in mind. Neither of the two members Pinker has in mind was by any means the most vocal or active of these opponents, their departures had nothing to do with their substantive views, and several of the members named to the council since their departure have also opposed the President's views on these issues. Scientific content in all of the council's reports, meanwhile, was carefully vetted with outside experts before publication, and it is no surprise that Pinker offers no specific instances of “distortions of science” — there are none he could offer.</p>
<p>Loath to rest easy with religious bigotry and slander, however, Pinker concludes with a stunning display of confusion, managing to mystify himself with simple questions and to dismiss centuries of debate with a shrug. He then informs us that dignity is relative and fungible, and — at last, the punch line — that it is in any case just a phenomenon of human perception. He says those who disagree with him have blood on their hands (“even if progress were delayed a mere decade by moratoria, red tape, and funding taboos (to say nothing of the threat of criminal prosecution), millions of people with degenerative diseases and failing organs would needlessly suffer and die”) and so, by implication, that no limit on scientific research could be justified on any grounds other than safety.</p>
<p>It would be hard to answer the bioethics council's thoughtful and varied collection with a less appropriate rejoinder than Pinker's insulting, ill-informed, and anti-intellectual tirade. He misrepresents the most elementary facts about the council's work and intentions, repeating baseless charges and engaging in crude character assassination; and his assertion that the council is intolerant of dissenting opinion is belied by the fact that his rant is based on remarks he actually <a href="http://bioethics.gov/transcripts/march08/session5.html" type="external">delivered</a> at a council meeting, by invitation. His fears of a religious, and especially a Catholic, plot to overthrow democracy are absurd. And his insistence on filtering out of American life any hint of religious influence is badly misguided.</p>
<p>Even if dignity remains difficult to define, undignified public discourse is easy to discern, and Pinker has offered an obvious example. — Yuval Levin is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and senior editor of <a href="http://www.thenewatlantis.com/" type="external">The New Atlantis</a> magazine. He is a former executive director of the President's Council on Bioethics.</p> | false | 1 | human dignity long contentious subject american bioethics frequently employed illdefined concept european political life international law ethical tradition west dignity particularly hard time finding precise meaning place angloamerican sphere synonym equality autonomy describe something else concept foreign political vocabulary either way belong american bioethics best left safely across pond different scholars observers years taken granted quite different definitions term others simply denied utility altogether try organize dispute help make sense term presidents council bioethics established president bush 2001 among things provide forum national discussion bioethical issues recently produced collection essays laying range views human dignity public examination council served executive director part presidents first term invited two dozen experts including members council well outside academics writers offer thoughts human dignity bioethics volume far drawn modest response bioethicists others applauding effort lay range opinions bemoaning lack agreement seemingly basic concept week latest issue new republic volume also elicited bizarre astonishing display paranoid vitriol academic celebrity steven pinker harvard psychologist bestselling author books language cognition evolutionary biology seems decided concept human dignity stupid weapon aggression arsenal religious crusade intent crushing american liberty imposing catholic agenda secular democracy pinkers essay striking exhibit set attitudes toward religion wests moral tradition become surprisingly common among americas intellectual elite mix fear suspicion disgust lot instance lefts intense paranoia bush administration peculiar notion american conservatives declared war science involves generally inclination reject idea drawn way religiously inspired tradition unfortunately includes everything humanities elements powerfully evident pinkers screed briefly introducing subject essay manages almost entirely ignore substance volume consideration taking particular essay book instance addresses instead author imagines sinister catholic conspiracy subject nation papist theology death deep alarm pinker informs readers contributors volume make living christian institutions georgetown university essays even mention bible leads conclude work bioethics council book general springs movement impose radical political agenda fed fervent religious impulses onto american biomedicine begin patent nonsense even cursory review councils reports deliberations demonstrate spent significantly less time even clinton administration predecessor considering explicitly religious views discussing religious issues way sought ground positions arguments recommendations religion huffing panicked flight imaginary inquisition pinker seems unable distinguish openness learning insights western tradition assertion sectarian theology even rejects pedagogical value literature hectoring one contributor volume dared mention novel seems treat noxious pollutant artifact civilization peerreviewed committee tenured biologists160this leaves pinker peculiar position denying grounds even standards ethics though blissfully blind difficulty rather human dignity wants lean support upon personal autonomy idea humans minimum capacity suffer prosper reason choose human right impinge life body freedom another minimum capacities demand maximal protections reasons rooted traditions sources declares bounds popish cabal pinker wait hear answer rushes paint bioethics council committee pious executioners arguing governmentsponsored bioethics want medical practice maximize health flourishing considers quest bad thing good thing asserting without basis council predecessors previous administrations designed provide diversity opinion merely support positions president appointed packed conservative scholars pundits advocates religious particularly catholic principles public sphere writers paper trail skittishness toward biomedical advances together smattering scientists mostly reputation religious politically conservative pinker might examined record councils discussions including devastating grilling 2003 may help explain vehemence reports backgrounds members especially scientist members sense absurdly misinformed diatribe much better informed book claims read asserting instance one given opportunity defend view dignity means essentially nothing autonomy useless pernicious concept though several essays volume notably patricia churchlands contribution elements daniel dennetts among others pinker saves brazenly venomous disingenuous assault one volumes contributors particular leon kass councils former chairman begins sweepingly inaccurate survey kasss views w orks misleadingly implies passage quotes kasss 1994 book eating kasss essay dignity volume reviewed later referring passage never offering context says kass prodeath antifreedom views asserts kass vociferous advocate central role religion morality public life vociferous person publicly insistent pinker point single instance kass calling central role religion public life pinker concludes repeating scurrilous lie kass fired two members bioethics council disagreed embryonic stemcell research therapeutic cloning kass favor criminalizing distortions science kept finding way council reports disagreement stem cell research therapeutic cloning intentional function original design councils membership half members disagreed president bushs views one another issues chosen disagreement mind neither two members pinker mind means vocal active opponents departures nothing substantive views several members named council since departure also opposed presidents views issues scientific content councils reports meanwhile carefully vetted outside experts publication surprise pinker offers specific instances distortions science none could offer loath rest easy religious bigotry slander however pinker concludes stunning display confusion managing mystify simple questions dismiss centuries debate shrug informs us dignity relative fungible last punch line case phenomenon human perception says disagree blood hands even progress delayed mere decade moratoria red tape funding taboos say nothing threat criminal prosecution millions people degenerative diseases failing organs would needlessly suffer die implication limit scientific research could justified grounds safety would hard answer bioethics councils thoughtful varied collection less appropriate rejoinder pinkers insulting illinformed antiintellectual tirade misrepresents elementary facts councils work intentions repeating baseless charges engaging crude character assassination assertion council intolerant dissenting opinion belied fact rant based remarks actually delivered council meeting invitation fears religious especially catholic plot overthrow democracy absurd insistence filtering american life hint religious influence badly misguided even dignity remains difficult define undignified public discourse easy discern pinker offered obvious example yuval levin fellow ethics public policy center senior editor new atlantis magazine former executive director presidents council bioethics | 881 |
<p>As the movie came out over 40 years ago, I hope readers will forgive me if I reveal the ending of the original Ocean’s Eleven (1960), directed by Lewis Milestone and starring Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr, Peter Lawford, Joey Bishop and others who made up the famous Rat Pack. Having successfully robbed five Las Vegas casinos on New Year’s eve by putting their commando training to use, Sinatra’s Danny Ocean and his gang of eleven army buddies, all former paratroopers, conspire to smuggle the money out of town by hiding it in the coffin of one of their number who died (of natural causes) during the operation. But when his widow arrives in Vegas to arrange for shipment of the body back to San Francisco, she is persuaded by a compassionate local official to save the cost of transport by arranging for a funeral, with full military honors, on the spot. As his buddies listen to a eulogy based on the 23rd Psalm, one of them whispers to a neighbor, “What’s that noise?”</p>
<p>“Don’t you know? The deceased is being cremated.”</p>
<p>The surviving ten look at each other in horror and then settle down to listen to the rest of the sermon. The final scene shows them walking out into the bright sunshine of the Las Vegas strip.</p>
<p>I doubt if anyone would nowadays consider Ocean’s Eleven a great movie. It was an early harbinger of the Rat Pack’s self-indulgence that would eventually wreck the careers and lives of every one of its members save Sinatra. But at least they knew how a movie ought to end. It is true there was still at the time (just about) the Hays Code, whose first principle was that “No picture shall be produced that will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin.”</p>
<p>Of course this commandment was routinely broken by the best of the films noirs of the 40s and 50s, but even they did not have the temerity to show criminals profiting from their crime. Not because, I believe, their producers feared prosecution but because this was merely a codification of what everybody knew anyway, which is that it is not the lot of man on earth to get away, by sheer cleverness, with the fame and the girl and the money. We can all be successful for a while, but in the end no one gets out alive. To remind us of this essential fact of the human condition is what art was created for.</p>
<p>But the remake of Ocean’s Eleven is anti-art, a branch of fantasy or wish-fulfilment for incipient criminals looking for reassurance that “crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin” can pay off big time. From the very beginning, Danny Ocean (George Clooney) shows his contempt for the legal system in whose toils we meet him as he comes before an unseen parole board and is asked what he will do if his parole is granted. The camera draws in as if expecting an answer, but there is no answer. Instead, we cut to Danny coming out of prison, dressed in the tuxedo he obviously went in with, and visiting casinos in Atlantic City. He meets an old friend called Frank who refuses to answer to that name but insists he is Ramon (Bernie Mac) and the two meet up later to talk about a “job” that Danny has in mind. Danny calls his parole officer to report in and says he hasn’t been drinking (he has) and that he wouldn’t dream of going out of state — and we cut to Danny in Hollywood, California, recruiting another member of what is to be a gang of eleven master criminals for the big “job.”</p>
<p>All this is so familiar that the cast could hardly look as if it were doing anything but going through the motions even if it tried. And it doesn’t try very hard. The job turns out to be insanely difficult, which in movie terms means that it is insanely easy. In other words, no movie criminals ever pull any job that is not insanely difficult, which tells us that the director (Steven Soderbergh) and the writer (Ted Griffin) are pulling the cinematic equivalent of a convenience store hold-up — a routine knocking off of three casinos simultaneously and in spite of security that makes that which protects nuclear missile launchers look trivial. It’s the kind of thing that movie criminals are always pulling off. What are the odds! All this contributes to the general tedium of the proceedings.</p>
<p>As does the sub-plot in which Danny is attempting to win back his wife, Tess (Julia Roberts), with whom he is still in love and who is at present — would you believe it? — the mistress of an arrogant rich guy called Terry Benedict (Andy Garcia) who just happens to be the owner of the very same three casinos that Danny is proposing to relieve of $160,000,000 without being detected. Danny’s sidekick, Rusty (Brad Pitt) asks him if the job is for the money or if it is “personal.” Rusty does not otherwise appear to be an idiot, however.</p>
<p>The plot, as you might imagine, turns out to be as ludicrously far-fetched as the situation, and I see no need to waste any time on it. The real point is that Danny and the gang, like Gene Hackman in Heist or Bruce Willis and Billy Bob Thornton in Bandits or Robert Forster in Diamond Men or the heroes in any of dozens of recent movies, make their big score and live happily ever after, unpursued either by legally constituted authority or by the allegedly vengeful and unrelenting rich guy they robbed. And of course Tess comes with.</p>
<p>Crime pays, if you’re cool enough, which is probably what a significant number of criminals believe but which anyone less self-deluded will know is a lie. I think we all ought to be worried that it is apparently such a sweet lie that our Hollywood fantasy-merchants are filling their own bags of dishonestly obtained swag by telling it again and again. Let us hope that the universe proves itself as just to them as it doubtless would to any real-life Danny foolish enough to believe what he sees in the movies.</p> | false | 1 | movie came 40 years ago hope readers forgive reveal ending original oceans eleven 1960 directed lewis milestone starring frank sinatra dean martin sammy davis jr peter lawford joey bishop others made famous rat pack successfully robbed five las vegas casinos new years eve putting commando training use sinatras danny ocean gang eleven army buddies former paratroopers conspire smuggle money town hiding coffin one number died natural causes operation widow arrives vegas arrange shipment body back san francisco persuaded compassionate local official save cost transport arranging funeral full military honors spot buddies listen eulogy based 23rd psalm one whispers neighbor whats noise dont know deceased cremated surviving ten look horror settle listen rest sermon final scene shows walking bright sunshine las vegas strip doubt anyone would nowadays consider oceans eleven great movie early harbinger rat packs selfindulgence would eventually wreck careers lives every one members save sinatra least knew movie ought end true still time hays code whose first principle picture shall produced lower moral standards see hence sympathy audience never thrown side crime wrongdoing evil sin course commandment routinely broken best films noirs 40s 50s even temerity show criminals profiting crime believe producers feared prosecution merely codification everybody knew anyway lot man earth get away sheer cleverness fame girl money successful end one gets alive remind us essential fact human condition art created remake oceans eleven antiart branch fantasy wishfulfilment incipient criminals looking reassurance crime wrongdoing evil sin pay big time beginning danny ocean george clooney shows contempt legal system whose toils meet comes unseen parole board asked parole granted camera draws expecting answer answer instead cut danny coming prison dressed tuxedo obviously went visiting casinos atlantic city meets old friend called frank refuses answer name insists ramon bernie mac two meet later talk job danny mind danny calls parole officer report says hasnt drinking wouldnt dream going state cut danny hollywood california recruiting another member gang eleven master criminals big job familiar cast could hardly look anything going motions even tried doesnt try hard job turns insanely difficult movie terms means insanely easy words movie criminals ever pull job insanely difficult tells us director steven soderbergh writer ted griffin pulling cinematic equivalent convenience store holdup routine knocking three casinos simultaneously spite security makes protects nuclear missile launchers look trivial kind thing movie criminals always pulling odds contributes general tedium proceedings subplot danny attempting win back wife tess julia roberts still love present would believe mistress arrogant rich guy called terry benedict andy garcia happens owner three casinos danny proposing relieve 160000000 without detected dannys sidekick rusty brad pitt asks job money personal rusty otherwise appear idiot however plot might imagine turns ludicrously farfetched situation see need waste time real point danny gang like gene hackman heist bruce willis billy bob thornton bandits robert forster diamond men heroes dozens recent movies make big score live happily ever unpursued either legally constituted authority allegedly vengeful unrelenting rich guy robbed course tess comes crime pays youre cool enough probably significant number criminals believe anyone less selfdeluded know lie think ought worried apparently sweet lie hollywood fantasymerchants filling bags dishonestly obtained swag telling let us hope universe proves doubtless would reallife danny foolish enough believe sees movies | 534 |
<p>WASHINGTON — Despite ongoing efforts to write a health care bill by Republican lawmakers, including Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada, Senate GOP leaders said Tuesday they were moving on to other legislative priorities.</p>
<p>Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he expects a package of presidential nominations to clear the Senate before lawmakers leave for recess in less than two weeks.</p>
<p>When lawmakers return in September, McConnell said the Senate would take up tax reform and legislation to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a government shutdown.</p>
<p>“We have important work to get done over the remainder of this work period,” McConnell said. “I hope colleagues will cooperate across the aisle in our efforts to do so.”</p>
<p>There are 84 presidential appointments ready for confirmation, including 30 federal judge nominations, said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo.</p>
<p>As a first step Tuesday, the Senate confirmed former Justice Department lawyer <a href="" type="internal">Christopher Wray</a> as the new FBI chief, replacing James Comey, who was <a href="" type="internal">fired by President Donald Trump</a>. The vote was 92-5 with five Democrats voting no.</p>
<p>Republicans suffered embarrassing defeats last week when various bills to repeal or replace the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, <a href="" type="internal">failed in the Senate</a>.</p>
<p>Senate Democrats, emboldened by that outcome, said they now will challenge Republicans on other legislative issues, such as tax reform.</p>
<p>Democrats issue warning</p>
<p>Democrats on Tuesday drew a line in the sand.</p>
<p>A letter signed by 45 Senate Democrats, including Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, warned that any tax reform plan should not burden the middle class, not include a tax cut for the top 1 percent of the wealthiest Americans and not include cuts to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security.</p>
<p>“The best tax reform is bipartisan tax reform aimed at helping the middle class — not the top 1 percent,” Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. said.</p>
<p>McConnell said Republicans would go it alone on tax reform because the Democrats opposed measures to improve economic growth.</p>
<p>“Ultimately, we have to put incentives in place to get that growth rate up,” McConnell said.</p>
<p>McConnell said the Senate would take up tax reform under budget reconciliation rules, allowing the GOP to pass a bill with a simple majority. Republicans were confident they could muster a simple majority, unlike a health care repeal bill last week that ended debate and <a href="" type="internal">doomed a seven-year GOP aspiration to kill Obamacare</a>. The 49-51 vote included three GOP defections.</p>
<p>Even though Trump urged senators to continue efforts now on health care, McConnell said they lacked the votes to move ahead with a health care bill.</p>
<p>“Our problem with health care was not the Democrats. We didn’t have 50 votes,” McConnell said.</p>
<p>Still, efforts are underway to write a health care repeal bill in the Senate. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said he would begin bipartisan hearings in his health committee to seek a way to move forward.</p>
<p>Heller works on new version</p>
<p>Heller is working with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., on a bill that would provide states with block grants for health care and allow those states to use those funds as they wish.</p>
<p>“The Graham-Cassidy proposal is one idea that could work for Nevada because it gives us flexibility,” Heller said, adding that Nevada would be able to spend the funds “how it sees fit and explore new options to address coverage and cost.”</p>
<p>The proposal would leave intact taxes imposed under Obamacare, which could draw the ire of conservatives who complained that previous Senate proposals failed to fully repeal the ACA.</p>
<p>Heller opposed earlier versions of Senate replacement plans because of cuts to Medicaid, which was expanded under Obamacare to cover an additional 200,000 people in Nevada.</p>
<p>He voted for repeal last week.</p>
<p>“Obamacare isn’t working in Nevada, and there’s no better example of that than the fact that 14 of our 17 counties will have no coverage option on the exchange next year,” Heller said.</p>
<p>“At the same time,” Heller said, “…protecting Nevada’s most vulnerable has been a priority of mine.”</p>
<p>Heller is up for reelection in 2018 and already has drawn Democratic opposition, including Rep. Jacky Rosen, D-Nev.</p>
<p>The Rosen campaign launched a 60-second digital ad Tuesday highlighting Heller’s vote last week for the Obamacare repeal bill.</p>
<p>“Instead of following through on his public promise to oppose the Republican health care plan, Senator Heller was dishonest, misleading and disingenuous,” said Danny Kazin, the Rosen campaign manager.</p>
<p>Before the vote, Heller was pressured by Trump to vote for repeal at a <a href="" type="internal">White House meeting where he was seated next to the president</a>.</p>
<p>Photographs of that meeting with Trump are featured prominently in the Rosen campaign ad.</p>
<p>Heller said he voted to repeal the Obamacare individual mandate because 90,000 people in Nevada are paying the tax penalty because they can’t afford insurance.</p>
<p>“She won’t tell you that,” Heller said.</p>
<p>Contact Gary Martin at 2022-662-7390 or [email protected]. Follow <a href="http://www.twitter.com/garymartindc" type="external">@garymartindc</a> on Twitter.</p>
<p>Next priorities</p>
<p>Following a defeat on their efforts to repeal Obamacare, Republicans said they will move forward on other legislative priorities.</p>
<p>—Presidential nominations for administration positions and judicial appointments</p>
<p>—Tax reform legislation</p>
<p>—Legislation to raise the debt limit to avoid a government shutdown</p>
<p>Source: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell</p>
<p /> | false | 1 | washington despite ongoing efforts write health care bill republican lawmakers including sen dean heller nevada senate gop leaders said tuesday moving legislative priorities senate majority leader mitch mcconnell rky said expects package presidential nominations clear senate lawmakers leave recess less two weeks lawmakers return september mcconnell said senate would take tax reform legislation raise debt ceiling avoid government shutdown important work get done remainder work period mcconnell said hope colleagues cooperate across aisle efforts 84 presidential appointments ready confirmation including 30 federal judge nominations said sen john barrasso rwyo first step tuesday senate confirmed former justice department lawyer christopher wray new fbi chief replacing james comey fired president donald trump vote 925 five democrats voting republicans suffered embarrassing defeats last week various bills repeal replace affordable care act commonly known obamacare failed senate senate democrats emboldened outcome said challenge republicans legislative issues tax reform democrats issue warning democrats tuesday drew line sand letter signed 45 senate democrats including catherine cortez masto nevada warned tax reform plan burden middle class include tax cut top 1 percent wealthiest americans include cuts medicare medicaid social security best tax reform bipartisan tax reform aimed helping middle class top 1 percent senate minority leader charles schumer dny said mcconnell said republicans would go alone tax reform democrats opposed measures improve economic growth ultimately put incentives place get growth rate mcconnell said mcconnell said senate would take tax reform budget reconciliation rules allowing gop pass bill simple majority republicans confident could muster simple majority unlike health care repeal bill last week ended debate doomed sevenyear gop aspiration kill obamacare 4951 vote included three gop defections even though trump urged senators continue efforts health care mcconnell said lacked votes move ahead health care bill problem health care democrats didnt 50 votes mcconnell said still efforts underway write health care repeal bill senate sen lamar alexander rtenn said would begin bipartisan hearings health committee seek way move forward heller works new version heller working sen lindsey graham rsc sen bill cassidy rla bill would provide states block grants health care allow states use funds wish grahamcassidy proposal one idea could work nevada gives us flexibility heller said adding nevada would able spend funds sees fit explore new options address coverage cost proposal would leave intact taxes imposed obamacare could draw ire conservatives complained previous senate proposals failed fully repeal aca heller opposed earlier versions senate replacement plans cuts medicaid expanded obamacare cover additional 200000 people nevada voted repeal last week obamacare isnt working nevada theres better example fact 14 17 counties coverage option exchange next year heller said time heller said protecting nevadas vulnerable priority mine heller reelection 2018 already drawn democratic opposition including rep jacky rosen dnev rosen campaign launched 60second digital ad tuesday highlighting hellers vote last week obamacare repeal bill instead following public promise oppose republican health care plan senator heller dishonest misleading disingenuous said danny kazin rosen campaign manager vote heller pressured trump vote repeal white house meeting seated next president photographs meeting trump featured prominently rosen campaign ad heller said voted repeal obamacare individual mandate 90000 people nevada paying tax penalty cant afford insurance wont tell heller said contact gary martin 20226627390 gmartinreviewjournalcom follow garymartindc twitter next priorities following defeat efforts repeal obamacare republicans said move forward legislative priorities presidential nominations administration positions judicial appointments tax reform legislation legislation raise debt limit avoid government shutdown source senate majority leader mitch mcconnell | 568 |
<p>The opening gambit from the Left is to try to paint Judge Alito as someone who, in his 15 years on the Third Circuit, has had a handful of conservative rulings that have been at odds with the Supreme Court — and with Justice O’Connor in particular. But given the celebrated inconsistency of Justice O’Connor’s positions and her steady slide to the Left over the years, most if not all of the several instances in which the Supreme Court has disagreed with Judge Alito have a ready and telling explanation: Judge Alito, at the time of his rulings, has taken seriously the Supreme Court precedents then in effect and has, with intellectual rigor, applied them faithfully — only to learn later the cruel lesson that O’Connor’s ad hoc approach is subversive of principled decision-making. Alito has, in short, been far more faithful to Supreme Court precedent, and to O’Connor’s previously stated positions, than O’Connor has.</p>
<p>Judge Alito’s unanimous panel opinion in Chittister v. Department of Community and Economic Development, 226 F.3d 2223 (3rd Cir. 2000) and the Supreme Court’s subsequent opinion in 2003 in Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs provide a powerful illustration of this point.</p>
<p>Consider:</p>
<p>1. The question in Chittister was whether Congress validly abrogated the states’s Eleventh Amendment immunity when it enacted the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. The FMLA requires a broad class of employers, including states, to provide their employees with 12 weeks of leave in four situations: (A) “Because of the birth of a son or daughter of the employee and in order to care for such son or daughter”; (B) “Because of the placement of a son or daughter with the employee for adoption or foster care”; (C) “In order to care for the spouse, or a son, daughter, or parent, of the employee, if such spouse, son, daughter, or parent has a serious health condition”; or (D) “Because of a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the functions of the position of such employee”. The FMLA permits employees to sue in federal court for violations of the act.</p>
<p>2. Alito’s panel opinion applied recent Supreme Court precedents to conclude that Congress had not validly abrogated the states’s Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting the FMLA. Judge McKee, a Clinton appointee, and Judge Fullam, an LBJ&#160;appointee, joined Alito’s opinion. The panel opinion affirmed the ruling made by the district judge, a Carter appointee.</p>
<p>3. When the Chittister opinion was rendered, three other circuit courts had already unanimously reached the same conclusion. The Second Circuit’s opinion in Hale v. Mann was joined by Judge Kearse, a Carter appointee, and Judge Cabranes, a Clinton appointee. The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion in Garrett v. University of Alabama was joined by Chief Judge Anderson, a Carter appointee.</p>
<p>4. In December 2001, a Ninth Circuit panel of three very liberal judges (Tashima, Berzon, and the most irresponsible and lawless judge in the entire country, Stephen Reinhardt) addressed the same issue in Hibbs v. Department of Human Resources. By then, as the Ninth Circuit panel observed, seven circuits had ruled that Congress had not validly abrogated the states’s Eleventh Amendment immunity. But, said the panel, only one of those cases (the Fifth Circuit decision in Kazmier) had expressly involved subpart (C) of section 2612(a)(1). This “family care” subpart, the panel ruled, could “more plausibly be defended as an attempt to remedy gender discrimination.” And, on that basis, the panel ruled that the enactment of that specific provision was a proper exercise of Congress’s power under section 5 of the 14th Amendment.</p>
<p>5. In May 2003, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision that took most informed observers by surprise, affirmed the Ninth Circuit ruling. The Court’s ruling was limited to the family care provision (subpart (C)). Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice O’Connor switched sides from the Court’s previous Eleventh Amendment rulings, in which there had been a rigid 5-4 divide (with Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer in dissent). In short, at most two of the nine justices actually believed that there was any meaningful difference between Hibbs and previous cases.</p>
<p>6. Understood as limited to subpart (C), the Supreme Court’s decision in Hibbs does not in fact disagree with Alito’s holding in Chittister, the facts of which involved subpart (D). Tellingly, in identifying a circuit conflict below, the majority decision in Hibbs cited only the Ninth Circuit and Fifth Circuit opinions.</p>
<p>7. I say that “at most two” justices believed there was any meaningful difference between Hibbs and previous cases because many informed Supreme Court observers doubt that even Rehnquist and O’Connor believed that there was any meaningful difference. The commonly offered explanation for O’Connor’s surprising vote is that one of her former clerks argued the case in support of the position she adopted. As for Rehnquist, the commonly offered explanation is that he switched his vote — and assigned himself the majority opinion — in order to try to minimize the broader damage that would have been done to the Court’s Eleventh Amendment precedents if Stevens were to write or assign the majority opinion.</p>
<p>Bottom line: Anyone who faults Judge Alito in this case or any other case for somehow failing to anticipate O’Connor’s next change of mind doesn’t understand that the obligation of lower-court judges is to apply, and draw sensible implications from, existing Supreme Court precedents. The fact that O’Connor frequently and famously acted inconsistently with her prior positions — and, as the swing vote, often swung the Court majority with her — cannot be transmuted into blame on Alito’s part.</p>
<p>— Edward Whelan is president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and is a regular contributor to NRO’s “Bench Memos” blog on judicial nominations.</p>
<p /> | false | 1 | opening gambit left try paint judge alito someone 15 years third circuit handful conservative rulings odds supreme court justice oconnor particular given celebrated inconsistency justice oconnors positions steady slide left years several instances supreme court disagreed judge alito ready telling explanation judge alito time rulings taken seriously supreme court precedents effect intellectual rigor applied faithfully learn later cruel lesson oconnors ad hoc approach subversive principled decisionmaking alito short far faithful supreme court precedent oconnors previously stated positions oconnor judge alitos unanimous panel opinion chittister v department community economic development 226 f3d 2223 3rd cir 2000 supreme courts subsequent opinion 2003 nevada department human resources v hibbs provide powerful illustration point consider 1 question chittister whether congress validly abrogated statess eleventh amendment immunity enacted family medical leave act 1993 fmla requires broad class employers including states provide employees 12 weeks leave four situations birth son daughter employee order care son daughter b placement son daughter employee adoption foster care c order care spouse son daughter parent employee spouse son daughter parent serious health condition serious health condition makes employee unable perform functions position employee fmla permits employees sue federal court violations act 2 alitos panel opinion applied recent supreme court precedents conclude congress validly abrogated statess eleventh amendment immunity enacting fmla judge mckee clinton appointee judge fullam lbj160appointee joined alitos opinion panel opinion affirmed ruling made district judge carter appointee 3 chittister opinion rendered three circuit courts already unanimously reached conclusion second circuits opinion hale v mann joined judge kearse carter appointee judge cabranes clinton appointee eleventh circuits opinion garrett v university alabama joined chief judge anderson carter appointee 4 december 2001 ninth circuit panel three liberal judges tashima berzon irresponsible lawless judge entire country stephen reinhardt addressed issue hibbs v department human resources ninth circuit panel observed seven circuits ruled congress validly abrogated statess eleventh amendment immunity said panel one cases fifth circuit decision kazmier expressly involved subpart c section 2612a1 family care subpart panel ruled could plausibly defended attempt remedy gender discrimination basis panel ruled enactment specific provision proper exercise congresss power section 5 14th amendment 5 may 2003 supreme court 63 decision took informed observers surprise affirmed ninth circuit ruling courts ruling limited family care provision subpart c chief justice rehnquist justice oconnor switched sides courts previous eleventh amendment rulings rigid 54 divide stevens souter ginsburg breyer dissent short two nine justices actually believed meaningful difference hibbs previous cases 6 understood limited subpart c supreme courts decision hibbs fact disagree alitos holding chittister facts involved subpart tellingly identifying circuit conflict majority decision hibbs cited ninth circuit fifth circuit opinions 7 say two justices believed meaningful difference hibbs previous cases many informed supreme court observers doubt even rehnquist oconnor believed meaningful difference commonly offered explanation oconnors surprising vote one former clerks argued case support position adopted rehnquist commonly offered explanation switched vote assigned majority opinion order try minimize broader damage would done courts eleventh amendment precedents stevens write assign majority opinion bottom line anyone faults judge alito case case somehow failing anticipate oconnors next change mind doesnt understand obligation lowercourt judges apply draw sensible implications existing supreme court precedents fact oconnor frequently famously acted inconsistently prior positions swing vote often swung court majority transmuted blame alitos part edward whelan president ethics public policy center regular contributor nros bench memos blog judicial nominations | 553 |
<p>SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — Puerto Rico’s nonvoting representative in the U.S. Congress said Sunday that Hurricane Maria’s destruction has set the island back decades, even as authorities worked to assess the extent of the damage.</p>
<p>“The devastation in Puerto Rico has set us back nearly 20 to 30 years,” said Puerto Rico Resident Commissioner Jenniffer Gonzalez. “I can’t deny that the Puerto Rico of now is different from that of a week ago. The destruction of properties, of flattened structures, of families without homes, of debris everywhere. The island’s greenery is gone.”</p>
<p>Engineers on Sunday planned to inspect the roughly 90-year-old Guajataca Dam, which holds back a reservoir covering about 2 square miles in northwest Puerto Rico. The government said it suffered a large crack after Maria dumped 15 inches&#160;of rain on the surrounding mountains and that it “will collapse at any minute.” Nearby residents had been evacuated, but began returning to their homes Saturday after a spillway eased pressure on the dam.</p>
<p>Puerto Rico’s National Guard diverted an oil tanker that broke free and threatened to crash into the southeast coast, said Gov. Ricardo Rossello, and officials still had not had communication with nine of 78 municipalities.</p>
<p>“This is a major disaster,” he said. “We’ve had extensive damage. This is going to take some time.”</p>
<p>The death toll from Maria in Puerto Rico was at least 10, including two police officers who drowned in floodwaters in the western town of Aguada. That number was expected to climb as officials from remote towns continued to check in with officials in San Juan. Authorities in the town of Vega Alta on the north coast said they had been unable to reach an entire neighborhood called Fatima, and were particularly worried about residents of a nursing home.</p>
<p>Across the Caribbean, Maria had claimed at least 31 lives, including at least 15 on hard-hit Dominica.</p>
<p>Mike Hyland, a spokesman for the American Public Power Association, which represents the Puerto Rican power agency, said Sunday that restoration is a long ways off. The organization is working with U.S. Energy Department crews as well as New York Power Authority workers sent down by Gov. Andrew Cuomo to fly over the island and assess damage.</p>
<p>Crews hoped to get helicopters and drones in the air over the next two days to assess the damage, but Hyland said they need to be patient and let the military continue rescuing people before focusing on restoring power.</p>
<p>“We are trying to get an understanding of the extent of the damage over the next 48 hours to then begin to work with our federal partners to get the right crews and equipment down to Puerto Rico,” Hyland said.</p>
<p>Large amounts of federal aid have begun moving into Puerto Rico, welcomed by local officials who praised the Trump administration’s response but called for the emergency loosening of rules long blamed for condemning the U.S. territory to second-class status.</p>
<p>The opening of the island’s main port in the capital allowed 11 ships to bring in 1.6 million gallons of water, 23,000 cots, dozens of generators and food. Dozens more shipments are expected in upcoming days.</p>
<p>The federal aid effort is racing to stem a growing humanitarian crisis in towns left without fresh water, fuel, electricity or phone service. Officials with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which is in charge of the relief effort, said they would take satellite phones to all of Puerto Rico’s towns and cities, more than half of which were cut off following Maria’s devastating crossing of Puerto Rico on Wednesday.</p>
<p>The island’s infrastructure was in sorry shape long before Maria struck. A $73 billion debt crisis has left agencies like the state power company broke. As a result the power company abandoned most basic maintenance in recent years, leaving the island subject to regular blackouts.</p>
<p>A federal control board overseeing Puerto Rico’s finances authorized up to $1 billion in local funds to be used for hurricane response, but the governor said he would ask for more.</p>
<p>“We’re going to request waivers and other mechanisms so Puerto Rico can respond to this crisis,” Rossello said. “Puerto Rico will practically collect no taxes in the next month.”</p>
<p>U.S. Rep. Nydia Velazquez of New York said she will request a one-year waiver from the Jones Act, a federal law blamed for driving up prices on Puerto Rico by requiring cargo shipments there to move only on U.S. vessels as a means of supporting the U.S. maritime industry.</p>
<p>“We will use all our resources,” Velazquez said. “We need to make Puerto Rico whole again. These are American citizens.”</p>
<p>A group of anxious mayors traveled to the capital to meet with Rossello to present a long list of items they urgently need. The north coastal town of Manati had run out of fuel and fresh water, Mayor Jose Sanchez Gonzalez said.</p>
<p>“Hysteria is starting to spread. The hospital is about to collapse. It’s at capacity,” he said, crying. “We need someone to help us immediately.”</p>
<p>Across Puerto Rico, more than 15,000 people were in shelters, including some 2,000 rescued from the north coastal town of Toa Baja. Many Puerto Ricans planned to head to the mainland to temporarily escape the devastation.</p> | false | 1 | san juan puerto rico ap puerto ricos nonvoting representative us congress said sunday hurricane marias destruction set island back decades even authorities worked assess extent damage devastation puerto rico set us back nearly 20 30 years said puerto rico resident commissioner jenniffer gonzalez cant deny puerto rico different week ago destruction properties flattened structures families without homes debris everywhere islands greenery gone engineers sunday planned inspect roughly 90yearold guajataca dam holds back reservoir covering 2 square miles northwest puerto rico government said suffered large crack maria dumped 15 inches160of rain surrounding mountains collapse minute nearby residents evacuated began returning homes saturday spillway eased pressure dam puerto ricos national guard diverted oil tanker broke free threatened crash southeast coast said gov ricardo rossello officials still communication nine 78 municipalities major disaster said weve extensive damage going take time death toll maria puerto rico least 10 including two police officers drowned floodwaters western town aguada number expected climb officials remote towns continued check officials san juan authorities town vega alta north coast said unable reach entire neighborhood called fatima particularly worried residents nursing home across caribbean maria claimed least 31 lives including least 15 hardhit dominica mike hyland spokesman american public power association represents puerto rican power agency said sunday restoration long ways organization working us energy department crews well new york power authority workers sent gov andrew cuomo fly island assess damage crews hoped get helicopters drones air next two days assess damage hyland said need patient let military continue rescuing people focusing restoring power trying get understanding extent damage next 48 hours begin work federal partners get right crews equipment puerto rico hyland said large amounts federal aid begun moving puerto rico welcomed local officials praised trump administrations response called emergency loosening rules long blamed condemning us territory secondclass status opening islands main port capital allowed 11 ships bring 16 million gallons water 23000 cots dozens generators food dozens shipments expected upcoming days federal aid effort racing stem growing humanitarian crisis towns left without fresh water fuel electricity phone service officials federal emergency management agency charge relief effort said would take satellite phones puerto ricos towns cities half cut following marias devastating crossing puerto rico wednesday islands infrastructure sorry shape long maria struck 73 billion debt crisis left agencies like state power company broke result power company abandoned basic maintenance recent years leaving island subject regular blackouts federal control board overseeing puerto ricos finances authorized 1 billion local funds used hurricane response governor said would ask going request waivers mechanisms puerto rico respond crisis rossello said puerto rico practically collect taxes next month us rep nydia velazquez new york said request oneyear waiver jones act federal law blamed driving prices puerto rico requiring cargo shipments move us vessels means supporting us maritime industry use resources velazquez said need make puerto rico whole american citizens group anxious mayors traveled capital meet rossello present long list items urgently need north coastal town manati run fuel fresh water mayor jose sanchez gonzalez said hysteria starting spread hospital collapse capacity said crying need someone help us immediately across puerto rico 15000 people shelters including 2000 rescued north coastal town toa baja many puerto ricans planned head mainland temporarily escape devastation | 536 |
<p>NEW YORK — Considering what lies ahead for the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/New-York-Yankees/" type="external">New York Yankees</a>, nobody was about to complain as the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Seattle-Mariners/" type="external">Seattle Mariners</a> committed one error after another in the first inning.</p>
<p>Instead, they just simply took advantage of the bizarre set of circumstances.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Starlin_Castro/" type="external">Starlin Castro</a> went 4-for-4 Sunday as the Yankees scored six runs in the first inning when the Mariners made five errors en route to a 10-1 rout.</p>
<p>“It was really strange and, we did a good of job of really capitalizing,” Yankees manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Girardi/" type="external">Joe Girardi</a> said.</p>
<p>Heading into seven straight home games against division leaders Boston and Cleveland, the Yankees won for the ninth time in 13 games. They are 2 1/2 games behind Boston and 3 1/2 games ahead of Minnesota for the first American League wild-card spot.</p>
<p>“I think you just try to take advantage of it,” Yankees first baseman <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chase_Headley/" type="external">Chase Headley</a> said. “Everybody is excited when your score runs. It doesn’t really matter if it’s on home runs or errors.”</p>
<p>Did they ever.</p>
<p>Castro began his 16th career four-hit day with a double to right field against Seattle left-hander Andrew Albers (2-1).</p>
<p>Then the fielding adventures began for the Mariners, who are 1 1/2 games behind the Twins for the second wild card.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Gary-Sanchez/" type="external">Gary Sanchez</a> followed with an RBI single to tie the score and wound up on second when left fielder Ben Gamel overran the ball. Gamel’s misplay was minor to the kind of day endured by shortstop <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jean-Segura/" type="external">Jean Segura</a>.</p>
<p>Segura was charged with three errors, becoming the first shortstop to make three errors in an inning since Castro for the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Chicago-Cubs/" type="external">Chicago Cubs</a> on April 25, 2011, at Colorado. It tied a dubious team record as it marked the sixth instance a Seattle shortstop made three errors and was the first time since <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jack_Wilson/" type="external">Jack Wilson</a> on May 4, 2010.</p>
<p>Segura’s first error occurred when he let a popup by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Didi-Gregorius/" type="external">Didi Gregorius</a> to shallow left field fall in between him, Gamel and center fielder Guillermo Heredia. It was initially ruled a hit but quickly changed.</p>
<p>“There was a couple of big errors there. We don’t want to make an error,” said Segura, who also said Heredia called for the Gregorius popup. “I think everybody is ready to play and continue as a team and win some ballgames, but it happens. It happened crazy today, but it happens.”</p>
<p>The bloop error loaded the bases for the Yankees and helped give them a 2-1 lead when third baseman Kyle Seager simply dropped Headley’s ground ball.</p>
<p>After a strikeout by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Todd-Frazier/" type="external">Todd Frazier</a>, <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jacoby_Ellsbury/" type="external">Jacoby Ellsbury</a> doubled to left field, but Segura experienced an adventure executing the relay to home plate. He missed Gamel’s throw for his second error and then overthrew catcher Mike Zunino for his third error as the Yankees took a 5-1 lead.</p>
<p>“We want to beat them,” Castro said. “We’ll take whatever mistake they make.”</p>
<p>Ellsbury scored on an RBI infield single to Seager by Ronald Torreyes. The Yankees added their final four runs after Girardi was ejected for seeking an explanation when it Segura ran out of the base line on a groundout by <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Robinson_Cano/" type="external">Robinson Cano</a>.</p>
<p>Girardi challenged the play and when the review stood, he engaged in a demonstrative argument and quickly was tossed by second base umpire <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Mike_Everitt/" type="external">Mike Everitt</a>.</p>
<p>After Girardi went to his office, the Yankees took a 7-1 lead on Castro’s RBI single in the third. The lead reached 8-1 when Castro scored on a sacrifice fly by Headley in the sixth. New York’s final two runs occurred in the seventh on a single by pinch-hitter Greg Bird.</p>
<p>The six-run first was more than enough for <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Masahiro-Tanaka/" type="external">Masahiro Tanaka</a> (10-10), who struck out 10 and pitched seven innings of one-run ball in his second start back from right shoulder inflammation.</p>
<p>Tanaka’s 100th career start began with him allowing three straight one-out hits, including an RBI double to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Nelson_Cruz/" type="external">Nelson Cruz</a>, but he quickly finished the first and found a groove.</p>
<p>“He threw phenomenal,” Castro said.</p>
<p>The Mariners never recovered after the ugly opening inning and fell to 5-4 on a nine-game road trip. Seattle made at least four errors for the second time on the trip (also Monday in Atlanta) and according to STATS became the third team to make at least five errors in an inning since 1974.</p>
<p>The last team to do so was the Chicago Cubs, who made five of their seven miscues in the opening inning at St. Louis on July 2, 1977. Seattle also made at least five errors for the 16th time in team history, doing so for only third time since 1996.</p>
<p>“Certainly you can’t make that many mistakes and give a team that many extra outs,” Seattle manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Scott-Servais/" type="external">Scott Servais</a> said. “It was a lot of unforced errors.”</p>
<p>Albers (2-1) tied career highs by allowing eight runs (three earned) and 11 hits in five-plus innings.</p>
<p>NOTES: Seattle OF Jarrod Dyson (strained right groin) was eligible to come off the disabled list and was not cleared to return. He will continue testing his groin before Monday’s game in Baltimore. … Yankees DH <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Matt_Holliday/" type="external">Matt Holliday</a> (back) continued his rehab assignment with Class A Tampa on Saturday by going 2-for-5. He may not return until Friday when rosters can be expanded. … Mariners LHP James Paxton (pectoral) and RHP <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Felix_Hernandez/" type="external">Felix Hernandez</a> (right shoulder bursitis) played catch in Seattle, but neither is close to getting on a mound for a bullpen session. … Yankees manager Joe Girardi was ejected for the fifth time this season and 35th time since taking the job 2008.</p> | false | 1 | new york considering lies ahead new york yankees nobody complain seattle mariners committed one error another first inning instead simply took advantage bizarre set circumstances starlin castro went 4for4 sunday yankees scored six runs first inning mariners made five errors en route 101 rout really strange good job really capitalizing yankees manager joe girardi said heading seven straight home games division leaders boston cleveland yankees ninth time 13 games 2 12 games behind boston 3 12 games ahead minnesota first american league wildcard spot think try take advantage yankees first baseman chase headley said everybody excited score runs doesnt really matter home runs errors ever castro began 16th career fourhit day double right field seattle lefthander andrew albers 21 fielding adventures began mariners 1 12 games behind twins second wild card gary sanchez followed rbi single tie score wound second left fielder ben gamel overran ball gamels misplay minor kind day endured shortstop jean segura segura charged three errors becoming first shortstop make three errors inning since castro chicago cubs april 25 2011 colorado tied dubious team record marked sixth instance seattle shortstop made three errors first time since jack wilson may 4 2010 seguras first error occurred let popup didi gregorius shallow left field fall gamel center fielder guillermo heredia initially ruled hit quickly changed couple big errors dont want make error said segura also said heredia called gregorius popup think everybody ready play continue team win ballgames happens happened crazy today happens bloop error loaded bases yankees helped give 21 lead third baseman kyle seager simply dropped headleys ground ball strikeout todd frazier jacoby ellsbury doubled left field segura experienced adventure executing relay home plate missed gamels throw second error overthrew catcher mike zunino third error yankees took 51 lead want beat castro said well take whatever mistake make ellsbury scored rbi infield single seager ronald torreyes yankees added final four runs girardi ejected seeking explanation segura ran base line groundout robinson cano girardi challenged play review stood engaged demonstrative argument quickly tossed second base umpire mike everitt girardi went office yankees took 71 lead castros rbi single third lead reached 81 castro scored sacrifice fly headley sixth new yorks final two runs occurred seventh single pinchhitter greg bird sixrun first enough masahiro tanaka 1010 struck 10 pitched seven innings onerun ball second start back right shoulder inflammation tanakas 100th career start began allowing three straight oneout hits including rbi double nelson cruz quickly finished first found groove threw phenomenal castro said mariners never recovered ugly opening inning fell 54 ninegame road trip seattle made least four errors second time trip also monday atlanta according stats became third team make least five errors inning since 1974 last team chicago cubs made five seven miscues opening inning st louis july 2 1977 seattle also made least five errors 16th time team history third time since 1996 certainly cant make many mistakes give team many extra outs seattle manager scott servais said lot unforced errors albers 21 tied career highs allowing eight runs three earned 11 hits fiveplus innings notes seattle jarrod dyson strained right groin eligible come disabled list cleared return continue testing groin mondays game baltimore yankees dh matt holliday back continued rehab assignment class tampa saturday going 2for5 may return friday rosters expanded mariners lhp james paxton pectoral rhp felix hernandez right shoulder bursitis played catch seattle neither close getting mound bullpen session yankees manager joe girardi ejected fifth time season 35th time since taking job 2008 | 580 |
<p>For my entire adult life I have listened to the invective leveled against the Republican Party by liberals: It is a party sustained by racist appeals, composed of haters and conspiracy nuts, indifferent to the plight of the poor and the weak, anti-woman.</p>
<p>I have repeatedly denied those charges, publicly and forcefully. The broad indictment, the unfair generalizations, were caricature and calumny, the product of the fevered imagination of the left. Then along came Donald J. Trump, who seemed to embody every awful charge made against the Republican Party.</p>
<p>Later this week he will become my party’s nominee.</p>
<p>For many of us lifelong Republicans, the convention in Cleveland will be a time of serious self-reflection, a difficult and honest reckoning. Those of us who have chosen not to attend the convention will have a bit more time on our hands to think it over. How on earth did our party produce Mr. Trump as its nominee?</p>
<p>There’s a powerful temptation for many Republicans to avoid that question — or, in wrestling with it, to look to reassuring explanations and extenuating circumstances. For example, Mr. Trump benefited from an unusually large field of candidates by consolidating support among a small but significant number of Republican primary voters while the rest split their support among the fractured field. Or: Mr. Trump profited from a huge imbalance in free media, earning close to $2 billion worth of it during the presidential campaign, eclipsing, according to&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html?smid=tw-share&amp;_r=0" type="external">one analysis</a>, the total value of media attention given to all other Republican candidates combined.</p>
<p>There are other explanations as well, and they may all have merit. But there is still the unalterable fact that Mr. Trump led for virtually the entire contest and defined its terms from the outset. At every stage — with every racist statement and nativist appeal, every cruel insult, every new conspiracy theory and fresh revelation of his vast ignorance — he grew stronger rather than weaker. The ceiling we kept hearing about last summer and fall, starting at the high teens and low 20s, kept rising. The candidates who were supposed to vanquish him — many of them talented and accomplished individuals — kept dropping out.</p>
<p>Mr. Trump’s comeuppance never came.</p>
<p>He ended up&#160; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html" type="external">winning 36 contests</a>&#160;and&#160; <a href="http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/trump-trumps-wins-historic-race-record-fashion/" type="external">more Republican primary votes</a> than anyone in history. That means people like me — in my particular case, someone who all told served a decade in the Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations and in the George W. Bush White House — are not only alienated from our political home and isolated in our party; we are in open revolt against its nominee. That says something about Mr. Trump, but it also tells us something about the party he now leads.</p>
<p>For many on the left, explaining what happened is simple: The Republican Party has always been this way, and Mr. Trump is the logical and inevitable culmination of what the Republican Party has represented for decades. He is the ugly face of an ugly party.</p>
<p>I believe the truth is a good deal more complicated. For one thing, the rise of Mr. Trump doesn’t invalidate my own experiences of life in a party comprising mostly honorable individuals working to advance an agenda they believed was in the national interest. I understand this will elicit a roll of the eyes in an age when cynicism is fashionable, but it happens to be true. Both parties are made up of imperfect people who have very different worldviews yet who by and large are acting in what they believe is the public interest. The idea that one side comprises Children of Light and the other Children of Darkness is a silly, partisan distortion.</p>
<p>Nor can you take presidents like Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush and nominees like Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney and say that the common denominator, the core of their appeal, was racism, nativism and misogyny.</p>
<p>But it is fair to say that there existed in the Republican Party repulsive elements, people who were attracted to racial and ethnic politics and moved by resentment and intolerance rather than a vision of the good. This group was larger than I ever imagined, and at important moments the Republican Party either overlooked them or played to them. Some may have been hoping to appeal to these elements while also containing and moderating them, to sand off the rough edges, to keep them within the coalition but not allow them to become dominant. But the opposite happened. The party guests took over the party.</p>
<p>A kind of perfect storm occurred: the financial crisis of 2008 combined with long-term economic stagnation, significant demographic and cultural changes, utter contempt for the political class and outrage that Republicans were not nullifying President Obama or promoting an agenda connected to their concerns. A friend of mine pointed out to me that part of the problem is that we are drenched in distaste for the actual practice of politics, and there’s an unstated sense among conservative activists in particular that the activity of governing is somehow illegitimate.</p>
<p>Instead of arguing for the dignity and necessity of politics — instead of making the case for why the give and take, the debate and compromise, are both necessary and appropriate — activists and their counterparts in government disparaged it. This helps explain how Mr. Trump seized on deeply anti-political feelings and used them to his advantage, why Republicans so devalued any focus on policy this election season, and why the former reality television star was rewarded for his vast ignorance on issues. That can work only with people who disdain the government and the activity of governing.</p>
<p>All of this was the kindling, and then came the match.</p>
<p>Many of us were aware of the anger and grievances of Republican primary voters, many of which were understandable and some of which were justified. But we did not imagine that these voters, knowing full well the ugly things Mr. Trump represents, would hand him the keys. They did, and now the Republican Party, with its leading figures lining up behind Mr. Trump, cannot escape from him. That is a haunting reality for those of us who have given some part of our lives to a party we believed was flawed but also a force for good and a force for justice.</p>
<p>So what now? The inclination for some is to walk away, to give up on the party. That’s not the path I’m taking, at least not yet. For while the struggle for the nomination is over, the struggle for the soul of the party is not. This is a difficult moment for the Republican Party, but not necessarily a lasting one.</p>
<p>There are plenty of Republicans who either oppose Mr. Trump or are queasy about supporting him. He did not win a majority of the total votes cast in the primary. And while Trumpism is on the ascendancy right now, my expectation is that it will soon be politically and morally discredited, including in the eyes of most Republicans.</p>
<p>If not, and certainly if Mr. Trump wins the presidency, the Republican Party will fully enter its dark age. (Set aside for now the damage he would do to the country.) But if he loses, there will be a pitched battle to rebuild the Republican Party; to make it different and better, more hopeful, humane and in touch with the concerns of both working- and middle-class voters, than it was pre-Trump.</p>
<p>The party many of us will fight for is a conservative one that appeals to rather than alienates nonwhites, that doesn’t view decency as a sign of weakness or confuse bullying and bluster with strength, and that aims to channel aspirations rather than stoke resentments and organize hatreds.</p>
<p>That vision of the Republican Party will not be on display this week in Cleveland. The nominee of the party makes that impossible. So Republicans will need to look elsewhere for inspiration. In his marvelous biography of Abraham Lincoln, originally published in 1916, Lord Charnwood said of him,</p>
<p>This most unrelenting enemy to the project of the Confederacy was the one man who had quite purged his heart and mind from hatred or even anger towards his fellow-countrymen of the South.</p>
<p>Lord Charnwood added,</p>
<p>For perhaps not many conquerors, and certainly few successful statesmen, have escaped the tendency of power to harden or at least to narrow their human sympathies; but in this man a natural wealth of tender compassion became richer and more tender while in the stress of deadly conflict he developed an astounding strength.</p>
<p>In every important respect, Donald Trump is a repudiation of Lincoln. Win or lose, on the morning after Election Day, Republicans will have to choose whose vision of the party they want to follow.</p>
<p>Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, served in the last three Republican administrations and is a contributing opinion writer.</p> | false | 1 | entire adult life listened invective leveled republican party liberals party sustained racist appeals composed haters conspiracy nuts indifferent plight poor weak antiwoman repeatedly denied charges publicly forcefully broad indictment unfair generalizations caricature calumny product fevered imagination left along came donald j trump seemed embody every awful charge made republican party later week become partys nominee many us lifelong republicans convention cleveland time serious selfreflection difficult honest reckoning us chosen attend convention bit time hands think earth party produce mr trump nominee theres powerful temptation many republicans avoid question wrestling look reassuring explanations extenuating circumstances example mr trump benefited unusually large field candidates consolidating support among small significant number republican primary voters rest split support among fractured field mr trump profited huge imbalance free media earning close 2 billion worth presidential campaign eclipsing according to160 one analysis total value media attention given republican candidates combined explanations well may merit still unalterable fact mr trump led virtually entire contest defined terms outset every stage every racist statement nativist appeal every cruel insult every new conspiracy theory fresh revelation vast ignorance grew stronger rather weaker ceiling kept hearing last summer fall starting high teens low 20s kept rising candidates supposed vanquish many talented accomplished individuals kept dropping mr trumps comeuppance never came ended up160 winning 36 contests160and160 republican primary votes anyone history means people like particular case someone told served decade ronald reagan george h w bush administrations george w bush white house alienated political home isolated party open revolt nominee says something mr trump also tells us something party leads many left explaining happened simple republican party always way mr trump logical inevitable culmination republican party represented decades ugly face ugly party believe truth good deal complicated one thing rise mr trump doesnt invalidate experiences life party comprising mostly honorable individuals working advance agenda believed national interest understand elicit roll eyes age cynicism fashionable happens true parties made imperfect people different worldviews yet large acting believe public interest idea one side comprises children light children darkness silly partisan distortion take presidents like ronald reagan george h w bush george w bush nominees like bob dole john mccain mitt romney say common denominator core appeal racism nativism misogyny fair say existed republican party repulsive elements people attracted racial ethnic politics moved resentment intolerance rather vision good group larger ever imagined important moments republican party either overlooked played may hoping appeal elements also containing moderating sand rough edges keep within coalition allow become dominant opposite happened party guests took party kind perfect storm occurred financial crisis 2008 combined longterm economic stagnation significant demographic cultural changes utter contempt political class outrage republicans nullifying president obama promoting agenda connected concerns friend mine pointed part problem drenched distaste actual practice politics theres unstated sense among conservative activists particular activity governing somehow illegitimate instead arguing dignity necessity politics instead making case give take debate compromise necessary appropriate activists counterparts government disparaged helps explain mr trump seized deeply antipolitical feelings used advantage republicans devalued focus policy election season former reality television star rewarded vast ignorance issues work people disdain government activity governing kindling came match many us aware anger grievances republican primary voters many understandable justified imagine voters knowing full well ugly things mr trump represents would hand keys republican party leading figures lining behind mr trump escape haunting reality us given part lives party believed flawed also force good force justice inclination walk away give party thats path im taking least yet struggle nomination struggle soul party difficult moment republican party necessarily lasting one plenty republicans either oppose mr trump queasy supporting win majority total votes cast primary trumpism ascendancy right expectation soon politically morally discredited including eyes republicans certainly mr trump wins presidency republican party fully enter dark age set aside damage would country loses pitched battle rebuild republican party make different better hopeful humane touch concerns working middleclass voters pretrump party many us fight conservative one appeals rather alienates nonwhites doesnt view decency sign weakness confuse bullying bluster strength aims channel aspirations rather stoke resentments organize hatreds vision republican party display week cleveland nominee party makes impossible republicans need look elsewhere inspiration marvelous biography abraham lincoln originally published 1916 lord charnwood said unrelenting enemy project confederacy one man quite purged heart mind hatred even anger towards fellowcountrymen south lord charnwood added perhaps many conquerors certainly successful statesmen escaped tendency power harden least narrow human sympathies man natural wealth tender compassion became richer tender stress deadly conflict developed astounding strength every important respect donald trump repudiation lincoln win lose morning election day republicans choose whose vision party want follow peter wehner senior fellow ethics public policy center served last three republican administrations contributing opinion writer | 778 |
<p />
<p>A week ago Israel suspended participation in the peace talks in response to news that the Palestinian Authority’s Fatah had for a third time concluded a unity agreement with the Hamas leadership of Gaza. Such a move toward intra-Palestinian reconciliation should have been welcomed by Israel as a tentative step in the right direction. Instead it was immediately denounced by Netanyahu as the end of the diplomatic road, contending that Israel will never be part of any political process that includes a terrorist organization pledged to its destruction.</p>
<p>Without Hamas’ participation any diplomatic results of negotiations would likely have been of questionable value, and besides, Hamas deserves inclusion. It has behaved as a political actor since it took part in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, and has repeatedly indicated its willingness to reach a long-term normalizing agreement with Israel if and when Israel is ready to withdraw fully to the 1967 borders and respect Palestinian sovereign rights. The contention that Hamas is pledged to Israel’s destruction is pure hasbara, a cynical means to manipulate the fear factor in Israeli domestic politics, as well as ensuring the persistence of the conflict. This approach has become Israel’s way of choosing expansion over peace, and seemingly ignoring its own citizens’ mandate to secure a stable peace agreement.</p>
<p>Israel had days earlier complained about an initiative taken by the PA to become a party to 15 international treaties. Again, a step that would be viewed as constructive if seeking an end to the conflict was anywhere to be found in Israel’s playbook. Such an initiative should have been interpreted in a positive direction as indicating the Palestinian intention to be a responsible member of the international community. Israel’s contrary lame allegation that by acting independently the PA departed from the agreed roadmap of negotiations prematurely assuming the prerogatives of a state rather than waiting Godot-like for such a status to be granted via the bilateral diplomatic route.</p>
<p>To remove any doubt about the priorities of the Netanyahu-led government, Israel during the nine months set aside for reaching an agreement, authorized no less than 13,851 new housing units in the settlements, added significant amounts of available land for further settlement expansion, and demolished 312 Palestinian homes. These acts were not only unlawful, but actually accelerated earlier settlement trends, and were obviously provocative from a Palestinian perspective. As Haaretz columnist, Gideon Levy, observed in a TV interview, if Israeli authorizes even one additional housing unit during negotiations it is sending a clear signal to the Palestinian people and their leaders that it has no interest in reaching a sustainable peace agreement.</p>
<p>The revival of direct negotiations last August between the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority was mainly a strong arm initiative of the U.S. Government, energized by John Kerry, the American Secretary of State, who has put relentless pressure on both sides to start talking despite the manifest futility of such a process from its outset. Such resolve raises the still unanswered question, ‘why?’ Kerry melodramatically proclaimed that these negotiations were the last chance to save the two-state solution as the means to end the conflict, in effect, declaring this new round of U.S. sponsored negotiations to be an all or nothing moment of decision for the Palestinian Authority and Israel. Kerry has reinforced this appeal by warning that Israel risks isolation and boycott if no agreement is reached, and in the last several days, declared behind closed doors that Israel was taking a path that could lead Israel to becoming an apartheid state by this apparent refusal to seek a diplomatic solution.</p>
<p>It is probably beside the point that no one at the State Department informed Kerry before he started to walk this tightrope that the two-state goal that he so unconditionally endorsed was already dead and buried as a realistic option. Further, that Israel had established an apartheid regime on the West Bank decades ago, making his supposedly controversial statement better understood to be ‘old news.’ In other words, Kerry showed himself awkwardly out of touch by issuing future warnings about matters that were already in a past tense. With respect to apartheid he discredited himself further by apologizing for using the a-word in response to objections by Israeli supporters in the United States, however descriptive ‘apartheid’ has become of the discriminatory nature of the occupation. American leaders present themselves as craven in relation to Israeli sensibilities when they retreat in this manner from reality without showing the slightest sign of embarrassment.</p>
<p>The agreement of Israel and the PA to sit together and negotiate formally expired on April 29th, yet the indefatigable Kerry rather remarkably pushed the parties to agree on an extension by a flurry of meetings in recent weeks disclosing a mood hovering uneasily between exasperation and desperation. Even if the talks were to resume, as still might happen, it should not be interpreted as a hopeful development. There is utterly no reason to think that a diplomatic process in the current political climate is capable of producing a just and sustainable peace. To think differently embraces an illusion, and more meaningfully, gives Israel additional time to consolidate its expansionist plans to a point that makes it absurd to imagine the creation of a truly viable and independent sovereign parallel Palestinian state.</p>
<p>So long as the political preconditions for fruitful inter-governmental diplomacy do not exist, calls for direct negotiations should be abandoned. Both sides must approach negotiations with a genuine incentive to strike a deal that is fair to the other side, which implies a willingness to respect Palestinian rights under international law. For reasons suggested, those preconditions do not exist on the Israeli side. This makes it deeply misleading to put the blame for the breakdown of the talks on both sides, or sometimes even to point the finger at the Palestinians, as has been the practice in the mainstream Western media whenever negotiations hit a stone wall.</p>
<p>It has been painfully obvious ever since Oslo (1993), that there is something fundamentally deficient about the double role played by the United States Government in relation to such negotiations. How can it be trusted when American officials declare over and over again that the country will forever remain the unconditional ally of Israel, and yet at the same time give even minimal confidence to the Palestinians that it a neutral third party seeking to promote a just peace? The short answer is that ‘it can’t’ and ‘will not.’</p>
<p>From the very outset of the recent diplomatic initiative this contradiction in roles was resolved in Israel’s favor by the Obama appointment of Martin Indyk as Special Envoy entrusted with the delicate symbolic role of overseeing the negotiations. Indyk has a long public career of involvements supportive of Israel, including past employment with the notorious AIPAC lobby that exerts its disproportionate pro-Israeli influence over the entire American political scene. Only the weakness of the Palestinian Authority can explain a willingness to entrust its diplomatic fate to such a framework already strongly tilted in favor of Israel due to Israel’s skills and strengths as an experienced political actor on the global stage.</p>
<p>Against this background we have to ask what is gained and lost by such fruitless negotiations. What is gained by Israel and the United States is some hope that while negotiations proceed, the conflict will not escalate by taking an unwelcome turn toward a Third Intifada that forcibly challenges Israel’s occupation policies associated with the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. There is also the sense that so long as the U.S. Government is seen as backing a two-state solution it satisfies regional expectations, and provide a rationale for supporting even a futile diplomatic effort because it is the only game in town, and it seems perverse to challenge its utility without presenting an alternative. The Arab world itself endorsed and recently reaffirmed its 2002 regional peace initiative calling for Israel’s withdrawal from occupied Palestine and formal acceptance of Palestinian state within 1967 green line borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital. Such a vision of peace derives from unanimous Security Council Resolution 242 that was premised on Israel’s withdrawal from territories occupied in the course of the 1967 War, but additionally on a just solution of the refugee problem. And there is near universal appreciation expressed for Kerry’s dedication to resolving the conflict, and so it is a kind of public relations success story despite the serious drawbacks mentioned.</p>
<p>In effect, there has existed a global consensus since 1967 on establishing peace between Israel and Palestine, reinforced by the apparent absence of alternatives, that is, the only possibilities are widely believed to be either two-states or the persistence of the conflict. It should be appreciated that way back in 1988 the Palestinian Liberation Organization, then speaking for all Palestinians under the leadership of Yasir Arafat, gave up its maximalist goals, and formally indicated its willingness to make peace with Israel based on these 1967 borders, with an implied readiness to compromise on the refugee issue. Such an approach allowed Israel to possess secure borders based on 78% of historic Palestine, and limited the Palestinian state to the other 22%, which is less than half of what the UN had offered the Palestinians its partition proposal of 1947, which at the time seemed unreasonable from a Palestinian perspective.</p>
<p>In appraisals of the conflict this historic Palestinian concession, perhaps imprudently made by the PLO, has never been acknowledged, much less reciprocated, by either Israel or the United States. In my view, this absence of response exhibited all along a fundamental lack of political will on the Israeli side to reach a solution through inter-governmental negotiations, although some would interpret the Camp David initiative in 2000 as the last time that Israeli leadership seemed somewhat inclined to resolve the conflict diplomatically.</p>
<p>The Palestinian Authority depends on Israel to transfer tax revenues upon which its governing capacity rests, and it can usually be brought into line if it acts in defiance of Tel Aviv and Washington. Also, collaboration on security arrangements with Israel creates both co-dependency and give a measure of stability to the otherwise frozen situation. Occasionally, seemingly with quixotic intent, the PA and Abbas challenge this image by suggesting their option to quit the political stage and return the responsibilities of administering the West Bank to Israel.</p>
<p>The two-state consensus has been increasingly challenged over the years by influential Palestinians, including Edward Said, who toward the end of his life argued that in view of intervening developments subsequent to 1988, only a one-state solution could reconcile the two peoples in an acceptable manner based on mutual respect for rights, democracy, and equality. The advocacy of a single secular democratic state draws on two sets of arguments—a pragmatic contention that the settlement process and the changed demographic of East Jerusalem are essentially irreversible, and thus there is no feasible means at this time to create a viable Palestinian state, and this becomes more apparent with each passing day; and a principled contention that it makes no political or ethical sense in the twenty-first century to encourage the formation of ethnic states, especially as in this case, 20% of the Israeli population is Palestinian, and subject to an array of discriminatory legislative measures. In some respects, the essence of the Palestinian predicament is to acknowledge that it is too late for the two-state solution and seemingly too early for a one-state solution.</p>
<p>Assuming that the diplomatic route is blocked, is the situation hopeless for the Palestinians? I believe that Palestinian hopes for a just peace should never have rested on the outcome of formal diplomacy for the reasons given above. Put succinctly, given the Israel failure to heed the call for withdrawal in U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, its non-response to the 1988 PLO acceptance of Israel within the 1967 borders, and its consistent commitment to settlement expansion, no sane person should have put much faith in an Israeli readiness to make a peace respectful of Palestinian rights under international law.</p>
<p>Currently, the best prospect for realizing Palestinian self-determination is by way of pressures exerted through the mobilization of a movement from below, combining popular resistance with global solidarity. Such a process, what I have called ‘legitimacy war,’ exemplified by Gandhi’s nonviolent victory over the British Empire and more recently by the success of the global anti-apartheid movement against racist South Africa, represents the latest strategic turn in the Palestinian national movement, and seems even compatible with the recent outlook of Hamas as expressed by its leaders and confirmed by its behavior.</p>
<p>It is time to appreciate that the current approach of the Palestinian national movement rests on two broad undertakings: the adoption of nonviolent resistance tactics and an increasingly strengthened global solidarity movement, centered on the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) initiative, which is gaining momentum throughout the world, especially in Europe. These developments are reinforced by UN calls to Member States to remind corporate and financial actors under their national control that it is problematic under international law to continue engaging in business dealings with Israeli settlements.</p>
<p>In effect, there are horizons of hope for Palestinians with respect to seeking a just and sustainable peace between these two ethnic communities that is gaining most of its impact and influence from the actions of people rather than the maneuvers of governments. Of course, if the political climate changes in response to legitimacy war pressures, governments could have a crucial future role to play, taking advantage of a new balance of forces that could enable diplomacy to move towards solutions. Constructive diplomacy would contrast with what has recently transpired, which seemed to combine deflection from Israeli expansionism followed by participation in a childish blame game. It is important that world public opinion reject as meaningless the diplomatic charade of peace talks while the fate of a people continues to be daily sacrificed on the altar of geopolitics.</p> | false | 1 | week ago israel suspended participation peace talks response news palestinian authoritys fatah third time concluded unity agreement hamas leadership gaza move toward intrapalestinian reconciliation welcomed israel tentative step right direction instead immediately denounced netanyahu end diplomatic road contending israel never part political process includes terrorist organization pledged destruction without hamas participation diplomatic results negotiations would likely questionable value besides hamas deserves inclusion behaved political actor since took part 2006 palestinian legislative elections repeatedly indicated willingness reach longterm normalizing agreement israel israel ready withdraw fully 1967 borders respect palestinian sovereign rights contention hamas pledged israels destruction pure hasbara cynical means manipulate fear factor israeli domestic politics well ensuring persistence conflict approach become israels way choosing expansion peace seemingly ignoring citizens mandate secure stable peace agreement israel days earlier complained initiative taken pa become party 15 international treaties step would viewed constructive seeking end conflict anywhere found israels playbook initiative interpreted positive direction indicating palestinian intention responsible member international community israels contrary lame allegation acting independently pa departed agreed roadmap negotiations prematurely assuming prerogatives state rather waiting godotlike status granted via bilateral diplomatic route remove doubt priorities netanyahuled government israel nine months set aside reaching agreement authorized less 13851 new housing units settlements added significant amounts available land settlement expansion demolished 312 palestinian homes acts unlawful actually accelerated earlier settlement trends obviously provocative palestinian perspective haaretz columnist gideon levy observed tv interview israeli authorizes even one additional housing unit negotiations sending clear signal palestinian people leaders interest reaching sustainable peace agreement revival direct negotiations last august government israel palestinian authority mainly strong arm initiative us government energized john kerry american secretary state put relentless pressure sides start talking despite manifest futility process outset resolve raises still unanswered question kerry melodramatically proclaimed negotiations last chance save twostate solution means end conflict effect declaring new round us sponsored negotiations nothing moment decision palestinian authority israel kerry reinforced appeal warning israel risks isolation boycott agreement reached last several days declared behind closed doors israel taking path could lead israel becoming apartheid state apparent refusal seek diplomatic solution probably beside point one state department informed kerry started walk tightrope twostate goal unconditionally endorsed already dead buried realistic option israel established apartheid regime west bank decades ago making supposedly controversial statement better understood old news words kerry showed awkwardly touch issuing future warnings matters already past tense respect apartheid discredited apologizing using aword response objections israeli supporters united states however descriptive apartheid become discriminatory nature occupation american leaders present craven relation israeli sensibilities retreat manner reality without showing slightest sign embarrassment agreement israel pa sit together negotiate formally expired april 29th yet indefatigable kerry rather remarkably pushed parties agree extension flurry meetings recent weeks disclosing mood hovering uneasily exasperation desperation even talks resume still might happen interpreted hopeful development utterly reason think diplomatic process current political climate capable producing sustainable peace think differently embraces illusion meaningfully gives israel additional time consolidate expansionist plans point makes absurd imagine creation truly viable independent sovereign parallel palestinian state long political preconditions fruitful intergovernmental diplomacy exist calls direct negotiations abandoned sides must approach negotiations genuine incentive strike deal fair side implies willingness respect palestinian rights international law reasons suggested preconditions exist israeli side makes deeply misleading put blame breakdown talks sides sometimes even point finger palestinians practice mainstream western media whenever negotiations hit stone wall painfully obvious ever since oslo 1993 something fundamentally deficient double role played united states government relation negotiations trusted american officials declare country forever remain unconditional ally israel yet time give even minimal confidence palestinians neutral third party seeking promote peace short answer cant outset recent diplomatic initiative contradiction roles resolved israels favor obama appointment martin indyk special envoy entrusted delicate symbolic role overseeing negotiations indyk long public career involvements supportive israel including past employment notorious aipac lobby exerts disproportionate proisraeli influence entire american political scene weakness palestinian authority explain willingness entrust diplomatic fate framework already strongly tilted favor israel due israels skills strengths experienced political actor global stage background ask gained lost fruitless negotiations gained israel united states hope negotiations proceed conflict escalate taking unwelcome turn toward third intifada forcibly challenges israels occupation policies associated west bank east jerusalem gaza also sense long us government seen backing twostate solution satisfies regional expectations provide rationale supporting even futile diplomatic effort game town seems perverse challenge utility without presenting alternative arab world endorsed recently reaffirmed 2002 regional peace initiative calling israels withdrawal occupied palestine formal acceptance palestinian state within 1967 green line borders east jerusalem capital vision peace derives unanimous security council resolution 242 premised israels withdrawal territories occupied course 1967 war additionally solution refugee problem near universal appreciation expressed kerrys dedication resolving conflict kind public relations success story despite serious drawbacks mentioned effect existed global consensus since 1967 establishing peace israel palestine reinforced apparent absence alternatives possibilities widely believed either twostates persistence conflict appreciated way back 1988 palestinian liberation organization speaking palestinians leadership yasir arafat gave maximalist goals formally indicated willingness make peace israel based 1967 borders implied readiness compromise refugee issue approach allowed israel possess secure borders based 78 historic palestine limited palestinian state 22 less half un offered palestinians partition proposal 1947 time seemed unreasonable palestinian perspective appraisals conflict historic palestinian concession perhaps imprudently made plo never acknowledged much less reciprocated either israel united states view absence response exhibited along fundamental lack political israeli side reach solution intergovernmental negotiations although would interpret camp david initiative 2000 last time israeli leadership seemed somewhat inclined resolve conflict diplomatically palestinian authority depends israel transfer tax revenues upon governing capacity rests usually brought line acts defiance tel aviv washington also collaboration security arrangements israel creates codependency give measure stability otherwise frozen situation occasionally seemingly quixotic intent pa abbas challenge image suggesting option quit political stage return responsibilities administering west bank israel twostate consensus increasingly challenged years influential palestinians including edward said toward end life argued view intervening developments subsequent 1988 onestate solution could reconcile two peoples acceptable manner based mutual respect rights democracy equality advocacy single secular democratic state draws two sets argumentsa pragmatic contention settlement process changed demographic east jerusalem essentially irreversible thus feasible means time create viable palestinian state becomes apparent passing day principled contention makes political ethical sense twentyfirst century encourage formation ethnic states especially case 20 israeli population palestinian subject array discriminatory legislative measures respects essence palestinian predicament acknowledge late twostate solution seemingly early onestate solution assuming diplomatic route blocked situation hopeless palestinians believe palestinian hopes peace never rested outcome formal diplomacy reasons given put succinctly given israel failure heed call withdrawal un security council resolution 242 nonresponse 1988 plo acceptance israel within 1967 borders consistent commitment settlement expansion sane person put much faith israeli readiness make peace respectful palestinian rights international law currently best prospect realizing palestinian selfdetermination way pressures exerted mobilization movement combining popular resistance global solidarity process called legitimacy war exemplified gandhis nonviolent victory british empire recently success global antiapartheid movement racist south africa represents latest strategic turn palestinian national movement seems even compatible recent outlook hamas expressed leaders confirmed behavior time appreciate current approach palestinian national movement rests two broad undertakings adoption nonviolent resistance tactics increasingly strengthened global solidarity movement centered boycott divestment sanctions bds initiative gaining momentum throughout world especially europe developments reinforced un calls member states remind corporate financial actors national control problematic international law continue engaging business dealings israeli settlements effect horizons hope palestinians respect seeking sustainable peace two ethnic communities gaining impact influence actions people rather maneuvers governments course political climate changes response legitimacy war pressures governments could crucial future role play taking advantage new balance forces could enable diplomacy move towards solutions constructive diplomacy would contrast recently transpired seemed combine deflection israeli expansionism followed participation childish blame game important world public opinion reject meaningless diplomatic charade peace talks fate people continues daily sacrificed altar geopolitics | 1,299 |
<p>Like most Washington scandals, the frenzy over a senior Obama adviser unmasking identities of Trump officials is larger and smaller than both sides imagine.</p>
<p>President Donald Trump and his supporters say the former national security adviser, Susan Rice, engaged in domestic political spying when <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel" type="external">she asked for the identities of Trump transition officials</a> caught up in surveillance of foreign targets. (In March, Trump accused his predecessor on Twitter of illegally wiretapping Trump Tower, and he has since said the Rice story confirmed his initial tweet. It didn’t.)</p>
<p>Democrats and some Never Trump types say the fixation on Rice is a dangerous distraction from the real story: collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. If Rice unmasked names in intelligence reports (which she did), these Trump critics say she was justified because of the unique threat of Russian influence over the incoming president.</p>
<p>The Rice scandal is larger than either party’s party line because it raises the prospect of abuse of the U.S. surveillance apparatus. A senior White House official can learn quite a bit about political opposition by unmasking the redacted names of U.S. citizens caught up in the routine surveillance of foreign targets. As I’ve written before, in the Obama years it looks like it was routine for senior government officials to request the identities of those Americans.</p>
<p>But the scandal is also smaller than it seems in Washington, because it turns out one instance of Rice’s unmasking, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/13/politics/susan-rice-house-investigators-unmasked-trump-officials/index.html" type="external">reported</a> last week by CNN, has nothing to do with Russia. The report relates to a visit to New York from Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates. During the transition he traveled to Four Seasons Hotel for a meeting with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner; Trump’s political strategist Stephen Bannon; and Michael Flynn, the retired general who would go on to serve less than a month as Trump’s national security adviser.</p>
<p>Normally, visiting dignitaries like Prince Mohammed inform the U.S. government of their travel. In this case, he didn’t and proceeded to take a lengthy meeting with the incoming administration. Participants from both sides tell me the meeting covered a range of topics about the Middle East — Iranian expansion, the war in Yemen, counterterrorism. Neither Emirati nor U.S. participants said they broached the prospect of a channel to Russia.</p>
<p>Unmasking Kushner, Bannon and Flynn in that meeting is not in and of itself evidence of political spying. It does not support Trump’s claim that Obama had tapped Trump Tower. It doesn’t rise to the level of a scandal. What’s more, Republicans like Representative Trey Gowdy have praised Rice for her openness this month in her closed-session testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, and reiterated a point made by that committee’s chairman, Devin Nunes, that Rice did not violate the law by requesting that some U.S. persons in intelligence reports be unmasked. Rice, according to sources familiar with her testimony, reiterated that she never leaked the information she unmasked.</p>
<p>Gowdy is still trying to get answers. He told me Monday, “The issues are serious enough to warrant an open-minded, objective review, but we don’t have all the information necessary to draw to a conclusion.”</p>
<p>That’s important. Gowdy says he still has not received exact numbers on how many times Rice or other senior Obama officials made requests to unmask U.S. citizens in intelligence reports. He said he doesn’t yet have enough information to determine whether the volume of requests or their dissemination within the intelligence community were unusual. His committee has learned that Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, also made a number of unmasking requests in her final year in office. Was that unusual or part of her job? Why did she need this information?</p>
<p>“I can only judge within the strictures of my interactions,” Gowdy said. “I can’t extrapolate to broader points until I talk to all the witnesses and see all the documents. The next witness could contradict all of what Rice said.”</p>
<p>Gowdy told me that he has come to the view that the unmasking issue has little to do with Russia, and has much more to do with the vast surveillance powers accrued in recent years by the national security state under Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. At the end of 2015, Nunes and the ranking Democrat on the intelligence committee, Representative Adam Schiff, became aware of the White House <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-spy-net-on-israel-snares-congress-1451425210?mg=prod/accounts-wsj&amp;mg=prod/accounts-wsj" type="external">unmasking</a> members of Congress who met with Israeli leaders during the debate over the Iran nuclear deal. They succeeded in getting the intelligence community to agree to inform congressional leaders in the future when members of Congress are unmasked.</p>
<p>Gowdy himself is not opposed to the surveillance programs authorized under Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. But he acknowledges that the difficult time his committee has had getting more information from the intelligence agencies about the last administration’s unmasking requests makes broad surveillance a tough sell to his colleagues this fall as Congress looks to vote again to reauthorize these programs.</p>
<p>“My interest is in going to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and saying this is an important national security tool and this is how it’s used,” Gowdy said. “A lot of my colleagues right now are very skeptical of reauthorizing this because of how little we know about unmasking.”</p>
<p>All of this brings us back to Trump. It’s easy to poke fun at how the president is prone to hyperbole in his Twitter account. But when he came into office, Trump faced a spate of highly classified leaks, which forced Flynn to resign and led the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to recuse himself from the Justice Department’s investigation into Russian influence of the election. Add to this that CNN <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/politics/paul-manafort-government-wiretapped-fisa-russians/index.html" type="external">reported</a> Tuesday that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort was surveilled under FISA authorization both before and after the election. It’s easy to see in this context that Trump was genuinely concerned that his predecessor was turning the watchful eye of the U.S. government against him.</p>
<p>We will learn soon enough from Robert Mueller, the special counsel investigating Russia’s influence of the 2016 election, whether the government’s eavesdroppers were warranted in their suspicion of Trump and his associates.</p>
<p>Eli Lake is a Bloomberg View columnist. He was the senior national security correspondent for the Daily Beast and covered national security and intelligence for the Washington Times, the New York Sun, and UPI. To read more of his reports, <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/Blogs/EliLake/id-412/" type="external">Go Here Now</a>.</p> | false | 1 | like washington scandals frenzy senior obama adviser unmasking identities trump officials larger smaller sides imagine president donald trump supporters say former national security adviser susan rice engaged domestic political spying asked identities trump transition officials caught surveillance foreign targets march trump accused predecessor twitter illegally wiretapping trump tower since said rice story confirmed initial tweet didnt democrats never trump types say fixation rice dangerous distraction real story collusion trump campaign russia rice unmasked names intelligence reports trump critics say justified unique threat russian influence incoming president rice scandal larger either partys party line raises prospect abuse us surveillance apparatus senior white house official learn quite bit political opposition unmasking redacted names us citizens caught routine surveillance foreign targets ive written obama years looks like routine senior government officials request identities americans scandal also smaller seems washington turns one instance rices unmasking reported last week cnn nothing russia report relates visit new york sheikh mohammed bin zayed alnahyan crown prince united arab emirates transition traveled four seasons hotel meeting trumps soninlaw jared kushner trumps political strategist stephen bannon michael flynn retired general would go serve less month trumps national security adviser normally visiting dignitaries like prince mohammed inform us government travel case didnt proceeded take lengthy meeting incoming administration participants sides tell meeting covered range topics middle east iranian expansion war yemen counterterrorism neither emirati us participants said broached prospect channel russia unmasking kushner bannon flynn meeting evidence political spying support trumps claim obama tapped trump tower doesnt rise level scandal whats republicans like representative trey gowdy praised rice openness month closedsession testimony house intelligence committee reiterated point made committees chairman devin nunes rice violate law requesting us persons intelligence reports unmasked rice according sources familiar testimony reiterated never leaked information unmasked gowdy still trying get answers told monday issues serious enough warrant openminded objective review dont information necessary draw conclusion thats important gowdy says still received exact numbers many times rice senior obama officials made requests unmask us citizens intelligence reports said doesnt yet enough information determine whether volume requests dissemination within intelligence community unusual committee learned obamas ambassador united nations samantha power also made number unmasking requests final year office unusual part job need information judge within strictures interactions gowdy said cant extrapolate broader points talk witnesses see documents next witness could contradict rice said gowdy told come view unmasking issue little russia much vast surveillance powers accrued recent years national security state title vii foreign intelligence surveillance act end 2015 nunes ranking democrat intelligence committee representative adam schiff became aware white house unmasking members congress met israeli leaders debate iran nuclear deal succeeded getting intelligence community agree inform congressional leaders future members congress unmasked gowdy opposed surveillance programs authorized title vii foreign intelligence surveillance act acknowledges difficult time committee getting information intelligence agencies last administrations unmasking requests makes broad surveillance tough sell colleagues fall congress looks vote reauthorize programs interest going colleagues sides aisle saying important national security tool used gowdy said lot colleagues right skeptical reauthorizing little know unmasking brings us back trump easy poke fun president prone hyperbole twitter account came office trump faced spate highly classified leaks forced flynn resign led attorney general jeff sessions recuse justice departments investigation russian influence election add cnn reported tuesday former trump campaign chairman paul manafort surveilled fisa authorization election easy see context trump genuinely concerned predecessor turning watchful eye us government learn soon enough robert mueller special counsel investigating russias influence 2016 election whether governments eavesdroppers warranted suspicion trump associates eli lake bloomberg view columnist senior national security correspondent daily beast covered national security intelligence washington times new york sun upi read reports go | 606 |
<p />
<p>NOTE:&#160; Gold weights are based on metric tons and Troy ounces. 500 metric tons of gold would be 16,075,000 troy ounces. This changes the arithmetic slightly but not the point</p>
<p>I was the first to point out that <a href="" type="internal">the Federal Reserve was rigging all markets</a>, not merely bond prices and interest rates, and that the Fed is rigging the bullion market in order to protect the US dollar's exchange value, which is threatened by the Fed's quantitative easing.&#160; With the Fed adding to the supply of dollars faster than the demand for dollars is increasing, the price or exchange value of the dollar is set up to fall.</p>
<p>A fall in the dollar's exchange rate would push up import prices and, thereby, domestic inflation, and the Fed would lose control over interest rates. The bond market would collapse and with it the values of debt-related derivatives on the "banks too big too fail" balance sheets. The financial system would be in turmoil, and panic would reign.</p>
<p>Rapidly rising bullion prices were an indication of loss of confidence in the dollar and&#160;were signaling a drop in the dollar's exchange rate. The Fed used naked shorts in the paper gold market to offset the price effect of a rising demand for bullion possession. Short sales that drive down the price trigger stop-loss orders that automatically lead to individual sales of bullion holdings once their loss limits are reached.</p>
<p>According to Andrew Maguire, on Friday, April 12, the Fed's agents hit the market with 500 tons of naked shorts.&#160; Normally, a short is when an investor thinks the price of a stock or commodity is going to fall. He wants to sell the item in advance of the fall, pocket the money, and then buy the item back after it falls in price, thus making money on the short sale. If he doesn't have the item, he borrows it from someone who does, putting up cash collateral equal to the current market price.&#160; Then he sells the item, waits for it to fall in price, buys it back at the lower price, and returns it to the owner who returns his collateral.&#160; If enough shorts are sold, the result can be to drive down the market price.</p>
<p>A naked short is when the short seller does not have or borrow the item that he shorts, but sells shorts regardless.&#160; In the paper gold market, the participants are betting on gold prices and are content with the monetary payment.&#160; Therefore, generally, as participants are not interested in taking delivery of the gold, naked shorts do not need to be covered with the physical metal.</p>
<p>In other words, with naked shorts, no physical metal is actually sold.</p>
<p>People ask me how I know that the Fed is rigging the bullion price and seem surprised that anyone would think the Fed and its bullion bank agents would do such a thing, despite the public knowledge that the Fed is rigging the bond market and that the banks with the Fed's knowledge rigged the Libor rate. The answer is that the circumstantial evidence is powerful.</p>
<p>Consider the 500 tons of paper gold sold on Friday.&#160; Begin with the question, how many ounces is 500 tons?&#160; There are 2,000 pounds to one ton.&#160; 500 tons equal 1,000,000 pounds.&#160; There are 16 ounces to one pound, which comes to 16 million ounces of short sales on Friday.</p>
<p>Who has 16 million ounces of gold? At the beginning gold price that day of about $1,550, that comes to $24,800,000,000.&#160; Who has that kind of money?</p>
<p>What happens when 500 tons of gold sales are dumped on the market at one time or on one day?&#160; Correct, it drives the price down. Investors who want to get out of large positions would spread sales out over time so as not to lower their sales proceeds. The sale took gold down by about $73 per ounce. That means the seller or sellers lost up to $73 dollars 16 million times, or $1,168,000,000.</p>
<p>Who can afford to lose that kind of money?&#160; Only a central bank that can print it.</p>
<p>I believe that the authorities would like to drive the gold price down further and will, if they can, hit the gold market twice more next week and put gold at $1,400 per ounce or lower. The successive declines could perhaps spook individual holders of physical gold and result in actual net sales of physical gold as people reduced their holdings of the metal.</p>
<p>However, bullion dealer Bill Haynes told <a href="http://kingworldnews.com" type="external">kingworldnews.com</a> that last Friday&#160;bullion purchasers among the public outpaced sellers by 50 to 1, and that the premiums&#160;over the spot price on gold and silver coins are the highest in decades. I myself checked with Gainesville Coins and was told that far more buyers than sellers had responded to the price drop.</p>
<p>Unless the authorities have the actual metal with which to back up the short selling, they could be met with demands for deliveries. Unable to cover the shorts with real metal, the scheme would be exposed.</p>
<p>Do the authorities have the metal with which to cover shorts?&#160; I do not know.&#160; However,&#160;knowledgeable dealers are suspicious.&#160; Some think that US physical stocks of gold were used up in sales in efforts to disrupt the rise in the gold price from $272 in December 2000 to $1,900 in 2011.&#160; They point to Germany's recent request that the US return the German gold stored in the US, and to the US government's reply that it would return the gold piecemeal over seven years.&#160; If the US has the gold, why not return it to Germany?</p>
<p>The clear implication is that the US cannot deliver the gold.</p>
<p>Andrew Maguire also reports that foreign central banks, especially China, are loading up on physical gold at the low prices made possible by the short selling.&#160; If central banks are using their dollar holdings to purchase bullion at bargain prices, the likely results will be pressure on the dollar's exchange value and a declining market supply of physical bullion.&#160; In other words, by trying to protect the dollar from its quantitative easing policy, the Fed might be hastening the dollar's demise.</p>
<p>Possibly the Fed fears a dollar crisis or derivative blowup is nearing and is trying to reset the gold/dollar price prior to the outbreak of trouble.&#160; If ill winds are forecast, the&#160;Fed might feel it is better positioned to deal with crisis if the price of bullion is lower and confidence in bullion as a refuge has been shaken.</p>
<p>In addition to short selling that is clearly intended to drive down the gold price, orchestration is also indicated by the advance announcements this month first from&#160;brokerage houses and then from Goldman Sachs that hedge funds and institutional investors would be selling their gold positions. The purpose of these announcements&#160;was to encourage individual investors to get out of gold before the big boys did.&#160; Does&#160;anyone believe that hedge funds and Wall Street would announce their sales in advance so the small fry can get out of gold at a higher price than they do?</p>
<p>If these advanced announcements are not orchestration, what are they?</p>
<p>I see the orchestrated effort to suppress the price of gold and silver as a sign that the authorities are frightened that trouble is brewing that they cannot control unless there&#160;is strong confidence in the dollar. Otherwise, what is the point of the heavy short selling and orchestrated announcements of gold sales in advance of the sales?</p> | false | 1 | note160 gold weights based metric tons troy ounces 500 metric tons gold would 16075000 troy ounces changes arithmetic slightly point first point federal reserve rigging markets merely bond prices interest rates fed rigging bullion market order protect us dollars exchange value threatened feds quantitative easing160 fed adding supply dollars faster demand dollars increasing price exchange value dollar set fall fall dollars exchange rate would push import prices thereby domestic inflation fed would lose control interest rates bond market would collapse values debtrelated derivatives banks big fail balance sheets financial system would turmoil panic would reign rapidly rising bullion prices indication loss confidence dollar and160were signaling drop dollars exchange rate fed used naked shorts paper gold market offset price effect rising demand bullion possession short sales drive price trigger stoploss orders automatically lead individual sales bullion holdings loss limits reached according andrew maguire friday april 12 feds agents hit market 500 tons naked shorts160 normally short investor thinks price stock commodity going fall wants sell item advance fall pocket money buy item back falls price thus making money short sale doesnt item borrows someone putting cash collateral equal current market price160 sells item waits fall price buys back lower price returns owner returns collateral160 enough shorts sold result drive market price naked short short seller borrow item shorts sells shorts regardless160 paper gold market participants betting gold prices content monetary payment160 therefore generally participants interested taking delivery gold naked shorts need covered physical metal words naked shorts physical metal actually sold people ask know fed rigging bullion price seem surprised anyone would think fed bullion bank agents would thing despite public knowledge fed rigging bond market banks feds knowledge rigged libor rate answer circumstantial evidence powerful consider 500 tons paper gold sold friday160 begin question many ounces 500 tons160 2000 pounds one ton160 500 tons equal 1000000 pounds160 16 ounces one pound comes 16 million ounces short sales friday 16 million ounces gold beginning gold price day 1550 comes 24800000000160 kind money happens 500 tons gold sales dumped market one time one day160 correct drives price investors want get large positions would spread sales time lower sales proceeds sale took gold 73 per ounce means seller sellers lost 73 dollars 16 million times 1168000000 afford lose kind money160 central bank print believe authorities would like drive gold price hit gold market twice next week put gold 1400 per ounce lower successive declines could perhaps spook individual holders physical gold result actual net sales physical gold people reduced holdings metal however bullion dealer bill haynes told kingworldnewscom last friday160bullion purchasers among public outpaced sellers 50 1 premiums160over spot price gold silver coins highest decades checked gainesville coins told far buyers sellers responded price drop unless authorities actual metal back short selling could met demands deliveries unable cover shorts real metal scheme would exposed authorities metal cover shorts160 know160 however160knowledgeable dealers suspicious160 think us physical stocks gold used sales efforts disrupt rise gold price 272 december 2000 1900 2011160 point germanys recent request us return german gold stored us us governments reply would return gold piecemeal seven years160 us gold return germany clear implication us deliver gold andrew maguire also reports foreign central banks especially china loading physical gold low prices made possible short selling160 central banks using dollar holdings purchase bullion bargain prices likely results pressure dollars exchange value declining market supply physical bullion160 words trying protect dollar quantitative easing policy fed might hastening dollars demise possibly fed fears dollar crisis derivative blowup nearing trying reset golddollar price prior outbreak trouble160 ill winds forecast the160fed might feel better positioned deal crisis price bullion lower confidence bullion refuge shaken addition short selling clearly intended drive gold price orchestration also indicated advance announcements month first from160brokerage houses goldman sachs hedge funds institutional investors would selling gold positions purpose announcements160was encourage individual investors get gold big boys did160 does160anyone believe hedge funds wall street would announce sales advance small fry get gold higher price advanced announcements orchestration see orchestrated effort suppress price gold silver sign authorities frightened trouble brewing control unless there160is strong confidence dollar otherwise point heavy short selling orchestrated announcements gold sales advance sales | 691 |
<p>DETROIT — Two teams hoping against hope they can become contenders and avoid the dreaded selloff label — the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Toronto-Blue-Jays/" type="external">Toronto Blue Jays</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Detroit-Tigers/" type="external">Detroit Tigers</a> — begin the post-All-Star-break schedule Friday with a three-game series at Comerica Park.</p>
<p>Toronto, 41-47 and 8 1/2 games out of first place in the American League East, has a serious road trip at Detroit, Boston and Cleveland to open the traditional second half.</p>
<p>“Everybody knows that when we are healthy what we can do,” Blue Jays reliever <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Roberto-Osuna/" type="external">Roberto Osuna</a> said. “We were almost in a similar situation in 2015. Those were my teammates then and I believe in them. I don’t have any doubt about making the playoffs this year. Hopefully we can stay healthy in the second half.”</p>
<p>“That’s the spot we’re in,” starter <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/J.A._Happ/" type="external">J.A. Happ</a> said. “We’ll have to find a way to climb out of it. We’ll take the break and we’ll see what we’ve got to come back. It’ll take a great effort but I think we can do it.</p>
<p>“It’s the personnel in here and we have our rotation back where we thought it was going to be and hopefully we can kind go on a run and hopefully our offense will just continue to be as consistent as they can be.</p>
<p>“That’s what it’s going to take, a lot of consistency on both sides of it. We’ll find out where we’re at. We certainly have a tough stretch coming out of the break.”</p>
<p>Detroit, 39-48 and eight games out in the AL Central, will spend a week at Kansas City and Minnesota after hosting Toronto. The Tigers need a two-week hot streak but with a season-best four-game winning streak, that does not seem likely.</p>
<p>“You are what your record shows,” second baseman <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Ian_Kinsler/" type="external">Ian Kinsler</a> said. “That’s the bottom line. There is no way around it. There are no excuses. You can point your finger. You can talk about the pitching, the offense, the base running, whatever you want.</p>
<p>“At the end of the day, we are what our record shows.”</p>
<p>Detroit had an eight-game losing streak and was just 7-14 before the break. The Tigers can’t string solid starts together and their bullpen acts like leads are bronchitis — they keep coughing them up.</p>
<p>“We need to win games, we’re in last place, or next to last place,” Kinsler said. “There’s a lot of time left, but it’s tough to catch good teams. Good teams aren’t going to lose a bunch of games in a row.”</p>
<p>“It’s been frustrating,” J.D. Martinez said. “I feel like we are playing under our ability. I feel like we have underachieved. We definitely have underachieved. We’re a good team, but for some reason, we are not finding ways to win games.”</p>
<p>The Blue Jays will open with Aaron Sanchez (0-2, 4.85 ERA), who was limited to just six starts in the first half due to a blister on his right middle finger.</p>
<p>Sanchez has no career record against Detroit with three relief appearances and two starts resulting in no wins or losses and a 2.00 ERA.</p>
<p>The Tigers will open with right-hander <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Verlander/" type="external">Justin Verlander</a> (5-6, 4.73 ERA) and then All-Star Michael Fulmer.</p>
<p>The Blue Jays have a winning record against Verlander in his 11 career starts against them, with Verlander holding a 3-4 mark and a 4.76 ERA against Toronto.</p>
<p>“We have guys who are performing a little below what their track record says,” Detroit manager <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brad_Ausmus/" type="external">Brad Ausmus</a> said. “Which is also why I expect a correction. The offense has been part of the story. And I hate to say it, but we’ve hit a lot of balls hard, significantly more than any other team, that have gone for outs.</p>
<p>“That can change a game. A potential big hit becomes an out. Our offense hasn’t hit the ball as poorly as the numbers show.”</p>
<p>Detroit isn’t hitting home runs at its traditional pace and that’s a disaster for a team with limited athleticism. GM Al Avila wants to reduce payroll but doesn’t want to give players away.</p>
<p>There seems to be a market for free-agent-to-be right fielder J.D. Martinez along with catcher <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Alex_Avila/" type="external">Alex Avila</a>, on a one-year contract, and lefty closer <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Wilson/" type="external">Justin Wilson</a>, who has one more year of arbitration before he can become a free agent.</p>
<p>Toronto doesn’t have the payroll problems Detroit does but it does want to get a little younger and it does have some prospective free agents it may be open to trading.</p>
<p>Starters <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Marco-Estrada/" type="external">Marco Estrada</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Francisco_Liriano/" type="external">Francisco Liriano</a> can become free agents but they’re not having good seasons. Relievers <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Joe_Smith/" type="external">Joe Smith</a> and <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/J.P._Howell/" type="external">J.P. Howell</a> have been injured.</p>
<p>Smith could return to the Blue Jays early next week after missing time with right shoulder inflammation, while Howell hasn’t pitched since June because of his own shoulder problems.</p>
<p>“Bottom line is to just win games,” first baseman <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Justin_Smoak/" type="external">Justin Smoak</a> of Toronto said. “We feel we definitely have a team that is capable of doing that. We’ve got a lot of guys on this team who have accomplished a lot of different things in the game and are really good players.</p>
<p>“Once you start winning games and you get on a roll, things can happen. We haven’t got on one of those rolls to really feel like that.”</p>
<p>“We don’t have long to turn it around,” Verlander said. “Obviously, Al’s already put out there some of the guys that are on the block, and we’d probably have to peel off like 10 or 12 straight to kind of turn that tide a little bit. But I’m not saying it’s not possible.</p>
<p>“I think as long as everybody in this clubhouse is wearing the Old English D, that’s all we think about. You think about winning for this organization. You think about turning things around. Think about winning ballgames. That’s it.”</p> | false | 1 | detroit two teams hoping hope become contenders avoid dreaded selloff label toronto blue jays detroit tigers begin postallstarbreak schedule friday threegame series comerica park toronto 4147 8 12 games first place american league east serious road trip detroit boston cleveland open traditional second half everybody knows healthy blue jays reliever roberto osuna said almost similar situation 2015 teammates believe dont doubt making playoffs year hopefully stay healthy second half thats spot starter ja happ said well find way climb well take break well see weve got come back itll take great effort think personnel rotation back thought going hopefully kind go run hopefully offense continue consistent thats going take lot consistency sides well find certainly tough stretch coming break detroit 3948 eight games al central spend week kansas city minnesota hosting toronto tigers need twoweek hot streak seasonbest fourgame winning streak seem likely record shows second baseman ian kinsler said thats bottom line way around excuses point finger talk pitching offense base running whatever want end day record shows detroit eightgame losing streak 714 break tigers cant string solid starts together bullpen acts like leads bronchitis keep coughing need win games last place next last place kinsler said theres lot time left tough catch good teams good teams arent going lose bunch games row frustrating jd martinez said feel like playing ability feel like underachieved definitely underachieved good team reason finding ways win games blue jays open aaron sanchez 02 485 era limited six starts first half due blister right middle finger sanchez career record detroit three relief appearances two starts resulting wins losses 200 era tigers open righthander justin verlander 56 473 era allstar michael fulmer blue jays winning record verlander 11 career starts verlander holding 34 mark 476 era toronto guys performing little track record says detroit manager brad ausmus said also expect correction offense part story hate say weve hit lot balls hard significantly team gone outs change game potential big hit becomes offense hasnt hit ball poorly numbers show detroit isnt hitting home runs traditional pace thats disaster team limited athleticism gm al avila wants reduce payroll doesnt want give players away seems market freeagenttobe right fielder jd martinez along catcher alex avila oneyear contract lefty closer justin wilson one year arbitration become free agent toronto doesnt payroll problems detroit want get little younger prospective free agents may open trading starters marco estrada francisco liriano become free agents theyre good seasons relievers joe smith jp howell injured smith could return blue jays early next week missing time right shoulder inflammation howell hasnt pitched since june shoulder problems bottom line win games first baseman justin smoak toronto said feel definitely team capable weve got lot guys team accomplished lot different things game really good players start winning games get roll things happen havent got one rolls really feel like dont long turn around verlander said obviously als already put guys block wed probably peel like 10 12 straight kind turn tide little bit im saying possible think long everybody clubhouse wearing old english thats think think winning organization think turning things around think winning ballgames thats | 519 |
<p />
<p>Is the Fed "tapering?" Did the Fed really cut its bond purchases during the three month period November 2013 through January 2014? Apparently not, if foreign holders of Treasuries are unloading them.</p>
<p>From November 2013 through January 2014 Belgium with a GDP of $480 billion purchased $141.2 billion of US Treasury bonds. Somehow Belgium came up with enough money to allocate during a 3-month period 29 percent of its annual GDP to the purchase of US Treasury bonds.</p>
<p>Certainly Belgium did not have a budget surplus of $141.2 billion. Was Belgium running a trade surplus during a 3-month period equal to 29 percent of Belgium GDP?</p>
<p>No, Belgium's trade and current accounts are in deficit.</p>
<p>Did Belgium's central bank print $141.2 billion worth of euros in order to make the purchase?</p>
<p>No, Belgium is a member of the euro system, and its central bank cannot increase the money supply.</p>
<p>So where did the $141.2 billion come from?</p>
<p>There is only one source. The money came from the US Federal Reserve, and the purchase was laundered through Belgium in order to hide the fact that actual Federal Reserve bond purchases during November 2013 through January 2014 were $112 billion per month.</p>
<p>In other words, during those 3 months there was a sharp rise in bond purchases by the Fed. The Fed's actual bond purchases for those three months are $27 billion per month above the original $85 billion monthly purchase and $47 billion above the official $65 billion monthly purchase at that time. (In March 2014, official QE was tapered to $55 billion per month and to $45 billion for May.)</p>
<p>Why did the Federal Reserve have to purchase so many bonds above the announced amounts and why did the Fed have to launder and hide the purchase?</p>
<p>Some country or countries, unknown at this time, for reasons we do not know dumped $104 billion in Treasuries in one week.</p>
<p>Another curious aspect of the sale and purchase laundered through Belgium is that the sale was not executed and cleared via the Fed's own National Book-Entry System (NBES), which was designed to facilitate the sale and ownership transfer of securities for Fed custodial customers. Instead, the foreign owner(s) of the Treasuries removed them from the Federal Reserve's custodial holdings and sold them through the Euroclear securities clearing system, which is based in Brussels, Belgium.</p>
<p>We do not know why or who. We know that there was a withdrawal, a sale, a drop in the Federal Reserve's "Securities held in Custody for Foreign Official and International Accounts," an inexplicable rise in Belgium's holdings, and then the bonds reappear in the Federal Reserve's custodial accounts.</p>
<p>What are the reasons for this deception by the Federal Reserve?</p>
<p>The Fed realized that its policy of Quantitative Easing initiated in order to support the balance sheets of "banks too big to fail" and to lower the Treasury's borrowing cost was putting pressure on the US dollar's value. Tapering was a way of reassuring holders of dollars and dollar-denominated financial instruments that the Fed was going to reduce and eventually end the printing of new dollars with which to support financial markets. The image of foreign governments bailing out of Treasuries could unsettle the markets that the Fed was attempting to sooth by tapering.</p>
<p>A hundred billion dollar sale of US Treasuries is a big sale. If the seller was a big holder of Treasuries, the sale could signal the bond market that a big holder might be selling Treasuries in large chunks. The Fed would want to keep the fact and identity of such a seller secret in order to avoid a stampede out of Treasuries. Such a stampede would raise interest rates, collapse US financial markets, and raise the cost of financing the US debt. To avoid the rise in interest rates, the Fed would have to accept the risk to the dollar of purchasing all the bonds. This would be a no-win situation for the Fed, because a large increase in QE would unsettle the market for US dollars.</p>
<p>Washington's power ultimately rests on the dollar as world reserve currency. This privilege, attained at Bretton Woods following World War 2, allows the US to pay its bills by issuing debt. The world currency role also gives the US the power to cut countries out of the international payments system and to impose sanctions.</p>
<p>As impelled as the Fed is to protect the large banks that sit on the board of directors of the New York Fed, the Fed has to protect the dollar. That the Fed believed that it could not buy the bonds outright but needed to disguise its purchase by laundering it through Belgium suggests that the Fed is concerned that the world is losing confidence in the dollar.</p>
<p>If the world loses confidence in the dollar, the cost of living in the US would rise sharply as the dollar drops in value. Economic hardship and poverty would worsen. Political instability would rise.</p>
<p>If the dollar lost substantial value, the dollar would lose its reserve currency status. Washington would not be able to issue new debt or new dollars in order to pay its bills.</p>
<p>Its wars and hundreds of overseas military bases could not be financed.</p>
<p>The withdrawal from unsustainable empire would begin. The rest of the world would see this as the silver lining in the collapse of the international monetary system brought on by the hubris and arrogance of Washington.</p> | false | 1 | fed tapering fed really cut bond purchases three month period november 2013 january 2014 apparently foreign holders treasuries unloading november 2013 january 2014 belgium gdp 480 billion purchased 1412 billion us treasury bonds somehow belgium came enough money allocate 3month period 29 percent annual gdp purchase us treasury bonds certainly belgium budget surplus 1412 billion belgium running trade surplus 3month period equal 29 percent belgium gdp belgiums trade current accounts deficit belgiums central bank print 1412 billion worth euros order make purchase belgium member euro system central bank increase money supply 1412 billion come one source money came us federal reserve purchase laundered belgium order hide fact actual federal reserve bond purchases november 2013 january 2014 112 billion per month words 3 months sharp rise bond purchases fed feds actual bond purchases three months 27 billion per month original 85 billion monthly purchase 47 billion official 65 billion monthly purchase time march 2014 official qe tapered 55 billion per month 45 billion may federal reserve purchase many bonds announced amounts fed launder hide purchase country countries unknown time reasons know dumped 104 billion treasuries one week another curious aspect sale purchase laundered belgium sale executed cleared via feds national bookentry system nbes designed facilitate sale ownership transfer securities fed custodial customers instead foreign owners treasuries removed federal reserves custodial holdings sold euroclear securities clearing system based brussels belgium know know withdrawal sale drop federal reserves securities held custody foreign official international accounts inexplicable rise belgiums holdings bonds reappear federal reserves custodial accounts reasons deception federal reserve fed realized policy quantitative easing initiated order support balance sheets banks big fail lower treasurys borrowing cost putting pressure us dollars value tapering way reassuring holders dollars dollardenominated financial instruments fed going reduce eventually end printing new dollars support financial markets image foreign governments bailing treasuries could unsettle markets fed attempting sooth tapering hundred billion dollar sale us treasuries big sale seller big holder treasuries sale could signal bond market big holder might selling treasuries large chunks fed would want keep fact identity seller secret order avoid stampede treasuries stampede would raise interest rates collapse us financial markets raise cost financing us debt avoid rise interest rates fed would accept risk dollar purchasing bonds would nowin situation fed large increase qe would unsettle market us dollars washingtons power ultimately rests dollar world reserve currency privilege attained bretton woods following world war 2 allows us pay bills issuing debt world currency role also gives us power cut countries international payments system impose sanctions impelled fed protect large banks sit board directors new york fed fed protect dollar fed believed could buy bonds outright needed disguise purchase laundering belgium suggests fed concerned world losing confidence dollar world loses confidence dollar cost living us would rise sharply dollar drops value economic hardship poverty would worsen political instability would rise dollar lost substantial value dollar would lose reserve currency status washington would able issue new debt new dollars order pay bills wars hundreds overseas military bases could financed withdrawal unsustainable empire would begin rest world would see silver lining collapse international monetary system brought hubris arrogance washington | 519 |
<p>HOUSTON — In an impassioned and detailed breakdown of the events surrounding <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Houston-Texans/" type="external">Houston Texans</a> quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tom-Savage/" type="external">Tom Savage</a> suffering a scary concussion and briefly going back into the game Sunday, head coach <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Bill-OBrien/" type="external">Bill O’Brien</a> was emphatic Monday about one thing.</p>
<p>O’Brien said he never would have allowed Savage to resume playing if he had viewed the viral, disturbing video shown during the game broadcast of Savage lying on the ground in the end zone with his arms and hands twitching after absorbing a crushing blow from <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/San-Francisco-49ers/" type="external">San Francisco 49ers</a> outside linebacker Elvis Dumervil.</p>
<p>O’Brien extended that opinion of not placing Savage into potential danger to head athletic trainer Geoff Kaplan.</p>
<p>“At no point in time, is there anything more important to me than the safety of our players,” O’Brien said. “I love our players and I care about them and I cannot stand when players get injured. With benefit of seeing the video that people are seeing, I would’ve never put him back in the game, but I don’t see that.</p>
<p>“I’m not passing the buck. Anybody that’s been on the sideline of a football game knows that, from a coaching standpoint, you really can’t see things like that, especially when the ball’s in certain areas of the field.”</p>
<p>The NFL and NFL Players Association have launched a joint investigation into if the concussion protocol was handled correctly. There’s no timetable for when the investigation would conclude.</p>
<p>During a conference call Monday, NFL spokesman Joe Lockhart said the league and the players’ union will work together to “conduct a thorough review of the incident focused on whether the protocol was properly followed, but we’re also continuing looking at the protocol to look for ways to improve and strengthen it.”</p>
<p>The NFL concussion protocol and the league’s response to head injuries are under major scrutiny again in the wake of Savage’s injury.</p>
<p>The way the protocol works involves a team effort between spotters in the press box, independent neurologist consultants and team medical personnel.</p>
<p>Savage went to the sideline under the medical tent after the Dumervil hit, was quickly cleared and then went back in the game for one series. A trainer noticed something wasn’t right with Savage, had him checked again and he was ruled out for the remainder of the game.</p>
<p>What can be done to upgrade the system to prevent future breakdowns like this one? Well, video isn’t allowed on the sideline for coaches. Coaches just have access to tablets for electronic playbooks.</p>
<p>There has been injury video available on the sidelines for medical personnel, including team and those unaffiliated since January of 2012, according to the NFL.</p>
<p>Two certified athletic trainers are assigned to a stadium booth with access to multiple views of video and replay. They monitor the game and communicate with team medical staff by radio to make sure that a concussion evaluation is conducted on the sideline.</p>
<p>Both spotters file a report of all activity after each game for review by the NFL chief medical officer and NFLPA medical director.</p>
<p>“Obviously, this was more than a standard head injury evaluation,” said Dr. Erin Manning, a neurologist for the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York. “What makes it hard for the physician is they’re doing that evaluation on the sideline fairly quickly. You’re doing it based on what the player is reporting and if you find anything. Sometimes, it’s limited information, sometimes people don’t start showing symptoms until long after they’ve had a head injury.”</p>
<p>That was the case with Savage, whose symptoms didn’t kick in until after the roughly five-minute period between when he went back into the game after being hit by Dumervil.</p>
<p>“The way the system is set up is unfortunate because people can have delayed symptoms and there will be people going back in who have symptoms later and can have delayed systems,” Manning said. “In a way, the system works because they realized something was wrong and took Tom Savage out. That part did work.”</p>
<p>There was a major disconnect between Savage taking the scary hit and being allowed to go back in the game that triggered an outcry in social media and broadcasting with incorrect speculation that the former Pitt standout had experienced a seizure and was coughing up blood.</p>
<p>“The audience feels like if they can see it at home, why can’t the people on the sideline see it?” Manning said. “It’s hard when you’re standing on the sideline and you can’t see everything on the field. That’s why they put in the spotters to try to eliminate some of that.</p>
<p>“Even then, the spotter isn’t necessarily seeing it. One answer might be to have one person designated on the sideline who can see that video and say, ‘This looked really bad.'”</p>
<p>What did the arm movement mean?</p>
<p>“There’s some abnormal movement, but calling it a seizure is an overreaction,” Manning said. “Part of the reason is people have misconceptions of what a seizure looks like.”</p>
<p>After Savage got hit when the offensive line was overwhelmed by a heavy blitz package, he went to the sideline and got checked out inside a medical tent and was quickly cleared and went back into the game for a three-and-out series during which he threw two incompletions.</p>
<p>Savage was ruled out after being rechecked inside the locker room after initially resisting leaving the game. He seemed fine afterward.</p>
<p>“The medical people on the sideline, they come to me and say, ‘We’re going to check Tom for a concussion,'” O’Brien said. “They take him into the tent, they check him, maybe two, three minutes. They say Tom can play, he’s good to go. So, I make the determination, talk to Tom, ‘Hey, here’s the plays we’re going to go with,’ and we put Tom back out there. After that next series, they came back over to me, ‘We’re going to check him again.’ I said, ‘Thanks, OK, great.’ I said to Kap at that point, our trainer, ‘Look, I think we need to check him again.’</p>
<p>“It wasn’t anything I particularly saw on the field, just said, ‘Look, that was a quick check. Let’s continue to check him and make sure Tom Savage is OK.’ They were not satisfied with his answers to the questions they were asking him, and they pulled him from the game.”</p>
<p>–Standing in front of his locker following another setback, Texans Pro-Bowl outside linebacker Jadeveon Clowney didn’t hold back his disappointment and frustration.</p>
<p>The Texans were beaten, 26-16, by a San Francisco 49ers team that had won just two games entering Sunday.</p>
<p>“I’m very upset,” Clowney said. “Man, we’re 4-9. I’m upset about that. We’re a lot better than what our record says we are.”</p>
<p>The Texans allowed 416 yards of total offense and 20 first downs. They yielded 102 rushing yards, including 78 to <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Carlos-Hyde/" type="external">Carlos Hyde</a> with one touchdown.</p>
<p>“I’m tired of losing,” Clowney said. “Yeah, it hurt.”</p>
<p>The Texans’ latest loss unfolded as 49ers quarterback <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Jimmy-Garoppolo/" type="external">Jimmy Garoppolo</a> completed 20 of 33 passes for 334 yards, one touchdown and one interception.</p>
<p>“He’s good, he nice,” Clowney said. “He made some nice passes, some accurate passes, got the ball out of his hand fast. He’s doing his thing.”</p>
<p>The Texans have now lost six of their past seven games. Clowney attributed the decline to key injuries, not head coach Bill O’Brien.</p>
<p>“Bill O’Brien is a good coach, man,” Clowney said. “You’ve gotta look around the locker room. We ain’t got everybody.”</p>
<p>Clowney briefly left the game with a leg injury, but walked it off on the sideline and went back in the game.</p>
<p>“I knew I was going to come back,” he said. “I just had to let it calm down.”</p>
<p>–Dealing with the aftermath of his third concussion of the year and being placed on injured reserve for the second time this season, Texans tight end <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/CJ-Fiedorowicz/" type="external">C.J. Fiedorowicz</a> still hopes to resume his NFL career.</p>
<p>Fiedorowicz is evaluating his medical options and the Texans are taking their time while he continues to recuperate and haven’t made any decisions on his status. Texans head coach Bill O’Brien said he expects Fiedorowicz back next season.</p>
<p>Following an ESPN report suggesting Fiedorowicz could be forced to retire, Fiedorowicz’s agent told The Chronicle, Fiedorowicz wants to play and will take his time.</p>
<p>League sources not authorized to speak publicly said that the Texans are concerned about Fiedorowicz’s short-term and long-term health because of his history of concussions, but added no decisions have been made or imminent.</p>
<p>–Texans linebacker <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Brian-Cushing/" type="external">Brian Cushing</a> made an emotional return Sunday and was effective at an unfamiliar position.</p>
<p>Although Cushing recorded five tackles and a half-sack and was a team captain in his first game back after serving a 10-game suspension for violating the NFL performance-enhancing drug policy, he didn’t get everything he wanted.</p>
<p>“I’ve had time off, but it comes back kind of quick,” he said. “It’s one of those things you remember pretty fast once you get out there and you knock it out pretty quick.”</p>
<p>–Texans kicker Ka’imi Fairbairn continues to struggle mightily.</p>
<p>The former Lou Groza award winner from UCLA missed an extra point wide left and had a 52-yard field-goal attempt hit the left upright.</p>
<p>He has four missed kicks in the past two games, including a pair of missed field goals in a loss last week to the <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/Tennessee-Titans/" type="external">Tennessee Titans</a>.</p>
<p>Fairbairn has connected on 18 of 23 field goals and 30 of 33 extra points in his second NFL season.</p>
<p>NOTES: LB Dylan Cole got crushed on a sideline crack-back block that drew a penalty, but said he merely got the wind knocked out of him. … WR Will Fuller V returned after missing the past three games with cracked ribs and made an immediate impact. Fuller finished three catches for 26 yards on five targets. He had a pair of first downs on catches in the first quarter.</p>
<p>REPORT CARD VS. 49ERS</p>
<p>–PASSING OFFENSE: B-minus – Entering the game after Tom Savage suffered a concussion, backup <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/T.J._Yates/" type="external">T.J. Yates</a> threw two touchdown passes. <a href="https://www.upi.com/topic/DeAndre-Hopkins/" type="external">DeAndre Hopkins</a> caught 11 passes.</p>
<p>–RUSHING OFFENSE: C – The Texans rushed for a season-low 53 yards last week. They improved to 90 yards this game.</p>
<p>–PASS DEFENSE: D – The Texans allowed quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo to complete 20 of 33 passes for 334 yards, one touchdown and one interception.</p>
<p>–RUSH DEFENSE: D – The Texans allowed 102 rushing yards overall as a team, including one touchdown run from Carlos Hyde.</p>
<p>–SPECIAL TEAMS: D – Ka’imi Fairbairn missed a field goal and an extra point. The return game was non-existent.</p>
<p>–COACHING: F – Play-calling could have been better and the Texans lacked intensity as they fell to the now 3-10 49ers.</p> | false | 1 | houston impassioned detailed breakdown events surrounding houston texans quarterback tom savage suffering scary concussion briefly going back game sunday head coach bill obrien emphatic monday one thing obrien said never would allowed savage resume playing viewed viral disturbing video shown game broadcast savage lying ground end zone arms hands twitching absorbing crushing blow san francisco 49ers outside linebacker elvis dumervil obrien extended opinion placing savage potential danger head athletic trainer geoff kaplan point time anything important safety players obrien said love players care stand players get injured benefit seeing video people seeing wouldve never put back game dont see im passing buck anybody thats sideline football game knows coaching standpoint really cant see things like especially balls certain areas field nfl nfl players association launched joint investigation concussion protocol handled correctly theres timetable investigation would conclude conference call monday nfl spokesman joe lockhart said league players union work together conduct thorough review incident focused whether protocol properly followed also continuing looking protocol look ways improve strengthen nfl concussion protocol leagues response head injuries major scrutiny wake savages injury way protocol works involves team effort spotters press box independent neurologist consultants team medical personnel savage went sideline medical tent dumervil hit quickly cleared went back game one series trainer noticed something wasnt right savage checked ruled remainder game done upgrade system prevent future breakdowns like one well video isnt allowed sideline coaches coaches access tablets electronic playbooks injury video available sidelines medical personnel including team unaffiliated since january 2012 according nfl two certified athletic trainers assigned stadium booth access multiple views video replay monitor game communicate team medical staff radio make sure concussion evaluation conducted sideline spotters file report activity game review nfl chief medical officer nflpa medical director obviously standard head injury evaluation said dr erin manning neurologist hospital special surgery new york makes hard physician theyre evaluation sideline fairly quickly youre based player reporting find anything sometimes limited information sometimes people dont start showing symptoms long theyve head injury case savage whose symptoms didnt kick roughly fiveminute period went back game hit dumervil way system set unfortunate people delayed symptoms people going back symptoms later delayed systems manning said way system works realized something wrong took tom savage part work major disconnect savage taking scary hit allowed go back game triggered outcry social media broadcasting incorrect speculation former pitt standout experienced seizure coughing blood audience feels like see home cant people sideline see manning said hard youre standing sideline cant see everything field thats put spotters try eliminate even spotter isnt necessarily seeing one answer might one person designated sideline see video say looked really bad arm movement mean theres abnormal movement calling seizure overreaction manning said part reason people misconceptions seizure looks like savage got hit offensive line overwhelmed heavy blitz package went sideline got checked inside medical tent quickly cleared went back game threeandout series threw two incompletions savage ruled rechecked inside locker room initially resisting leaving game seemed fine afterward medical people sideline come say going check tom concussion obrien said take tent check maybe two three minutes say tom play hes good go make determination talk tom hey heres plays going go put tom back next series came back going check said thanks ok great said kap point trainer look think need check wasnt anything particularly saw field said look quick check lets continue check make sure tom savage ok satisfied answers questions asking pulled game standing front locker following another setback texans probowl outside linebacker jadeveon clowney didnt hold back disappointment frustration texans beaten 2616 san francisco 49ers team two games entering sunday im upset clowney said man 49 im upset lot better record says texans allowed 416 yards total offense 20 first downs yielded 102 rushing yards including 78 carlos hyde one touchdown im tired losing clowney said yeah hurt texans latest loss unfolded 49ers quarterback jimmy garoppolo completed 20 33 passes 334 yards one touchdown one interception hes good nice clowney said made nice passes accurate passes got ball hand fast hes thing texans lost six past seven games clowney attributed decline key injuries head coach bill obrien bill obrien good coach man clowney said youve got ta look around locker room aint got everybody clowney briefly left game leg injury walked sideline went back game knew going come back said let calm dealing aftermath third concussion year placed injured reserve second time season texans tight end cj fiedorowicz still hopes resume nfl career fiedorowicz evaluating medical options texans taking time continues recuperate havent made decisions status texans head coach bill obrien said expects fiedorowicz back next season following espn report suggesting fiedorowicz could forced retire fiedorowiczs agent told chronicle fiedorowicz wants play take time league sources authorized speak publicly said texans concerned fiedorowiczs shortterm longterm health history concussions added decisions made imminent texans linebacker brian cushing made emotional return sunday effective unfamiliar position although cushing recorded five tackles halfsack team captain first game back serving 10game suspension violating nfl performanceenhancing drug policy didnt get everything wanted ive time comes back kind quick said one things remember pretty fast get knock pretty quick texans kicker kaimi fairbairn continues struggle mightily former lou groza award winner ucla missed extra point wide left 52yard fieldgoal attempt hit left upright four missed kicks past two games including pair missed field goals loss last week tennessee titans fairbairn connected 18 23 field goals 30 33 extra points second nfl season notes lb dylan cole got crushed sideline crackback block drew penalty said merely got wind knocked wr fuller v returned missing past three games cracked ribs made immediate impact fuller finished three catches 26 yards five targets pair first downs catches first quarter report card vs 49ers passing offense bminus entering game tom savage suffered concussion backup tj yates threw two touchdown passes deandre hopkins caught 11 passes rushing offense c texans rushed seasonlow 53 yards last week improved 90 yards game pass defense texans allowed quarterback jimmy garoppolo complete 20 33 passes 334 yards one touchdown one interception rush defense texans allowed 102 rushing yards overall team including one touchdown run carlos hyde special teams kaimi fairbairn missed field goal extra point return game nonexistent coaching f playcalling could better texans lacked intensity fell 310 49ers | 1,041 |
<p>Hurricane Harvey moved slowly but powerfully across Texas on Saturday, downgraded to a Category 1&#160;storm, but only after hammering the coast with life-threatening winds and the prospect of catastrophic flooding.</p>
<p>The hurricane, initially a Category 4 and the most powerful storm in over a decade to hit the mainland United States, made a first landfall northeast of Corpus Christi, Texas, late on Friday with maximum winds of 130 miles per hour (209 km per hour).</p>
<p>In a sign of its lumbering movement, it then made a second landfall nearby three hours later.</p>
<p>Harvey was downgraded to a Category 2 hurricane by the National Hurricane Center early on Saturday as it moved slowly over parts of Texas at about 6 mph (10 km per hour).</p>
<p>The storm was expected to meander across the coast and up through Louisiana for days, with forecasts for storm surges of up to 13 feet (4 metres) and over 3 feet (90 cm) of rain.</p>
<p>Nearly 10 inches of rain had already fallen in a few areas in southeastern Texas, the center said.</p>
<p>The town of Rockport appeared to be one of the hardest hit by Harvey’s punch, hours after the mayor told anyone staying to write their names on their arms for identification in case of death or injury.</p>
<p>A high school, hotel, senior housing complex and other buildings suffered structural damage, according to emergency officials and local media. Some were being used as shelters.</p>
<p>“Right now we’re still hunkered down and can’t go anywhere,” said Steve Sims, the volunteer fire chief in Rockport. “We’ve heard rumors of 1,000 different things, we can’t confirm anything because we haven’t seen anything. We know we’ve got a lot of problems, but we don’t know what yet.”</p>
<p>Sims said power, internet and most cell phone service was out in the town of 10,000 where about two-thirds of people evacuated. Most of the senior citizens and nursing homes were among the first to be evacuated, he said.</p>
<p>As many as 6 million people were believed to be in Harvey’s path, as is the heart of America’s oil refining operations. The storm’s impact on refineries has already pushed up gasoline prices while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency lifted some rules on gasoline to reduce shortages.</p>
<p>Donald Trump, facing the first large-scale natural disaster of his presidency, said on Twitter he signed a disaster proclamation which “unleashes the full force of government help” shortly before Harvey made landfall.</p>
<p>In the early hours of the morning Saturday, Trump took to Twitter announcing to the people of Texas that “America is with you” as Harvey maked landfall:</p>
<p>Fueled by the warm waters in the Gulf of Mexico, Harvey became the first Category 4 hurricane to wallop the United States since Charley in 2004 and the first to hit Texas since Carla in 1961.</p>
<p>“In the dark, internet out, ham radio not working. Is anybody out there? Alone trying not to be scared,” Donna McClure in Corpus Christi said on Twitter as the storm made landfall.</p>
<p>ERCOT, which operates most of the power grid for Texas, said power outages from Hurricane Harvey topped 200,000 by 3 a.m. local time on Saturday. AEP said approximately 162,000 of its customers were without power, while CenterPoint Energy reported 22,874 without lights.</p>
<p>As winds from the storm began to gust in Victoria, a downed powerline sparked a house fire, said the county sheriff’s office. The mayor estimated some 65 percent of the town’s 65,000 residents defied the mandatory evacuation order.</p>
<p>While thousands fled the expected devastating flooding and destruction, many residents stayed put in imperiled towns and stocked up on food, fuel and sandbags, drawing the ire of authorities.</p>
<p>HOUSTON PREPARES FOR FLOODS</p>
<p>As a Category 4 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson scale, Harvey was the first major hurricane of Category 3 or more to hit the mainland United States since Hurricane Wilma struck Florida in 2005.</p>
<p>Its size and strength also dredged up memories of Katrina, the 2005 hurricane that made a direct hit on New Orleans as a Category 3 storm, causing levees and flood walls to fail in dozens of places. About 1,800 died in the disaster made worse by a slow government emergency response.</p>
<p>Corpus Christi, a city of 320,000, was under voluntary evacuation for Harvey.</p>
<p>At least three cruise ships operated by Carnival Corp with thousands of passengers aboard were forced to change their plans to sail for the Port of Galveston.</p>
<p>Two of them headed New Orleans to pick up fresh supplies, while the third delayed its departure from Cozumel, Mexico.</p>
<p>Louisiana and Texas declared states of disaster, authorizing the use of state resources to prepare.</p>
<p>The NHC’s latest tracking model shows the storm sitting southwest of Houston for more than a day, giving the nation’s fourth most populous city a double dose of rain and wind.</p>
<p>The city warned residents of flooding from close to 20 inches (60 cm) of rain over several days.</p>
<p>GASOLINE PRICES SPIKE</p>
<p>Gasoline stations on the south Texas coast were running out of fuel residents fled the region. U.S. gasoline prices spiked as the storm shut down 22 percent of Gulf of Mexico oil production, according to the U.S. government.</p>
<p>More than 45 percent of the country’s refining capacity is along the U.S. Gulf Coast, and nearly a fifth of the nation’s crude oil is produced offshore. Ports from Corpus Christi to Texas City, Texas, were closed to incoming vessels and Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Anadarko Petroleum Corp, Exxon Mobil Corp and others have evacuated staff from offshore oil and gas platforms.</p>
<p>Concern that Harvey could cause shortages in fuel supply drove benchmark gasoline prices to their highest in four months, before profit taking pulled back prices. Meanwhile, U.S. gasoline margins hit their strongest levels in five years for this time of year.</p>
<p>The U.S. government said it would make emergency stockpiles of crude available if needed to plug disruptions. It has regularly used them to dampen the impact of previous storms on energy supplies.</p> | false | 1 | hurricane harvey moved slowly powerfully across texas saturday downgraded category 1160storm hammering coast lifethreatening winds prospect catastrophic flooding hurricane initially category 4 powerful storm decade hit mainland united states made first landfall northeast corpus christi texas late friday maximum winds 130 miles per hour 209 km per hour sign lumbering movement made second landfall nearby three hours later harvey downgraded category 2 hurricane national hurricane center early saturday moved slowly parts texas 6 mph 10 km per hour storm expected meander across coast louisiana days forecasts storm surges 13 feet 4 metres 3 feet 90 cm rain nearly 10 inches rain already fallen areas southeastern texas center said town rockport appeared one hardest hit harveys punch hours mayor told anyone staying write names arms identification case death injury high school hotel senior housing complex buildings suffered structural damage according emergency officials local media used shelters right still hunkered cant go anywhere said steve sims volunteer fire chief rockport weve heard rumors 1000 different things cant confirm anything havent seen anything know weve got lot problems dont know yet sims said power internet cell phone service town 10000 twothirds people evacuated senior citizens nursing homes among first evacuated said many 6 million people believed harveys path heart americas oil refining operations storms impact refineries already pushed gasoline prices us environmental protection agency lifted rules gasoline reduce shortages donald trump facing first largescale natural disaster presidency said twitter signed disaster proclamation unleashes full force government help shortly harvey made landfall early hours morning saturday trump took twitter announcing people texas america harvey maked landfall fueled warm waters gulf mexico harvey became first category 4 hurricane wallop united states since charley 2004 first hit texas since carla 1961 dark internet ham radio working anybody alone trying scared donna mcclure corpus christi said twitter storm made landfall ercot operates power grid texas said power outages hurricane harvey topped 200000 3 local time saturday aep said approximately 162000 customers without power centerpoint energy reported 22874 without lights winds storm began gust victoria downed powerline sparked house fire said county sheriffs office mayor estimated 65 percent towns 65000 residents defied mandatory evacuation order thousands fled expected devastating flooding destruction many residents stayed put imperiled towns stocked food fuel sandbags drawing ire authorities houston prepares floods category 4 hurricane saffirsimpson scale harvey first major hurricane category 3 hit mainland united states since hurricane wilma struck florida 2005 size strength also dredged memories katrina 2005 hurricane made direct hit new orleans category 3 storm causing levees flood walls fail dozens places 1800 died disaster made worse slow government emergency response corpus christi city 320000 voluntary evacuation harvey least three cruise ships operated carnival corp thousands passengers aboard forced change plans sail port galveston two headed new orleans pick fresh supplies third delayed departure cozumel mexico louisiana texas declared states disaster authorizing use state resources prepare nhcs latest tracking model shows storm sitting southwest houston day giving nations fourth populous city double dose rain wind city warned residents flooding close 20 inches 60 cm rain several days gasoline prices spike gasoline stations south texas coast running fuel residents fled region us gasoline prices spiked storm shut 22 percent gulf mexico oil production according us government 45 percent countrys refining capacity along us gulf coast nearly fifth nations crude oil produced offshore ports corpus christi texas city texas closed incoming vessels royal dutch shell plc anadarko petroleum corp exxon mobil corp others evacuated staff offshore oil gas platforms concern harvey could cause shortages fuel supply drove benchmark gasoline prices highest four months profit taking pulled back prices meanwhile us gasoline margins hit strongest levels five years time year us government said would make emergency stockpiles crude available needed plug disruptions regularly used dampen impact previous storms energy supplies | 628 |
<p>The presidential election is a race for the ages.</p>
<p>Nevada voters have a lineup of candidates who are breaking barriers or proving to be untraditional candidates who break the mold of what Americans have come to expect of a president.</p>
<p>The choices include the first female nominee of a major political party, a billionaire businessman without experience as an elected official, and a Libertarian hoping to gain votes from those who are unhappy with seeing either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump in the White House.</p>
<p>The state’s six electoral votes will play an important role in the presidential election. Because Nevada is a swing state that could go red or blue, presidential candidates make frequent trips here on the campaign trail.</p>
<p>A Review-Journal poll conducted from Sept. 27 to 29 found that the race is a dead heat. It showed that 45 percent of likely voters support Clinton and 44 percent support Trump. Five percent support Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson; 5 percent are undecided and 1 percent say they would support a different choice. That was within a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.</p>
<p>Much has happened since then, including the release of a damaging audiotape from 2005 of Trump talking about groping women and allegations from women, which Trump has flatly called lies, that he’s inappropriately touched them.</p>
<p>Trump’s standing in national polls has dipped amid the fallout and he faces an increasingly narrow path to a White House victory.</p>
<p>Also, WikiLeaks has been releasing emails from Clinton officials that have cast shadows on her campaign.</p>
<p>Democratic voters have the registration edge over Republicans in Nevada, although unaffiliated voters and people who cross party lines make the state a tossup.</p>
<p>Here’s a look at who’s on the ticket:</p>
<p>DEMOCRATIC TICKET</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton is no stranger to the White House.</p>
<p>The former first lady and former secretary of state is running a campaign based on the theme that she’s the most qualified and better prepared than anyone else on the ballot.</p>
<p>It’s an election year in which immigration has become a central issue. Clinton favors a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who are in the country illegally.</p>
<p>Clinton’s policy goals include investing in and rebuilding the nation’s aging infrastructure and boosting economic growth. She also supports adding more renewable energy to the electric grid as part of a long-term plan to wean the U.S. off fossil fuels and fight climate change.</p>
<p>Nevada would play a large role in that goal because Clinton wants to see increased renewable energy projects on public lands. Federal lands make up more than 80 percent of Nevada, which is the seventh largest state in the nation.</p>
<p>Her plans also call for opening up inaccessible areas of public lands to more recreational activities such as hunting and fishing.</p>
<p>On education, Clinton wants to make public colleges tuition-free for families making less than $125,000 a year.</p>
<p>She has frequently campaigned in Nevada, championing such issues as immigration and job training.</p>
<p>In Nevada, Clinton’s supporters include labor unions and immigration advocacy groups.</p>
<p>She has frequently criticized Trump for what he has said about topics ranging from immigration to women. At the same time, she has stressed the need for unity on the campaign trail.</p>
<p>“The only thing standing between Donald Trump and the Oval Office is all of us,” Clinton said at a Las Vegas union rally in May.</p>
<p>For her running mate, she picked U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, a former governor of Virginia.</p>
<p>REPUBLICAN TICKET</p>
<p>The pundits predicted he’d never get this far.</p>
<p>Trump burst onto the political stage in the summer of 2015, promising to build a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico and deport undocumented immigrants.</p>
<p>Predictions mounted that he would lose, but Trump won the GOP nomination anyway.</p>
<p>The billionaire businessman and real estate developer was already a familiar face to many Americans, primarily as the star of the NBC reality show “The Apprentice.”</p>
<p>His business dealings include Las Vegas, where Trump International hotel near the Strip bears his surname.</p>
<p>Trump has made a variety campaign promises and pledges beyond immigration. He’s a frequent critic of U.S. companies outsourcing jobs abroad, typically targeting China and Mexico.</p>
<p>Trump has said the U.S. would have better trade deals under his administration that would bring back manufacturing jobs.</p>
<p>He has never before held an elected office and is trying to sell voters on his business and deal-making experience as a much needed alternative in Washington. He frequently blasts elected officials and the federal government as inept.</p>
<p>“I just want to make better deals because they’re made by incompetent people,” Trump said at an August fundraiser in Stateline.</p>
<p>His background isn’t the only thing that makes Trump different. His comments are often headline-generating in a way that would make traditional politicians cringe.</p>
<p>At the second presidential debate earlier this month, Trump told Clinton he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate her if he’s elected, suggesting she’d end up in jail.</p>
<p>For his running mate, Trump tapped Indiana Gov. Mike Pence.</p>
<p>LIBERTARIAN TICKET</p>
<p>Former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson is running on the Libertarian ticket. His running mate is William “Bill” Weld, a former governor of Massachusetts.</p>
<p>Johnson has cast himself as a suitable, qualified alternative to voters unhappy with Trump and Clinton. But his campaign has failed to attract a following big enough to make any of the three debate stages, even as Clinton and Trump’s race increases in rhetoric.</p>
<p>“How crazy is it?” Johnson said of the election at a Las Vegas forum in August. “I might be the next president of the United States.”</p>
<p>Johnson had pinned his hopes on making it to the debate stage for his campaign to gain traction.</p>
<p>The Presidential Debate Commission decides who’s qualified to be on the debate stage based on a candidate’s standing in the polls and Johnson hasn’t measured up.</p>
<p>While governor in New Mexico, Johnson was a Republican. Weld was a Republican while governor in Massachusetts.</p>
<p>Still, Johnson’s run in Nevada appeals to some voters in a state known for libertarian leanings and avoiding government overreach.</p>
<p>His platform includes a variety of goals, including simplifying the federal income and payroll tax system and replacing it with a “consumption tax” that taxes citizens based on their spending, not their earnings.</p>
<p>Johnson also supports balancing the federal budget, calling the nation’s debt a problem caused by both Republicans and Democrats. He points out the national debt has grown under the administrations of both President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama.</p>
<p>On social issues, Johnson supports allowing states to set their own policies on medical and recreational marijuana without interference from the federal government.</p>
<p>Green Party candidate Jill Stein, while on the ballot in other states, didn’t qualify for placement in Nevada.</p>
<p>Contact Ben Botkin at [email protected] or 702-387-2904. Find @BenBotkin1 on Twitter.</p> | false | 1 | presidential election race ages nevada voters lineup candidates breaking barriers proving untraditional candidates break mold americans come expect president choices include first female nominee major political party billionaire businessman without experience elected official libertarian hoping gain votes unhappy seeing either hillary clinton donald trump white house states six electoral votes play important role presidential election nevada swing state could go red blue presidential candidates make frequent trips campaign trail reviewjournal poll conducted sept 27 29 found race dead heat showed 45 percent likely voters support clinton 44 percent support trump five percent support libertarian candidate gary johnson 5 percent undecided 1 percent say would support different choice within margin error plus minus 35 percentage points much happened since including release damaging audiotape 2005 trump talking groping women allegations women trump flatly called lies hes inappropriately touched trumps standing national polls dipped amid fallout faces increasingly narrow path white house victory also wikileaks releasing emails clinton officials cast shadows campaign democratic voters registration edge republicans nevada although unaffiliated voters people cross party lines make state tossup heres look whos ticket democratic ticket hillary clinton stranger white house former first lady former secretary state running campaign based theme shes qualified better prepared anyone else ballot election year immigration become central issue clinton favors pathway citizenship immigrants country illegally clintons policy goals include investing rebuilding nations aging infrastructure boosting economic growth also supports adding renewable energy electric grid part longterm plan wean us fossil fuels fight climate change nevada would play large role goal clinton wants see increased renewable energy projects public lands federal lands make 80 percent nevada seventh largest state nation plans also call opening inaccessible areas public lands recreational activities hunting fishing education clinton wants make public colleges tuitionfree families making less 125000 year frequently campaigned nevada championing issues immigration job training nevada clintons supporters include labor unions immigration advocacy groups frequently criticized trump said topics ranging immigration women time stressed need unity campaign trail thing standing donald trump oval office us clinton said las vegas union rally may running mate picked us sen tim kaine former governor virginia republican ticket pundits predicted hed never get far trump burst onto political stage summer 2015 promising build wall along us border mexico deport undocumented immigrants predictions mounted would lose trump gop nomination anyway billionaire businessman real estate developer already familiar face many americans primarily star nbc reality show apprentice business dealings include las vegas trump international hotel near strip bears surname trump made variety campaign promises pledges beyond immigration hes frequent critic us companies outsourcing jobs abroad typically targeting china mexico trump said us would better trade deals administration would bring back manufacturing jobs never held elected office trying sell voters business dealmaking experience much needed alternative washington frequently blasts elected officials federal government inept want make better deals theyre made incompetent people trump said august fundraiser stateline background isnt thing makes trump different comments often headlinegenerating way would make traditional politicians cringe second presidential debate earlier month trump told clinton would appoint special prosecutor investigate hes elected suggesting shed end jail running mate trump tapped indiana gov mike pence libertarian ticket former new mexico gov gary johnson running libertarian ticket running mate william bill weld former governor massachusetts johnson cast suitable qualified alternative voters unhappy trump clinton campaign failed attract following big enough make three debate stages even clinton trumps race increases rhetoric crazy johnson said election las vegas forum august might next president united states johnson pinned hopes making debate stage campaign gain traction presidential debate commission decides whos qualified debate stage based candidates standing polls johnson hasnt measured governor new mexico johnson republican weld republican governor massachusetts still johnsons run nevada appeals voters state known libertarian leanings avoiding government overreach platform includes variety goals including simplifying federal income payroll tax system replacing consumption tax taxes citizens based spending earnings johnson also supports balancing federal budget calling nations debt problem caused republicans democrats points national debt grown administrations president george w bush president barack obama social issues johnson supports allowing states set policies medical recreational marijuana without interference federal government green party candidate jill stein ballot states didnt qualify placement nevada contact ben botkin bbotkinreviewjournalcom 7023872904 find benbotkin1 twitter | 700 |
<p>By Ed Stoddard</p>
<p>MOGALAKWENA, South Africa (Reuters) – A new power struggle is unfolding in South Africa’s old homelands between global mining giants, traditional leaders and an impoverished rural populace.</p>
<p>Parts of an industry long used to labor unrest are now contending with community protests that have cut production of the country’s largest mineral export earner, platinum, and may shut some operations down altogether.</p>
<p>At the heart of the conflict are tribal leaders who have royal titles and feudal-style control over the homelands, poor rural areas designated to South Africa’s black majority by its former white minority rulers during apartheid.</p>
<p>Tribal leaders are also key allies of President Jacob Zuma, whose political base has become increasingly rural, and his African National Congress party has drafted a law that would cement their control.</p>
<p>But with protests spreading across the homelands, the communities, mining companies and some within the ANC itself are moving to change what they see as an anachronistic system.</p>
<p>The traditional leaders have acted as intermediaries with companies which have discovered chrome and coal as well as platinum in the homelands and hope to find shale gas. Many locals say they are seeing none of the proceeds.</p>
<p>“If they don’t give us that 175 million rand ($13 million), we are going to shut down the mine,” said Chippa Langa, a leader of the community around the Mogalakwena platinum mine, referring to a community fund set up by Anglo American Platinum (Amplats) (J:).</p>
<p>To avoid such an outcome, a leading human rights lawyer is negotiating with the local royal house to allow community representatives more control over the fund.</p>
<p>“We are renegotiating the agreement to make it more accountable,” said the lawyer, Richard Spoor, whose work has included spearheading a class action suit against gold producers over the fatal lung disease silicosis which miners contract.</p>
<p>It is a plan that, if copied elsewhere, would dilute the power of the tribal leaders and could do the same to the ANC, which has ruled South Africa since the end of apartheid in 1994.</p>
<p>But Spoor says he and his legal team, who are acting for the communities rather than the mine, are not undermining tradition.</p>
<p>“Our view is that this more democratic model is far more aligned with traditional law and custom. We don’t regard the current very authoritarian top-down style of chieftanship as consistent with the traditional institution.”</p>
<p>Zolani Mkiva, head of presidency at Contralesa, the umbrella group for South Africa’s traditional leaders, agreed that the African way is bottom up, but said what he called isolated cases involving some mining deals were giving the chiefs a bad name.</p>
<p>“They tend to attract attention and create an impression that this represents the African way of leadership,” he said.</p>
<p>Chris Griffith, chief executive of Amplats, a unit of Anglo American (L:), said the company was fully behind the restructuring of the community trust and was applying the lessons learned to other deals.</p>
<p>“What we are trying to do is get away from some of the previous structures where we felt obliged to pay the money over to the Kgoshi (chief),” Griffiths told Reuters, noting a new-style deal on a chrome project in February. At that project, there have been no protests so far.</p>
<p>LAND RIGHTS</p>
<p>Discontent has not been confined to Mogalakwena, the world’s largest open-pit platinum mine, where Amplats says protests two years ago cost it 8,600 ounces of its annual 200,000-plus ounces of production.</p>
<p>Impala Platinum’s (J:) Marula mine says it lost 10,000 ounces of almost 80,000 ounces of production in the last financial year to community protests that included road blocks, vehicle stonings and assaults on people reporting for work.</p>
<p>A nearby chrome project it set up with a tribal council – made up of a chief and his aides – has collapsed and Impala says it may soon have to close Marula, which would be the first such shutdown in South Africa linked purely to social upheaval.</p>
<p>Falling platinum prices have multiplied the pressure.</p>
<p>Implats CEO Nico Muller told Reuters the company would not change the structure itself but wanted the two sides to resolve their differences. “The way they apply the proceeds is perceived not to benefit the broader community,” he said.</p>
<p>Around Mogalakwena, set amid rust-tinged rocky outcrops in sweltering latitudes north of Johannesburg, resentment over grinding poverty runs deep.</p>
<p>“I never worked in the mine. I never got benefit, nothing,” said 57-year-old Leg Phalanea as he walked down a dusty street near the mine.</p>
<p>The bill before parliament formalizes the current political system in the homelands with a clause allowing traditional councils to enter partnerships with any “body or institution”. It says such deals “must be beneficial to the community represented by such council”, but does not require consultation.</p>
<p>However, Richard Mdakane, an ANC MP who chairs the parliamentary committee on traditional matters, said villagers should have more say. “We are amending many clauses that were there just to make sure that the bill allows community participation in these processes,” he said.</p>
<p>Some in the ANC are seeking to go further by ending the chief’s role as custodians of land now regarded as communal by giving villagers title deeds to the land they plough.</p>
<p>ANC Treasurer Secretary Zweli Mkhize – seen as a contender to replace Zuma as party chief at a December conference where policy positions will also be adopted – told Reuters: “We are discussing this issue. There is a huge discussion about what kind of land tenure we need in the former homelands.”</p>
<p>Tribal power is already ebbing in places such as Mogalakwena. Villagers there have agreed a new trust structure with four trustees: one from Amplats, one independent, and the other two from the royal Mapela clan, to replace a structure dominated by the tribal council.</p>
<p>Former chief Kgabagare Langa, who has been ousted in a dispute, said he is challenging his removal in court. The new chief, or Kgoshi, Hans Langa, said he could not comment on the restructuring as his lawyers were working on it.</p>
<p>Residents say they have received positive signals from the new chief’s camp and Amplats’ Griffith said the company was just waiting for him to settle in.</p>
<p>“It’s clear the new Kgoshi will want to see peace in Mapela,” said Jonathon Manamela, 53, treasurer of the Mapela Executive Committee, a community group involved in the talks. “Our culture believes you are a king because of the people.”</p>
<p>($1 = 13.5818 rand)</p> | false | 1 | ed stoddard mogalakwena south africa reuters new power struggle unfolding south africas old homelands global mining giants traditional leaders impoverished rural populace parts industry long used labor unrest contending community protests cut production countrys largest mineral export earner platinum may shut operations altogether heart conflict tribal leaders royal titles feudalstyle control homelands poor rural areas designated south africas black majority former white minority rulers apartheid tribal leaders also key allies president jacob zuma whose political base become increasingly rural african national congress party drafted law would cement control protests spreading across homelands communities mining companies within anc moving change see anachronistic system traditional leaders acted intermediaries companies discovered chrome coal well platinum homelands hope find shale gas many locals say seeing none proceeds dont give us 175 million rand 13 million going shut mine said chippa langa leader community around mogalakwena platinum mine referring community fund set anglo american platinum amplats j avoid outcome leading human rights lawyer negotiating local royal house allow community representatives control fund renegotiating agreement make accountable said lawyer richard spoor whose work included spearheading class action suit gold producers fatal lung disease silicosis miners contract plan copied elsewhere would dilute power tribal leaders could anc ruled south africa since end apartheid 1994 spoor says legal team acting communities rather mine undermining tradition view democratic model far aligned traditional law custom dont regard current authoritarian topdown style chieftanship consistent traditional institution zolani mkiva head presidency contralesa umbrella group south africas traditional leaders agreed african way bottom said called isolated cases involving mining deals giving chiefs bad name tend attract attention create impression represents african way leadership said chris griffith chief executive amplats unit anglo american l said company fully behind restructuring community trust applying lessons learned deals trying get away previous structures felt obliged pay money kgoshi chief griffiths told reuters noting newstyle deal chrome project february project protests far land rights discontent confined mogalakwena worlds largest openpit platinum mine amplats says protests two years ago cost 8600 ounces annual 200000plus ounces production impala platinums j marula mine says lost 10000 ounces almost 80000 ounces production last financial year community protests included road blocks vehicle stonings assaults people reporting work nearby chrome project set tribal council made chief aides collapsed impala says may soon close marula would first shutdown south africa linked purely social upheaval falling platinum prices multiplied pressure implats ceo nico muller told reuters company would change structure wanted two sides resolve differences way apply proceeds perceived benefit broader community said around mogalakwena set amid rusttinged rocky outcrops sweltering latitudes north johannesburg resentment grinding poverty runs deep never worked mine never got benefit nothing said 57yearold leg phalanea walked dusty street near mine bill parliament formalizes current political system homelands clause allowing traditional councils enter partnerships body institution says deals must beneficial community represented council require consultation however richard mdakane anc mp chairs parliamentary committee traditional matters said villagers say amending many clauses make sure bill allows community participation processes said anc seeking go ending chiefs role custodians land regarded communal giving villagers title deeds land plough anc treasurer secretary zweli mkhize seen contender replace zuma party chief december conference policy positions also adopted told reuters discussing issue huge discussion kind land tenure need former homelands tribal power already ebbing places mogalakwena villagers agreed new trust structure four trustees one amplats one independent two royal mapela clan replace structure dominated tribal council former chief kgabagare langa ousted dispute said challenging removal court new chief kgoshi hans langa said could comment restructuring lawyers working residents say received positive signals new chiefs camp amplats griffith said company waiting settle clear new kgoshi want see peace mapela said jonathon manamela 53 treasurer mapela executive committee community group involved talks culture believes king people 1 135818 rand | 629 |
<p>By My Pham and Matthew Tostevin</p>
<p>HANOI (Reuters) – Tensions are high on the South China Sea as Vietnam faces off against China over their overlapping maritime claims.</p>
<p>But for the boatmen on the junks cruising the calm expanse of Vietnam’s Ha Long Bay, another growing Chinese presence in the region is very welcome indeed.</p>
<p>“More than half our tourists are Chinese now,” said Nguyen Van Phu, 33, who has spent six years working on the boats that chug between the bay’s spectacular stone towers. “If they stopped coming it would be a big problem, if not a disaster.”</p>
<p>The number of Chinese tourists in Vietnam has surged this year, just one sign of the growing economic ties between two long-time enemies. Chinese investment in Vietnam is also increasing rapidly, as is trade between the two countries.</p>
<p>But while tourists, trade and investment are being welcomed, they also present a challenge for a fiercely independent country like Vietnam, which has been wary of China’s growing influence in the region.</p>
<p>“The rising economic dependence on China makes it more difficult for Vietnam to decide how far to confront China on the South China Sea,” said Nguyen Khac Giang, a researcher at the Vietnam Economics and Policy Research Institution.</p>
<p>Vietnam would suffer far more than China economically in the event of political instability given its smaller size, he said.</p>
<p>China exports more goods to Vietnam than any other country in Southeast Asia, sending textiles to be made into shirts and sneakers, and electronic components for mobile phones and large flat-panel displays. Those completed products are exported around the world, as well as back to China.</p>
<p>Vietnam also makes electronics components for factories in China, and exports computers for Chinese consumers.</p>
<p>Manufacturers see Vietnam as an attractive base, with wages as little as a third of those in coastal regions of China, according to employment consultants.</p>
<p>And while proximity has historically been a source of friction between the two countries – they fought a border war as recently as 1979 and armed clashes flared for years afterwards – for manufacturers it’s a boon.</p>
<p>“We strategically invested in Vietnam because of its geographical advantage – closer to China and hence lower cost on materials, transportation and relatively shorter production lead time,” said Bosco Law, chief executive of the Hong Kong-based Lawsgroup. The company makes clothes for brands such as Gap, whose global operations include scores of outlets in China.</p>
<p>Businesses contacted by Reuters declined to talk openly about the risks for them of tension between Vietnam and China.</p>
<p>Chinese trade and investment has surged across Southeast Asia in recent years as companies search out new bases for manufacturing and consumers for their goods.</p>
<p>China has also invested in infrastructure and plans to pour development funds into Southeast Asia as part of its sprawling Belt and Road initiative.</p>
<p>That has already had a political effect.</p>
<p>Big recipients of Chinese investment such as Cambodia and Laos are promoting China’s line on the South China Sea at regional meetings.</p>
<p>President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, meanwhile, has cited Chinese investment pledges as he softens his country’s stance on its maritime disputes with China.</p>
<p>MISTRUST</p>
<p>Tensions between Beijing and Hanoi have been high since mid-June, when Chinese pressure forced Vietnam to suspend oil drilling on a block that overlaps the line China says marks its claim to almost all the South China Sea.</p>
<p>As Vietnam has emerged as the most vocal regional opponent of China’s maritime claims in Southeast Asia, it has drawn Beijing’s ire. Its growing defense links to the United States, Japan and India also make China suspicious.</p>
<p>The Vietnamese government has also had to contend with public pressure at home. A row over Chinese oil drilling in disputed waters in the South China Sea in 2014 sparked anti-China riots in Vietnam in which foreign factories thought to be Chinese were set on fire, before the rig was removed.</p>
<p>Tourism dipped in the aftermath, but quickly bounced back. Trade has also risen steadily since then.</p>
<p>Exports to China jumped nearly 43 percent to $13 billion in the first half of 2017 from a year earlier, according to customs data. Imports rose more slowly, climbing 16 percent.</p>
<p>Chinese tourist arrivals, meanwhile, soared 60 percent to nearly 1.9 million in the first half of 2017 to account for around one third of all foreign visitors.</p>
<p>For the most part, the government has welcomed the boost from Chinese tourism, as it strives to meet a 6.7 percent target for annual economic growth.</p>
<p>INVESTMENTS WELCOMED</p>
<p>Vietnam is also welcoming Chinese investments, if cautiously.</p>
<p>“We should be careful&#160;but at the same time we should take advantage,” said Nguyen Mai, the president of Vietnam’s Association of Foreign Invested Enterprises.</p>
<p>The biggest foreign direct investors in Vietnam have long been from South Korea and Japan, particularly in the electronics sector. More than 100,000 Vietnamese work for Samsung (KS:) alone in Vietnam.</p>
<p>However, Chinese investment is growing quickly, nearly doubling last year to almost 8 percent of total foreign direct investment. Investment went into solar panel and plastics factories, among other areas.</p>
<p>Direct U.S. investment accounts for about 2 percent of the total so far this year; the United States is also Vietnam’s second-largest trade partner.</p> | false | 1 | pham matthew tostevin hanoi reuters tensions high south china sea vietnam faces china overlapping maritime claims boatmen junks cruising calm expanse vietnams ha long bay another growing chinese presence region welcome indeed half tourists chinese said nguyen van phu 33 spent six years working boats chug bays spectacular stone towers stopped coming would big problem disaster number chinese tourists vietnam surged year one sign growing economic ties two longtime enemies chinese investment vietnam also increasing rapidly trade two countries tourists trade investment welcomed also present challenge fiercely independent country like vietnam wary chinas growing influence region rising economic dependence china makes difficult vietnam decide far confront china south china sea said nguyen khac giang researcher vietnam economics policy research institution vietnam would suffer far china economically event political instability given smaller size said china exports goods vietnam country southeast asia sending textiles made shirts sneakers electronic components mobile phones large flatpanel displays completed products exported around world well back china vietnam also makes electronics components factories china exports computers chinese consumers manufacturers see vietnam attractive base wages little third coastal regions china according employment consultants proximity historically source friction two countries fought border war recently 1979 armed clashes flared years afterwards manufacturers boon strategically invested vietnam geographical advantage closer china hence lower cost materials transportation relatively shorter production lead time said bosco law chief executive hong kongbased lawsgroup company makes clothes brands gap whose global operations include scores outlets china businesses contacted reuters declined talk openly risks tension vietnam china chinese trade investment surged across southeast asia recent years companies search new bases manufacturing consumers goods china also invested infrastructure plans pour development funds southeast asia part sprawling belt road initiative already political effect big recipients chinese investment cambodia laos promoting chinas line south china sea regional meetings president rodrigo duterte philippines meanwhile cited chinese investment pledges softens countrys stance maritime disputes china mistrust tensions beijing hanoi high since midjune chinese pressure forced vietnam suspend oil drilling block overlaps line china says marks claim almost south china sea vietnam emerged vocal regional opponent chinas maritime claims southeast asia drawn beijings ire growing defense links united states japan india also make china suspicious vietnamese government also contend public pressure home row chinese oil drilling disputed waters south china sea 2014 sparked antichina riots vietnam foreign factories thought chinese set fire rig removed tourism dipped aftermath quickly bounced back trade also risen steadily since exports china jumped nearly 43 percent 13 billion first half 2017 year earlier according customs data imports rose slowly climbing 16 percent chinese tourist arrivals meanwhile soared 60 percent nearly 19 million first half 2017 account around one third foreign visitors part government welcomed boost chinese tourism strives meet 67 percent target annual economic growth investments welcomed vietnam also welcoming chinese investments cautiously careful160but time take advantage said nguyen mai president vietnams association foreign invested enterprises biggest foreign direct investors vietnam long south korea japan particularly electronics sector 100000 vietnamese work samsung ks alone vietnam however chinese investment growing quickly nearly doubling last year almost 8 percent total foreign direct investment investment went solar panel plastics factories among areas direct us investment accounts 2 percent total far year united states also vietnams secondlargest trade partner | 537 |
<p>Sen.&#160;John McCain, a Republican who may hold a pivotal vote in the last-ditch GOP effort to repeal Obamacare, is withholding his support as leaders stare down a final deadline to act by the end of the month.</p>
<p>“I am not supportive of the bill yet,” the Arizona senator told reporters Monday, adding that he wants a more thorough legislative process.</p>
<p>A number of other Republicans are jumping on board a proposal by Sens.&#160;Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana to replace the Affordable Care Act’s insurance subsidies with block grants to states, which would decide how to help people get health coverage.</p>
<p>The Congressional Budget Office said Monday it will offer a partial assessment of the measure early next week, but that it won’t have estimates of its effects on the deficit, health insurance coverage or premiums for at least several weeks. That could make it hard to win over several Republicans who opposed previous versions of repeal legislation.</p>
<p>On the conservative side, Sen.&#160;Rand Paul insisted Monday he is opposing the bill because it keeps too much of Obamacare.</p>
<p>“It’s another incarnation of replace. I won’t support it,” Paul of Kentucky told reporters, adding that it isn’t a “kidney stone” you pass to “just get rid of it.”</p>
<p>Asked about the likelihood that the bill would get enough GOP support to pass, Paul said, “Two weeks ago I would have said zero. But now I’m worried.”</p>
<p>Two months ago, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s effort to pass a replacement with only Republican support suffered a spectacular defeat in the Senate. When members of the Senate Health Committee then began working on a bipartisan plan to shore up Obamacare, Graham and Cassidy revved up a new bid to get their GOP-only bill to the Senate floor.</p>
<p>Democrats are warning that the proposal is a serious threat.</p>
<p>“This bill is worse than the last bill,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York told reporters Monday. “It will slash Medicaid, get rid of pre-existing conditions. It’s very, very bad.”</p>
<p>Later at a news conference, Schumer said voting on the measure without a full CBO analysis would be “legislative malpractice.”</p>
<p>The measure would end Obamacare’s requirements that individuals obtain health insurance and most employers provide it to their workers, and give states broad flexibility to address the needs of people with preexisting medical conditions. The proposal would end the Affordable Care Act’s tax on medical devices while keeping others intact, including taxes on the wealthy, to fund the block grants.</p>
<p>Shares of hospitals and health insurers that could see profits drop under the plan declined. Tenet Healthcare Corp. fell 6 percent to $15.72 at the close in New York while Community Health Systems Inc. slipped 4.6 percent to $7.26. The insurer Molina Healthcare Inc. lost 0.9 percent and Centene Corp. fell 1.5 percent.</p>
<p>Because the Graham-Cassidy plan has no Democratic support, Republicans have only until Sept. 30 to push it through the Senate before rules expire that allow it to be passed with 50 senators plus Vice President Mike Pence’s tiebreaking vote. Republicans control the Senate 52-48.</p>
<p>Graham said last week that McConnell said he was “all in” to help the two bill sponsors round up the 50 votes to pass the bill. Graham said they could have as many as 48 votes if the vote were held now. But a number of Republican senators have yet to get on board, including the three who defeated McConnell’s plan — Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and McCain.</p>
<p>Collins “has a number of concerns” about the new proposal, including the cuts to Medicaid and the effect on people with preexisting conditions, spokeswoman Annie Clark said Monday. She will examine the CBO analysis of the bill’s impact, Clark said.</p>
<p>Murkowski is getting a hard sell from Republican backers of the bill. Moments before she walked into McConnell’s office Monday, she said she’s working with Cassidy’s office to learn what the bill would mean for Alaska.</p>
<p>“What I’m trying to figure out is the impact to my state,” Murkowski told reporters. “There are some formulas at play with different pots of money with different allocations and different percentages so it is not clear.”</p>
<p>The conservative group Heritage Action, which opposed the GOP bill that failed in July, said last week the Graham-Cassidy proposal doesn’t appear to deliver on Republicans’ promise to repeal and replace Obamacare, though the group hasn’t taken a final position.</p>
<p>McCain had said earlier Monday on MSNBC that he would consider supporting the plan, but was waiting for input from Arizona’s GOP Gov. Doug Ducey.&#160;</p>
<p>On Monday, Ducey tweeted his support for the measure, calling it “the best path forward to repeal and replace Obamacare.” He added, “Congress has 12 days to say ‘yes’ to Graham-Cassidy. It’s time for them to get the job done.”</p>
<p>The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has scheduled a hearing for Sept. 26 about health-care block grants.</p>
<p>Co-sponsoring the proposal with Graham and Cassidy are Chairman Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, and Nevada Republican Dean Heller.</p>
<p>House Speaker Paul Ryan has spoken positively about the bill, as has Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus. Still, it isn’t clear that the measure would have enough support to pass the chamber.</p>
<p>Because the measure strives to equalize Medicaid funding between states, some Republicans from Medicaid expansion states in the House could find it hard to support. That includes states like New York and California, which stand to lose federal funds under Graham-Cassidy. Those states have only Democratic senators, but have some GOP House members.</p>
<p>Schumer said the block grants would also slash healthcare funding for states with GOP senators, including Alaska, Maine, Arizona, Ohio and West Virginia.</p>
<p>Liberal groups including MoveOn.org are working to defeat the plan. The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said Friday the bill would “significantly” cut federal funding for health coverage over the next decade. It said the cuts would grow more severe in 2027, when the block grants would expire and Medicaid per capita cap cuts would notch down spending. The group estimates that in 2027 alone, federal health spending would decline by $299 billion compared with current law and all states would be affected by cuts.</p>
<p>Credit ratings agency Fitch Ratings said Friday that because Medicaid spending represents one-third of state budgets, the bill would pose big challenges for them, particularly those that took advantage of Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion.</p>
<p>“States that expanded Medicaid access to the newly eligible population under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are particularly at risk under this latest bill,” Fitch said. “In the short-term non-expansion states may see gains under the bill given redistribution of ACA related spending streams. But, over time even non-expansion states will face budgetary challenges given the proposed changes to Medicaid, which will likely accelerate for all states over time.”</p>
<p>Republican senators from Medicaid expansion states, including Rob Portman of Ohio and Shelly Moore Capito of West Virginia, are among those who say they’re still reviewing the legislation.</p>
<p>Still, Republicans campaigned on the promise of repealing Obamacare, and many don’t want to give up. They insist the block grants approach in the measure brings flexibility to states that Obamacare lacks. Sen.&#160;John Cornyn, the No. 2 Republican leader, said last week that he’ll gauge support for the bill, and the topic is expected to be discussed again privately by Senate Republicans on Tuesday.</p>
<p>Graham and Cassidy say that Pence has been telephoning Republican senators and governors. President Donald Trump let the Republican senators know he’s rooting for them, though he didn’t explicitly supporting the legislation.</p>
<p>“I applaud the Senate for continuing to work toward a solution to relieve the disastrous Obamacare burden on the American people,” Trump said in a statement. “Inaction is not an option, and I sincerely hope that Senators Graham and Cassidy have found a way to address the Obamacare crisis.”</p> | false | 1 | sen160john mccain republican may hold pivotal vote lastditch gop effort repeal obamacare withholding support leaders stare final deadline act end month supportive bill yet arizona senator told reporters monday adding wants thorough legislative process number republicans jumping board proposal sens160lindsey graham south carolina bill cassidy louisiana replace affordable care acts insurance subsidies block grants states would decide help people get health coverage congressional budget office said monday offer partial assessment measure early next week wont estimates effects deficit health insurance coverage premiums least several weeks could make hard win several republicans opposed previous versions repeal legislation conservative side sen160rand paul insisted monday opposing bill keeps much obamacare another incarnation replace wont support paul kentucky told reporters adding isnt kidney stone pass get rid asked likelihood bill would get enough gop support pass paul said two weeks ago would said zero im worried two months ago majority leader mitch mcconnells effort pass replacement republican support suffered spectacular defeat senate members senate health committee began working bipartisan plan shore obamacare graham cassidy revved new bid get goponly bill senate floor democrats warning proposal serious threat bill worse last bill senate democratic leader chuck schumer new york told reporters monday slash medicaid get rid preexisting conditions bad later news conference schumer said voting measure without full cbo analysis would legislative malpractice measure would end obamacares requirements individuals obtain health insurance employers provide workers give states broad flexibility address needs people preexisting medical conditions proposal would end affordable care acts tax medical devices keeping others intact including taxes wealthy fund block grants shares hospitals health insurers could see profits drop plan declined tenet healthcare corp fell 6 percent 1572 close new york community health systems inc slipped 46 percent 726 insurer molina healthcare inc lost 09 percent centene corp fell 15 percent grahamcassidy plan democratic support republicans sept 30 push senate rules expire allow passed 50 senators plus vice president mike pences tiebreaking vote republicans control senate 5248 graham said last week mcconnell said help two bill sponsors round 50 votes pass bill graham said could many 48 votes vote held number republican senators yet get board including three defeated mcconnells plan susan collins maine lisa murkowski alaska mccain collins number concerns new proposal including cuts medicaid effect people preexisting conditions spokeswoman annie clark said monday examine cbo analysis bills impact clark said murkowski getting hard sell republican backers bill moments walked mcconnells office monday said shes working cassidys office learn bill would mean alaska im trying figure impact state murkowski told reporters formulas play different pots money different allocations different percentages clear conservative group heritage action opposed gop bill failed july said last week grahamcassidy proposal doesnt appear deliver republicans promise repeal replace obamacare though group hasnt taken final position mccain said earlier monday msnbc would consider supporting plan waiting input arizonas gop gov doug ducey160 monday ducey tweeted support measure calling best path forward repeal replace obamacare added congress 12 days say yes grahamcassidy time get job done senate homeland security governmental affairs committee scheduled hearing sept 26 healthcare block grants cosponsoring proposal graham cassidy chairman ron johnson wisconsin republican nevada republican dean heller house speaker paul ryan spoken positively bill republican rep mark meadows chairman conservative house freedom caucus still isnt clear measure would enough support pass chamber measure strives equalize medicaid funding states republicans medicaid expansion states house could find hard support includes states like new york california stand lose federal funds grahamcassidy states democratic senators gop house members schumer said block grants would also slash healthcare funding states gop senators including alaska maine arizona ohio west virginia liberal groups including moveonorg working defeat plan liberal center budget policy priorities said friday bill would significantly cut federal funding health coverage next decade said cuts would grow severe 2027 block grants would expire medicaid per capita cap cuts would notch spending group estimates 2027 alone federal health spending would decline 299 billion compared current law states would affected cuts credit ratings agency fitch ratings said friday medicaid spending represents onethird state budgets bill would pose big challenges particularly took advantage obamacares medicaid expansion states expanded medicaid access newly eligible population affordable care act aca particularly risk latest bill fitch said shortterm nonexpansion states may see gains bill given redistribution aca related spending streams time even nonexpansion states face budgetary challenges given proposed changes medicaid likely accelerate states time republican senators medicaid expansion states including rob portman ohio shelly moore capito west virginia among say theyre still reviewing legislation still republicans campaigned promise repealing obamacare many dont want give insist block grants approach measure brings flexibility states obamacare lacks sen160john cornyn 2 republican leader said last week hell gauge support bill topic expected discussed privately senate republicans tuesday graham cassidy say pence telephoning republican senators governors president donald trump let republican senators know hes rooting though didnt explicitly supporting legislation applaud senate continuing work toward solution relieve disastrous obamacare burden american people trump said statement inaction option sincerely hope senators graham cassidy found way address obamacare crisis | 835 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.