USA News and Discussions

[caltrek]

Mitch McConnell says a national abortion ban is 'possible' as GOP candidates dodge topic
Source: USA Today

WASHINGTON — Republicans are on the verge of a long-sought legal victory — striking down Roe v. Wade — but their political candidates are in no rush to talk about it on the campaign trail.

GOP campaign officials are advising candidates to downplay and soft-pedal the prospects of anti-abortion legislation as they battle pro-choice Democrats for control of Congress and various statehouses across the country.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell told USA Today that a national abortion ban is possible if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade.

Said McConnell: “With regard to the abortion issue, I think it’s pretty clear where Senate Republicans stand.”

Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... ?gnt-cfr=1

I think this promise is along the same lines as the promises made by many of the justices in their confirmation hearings - that they would accept Roe v. Wade as settled law, etc. Clearly, if the leaked memo does reflect their thinking, they do not intend to keep that promise. If McConnel is willing to codify Roe v. Wade he can do that by cooperating with the Democrats in the current session. Otherwise it is just a meaningless promise to be responsible if they are put in power. If they cannot act responsibly out of power, when bipartisan cooperation is still required, why should they be trusted with more power?

McConnel comes across as blackmailing women. There should be no cooperation with such bullying tactics.

As one Democratic senator pointed out:

(Common Dreams) "No one should be surprised at what the leak of Alito's opinion taking away abortion rights revealed. There is a plan, and this is just one part of it," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said Saturday. "This is why Mitch McConnell refused to let the Senate consider Judge Merrick Garland."

"This is why they eliminated the filibuster for Gorsuch," Whitehouse added. "This is why they pressured the FBI to tank the Kavanaugh investigation. This is why they broke the 'Garland rule' to stuff Barrett on the court mid-election. This is why $580 million was spent to capture the court. This is why the Federalist Society was the turnstile for Supreme Court nominees."

Source of citation: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/ ... rturns-roe

[caltrek]

Sanders: GOP Ended Filibuster to Pack Supreme Court, So Dems Must End It to Save Abortion Rights
by Jake Johnson
May 11, 2022

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/ ... e-abortion

(Common Dreams)"If Republicans can end the filibuster to install right-wing justices nominated by presidents who lost the popular vote in order to overturn Roe v. Wade, Democrats can and must end the filibuster to make abortion legal and safe."

On the eve of a key procedural vote on the Women's Health Protection Act, Sen. Bernie Sanders said in a floor speech Tuesday that the Senate's Democratic majority must use its power to end the legislative filibuster and codify abortion rights into federal law.

Sanders (I-Vt.), the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, acknowledged that Senate Democrats don't currently have the 60 votes needed to overcome the filibuster, an archaic rule that has enabled the Republican minority to stonewall much of the majority party's agenda over the past year.

"It is not good enough to just talk about passing this bill," Sanders said of the WHPA, legislation that would cement the right to abortion care free from medically unnecessary restrictions as the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing majority gears up to overturn Roe v. Wade.

"We must end the filibuster and pass it with 50 votes," said the Vermont senator. "You know, I hear a lot of talk from my Democratic colleagues about the need for unity. Well, if there was ever a time for unity, now is that time."

[wjfox]

[caltrek]

Is Leak of a Draft Supreme Court Opinion a Federal Crime?
by Michael A. Foster
May 13, 2022

Introduction:

(Eurasia Review) On May 2, 2022, it was first reported that a news organization had obtained a draft Supreme Court majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and received confirmation from “a person familiar with the court’s proceedings” in the case. The Court subsequently authenticated the draft opinion, and Chief Justice Roberts ordered an internal investigation.

Beyond discussion of the substance of the draft opinion and its implications for the constitutional right recognized in Roe v. Wade—and setting aside potential employment or professional consequences for the person or persons who shared the draft—a number of commentators have questioned whether the act of providing the draft opinion to a media organization was a federal crime. Several Members of the House Oversight Committee wrote a letter to the Attorney General on May 3, 2022, calling for, among other things, a Department of Justice investigation and a briefing on “whether criminal charges are being considered against the individual or individuals responsible for this breach.”

Although federal law does prohibit the dissemination of certain kinds of government information—such as “classified” information related to national security—there does not appear to be a federal criminal statute expressly prohibiting unauthorized sharing of Supreme Court documents like draft opinions. Several laws that have been publicly referenced in connection with disclosure of non-public Supreme Court information could apply to particular disclosures depending on the underlying facts, which remain unclear in this instance, but there would be legal hurdles associated with seeking to use any of the referenced laws to prosecute the person or persons who shared the draft opinion in Dobbs. The provenance of the disclosure is unknown, so the laws addressed in this Legal Sidebar may or may not apply depending on the facts.

Further developments in the Supreme Court marshal’s investigation could also make additional laws relevant…As relevant to the disclosure itself, this Legal Sidebar will briefly describe three federal criminal provisions that have been cited by commentators in the context of apparently unauthorized Supreme Court information dissemination and identify some of the potential issues that application of each of those laws could raise.

Read more here: https://www.eurasiareview.com/13052022- ... -analysis/

[weatheriscool]

House panel launches investigation into baby formula shortage
Source: The Hill

The House Oversight and Reform Committee is launching an investigation into the ongoing baby formula shortage, pressing the four largest domestic manufacturers for documents and information about the steps they are taking to alleviate the crisis.

The four companies — Abbott, Reckitt Benckiser, Nestlé and Perrigo — control nearly 90 percent of the U.S. market for baby formula.

“The national formula shortage poses a threat to the health and economic security of infants and families in communities throughout the country—particularly those with less income who have historically experienced health inequities, including food insecurity,” committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) wrote to the companies.

The lawmakers asked if the companies have enough supply to meet current demand and what steps they are taking to lower prices, prevent price gouging and increase consumer access.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-AAXeZ8C

[caltrek]

[wjfox]

The Supreme Court just made it much easier to bribe a member of Congress

A case brought by Ted Cruz is a huge boon to rich candidates and moneyed lobbyists.

By Ian Millhiser on May 16, 2022 1:30 pm

The Supreme Court’s conservative majority has been at war with campaign finance laws for more than a dozen years, stretching at least as far back as its decision in Citizens United v. FEC (2010). On Monday, the Court’s six Republican appointees escalated this war.

The Court’s decision in FEC v. Ted Cruz for Senate is a boon to wealthy candidates. It strikes down an anti-bribery law that limited the amount of money candidates could raise after an election in order to repay loans they made to their own campaign.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2022/5 ... lena-kagan

[caltrek]

I will put this article here as I believe the discussion of systemic racism in the U.S. has previously occurred in this thread.

Denial of Structural Racism Linked to Anti-Black Prejudice
May 23, 2022

Introduction:

(EurekAlert) People who deny the existence of structural racism are more likely to exhibit anti-Black prejudice and less likely to show racial empathy or openness to diversity, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

However, there were no similar findings for people who claimed they ignore race, which was instead associated with greater openness to diversity, the study found.

Researchers analyzed 83 previous studies on racism that included more than 25,000 participants. Denying structural racism and ignoring race are often considered to be two different types of colorblind racial ideology, but researchers and educators need to delineate between them because they appear to have very different outcomes, said lead researcher Jacqueline Yi, MS, a clinical-community psychology doctoral student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). The research was published online in the Journal of Counseling Psychology.

“The denial of structural racism appears to be a big barrier to racial equity because it allows for more victim-blaming explanations of systemic inequality,” Yi said. “The more that BIPOC [Black, indigenous and people of color] individuals are blamed for racial disparities, the less likely it is for white people and institutions to take responsibility for the continued effects of systemic racism.”

Denial of structural racism was more closely linked to anti-Black prejudice than prejudice against other people of color. People who denied structural racism were also more likely to endorse stronger beliefs that societal inequality is acceptable and reported fewer intentions to engage in social justice behaviors. There were no similar findings for people who said they ignore race.

Read more here: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/953224

[caltrek]

Speaking of Structural Racism in the United States.

Structural Racism and the Imperative to Eliminate Mental Health Disparities
Ned H. Kalin. M.D.
May 23, 2022

Introduction:

(The American Journal of Psychiatry) There is no question that there are huge inequities in the delivery of mental health care that are related to systemic factors, and there is also no question that structural racism is a major determinant of these inequities. Individuals of color and other minoritized groups disproportionately face interpersonal, societal, and environmental stressors that increase their risk to develop psychiatric disorders, and these factors also impede access to mental health care. The impact of structural racism on mental well-being and mental illness cannot be overstated. As a field we need to commit to taking action to enforce changes at multiple levels, individual and societal, with the goal of eliminating mental health disparities.

As part of this effort, we are very pleased to present this special issue of the Journal that brings together papers that highlight the pervasive negative consequences of structural racism on mental health, the importance of community and system-wide interventions, and proposes mental health inequity research priorities. We also are very pleased to showcase the contributing authors and the concepts and strategies reviewed in their papers aimed at reducing mental health care inequities. It is our intention that this issue will motivate clinicians, educators, and researchers to take actions that will make a difference. Each one of us should be asking, “How can I use my skills, energy, and influence to help reduce the disproportionate mental suffering that is endured by minoritized individuals?”

Read more: https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21100972

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21100970

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21100969

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21101001

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21101000

[weatheriscool]

Speaking of Structural Racism in the United States.

Structural Racism and the Imperative to Eliminate Mental Health Disparities
Ned H. Kalin. M.D.
May 23, 2022

Introduction:

(The American Journal of Psychiatry) There is no question that there are huge inequities in the delivery of mental health care that are related to systemic factors, and there is also no question that structural racism is a major determinant of these inequities. Individuals of color and other minoritized groups disproportionately face interpersonal, societal, and environmental stressors that increase their risk to develop psychiatric disorders, and these factors also impede access to mental health care. The impact of structural racism on mental well-being and mental illness cannot be overstated. As a field we need to commit to taking action to enforce changes at multiple levels, individual and societal, with the goal of eliminating mental health disparities.

As part of this effort, we are very pleased to present this special issue of the Journal that brings together papers that highlight the pervasive negative consequences of structural racism on mental health, the importance of community and system-wide interventions, and proposes mental health inequity research priorities. We also are very pleased to showcase the contributing authors and the concepts and strategies reviewed in their papers aimed at reducing mental health care inequities. It is our intention that this issue will motivate clinicians, educators, and researchers to take actions that will make a difference. Each one of us should be asking, “How can I use my skills, energy, and influence to help reduce the disproportionate mental suffering that is endured by minoritized individuals?”

Read more: https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21100972

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21100970

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21100969

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21101001

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10 ... p.21101000

This is what happens when a people don't take any responsibility for their standards of living. Why expect other people to do everything for you? What I am saying is any area that is majority black needs to have sound and capable government, tax base and care about their infrastructure. This would do more to solve this. Expecting washington dc 2,000 miles away to do it all for you is dumb.

Blacks have 5 times the representation in the media, entertainment and in sports. Our society goes out of its way to support blacks and give them a voice. It is really quite impossible to do everything for them and them do nothing for their own betterment. Like the old saying goes,,you can drag a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

[weatheriscool]

Also don't expect people to accept you when you commit half the murders and crimes in our society and take no responsibility for your actions. Why should we be happy about it? It isn't our fault that we wish for better for ourselves. Time for you to do the same.

[weatheriscool]

A new billionaire has been minted nearly every day during the pandemic
Tami Luhby
By Tami Luhby, CNN
Updated 2:32 PM EDT, Mon May 23, 2022
https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/22/economy/ ... index.html
The Covid-19 pandemic has been good for the wallets of the wealthy.

Some 573 people have joined the billionaire ranks since 2020, bringing the worldwide total to 2,668, according to an analysis released by Oxfam on Sunday. That means a new billionaire was minted about every 30 hours, on average, so far during the pandemic.

The report, which draws on data compiled by Forbes, looks at the rise of inequality over the past two years. It is timed to coincide with the kickoff of the annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, a gathering of some of the wealthiest people and world leaders.

Billionaires have seen their total net worth soar by $3.8 trillion, or 42%, to $12.7 trillion during the pandemic. A large part of the increase has been fueled by strong gains in the stock markets, which was aided by governments injecting money into the global economy to soften the financial blow of the coronavirus.

[BaobabScion]

This is what happens when a people don't take any responsibility for their standards of living. Why expect other people to do everything for you? What I am saying is any area that is majority black needs to have sound and capable government, tax base and care about their infrastructure. This would do more to solve this. Expecting washington dc 2,000 miles away to do it all for you is dumb.

Blacks have 5 times the representation in the media, entertainment and in sports. Our society goes out of its way to support blacks and give them a voice. It is really quite impossible to do everything for them and them do nothing for their own betterment. Like the old saying goes,,you can drag a horse to water but you can't make them drink.

Also don't expect people to accept you when you commit half the murders and crimes in our society and take no responsibility for your actions. Why should we be happy about it? It isn't our fault that we wish for better for ourselves. Time for you to do the same.

So you're anti-trans, anti-gay, and anti-black? Damn, you're 3-for-3. Impressive!

Will, Raklian, she's a keeper.

[SerethiaFalcon]

Lol! I have rarely met a black person that expects the government to do everything for them. In fact, a lot don't trust the government for many varied reasons. People do what they have to do to survive, however. Besides, hyper-individualism is a cultural inheritance from some European cultures with a more American flavor mixed in. African cultures are more community-oriented and collective, as a whole, which is reflected in a lot of black American culture as well (with some American individualism mixed in too). To me, the problems inherent between black Americans and white Americans have always come down to two things, lack of trust (some of that rooted in deeply ingrained cultural bias, power issues, and historical exploitation) and vastly different cultural outlooks (of course, dehumanization is also a serious issue, but can stem from these two things). That's my perspective, anyway. Communication, after all, is a two-way street. If one isn't willing to listen to someone vastly different from ourselves, then how do we expect that same individual or group to listen to us?

I was privileged as a kid to grow up as a minority outside of the US. When you are a minority, and most people don't look like you, sometimes, you learn things. I learned that people are individuals within a collective narrative or culture, some will be good, some will be bad, and most will be in between. There will always be talented and brilliant people within any group, and they won't always show it in the same way as other groups (as in, where you live, how you live, and expectations, all feed into how brilliant people exist in a group, what roles they take on, and what skills they master). Not only that, but history does have an impact on the present, as what was taught in family groups gets passed down from generation to generation. Some things get lost, but deep cultural wounds will affect people for a long, long time. For example, Botswana removed some of the San people from their homeland in the desert. A land that had deep spiritual and ancestral roots for them. When they did this, and of course, did not offer a very nice lifestyle outside of their homeland (poverty, cramped living conditions, etc), the San people started to have problems with drinking and other behaviors that had not been traditionally part of the issues they faced. What I found so striking is the problems mirrored the problems found in so many Native American communities when they were removed from their homelands, their spiritual and ancestral connection to the land being severed by a different culture with different outlooks on life. Those problems and the stress that happens pass down from generation to generation. Stories are told of the hardships, who to trust, who not to trust, etc. This creates a new cultural environment, whether they have to hide who they are or not (as a culture, not how they look), it definitely leads to a high-stress environment. I cannot begin to describe to you how much healthier cultures that have their homelands, and the connection to their ancestral lineage/gravesites, etc, are compared to those that have had that taken from them, in one way or another.

Also, abuse of power, exploitation, and dehumanization affects more than just the people/cultures being victimized. It also creates a culture of stress within the family/lineage of an abuser, especially if the cycle remains unbroken (aka, those who abuse others are more likely to abuse family members too). This is where I believe extremist views are most often born, in a family of dysfunction and violence. With abuse, it can be tricky. If the person/group being abused/exploited remains silent, they survive, but the abuse continues because it wasn't confronted, as there were no consequences to the behavior (and it gets worse and worse typically). If the abused/exploited speak up, there is a risk they won't survive, but also, there is a chance, with enough momentum, for the abuse/exploitation to end. The challenge then is that those victimized take back their personal power/agency and do not repeat what was done to them (this can be a very big ask, however).

[wjfox]

[wjfox]

Britain ended the horror of school shootings after one single massacre

Published May 25, 2022

On March 13, 1996, an ostracized former Boy Scout leader around whom rumors of pedophilia had swirled for years, walked into the gym of Dunblane Primary School and fired at children aged five and six gathered at a gym class.

In minutes, 15 children and one teacher were dead. Another child died later from gunshot wounds. At least 17 others were injured before the attack ended with Thomas Hamilton shooting himself. The Scottish town—and all of Britain—were plunged into mourning. The Queen came and knelt at the school. Teddy bears poured in from all over the world.

Columbine wouldn’t happen for another three years; Sandy Hook was over a decade away. The shooting at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, would not happen for two decades. Yesterday’s shooting of 20 people, mostly children, at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, was nearly 30 years away. For a brief moment, the mass school shooting was a British horror.

Eight days after the shooting, Britain’s parliament convened a tribunal headed by Lord W. Douglas Cullen, a senior Scottish judge at the time, to conduct a public inquiry into the shooting. It opened on May 29 in the Scottish town of Stirling, and sat for 26 days. The entire proceeding was open to the public and recorded in full in shorthand.

https://qz.com/1216653/britain-ended-th ... -massacre/

[caltrek]

Nearly 200 House Republicans Voted Against Supplying Baby Formula – That Is An Outrage
By Tiffanyann Goodson
May 24, 2022

Conclusion:

(Other Words) The House of Representatives just passed a bill to create a $28 million emergency fund to assist the FDA in increasing formula capacity. Stunningly, nearly 200 House Republicans voted against it — and Senate Republicans have signaled they may block it.

Voting against baby formula? This is an outrage. These lawmakers say they’re pro-life. To truly be pro-life, we must be concerned with feeding innocent children and helping struggling families.

My family has some privilege — we have full-time jobs, reliable child care, and a supportive network. In spite of all those advantages, we have just two weeks of food for our baby. My heart aches for families with far fewer resources.

This is part of a broader, systemic problem of our policymakers underinvesting in families. The proposed Build Back Better Act would have provided much more support for families with kids, but 50 Senate Republicans, plus Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, dumped that like it was spoiled milk.

This crisis — which has literally taken food from the mouth of my baby — has awakened a passion in me. It’s made me realize that we can’t be silent anymore. We must call out these lawmakers who won’t stand up for families — and tell them we’ll find new ones if they don’t.

Read more here: https://otherwords.org/200-members-of-c ... -outrage/

[wjfox]

[weatheriscool]

Report Shows FBI Spied on 3.3 Million Americans Without a Warrant, GOP Demands Answers
https://www.theepochtimes.com/report-sh ... lsuccess=1

Top House Republicans are demanding answers from the FBI after court-ordered information came to light showing that the federal agency had collected the information of over 3 million Americans without a warrant.

In a May 25 letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray, Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Mike Turner (R-Ohio) asked Wray to explain why his agency had wiretapped and gathered personal information on over 3.3 million Americans without a warrant (pdf).

Limited authority to gather foreign intelligence information is granted by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Specifically, section 702 of the bill says: “the Attorney General (AG) and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) may jointly authorize the targeting of (i) non-U.S. persons (ii) who are reasonably believed to be outside of the United States (iii) to acquire foreign intelligence information.”

However, this power can grant an expanding circle of possible searches to the FBI and other intel agencies, who can use the same power against American citizens who had any interaction with targeted foreigners.

Historically, insight into how FISA has been used against American citizens has been limited and hidden behind classified reports....

This is sickening. OUr government is truly evil.

[weatheriscool]

Nearly 200 House Republicans Voted Against Supplying Baby Formula – That Is An Outrage
By Tiffanyann Goodson
May 24, 2022

Conclusion:

(Other Words) The House of Representatives just passed a bill to create a $28 million emergency fund to assist the FDA in increasing formula capacity. Stunningly, nearly 200 House Republicans voted against it — and Senate Republicans have signaled they may block it.

Voting against baby formula? This is an outrage. These lawmakers say they’re pro-life. To truly be pro-life, we must be concerned with feeding innocent children and helping struggling families.

My family has some privilege — we have full-time jobs, reliable child care, and a supportive network. In spite of all those advantages, we have just two weeks of food for our baby. My heart aches for families with far fewer resources.

This is part of a broader, systemic problem of our policymakers underinvesting in families. The proposed Build Back Better Act would have provided much more support for families with kids, but 50 Senate Republicans, plus Democrats Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, dumped that like it was spoiled milk.

This crisis — which has literally taken food from the mouth of my baby — has awakened a passion in me. It’s made me realize that we can’t be silent anymore. We must call out these lawmakers who won’t stand up for families — and tell them we’ll find new ones if they don’t.

Read more here: https://otherwords.org/200-members-of-c ... -outrage/

This is bullshit on the part of the republicans. They better have a good excuse for doing so like a poison pill of some sort but as of this moment they haven't said anything about their reasoning. They need to vote and support helping our babies.