AOC claps back after article on her dress: 

'Sequins are a great accessory to universal healthcare'

© Aaron Schwartz

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez trolled the New York Post on Saturday for posting a story about the dress she wore while appearing on "The View" earlier this week, saying the outlet was "just mad that you can look good fighting for working families."

The 30-year-old progressive firebrand wrote that she "rents, borrows and thrifts" her clothes because doing so is environmentally sustainable.

"The Post is just mad that you can look good fighting for working families," she wrote. "Sequins are a great accessory to universal healthcare, don't you agree?"

Yep! I rent, borrow, and thrift my clothes. (It's also environmentally sustainable!)

The Post is just mad that you can look good fighting for working families.

Sequins are a great accessory to universal healthcare, don't you agree? ✨ https://t.co/xdQ65lbpXe- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 22, 2020

The freshman lawmaker was responding to the tabloid's story, which focused on a single critical tweet that called her a "Democratic socialite" for wearing a $580 Rickie Freeman dress on the ABC talk show.

She has previously spoken about how she had to rely on hand-me-downs from friends when she was running for office.

Earlier this week, Ocasio-Cortez celebrated clothing company M.M.LaFleur in an Instagram Story for offering to lend free clothing to women who are candidates in races up and down the ballot.

"When I was running for office (even now!), accessing clothing for the job was a big challenge both logistically and financially," she wrote. "As a candidate, a large part of asking people to vote for you is helping them visualize you on the jobs. As a member, that professionalism helps you challenge subconscious bias."

Ocasio-Cortez made history in 2018 when she ousted incumbent Rep. Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) in the Democratic primary and became the youngest woman elected to Congress that November.

The self-described democratic socialist has since faced immense scrutiny from conservatives and right-leaning publications, particularly over her appearance.

Eddie Scarry, a reporter with the Washington Examiner, in November faced backlash for tweeting out a picture of Ocasio-Cortez from behind in order to criticize her jacket, which he said looked expensive.

"If I walked into Congress wearing a sack, they would laugh & take a picture of my backside," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted in response. "If I walk in with my best sale-rack clothes, they laugh & take a picture of my backside. Dark hates light - that's why you tune it out. Shine bright & keep it pushing."

If I walked into Congress wearing a sack, they would laugh & take a picture of my backside.

If I walk in with my best sale-rack clothes, they laugh & take a picture of my backside.

Dark hates light - that's why you tune it out.

Shine bright & keep it pushing.✨ https://t.co/mRq5wn0v9A- Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 15, 2018

She also fired back at the conservative outlet The Washington Times for publishing an "exclusive" story about the cost of her haircut.

"40 million Americans live in poverty under today's extreme inequality, yet the right-wing want(s) you to blame Democratic socialism for their own moral failures," Ocasio-Cortez wrote. "Our policies, like Medicare for All, advance prosperity for working people."

"They're just mad we look good doing it," she quipped.

Not just bros: Sanders wins with diverse coalition


LAS VEGAS — Put "Bernie Bros" on the back-burner

It's the army of sobrinos and sobrinas — the Spanish words for nephews and nieces — who should strike fear in the hearts of Bernie Sanders' rivals for the Democratic presidential nomination and party elites after he ran up the score among Latino voters in the Nevada caucuses Saturday. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and other Latinx backers of Sanders refer to him fondly as their "tío," or uncle.

Sanders was the choice of 54 percent of Hispanic caucus-goers Saturday on his way to steamrolling to the most convincing victory of the primary season, according to an NBC entrance poll. His closest competitor, former Vice President Joe Biden, racked up 14 percent, with no other candidate cracking double digits.

Those results signaled that the energy Sanders has poured into building a more diverse coalition than his failed 2016 campaign is paying off at just the right time. He can now stake the first claim — less than two weeks before the "Super Tuesday" contests in 14 states — to having won a state where white, Hispanic and black voters are all represented in substantial numbers.

"If you can't put two out of those three together, you should start figuring out your exit plan," Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., said of most of Sanders' rivals — excluding Biden and former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg — in a telephone interview with NBC News.

Gallego added that he is "not surprised" that Sanders performed so well because the candidate and his campaign learned from missteps in 2016 and organized early and effectively in the Latino community.

The outcome among Hispanic voters here could easily portend success for Sanders in delegate-rich California and other heavily Hispanic states and congressional districts coming up on the primary calendar. At the same time, Sanders has closed Biden's lead with African-American voters to 31 percent to 29 percent nationally, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released Friday.

"In Nevada we had just put together a multi-generational, multi-racial coalition which is gonna not only win in Nevada, it's gonna sweep this country," Sanders said at a rally in El Paso, Texas, Saturday night.

For Democratic party elites who oppose Sanders because they detest his brand of progressive politics — he calls himself a Democratic socialist — time may be running out to stop a gathering Sanders storm. He has now won the popular vote in the first three contests, clearly appeals to a cross-section of the party's electorate and is far better organized than the critics who have failed to coalesce behind an alternative candidate.

A Biden campaign official, anticipating a second-place finish here, used similar logic to make the case that the former vice president is best positioned to win the nomination and defeat President Donald Trump.

"Our coalition is clear and it's a coalition that looks like the Democratic Party," the official said on the condition of anonymity. "If Democrats want to choose a nominee who can build the broad coalition we have to build to beat Donald Trump, it's clear that Biden is their candidate."





Slide 1 of 39: U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders addresses his first campaign rally after the Nevada Caucus in El Paso, Texas, U.S. February 22, 2020. REUTERS/Mike SegarNext Slide

Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders addresses his first campaign rally after the Nevada Caucus on Feb. 22 in El Paso, Texas. Sanders wins Democratic presidential caucuses in Nevada.

Biden edged Sanders 34 percent to 28 percent among African American caucus-goers here Saturday, according to the NBC entrance poll, with billionaire Tom Steyer coming in third at 17 percent and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren in fourth at 12 percent.

Sanders was the choice of 30 percent of white caucus-goers, followed by former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg at 19 percent. Biden registered fifth most-popular with white caucus-goers, trailing the 14 percent apiece for Warren and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.

Now, Sanders and the rest will head to South Carolina — via a handful of other states — for the Feb. 29 primary there. That's the last contest before the March 3 mega-primary, and it's the first state where black voters are expected to constitute a majority of the electorate. Biden was once seen as an overwhelming favorite in South Carolina, but Sanders' strength has put the state in play according to recent polling.

Most Democratic Party insiders once dismissed the idea that the combination of a committed bloc of Sanders voters and parity among other candidates would prevent any contender from winning the nomination outright by accumulating a majority of delegates before this summer's convention. Now, many of Sanders' critics see that scenario as their best hope of derailing Sanders.

In Nevada, the cross-section of support for him, especially among the Latinx voters to whom he has paid so much attention since his 2016 defeat, suggests that he's pretty much on the track he envisioned for his campaign.

Greyhound to Stop Allowing Border Patrol Agents on Its Buses Without Warrants

Greyhound Lines will no longer allow Border Patrol agents to conduct immigration checks on its buses without warrants, the company announced on Friday — one week after a leaked government memo revealed that agents could not board buses without consent.  

© Nicholas K. Geranios/Associated Press Customs and Border Protection agents boarding a Greyhound bus in Spokane, Wash., this month.

The memo appeared to take Greyhound by surprise. For years, the company, the largest operator of intercity buses in America, had been allowing border agents to board its vehicles without warrants, citing a law that it said it didn’t agree with

“C.B.P. searches have negatively impacted both our customers and our operations,” the company said in 2018, referring to Customs and Border Protection, the Border Patrol’s parent agency. “Greyhound does not coordinate with C.B.P., nor do we support these actions.”

But in the leaked memo, which was first reported by The Associated Press, the Border Patrol chief confirmed that agents were prohibited from boarding buses and questioning passengers without warrants or the company’s consent.

“When transportation checks occur on a bus at non-checkpoint locations, the agent must demonstrate that he or she gained access to the bus with the consent of the company’s owner or one of the company’s employees,” Chief Carla Provost wrote in the memo, which was dated Jan. 28.

As part of President Trump’s drive to crack down on illegal immigration, passengers aboard buses and trains on domestic routes have increasingly been subjected to immigration checks, and Border Patrol officers have been found working without permission on private property and setting up checkpoints up to 100 miles from the border.

The company said that it would place stickers on its buses “clearly displaying our position,” and that it planned to send “a letter to the Department of Homeland Security formally stating we do not consent to warrantless searches on our buses and in terminal areas that are not open to the general public.”

The changes were to take effect immediately. The American Civil Liberties Union applauded Greyhound’s announcement.

“We are pleased to see Greyhound clearly communicate that it does not consent to racial profiling and harassment on its buses,” said Andrea Flores, deputy director for policy in the A.C.L.U.’s equality division.

“Greyhound is sending a message that it prioritizes the communities it serves,” she added. “We will continue to push other transportation companies to follow its leadership.” Other bus carriers including Jefferson Lines and MTRWestern do not provide consent to warrantless immigration enforcement checks of their buses, according to their websites.

In a statement on Saturday, a Customs and Border Protection official said that while the agency “does not comment on materials asserted to be leaked internal memos, management regularly disseminates information to reinforce existing protocols.”

The official did not directly address Greyhound’s change but added that “enforcement operations away from the immediate border are performed consistent with law and in direct support of immediate border enforcement efforts, and such operations function as a means of preventing smuggling and other criminal organizations from exploitation of existing transportation hubs to travel further into the United States.”

In its statement on Friday, Greyhound referred to a “policy change” at the border agency, although it wasn’t clear that the agency had in fact altered any of its policies.

“We welcome the clarity that this change in protocol brings, as it aligns with our previously stated position, which is that we do not consent to warrantless searches,” the company said. “We are providing drivers and terminal employees with updated training regarding this policy change.”

Last year, Bob Ferguson, the attorney general of Washington State, said that Greyhound’s practice of allowing searches of its vehicles at a train station and bus terminal in Spokane fell “harshly on passengers of color, who are reportedly singled out by C.B.P. for questioning and detention.”

A 2018 “Transportation Not Deportation” petition that collected over 200,000 signatures demanded that Greyhound stop allowing Border Patrol agents on its buses without a warrant or probable cause.

The aggressive immigration enforcement tactics taking place nationwide are not limited to buses. In a widely circulated video recorded in El Paso last week, Border Patrol agents can be seen using a Taser to subdue and apprehend a man in a Burger King restaurant.
Michael Levenson contributed reporting.o Stop Allowing Border Patrol Agents on Its Buses Without Warrants

U.S. Supreme Court to decide winner in case of gas pipeline vs. Appalachian Trail

Gregory S. Schneider, Robert Barnes

The Atlantic Coast Pipeline begins in West Virginia and is planned to cross some of the most mountainous scenery in central Virginia before completing its 600-mile path in North Carolina.

© Norm Shafer for The Washington Post Lynn Cameron and Gregory Buppert look west along the Appalachian Trail where the Atlantic Coast Pipeline would be tunneled.

Work in Virginia has been halted for more than a year as the builders contend with a host of setbacks handed down by federal courts. None is more crucial than the question of whether the U.S. Forest Service has authority to grant the pipeline right of way under the Appalachian Trail in the George Washington National Forest.

Judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit threw out a Forest Service permit in December 2018, saying federal law prohibits any agency from allowing a pipeline on “lands in the National Park System.” That includes the trail, the judges said.

Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post

The pipeline’s builders, led by Dominion Energy, appealed to the high court, saying the ruling could create an impenetrable wall along the trail’s course from Georgia to Maine.

“Simply put, there is no basis in any federal statute to conclude that Congress intended to convert the Appalachian Trail into a 2,200-mile barrier separating critical natural resources from the eastern seaboard,” lawyer Paul Clement wrote in a brief on behalf of the pipeline.

The plaintiffs note that pipelines already cross the trail at 34 locations.

The Trump administration has weighed in on behalf of the project, with Solicitor General Noel Francisco arguing that while the National Park Service administers the trail, the land beneath it is controlled by the Forest Service.

Environmentalists fighting the construction argue that no pipeline has been granted a right of way across the trail on federal land since it became part of the park system. Other crossings are on private or state lands or on easements that predate federal ownership.

Trying to separate the land from the trail is an “elusively metaphysical distinction” that “contradicts the government’s own long-standing approach to administering the Trail,” according to a brief from lawyer Michael K. Kellogg, who will argue for the environmental groups in Monday’s hearing.

Virginia Attorney General Mark R. Herring (D) has filed a brief on behalf of the project’s opponents, arguing that the pipeline threatens “several of Virginia’s most cherished places.” Herring also questions whether there is any economic need for the pipeline, noting that “the demand for natural gas will remain flat or decrease for the foreseeable future and can be met with existing infrastructure.”

The high court’s ruling could determine the fate of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a controversial project that has drawn national attention from environmentalists, including former vice president Al Gore. Approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in 2017, the pipeline initially was projected to cost about $5 billion but has ballooned in price with multiple delays.

Fourth Circuit judges struck down a number of the project’s permits for being awarded hastily and improperly. Earlier this year, the court threw out a state permit for a pumping station in a historic African American community in Buckingham County, Va., saying the builders failed to consider the environmental justice impact.

The ruling about the Appalachian Trail crossing had three other elements that are not part of the appeal to the high court. The judges also said the permit didn’t comply with mandatory standards for protecting soil, water and wildlife; that the agency didn’t take a hard enough look at landslide and erosion risk; and that the Forest Service rejected alternate routes without fully analyzing them.

Federal law requires considering the feasibility of other routes before approving a pipeline crossing in a national forest.

A spokeswoman for Dominion said the company is working with federal agencies on all three of those elements and is confident it can address them.




a field with a mountain in the background: A view west along the Appalachian Trail at Cedar Cliffs.Next Slide
Full screen

1/4 SLIDES © Norm Shafer for The Washington Post

A view west along the Appalachian Trail at Cedar Cliffs.

The site where the pipeline would meet the trail is west of Charlottesville on the edge of George Washington National Forest. The builders want to tunnel through a mountain some 700 feet below the level of the trail, which runs along the ridgetop and intertwines with the Blue Ridge Parkway.

“The pipeline will be completely invisible from that crossing,” Dominion spokeswoman Ann Nallo said. “This project, even from the start, has always been designed with the environment in mind.”

Opponents concede that the crossing itself won’t physically affect the Appalachian Trail but say the pipeline and its long approach to the mountain will change the landscape.

Just north of the tunnel, the trail emerges onto a rocky outcrop at Cedar Cliffs, with a spectacular view of the Shenandoah Valley far below. The pipeline route would march across the valley, threading past farms and villages and then slicing through an unbroken tract of the national forest.

Even though it’s underground, the pipeline would have a 50-foot-wide, cleared path along its length.

“It will be very visible,” said Lynn Cameron, a board member for the Virginia Wilderness Committee, one of the plaintiffs in the case.

“It’s hard to separate the Appalachian Trail from the scenic beauty that hikers come here to see,” she said, standing on a lichen-covered rock and gesturing down at the bare stretch of forest, streaked with pockets of evergreens. “Some of the best tracks of Appalachian Trail are through national forest land. That’s what makes this route particularly painful.”

Greg Buppert, a lawyer with the Southern Environmental Law Center, accused Dominion of pushing the approval process too aggressively. “This is a protected landscape,” he said. “I think the problems we’re seeing with the pipeline are self-inflicted problems.”

Nallo countered that the company has gone to great lengths to satisfy environmental concerns. The pipeline’s pathway will be covered with grass and native plants, she said, adding that much of the landscape is already altered by human activity.

“I visited the trail a couple of times,” Nallo said. “You’re very close to the Blue Ridge Parkway at that point. When the leaves were down, I could see some of the houses and the roads down in the valley. . . . I think it’s a good example of how we try to achieve that balance as humans of being able to enjoy nature but being able to use those areas.”

The consolidated cases are U.S. Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Assn. and Atlantic Coast Pipeline LLC v. Cowpasture River Assn.

gregory.schneider@washpost.com

Jewish Group Demands MSNBC's Chris Matthews Apologize for Sanders Remark

Christina Zhao 

IfNotNow, an American Jewish progressive activist group, called on MSNBC host Chris Matthews to apologize for comparing Senator Bernie Sanders' Nevada caucuses victory to the Nazi invasion of France in 1940.

© Ethan Miller/Getty Chris Matthews of MSNBC waits to go on the air inside the spin room at Bally's Las Vegas Hotel & Casino after the Democratic presidential primary debate on February 19, 2020 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

As Nevada caucuses results began rolling in on Saturday night, Matthews, the host of Hardball, criticized Sanders' early lead, claiming that Republicans would drop opposition research on the progressive candidate that would "kill him" if he won the 2020 Democratic nomination.

He then compared the senator's inevitable win to Hitler's invasion of France: "I was reading last night about the fall of France in the summer of 1940 and the general, Reynaud, calls up Churchill and says, 'It's over.' And Churchill says, 'How can that be? You've got the greatest army in Europe. How can it be over?' He said, 'It's over.'"

Sanders won the caucuses with 47 percent of the vote, reported The Associated Press, solidifying his front-runner status in the Democratic field.

"The second time in as many weeks that an MSNBC commentator has used Nazi comparisons when talking about @BernieSanders, a Jewish candidate with family that was murdered in the Holocaust," IfNotNow tweeted on Saturday, following Matthew's remarks. "We demand an apology from @HardballChris—and we're still waiting for @chucktodd's apology."

The second time in as many weeks that an MSNBC commentator has used Nazi comparisons when talking about @BernieSanders, a Jewish candidate with family that was murdered in the Holocaust.

We demand an apology from @HardballChris — and we’re still waiting for @chucktodd’s apology. https://t.co/XTPoPdRHoP— IfNotNow🔥 (@IfNotNowOrg) February 22, 2020
Click to expand

Chuck Todd On MSNBC Reads A Quote Comparing Bernie Sanders Supporters to 'Brownshirts'

Newsweek reached out to IfNotNow and NBC for comment, but did not receive a response in time for publication.

Matthews' remarks quickly drew considerable backlash online, with rights groups, journalists and supporters of the senator pointing out that Sanders, who is Jewish, lost family members during the Holocaust.

"Chris Mathews has been generous to me on a number of occasions, even blurbing my book. However, his constant references to political violence and today Nazism to describe Bernie Sanders campaign is beyond the pale. @HardballChris must resign or be fired from@MSNBC," filmmaker Arun Chaudhary wrote.

"@HardballChris just compared Bernie Sanders and his movement to Hitler and the Nazis on national television," journalist Walker Bragman added. "Sanders, who is Jewish and lost family in the Holocaust, is on track to be the nation's first Jewish president. Enough with this. Matthews should not be on the air."

Matthews' comments were not the first time an MSNBC host sparked backlash this month over remarks said about the Sanders campaign. During a segment ahead of the New Hampshire primary, anchor Chuck Todd drew Twitter fire for quoting a column that described Sanders' supporters as a "digital brownshirt brigade."

After he quoted an article by conservative outlet The Bulwark comparing Sanders' supporters to Nazi paramilitaries, the hashtag #FireChuckTodd began trending on Twitter, with some supporters of the candidate calling the segment "indefensible."

How love evolved to favour cooperation over the instinct to survive
It began with maternal love – the first kind of love, from which all others evolved.
 

Nick Longrich, The Conversation

Why do we love? At best, it’s a mixed blessing, at worst, a curse. Love makes otherwise intelligent people act like fools. It causes heartache and grief. Lovers break our hearts, family sometimes drive us mad, friends can let us down.

But we’re hard-wired to bond with each other. That suggests the capacity for love evolved, that natural selection favoured caring for one another. Fossils tell us that love evolved hundreds of millions of years ago, helping our mammalian ancestors survive in the time of the dinosaurs.

Humans have peculiarly complex emotional lives. Romantic love, a long-term bonding, is unusual among mammals. We’re also unusual in forming long-term relationships with unrelated individuals through friendships.
The original love

But humans and all other mammals share one kind of love, the bond between a mother and her offspring. The universality of this attachment suggests that it’s the original, ancestral form of bonding – the first kind of love, from which all others evolved.

Evidence of parent-offspring bonding appears around 200 million years ago, in the latest Triassic and earliest Jurassic periods. Fossils of Kayentatherium, a Jurassic proto-mammal from Arizona, preserve a mother who died protecting her 38 tiny babies. For this behaviour to exist, the instincts of both mother and offspring first had to evolve.

In primitive animals, such as lizards, parents aren’t exactly parental. A mother Komodo dragon abandons her eggs, leaving hatchlings to fend for themselves. If she ever meets her young, she is likely to try to eat them: komodo dragons are cannibals. The young will instinctively run for their lives upon meeting her – and should.

Guarding hatchlings requires that the mother evolve instincts to see her small, helpless offspring as things to protect, not easy prey. Meanwhile, the offspring must evolve to see mum as a source of security and warmth, not fear.

Kayentatherium‘s fossilised mother-child association implies that this instinctive evolution had already happened. But Kayentatherium probably wasn’t a doting mother. With 38 kids, she probably couldn’t feed them, or spend much time on them.

In Welsh rocks laid down in the Late Triassic, we find evidence of more advanced parental care. Here, the proto-mammal Morganucodon shows mammal-style tooth replacement. Instead of endlessly replacing teeth from birth to death – as in lizards and sharks – Morganucodon was toothless as a baby, developed baby teeth, then shed those for adult teeth.

This replacement pattern is associated with lactation. Babies that suckle milk don’t need teeth. So Morganucodon mothers made milk. Providing more care to her young, Morganucodon probably invested heavily in a few offspring, like modern mammals, and would have evolved a correspondingly stronger bond with them. The young, completely dependent on the mother for food, would have developed a stronger emotional attachment as well.  

Credit: Pikrepo

It’s at this point in mammal history that our mammal ancestors stopped seeing each other as lizards did – exclusively in terms of danger, food and sex, feeling only the primitive emotions of fear, hunger and lust. Instead, they started to care for one another. Over millions of years, they increasingly began to bond, to protect and seek protection, exchange bodily warmth, groom one another, to play with, teach and learn from each other.

Mammals evolved the ability to form relationships. Once they did, this adaptation could be used in other contexts. Mammals could form relationships as family and friends in sophisticated social groups: elephant herds, monkey troops, killer whale pods, dog packs, human tribes. And in some species, males and females formed pair bonds.

Romantic love is a recent evolutionary development, associated with males helping females care for children. In most mammals, males are absentee fathers, contributing genes and nothing else to their offspring. In our closest relatives, chimpanzees, paternal care is minimal.

In a few species, including beavers, wolves, some bats, some voles and Homo sapiens, pairs form long-term bonds to cooperatively raise children. Pair bonding evolved sometime after our ancestors split from chimps, six million to seven million years ago – probably before the split between humans and Neanderthals.
Love in our DNA

We can guess that Neanderthals formed long-term relationships, because their DNA is in us. That implies that Neanderthals and humans didn’t simply mate. We had children, who themselves became parents and grandparents, and so on. For the results of those unions to not just survive, but thrive and integrate into their tribe, mixed children were likely to have been born to parents who cared for them – and each other.

Not all encounters between our species were peaceful or pretty, but neither were they entirely violent. Neanderthals were different from Homo sapiens, but enough like us that we could love them, and they, us – even coming from different tribes. A love story worthy of Jane Austen, literally written into our species’ DNA.

There’s an adaptive benefit to love. Today, the ecosystem is dominated by animals with parental care. Mammals and birds, and social insects including ants, wasps, bees and termites, all of which care for their young, dominate terrestrial ecosystems. Humans are the dominant terrestrial animal on Earth.

Parental care is adaptive by itself, but by teaching animals to form relationships, it also paved the way for the evolution of sociality and cooperation on a larger scale. Parental care in wood roaches, for example, led one lineage, termites, to evolve vast family groups, or colonies, that literally reshape the landscape.

Ants, forming up to 25% of the biomass of some habitats, likely evolved coloniality in the same way. Evolution can be violently competitive, but the ability to care and form relationships allowed for cooperative groups, which became effective competitors against other groups and species.

Caring helps us cooperate and cooperation helps us compete. Humans can be selfish and destructive. But we’ve dominated the planet only because an unparalleled ability to care for one another – for partners, children, families, friends, fellow humans – allowed cooperation on a scale never before seen in the history of life.

Nick Longrich, Senior Lecturer in Evolutionary Biology and Paleontology, University of Bath.

This article first appeared on The Conversation.Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+.

Mutual Aid by Peter Kropotkin
https://archive.org/details/mutualaid01krop/page/n9/mode/2up

Topics Anarchism, Political Science, Social Movement Theory, Philosophy

Collection solidarity revolutionary center; 

Language English

To understand the nature and value of Kroptkin's work, one must realize several things about him. In the first place, he was a noted physical geographer, as well as a trained agriculturist, and was widely read in biology and sociology. In the second place he was a lifelong revolutionary and a communist-anarchist. Both these facts directed and determined his principal book, "Mutual Aid,"

 

HEARD EN PASSANT 
DAVID CORN (MOTHER JONES) 
ON AM JOY MSNBC 2/23/2020 
YEAR OF THE RAT 

THE AMERICAN VOTER GETS TO CHOOSE BETWEEN:
  
AUTOCRACY, 

PLUTOCRACY 

OR SOCIAL DEMOCRACY

DEFINITIONS OF THESE TERMS CAN BE FOUND IN 


JACK LONDON'S IRON HEEL 1907 
A CLASSIC AMERICAN NOVEL OF CLASS WAR

 

1917 VERSION SMALL PRESS EDITION

https://archive.org/details/ironhe00lond/page/n11/mode/2up

‘Alternative cover’ landfill bill moves forward; ADEM says coal ash no longer permitted material.

LONG READ GOOD INFO ON LANDFILLS PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIVISM

By MARY SELL, Alabama Daily News  WBRC

© Provided by Birmingham WBRC 

MONTGOMERY, Ala. - The Alabama House of Representatives on Thursday approved legislation that clarifies landfills’ ability to use materials other than dirt to cover new garbage each day. Previously approved “alternative cover” materials have included shredded vehicle components from scrapped cars, contaminated soil and coal ash.

The Alabama Department of Environmental Management said Thursday that it no longer allows the use of coal ash as cover and while a Walker County landfill still has a permit to use it, it soon will not.

Sponsor Rep. Alan Baker, R-Brewton, said House Bill 140 is needed to codify what ADEM has allowed for about three decades.

“It would be up to ADEM to decide in permits what covers are allowed,” Baker said on the House floor.

Federal Environmental Protection Agency regulations say landfill operators must cover disposed solid waste with six inches of earthen material at the end of each operating day for safety and health reasons.

The EPA also says approval of alternative covers is allowed by directors of state environmental agencies if the landfill operator “demonstrates that the alternative material and thickness control disease vectors, fires, odors, blowing litter and scavenging without presenting a threat to human health and the environment.”

But late last year, some landfills had to stop using the alternatives after communities near two sites filed a lawsuit that argued ADEM wasn’t making landfills demonstrate the effectiveness of their covers.

The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals ruled in October that ADEM should not have allowed the alternatives, the Associated Press reported. The court was responding to a lawsuit filed by people who live near Arrowhead Landfill in Perry County and Stone’s Throw Landfill in Tallapoosa County.

The lawsuit claimed that the use of waste covers including tarps has led to a foul smell and vermin around landfills. The judges overturned a lower court that dismissed the lawsuit.

Current state law defines a sanitary landfill as a “controlled area of land upon which solid waste is deposited and is compacted and covered with compacted earth each day as deposited…”

House Bill 140 now allows for alternative coverings besides just compacted earth on the landfills.

It was approved by the House 102-0 on Thursday and now moves to the Senate.

Rep. Kyle South, R-Fayette, asked on the House floor Tuesday about the possibility of biosolids, treated sewage sludge, as cover. The Big Sky Environment Landfill in western Jefferson County is in South’s district. Several years ago, it was accepting biosolids from out of state. Referred to as the “poop train,” the waste from New York and New Jersey generated numerous complaints.

Baker said “zero” landfills were permitted to use biosolids as cover.

“Well, I encourage you to help me keep an eye out for that and hopefully it will stay at zero,” South said.

Several Birmingham area Democrats voiced concern for the bill early in the week and ADEM’s oversight of landfills, but voted for the amended version.

Rep. A. J. McCampbell, D-Demopolis, agreed with the changes that were made to Baker’s bill.

“I am appreciative that this has been a bipartisan effort to come up with legislation that will not only protect our environment but still allow the business community and waste disposal community to still provide the needed services and not fill up our landfills as quickly,” McCampbell said.

The bill was debated for about an hour earlier this week before being carried over to Thursday, giving supporters time to work on an amendment that specified alternative covers that “shall be approved by the Department of Environmental Management in compliance with federal law and United States Environmental Protection Agency rules or guidance to achieve a level of performance equal to or greater than earthen cover material.”

That amendment seemed to satisfy Democrats, who earlier in the week expressed opposition to the bill.

On Tuesday, House members voted down an amendment from Rep. Pebblin Warren, D-Tuskegee, that would have required public hearings before an alternative cover is approved and prohibited the use of coal ash.

The advocacy group Conservation Alabama had lobbied against Baker’s bill and had multiple concerns, including the health impacts on neighborhoods when nearby landfills use alternative covers.

On Thursday, Conservation Alabama Executive Director Tammy Monistere told Alabama Daily News the group is pleased with language added to the bill to specify alternative covers have to be “equal or greater” than earthen cover.

"We definitely feel like it was a positive amendment,” Monistere said.

While she said she wishes a ban on coal ash as cover had been added to the bill, Monistere said she was glad to see ADEM publicly say it’s being phased out.

Coal combustion residuals, commonly known as coal ash, are byproducts of the combustion of coal at power plants by electric utilities and independent power producers, according to the EPA. Coal ash contains contaminants like mercury, cadmium and arsenic associated with cancer and various other serious health effects, according to the agency.

‘Dirt poor’

Last year, the TimesDaily reported that the Court of Civil Appeals ruling meant the Colbert County Landfill could no longer use paper waste, or sludge, from a nearby paper plant as cover dirt.

“We got several tons daily, it kept our garbage from moving,” landfill manager Mike Shewbart told Alabama Daily News this week.

The paper sludge was trucked in daily and was easier to use than earth, especially in rainy weather like the areas experienced recently.

“It’s not dirt, it’s mud,” Shewbart said. “(Paper waste) allows us to cover in wet weather.”

Shewbart said the sludge is also applied to crop land and pastures in the area.

Some landfills are “dirt poor,” not having access to a lot of earth to use on a daily basis. That’s not the case at the Colbert County landfill, but the paper byproduct was going into the landfill everyday as garbage, Shewbart said, so it made sense to use it as cover.

He said the landfill hasn’t considered any other alternatives.

“We’ve been very blessed with a lot of sludge , so that helps us out,” Shewbart.

State Rep. Phillip Pettus, R-Green Hill, said he was initially concerned about the Baker’s bill, but supports it after talking to ADEM staff this week.

He said most of the alternative covers are tarps. Using them keeps six inches of material out of landfills each day.

And regulations say dirt must cover landfills at the end of each week.

“In the long run, they still have to cover it,” Pettus said.

Lynn Battle, ADEM's external affairs chief, told Alabama Daily news that when a landfill wants to use an alternative cover, it sends the department a permit modification request, including a justification for the change. The department’s approval process includes research on the material and whether it’s used elsewhere and a decision is issued based on the material’s ability to meet requirements like controlling odor and disease vectors and holding waste in place.

Battle said the approval process won’t change under Baker’s bill.

Advanced Disposal has five landfills in Alabama and while at least one, Turkey Trot Landfill in Washington County, had been permitted for coal ash but never used it as cover, Gerald Allen, Georgia-based Advanced Disposal South region landfill manager said.

He said most Advanced Disposal sites use 50’ by 50’ tarps, like patching a roof, at the end of the work day. The next morning, they’re picked up and more garbage is put down.

“You still have to cover with earth at the end of the work week,” Allen said.

Advanced Disposal owns the Stone’s Throw site in Tallassee, which was part of the lawsuit settled last year. That landfill was in 2015 named ADEM’s landfill of the year.

But Phyllis Gosa said her family and others have been fighting that site for years. Gosa doesn’t live in the area anymore, but her brother and his children and grandchildren are near it and smell it from their property.

“There is a sweet, chemical smell that’s nauseating,” Gosa said. “… My brother has a granddaughter who’s 2, she’s never smelled clean air.”

Gosa, who is black, said her family doesn’t want to leave the property that they can trace back to the 1870s and ancestors who had been slaves.

“That is our inheritance, because they understood the value of property***,” Gosa said.

Alabama Daily News reporter Caroline Beck contributed to this report.

Copyright 2020 WBRC. All rights reserved.

***What is Property? 
An Inquiry into the Principle of Right and of Government
by Pierre Joseph Proudhon
Publication date 1840
Topics Mutualism
Language English

Proudhon believed that the common conception of property conflated two distinct components which, once identified, demonstrated the difference between property used to further tyranny and property used to protect liberty. He argued that the result of an individual's labor which is currently occupied or used is a legitimate form of property. Thus, he opposed unused land being regarded as property, believing that land can only be rightfully possessed by use or occupation (which he called "possession"). As an extension of his belief that legitimate property (possession) was the result of labor and occupation, he argued against such institutions as interest on loans and rent.

The Oreo Workers Trump Betrayed

Union member Michael Smith stands outside Chicago’s Mondelēz snack 

factory before starting his 11 p.m. shift on Dec. 20, 2019. Smith toured 

the United States on the union’s behalf to explain the harm done by 

companies offshoring jobs. (Photo by Meredith Goldberg)

FEATURES » FEBRUARY 18, 2020

The Oreo Workers Trump Betrayed

Trump used these workers to win the White House. 

Their union has fought a losing battle against outsourcing ever since.

BY STEPHEN FRANKLIN

600 Mondelēz workers had been laid off—half the plant. In job-hungry Chicago neighborhoods, the union plant, with an average $27 wage, had been an oasis.
CHICAGO—Some labor struggles can feel like long, dramatic sagas: unexpected twists, broken hopes, valiant attempts to overcome unyielding giants. Michael Smith knows this tale well as a member of the small, beleaguered Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union, BCTGM.

Smith lost his delivery job of 15 years in the massive 2008 DHL Express layoff, then fell into debt, lost his house, and skimped by on unemployment checks and any work he could find. He finally landed a $25-an-hour job on Chicago’s South Side in 2010, with pension and healthcare benefits, on a factory line at snack-foods company Mondelēz International (known at the time as Kraft Foods). The job was a union one, with BCTGM.


But Smith again found himself in the crosshairs of a massive layoff six years later, as Mondelēz announced it was shifting 600 jobs to a new factory, with far lower wages, in Mexico. At 58, Smith had four children, bills for prostate cancer treatments, and slim prospects for finding another decent factory job in Chicago. So when BCTGM launched a public campaign to pressure Mondelēz into bringing the jobs back, Smith agreed to become a spokesperson, and the union offered him a modest stipend. Smith could have signed up for federally funded job training instead, but he wanted to fight the union fight.

Smith and BCTGM have now been battling the $26 billion global behemoth for nearly four years. Back in 2016, presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both briefly took up the cause. Meanwhile, Mondelēz has sent hundreds of union bakery jobs to Mexico and dealt a blow to the union’s remaining 2,000 members by ending their guaranteed pension plan.


BCTGM has suffered for years: Factory workers in Billings, Mont., joined a nationwide BCTGM strike in November 2012 in response to unilateral contract concessions imposed by Hostess in bankruptcy court. In response to the strike, Hostess shut down all its plants and laid off 18,500 workers. (Photo courtesy of BCTGM)

As a union, BCTGM has suffered. Automation, non-union shops, plant closures and offshoring in the bakery and confectionery industries have shrunk the union’s ranks from 115,000 members in 2002 to 66,000 in 2018.

Mondelēz, for its part, has been doing just fine. Most consumers know the company for its Nabisco products: Oreos, Ritz, Triscuits and more. After the snack giant spun off from Kraft Foods in 2012, it turned steady profits, returning $2.9 billion to its shareholders in 2014 as then-CEO Irene Rosenfeld took a 50% pay increase, to $21 million. To meet shareholder demand for continuing profits, Rosenfeld then embarked on an “aggressive cost-cutting plan.” Since 2015, the company has been shuttering plants and trimming labor costs.

In May 2015, BCTGM received a jolting offer from the company: Mondelēz would consider $130 million in equipment upgrades at the 62-year-old Chicago plant if the union accepted $46 million in annual wage and benefit cuts—a 60% cut in pay and benefits, the union calculated. If the union refused, the investment and jobs would go to a new multi-million-dollar plant in Mexico.

The union refused, hoping to deal with the issue when company-wide contract talks began in February 2016. Then, Mondelēz “stonewalled” on providing “cost comparisons” and information about the Mexico plant, says BCTGM International Strategic Campaign Coordinator Ron Baker. “There was no negotiation,” Baker recalls. (Mondelēz spokesperson Laurie Guzzinati says that all “valid requests for information” received a response “within a reasonable timeframe.”)

Mondelēz began layoffs in March 2016, saying the union hadn’t offered a proposal.

A veteran of United Mine Workers of America’s long battles with coal behemoths, Baker doubted that negotiations could convince Mondelēz to stay in Chicago—but he believed public pressure could draw sympathy over the loss suffered by workers at a plant that makes the Oreo, a truly iconic American snack.

Indeed, Trump had repeatedly brought up the Oreo saga as part of his campaign rhetoric about offshoring jobs. “I’m not eating Oreos anymore,” Trump said in New Hampshire in September 2015. “Nabisco is closing their plant, a big plant in Chicago, and they’re moving it to Mexico.” The plant remains open (it had never planned to close), but about half of its jobs were moved.

Donald Trump swears off Oreos at a presidential campaign

 event in Rochester, N.H., Sept. 17, 2015.

 (Photo by Darren McCollester/Getty Images)

When Mondelēz began its first round of 277 layoffs in March 2016, BCTGM stepped up its boycott campaign against Mexican-made Mondelēz products, begun months earlier, and opened a makeshift office across from the factory. The union was counting on publicity from the 2016 presidential campaigns.

Clinton visited the union’s campaign office that March, meeting with Michael Smith and other workers, then with Rosenfeld, reportedly to urge a halt to the move. Nothing changed.

The union sent Smith and others across the United States to meetings, public rallies and media interviews to talk about the harm done by prosperous companies seeking cheaper labor overseas. At a June 2016 Democratic Party platform committee meeting in Washington, D.C., Smith appealed: “I am not a number, nor [is] my family, nor my neighbors, nor my coworkers … We are, however, victims of [the] global snatch-and-grab that has gutted our community.”


In visits to 25 college campuses, BCTGM reps urged students to boycott Mexican-made Mondelēz products and have their schools do the same (though the union is not sure whether any schools did). More than 280 U.S. religious leaders signed a letter asking Mondelēz to stop shipping jobs outside the United States. The boycott made headlines and the rounds on social media, though some critics pointed to the limited success of such efforts and the xenophobic potential of “buy American” rhetoric.

After Trump became president, the union was optimistic he would take up the fight from the White House. In 2017, BCTGM reached out to Trump directly but received no reply, not even a tweet. Ron Baker says Trump has done nothing to help the union since 2016.

The 2016 job loss landed like a hammer. By summer, 600 Mondelēz workers had been laid off—half the plant—though the company did begin callbacks to fill openings created by retirements, per the union contract, and kept the process in place after the contract expired, according to a company spokesperson.

According to the union, the majority of workers at the plant were over 40, and many came from families that had worked for generations at the massive Southwest Side Chicago factory, which was built in the 1950s and employed up to 4,000 workers in its heyday. In job-hungry Chicago neighborhoods, the union plant, with an average $27 wage, had been an oasis. Manufacturing, once a driver of Chicago’s economy, accounted for about 18% of the city’s jobs in 1994 and only 10% in 2017. Chicago’s Black communities were hit especially hard: The percentage of workers in factory jobs dropped from almost 30% in 1960 to 6.5% in 2017, while unemployment more than doubled, to 20%. Two-thirds of the laid-off Mondelēz workers were people of color.

Lisa Peatry landed a job at Mondelēz in 2013, after four different layoffs and closings, including the Kool-Aid plant that sent some work to Mexico in 2002. She was 50, living on her own after raising three children. She liked her job on the production lines because they were fast and she appreciated her coworkers. “There was a diversity of races and everyone got along,” she says. Peatry was laid off in March 2016. Unable to keep up with rent, she lost her home and has been staying with a relative.

Eventually, Peatry found a factory job at $14 an hour—a job that often left her crying nightly from its difficulty and the treatment she received from bosses—and then a better job at $18. She still wanted to return to her $25.43-an-hour job at Mondelēz, but the company stopped its recalls, stranding Peatry and about 100 others on the recall list.

After being laid off, former Mondelēz worker Salvador Ortiz, 49, signed up for English classes and hoped to do better than friends, who were finding $11-an-hour jobs. Talking about his future one day in May 2016, in the living room of a comfortable bungalow not far from the plant, his wife cried, saying their middle-class dream was over. Ortiz feared losing his house and car. More than a year later, Ortiz was recalled back to the plant, but had suffered financially, getting by on unemployment checks and $14-an-hour jobs.

When Michael Smith was called back to Mondelēz in March 2018, he found the working conditions had changed for the worse. Smith was on mandatory overtime almost daily, sometimes working a double shift, getting only four or five hours of sleep and never knowing when he could make a doctor’s appointment. Smith felt the company was in disarray. He was now running an oven, a new job for him that was uncomfortable because of the high temperatures. “It’s 120 degrees and it’s like I’m sitting in the oven,” he tells In These Times. (Guzzinati says mandatory overtime may be required more than once weekly, to accommodate workload.)

Lisa Peatry enjoyed working on the production lines at Mondelēz

—for the pay, but also the diverse community. After Mondelēz 

offshored her job in March 2016, she was unable to pay rent, 

and lost her home. (Photo by Meredith Goldberg)​

In May 2018, just over two years after the union contract expired, Mondelēz imposed part of its benefits cuts, switching Smith and his coworkers’ retirement benefits from a guaranteed pension to a 401(k) account. Mondelēz honored existing pensions but pulled its 2,000 remaining union bakery workers out of BCTGM’s multiemployer pension fund, committing to instead pay an early withdrawal fee of $560 million over 20 years. Mondelēz told workers it was thinking about their future: The multiemployer plan could collapse by 2030, the company warned.

But the union sees it as just another blow to one of the most troubled multiemployer pension plans, which has suffered since the 2008 recession. When Hostess Brands, once the fund’s largest contributor, closed and filed bankruptcy in 2012, the company left a $2 billion pension liability. By 2018, the fund had $7.9 billion in liabilities and only $4.1 billion in assets.


In 2018, Mondelēz CEO Dirk Van de Put earned $15 million. The median Mondelēz worker worldwide, meanwhile, is a part-time hourly employee earning $30,639, an income ratio of 489 to 1.

A Navy vet with three children, Anthony Jackson mourned

 the loss of his job at Mondelēz, his best-paying job ever.

 Since the layoff in March
2016, when Mondelēz moved hundreds of jobs to a new 

factory in Mexico, Jackson says he’s only found low-wage 

work. (Photo by Meredith Goldberg)

Preventing U.S. firms from outsourcing jobs was a drumbeat for the 2016 Trump campaign. “These companies aren’t going to be leaving anymore,” Trump declared in December 2016 in Indianapolis. “They’re not going to be taking people’s hearts out. They’re not going to be announcing, like they did at Carrier, that they’re closing up and they’re moving to Mexico.”

But Rosemary Coates, head of the Reshoring Institute, a California-based nonprofit, says that, rather than bringing jobs back to the United States, companies are increasingly looking for new places to send production. The latest reshoring survey by consulting company A.T. Kearney shows that imports of manufactured items to the United States from 14 low-cost countries have steadily grown for the past five years, indicating that offshoring continues.

The Trump administration has lauded tariffs and trade wars as a way to pressure companies into keeping jobs in the United States. Yet, as Tobita Chow, director of the Justice Is Global project at the People’s Action Institute (and member of In These Times’ board of directors), explains, this strategy has backfired. “Trump’s trade wars have raised costs, reduced demand, killed jobs in the United States and worsened working conditions across much of the Global South,” Chow says.

In Mexico, factory workers earn 40% less than those in China. Mondelēz’s new plant opened in Salinas Victoria, Mexico, in late 2014 and now has 1,800 workers, according to the company. But workers in Mexico have been pinned under a mountain of problems.

Most Mexican unions serve companies under “protection contracts,” in which the company actually picks the union and dictates contract terms, defanging worker movements before they begin. Protection contracts are often signed by unions when a factory has very few workers to actually negotiate. In October 2014, with just 20 workers at the new plant, Mondelēz signed a union contract that capped the top day rate at 200 pesos, about $14.90 per day. BCTGM eventually obtained a copy of the contract, which it called proof that the Mexican workers were victims of a protection contract.

According to an August 2017 ruling from the National Labor Relations Board, a Mondelēz official told an administrative law judge that its Mexican workers earned $7 an hour in wages and benefits. As for the union there, a Mondelēz official told In These Times that the 2014 contract was no longer in effect and disputed the “protection union” moniker.

Meanwhile, BCTGM continued pressuring Mondelēz to reshore its jobs. In May 2017, 17 Democrats in the U.S. Senate called on Mondelēz to hire back workers let go at its plants in Chicago and at its operations in Fairlawn, N.J., Richmond, Va., Portland, Ore., and Atlanta—but nothing happened.

In November 2017, BCTGM partnered with religious and union leaders to arrange a visit with Mexican union activists from different groups in Monterrey, Mexico. The union has since reached out to the independent Mexican Los Mineros union, which separates itself from Mexico’s more corrupt or compromised unions. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has pushed through stronger worker protections, but implementing them will be a challenge as longstanding protection unions fear losing control.

Importantly, the new trade agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada—passed in December 2019 with support from U.S. labor unions—is a blow to the protection contracts signed by corrupt unions, calling for union monitoring and access to bi-national panels for inspections triggered by worker complaints.

Mondelez and BCTGM remain in a stalemate over lost jobs and a lost pension plan. They have not talked in a year, each claiming the other has quit negotiations. Mondelēz’s stock is up more than 30% since May 2015.

BCTGM Strategic Campaign Coordinator Nate Zeff, who picked up the torch when Baker retired in 2018, says a new campaign will launch early this year and will involve mobilizing Mondelēz workers in Mexico.

“We are almost four years into this fight,” Zeff says. “Eventually, we are going to win.”

“The real solution to offshoring is not trade wars—it’s to raise standards for workers across borders,” says Justice Is Global’s Chow. “We can get there through international worker solidarity, not by pitting workers against each other across borders as Trump has done.”

Michael Smith, who now works at the Chicago plant, has his own strategy. Ever an optimist, he is writing to Trump to ask for his help saving pension plans like his.

“It’s an opportunity for him to own up to saying he would never eat Oreos again,” Smith says. “It’s only a hope. He is still my president.”

Trump's son gets permit allowing him to hunt Alaska grizzly bear


GRIZZLIES ARE ENDANGERED 
IT WOULD BE NICE IF THE 1% WERE TOO

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Reuters) - Donald Trump Jr. has been granted the right to hunt a grizzly bear in northwestern Alaska near the Bering Sea town of Nome, a state official said on Friday.

The son of U.S. President Donald Trump was one of three people who applied for 27 spots for non-resident hunters targeting grizzlies in a designated region of northwestern Alaska’s Seward Peninsula, said Eddie Grasser, the wildlife conservation director for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

The state conducts periodic drawings for permits to hunt bears, caribou, moose and other animals in various regions. Winners are chosen by a lottery, and there are typically many more applications than hunting tags awarded.

“We get thousands of applications,” Grasser said. Whether anyone wins, he said, comes down to “pure chance, luck of the draw.”


But in the case of the bear-hunt permit that the president’s son won, there was little competition. Twenty-four tags for hunting bears in that region went unclaimed, Grasser said.

Winners of the state’s latest hunting-permit drawings were announced on Friday.

To follow through with the Nome-area bear hunt, Trump must pay a $1,000 non-resident tag fee and buy a $160 non-resident hunting license, Grasser said.

The president’s eldest son is an avid hunter and has made several trips to hunt in Alaska and Canada.


He is scheduled to come to Alaska later this year to hunt deer and ducks.

The Safari Club this month raffled off a $150,000 seven-day “dream hunt” expedition with Trump Jr. The raffle winner got the right to accompany the president’s son on a yacht traveling in November along coastal areas of the Tongass National Forest.


Reporting by Yereth Rosen in Anchorage; Editing by Gerry Doyle
Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.