Trump’s presidency is a potentially fatal self-inflicted wound on America

Published on July 16, 2020 By Sonali Kolhatkar, Independent Media Institute- Commentary

When schoolchildren across the United States began their summer break, President Donald Trump had more than two months to bring the coronavirus crisis under control in time for schools to reopen for the fall. But, instead of tackling the virus’ spread head-on, he did what most observers expected of him: he politicized the pandemic and acted as though he were the sole victim of the virus. If Trump’s message can be distilled into a single idea, it is that if we simply do not acknowledge that the virus is ravaging the nation, we can go about with business as usual and re-elect Trump in November.

Unfortunately for Trump, that plan is so far not quite working, and even pollsters biased in his favor are showing a grim election outcome for the president. But Trump’s loss is not necessarily our gain. Americans are dying from the coronavirus at a rate not seen in any other part of the world. The Washington Post points out that, “If you adjust per capita, then, Florida’s outbreak is currently about 70 times worse than that of the worst-hit country in 

Europe

The most infuriating aspect of the American response to the coronavirus is that other nations have clearly laid out a commonsense strategy that has worked so much better for them—enabling them to return to as much of a pre-pandemic “normal” as is possible under the circumstances. A prime example is Germany, where schools have been partially open with some online and some in-person instruction and remain responsive to outbreaks that may occur.

Jens Spahn, Germany’s federal minister of health, explained that the country’s robust health care system is a large part of the nation’s success story, saying, “the German health-care system was in good shape going into the crisis; everyone has had full access to medical care. This is a merit not just of the current government but of a system that was built over the course of many governments.” Contrast this with the United States, where there is no actual health care that covers everyone. Instead, there are patchwork systems that are linked to age, disability, income, and employment. It is no wonder then that health outcomes depend on many of the same factors.

Like the United States, Germany had the advantage of time in preparing for the pandemic in February and March as it spread like wildfire through Wuhan, China, and then Italy, offering cautionary lessons. Unlike the United States, Germany’s central government actually mobilized its laboratories to begin producing tests at a rapid rate. Under Trump’s oversight, the United States’ failure to do the same has been deemed “tragic.” As far back as March of this year, reports point out that the White House’s coronavirus task force, “typically devoted only five or 10 minutes, often at the end of contentious meetings, to talk about testing.”

Germany’s health minister explained, “Extensive testing is like pointing a flashlight in the dark: without it, you can see only shades of grey; but with it, you can see details clearly and immediately. And when it comes to a disease outbreak, you can’t control what you can’t see.” Trump realized this, and because he has no intention of controlling the virus, he railed against seeing it—openly. At his first political rally since the pandemic began, he told his adoring supporters, “I said to my people, ‘Slow the testing down please.’” Later he explained that he wasn’t kidding.

Spahn spoke of the need for public trust, saying, “it is critical that governments inform the public not just about what they know, but also about what they do not know. That is the only way to build the trust needed to fight a lethal virus in a democratic society.” But the United States’ right-wing media industry and profit-driven social media platforms have built themselves on selling mistrust through conspiracy-laden clickbait. Trump has built his presidency on lies. It is no wonder that in the moment when the ability to tell fact from fiction was needed the most, the United States has spectacularly failed.

“In Germany, we have succeeded in slowing the spread of the virus because the vast majority of citizens want to cooperate, out of a sense of responsibility for themselves and others,” said Spahn. Contrast that with the United States, where right-wing ideology is based on selfishness, individual “liberties,” white supremacy, and an unfounded fear of “government tyranny.” The internet is full of viral videos of Americans refusing to wear masks in grocery stores or at the dentist’s office—not because they necessarily disagree with the protection it offers to everyone, but because they do not like being told what to do.

Germany’s example illustrates that the infrastructure and approach needed to fight the virus is directly at odds with the rightward march in America. Our failure in managing to fight the virus began not in March, but back to Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Trump’s presidency was just the latest—perhaps mortal—wound in America’s self-inflicted death by a thousand cuts.

We ought to be outraged over what Trump and America’s right wing have wrought. But three and a half years of relentless outrage has left us weary and numb to the horrors of Trumpism. Only a handful of prominent figures are calling on Trump to resign, including his own niece. Contrast that with the chorus of demands for resignations from the Republican Party aimed at Barack Obama’s administration over various feigned outrages.

If something positive is to emerge from this ghoulish nightmare of deliberately enabling mass deaths, it ought to be a final nail in the coffin of American conservatism. A public health crisis cannot be fought with rugged individualism. While many Americans now say they regret voting for Trump in 2016, the more important mass regret ought to be over decades of conservative policies that stood in the way of tackling real crises and decimating existing public services. The death of Trump’s career needs to coincide with the death of Trumpism as a whole.

Trump’s plan for the coronavirus is to have no plan because to a significant percentage of Americans, having a plan would be akin to tyranny. So, if there is a plan, it is to make the virus go away—not in reality but from our view.

Trump has repeatedly told Americans that the virus would simply go away—like magic. Now, he has even taken steps to control hospital data on the virus, just like the sleight of hand that a magician requires in order to perform an illusion. The trick is to manage the illusion until the November election. Perhaps Americans—with all our lives at stake—can instead make Trump and Trumpism vanish in November as the first step in a long-overdue remaking of America.

Sonali Kolhatkar is the founder, host and executive producer of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show that airs on Free Speech TV and Pacifica stations.

EFF Launches Searchable Database of Police Agencies and the Tech Tools They Use to Spy on Communities

Atlas of Surveillance Shines Light on Deployment of Cameras, Drones, and More

PRESS RELEASE JULY 13, 2020


San Francisco—The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), in partnership with the Reynolds School of Journalism at the University of Nevada, Reno, today launched the largest-ever collection of searchable data on police use of surveillance technologies, created as a tool for the public to learn about facial recognition, drones, license plate readers, and other devices law enforcement agencies are acquiring to spy on our communities.

The Atlas of Surveillance database, containing several thousand data points on over 3,000 city and local police departments and sheriffs' offices nationwide, allows citizens, journalists, and academics to review details about the technologies police are deploying, and provides a resource to check what devices and systems have been purchased locally.

Users can search for information by clicking on regions, towns, and cities, such as Minneapolis, Tampa, or Tucson, on a U.S. map. They can also easily perform text searches by typing the names of cities, counties, or states on a search page that displays text results. The Atlas also allows people to search by specific technologies, which can show how surveillance tools are spreading across the country.

Built using crowdsourcing and data journalism over the last 18 months, the Atlas of Surveillance documents the alarming increase in the use of unchecked high-tech tools that collect biometric records, photos, and videos of people in their communities, locate and track them via their cell phones, and purport to predict where crimes will be committed.

While the use of surveillance apps and face recognition technologies are under scrutiny amid the COVID-19 pandemic and street protests, EFF and students at University of Nevada, Reno, have been studying and collecting information for more than a year in an effort to, for the first time, aggregate data collected from news articles, government meeting agendas, company press releases, and social media posts.

"There are two questions we get all the time: What surveillance is in my hometown, and how are technologies like drones and automated license plate readers spreading across the country?" said Dave Maass, a senior investigative researcher in EFF's Threat Lab and a visiting professor at the Reynolds School of Journalism. "A year a half ago, EFF and the Reynolds School partnered to answer these questions through a massive newsgathering effort, involving hundreds of journalism students and volunteers. What we found is a sprawling spy state that reaches from face recognition in the Hawaiian Islands to predictive policing in Maine, from body-worn cameras in remote Alaska to real-time crime centers along Florida's Gold Coast."

Information was collected on the most pervasive surveillance technologies in use, including drones, body-worn cameras, face recognition, cell-site simulators, automated license plate readers, predictive policing, camera registries, police partnerships with Amazon’s Ring camera network, and gunshot detection sensors. It also maps out more than 130 law enforcement tech hubs that process real-time surveillance data. While the Atlas contains a massive amount of data, its content is only the tip of the iceberg and underlines the need for journalists and members of the public to continue demanding transparency from criminal justice agencies. Reporters, students, volunteers, and watchdog groups can submit data or share data sets for inclusion in the Atlas.

“The prevalence of surveillance technologies in our society provides many challenges related to privacy and freedom of expression, but it's one thing to know that in theory, and another to see hard data laid out on a map," Reynolds School Professor and Director of the Center for Advanced Media Studies Gi Yun said. "Over a year and a half, Reynolds School of Journalism students at the University of Nevada, Reno have reviewed thousands of news articles and public records. This project not only informs the public debate but helps these students improve their understanding of surveillance as they advance in their reporting careers."

For the Atlas:
https://atlasofsurveillance.org

For more on street-level surveillance:
https://www.eff.org/issues/street-level-surveillance

EU Court Again Rules That NSA Spying Makes U.S. Companies Inadequate for Privacy

BY DANNY O'BRIEN EFF
JULY 16, 2020


The European Union’s highest court today made clear—once again—that the US government’s mass surveillance programs are incompatible with the privacy rights of EU citizens. The judgment was made in the latest case involving Austrian privacy advocate and EFF Pioneer Award winner Max Schrems. It invalidated the “Privacy Shield,” the data protection deal that secured the transatlantic data flow, and narrowed the ability of companies to transfer data using individual agreements (Standard Contractual Clauses, or SCCs).

Despite the many “we are disappointed” statements by the EU Commission, U.S. government officials, and businesses, it should come as no surprise, since it follows the reasoning the court made in Schrems’ previous case, in 2015.

Back then, the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) noted that European citizens had no real recourse in US law if their data was swept up in the U.S. governments’ surveillance schemes. Such a violation of their basic privacy rights meant that U.S. companies could not provide an “adequate level of [data] protection,” as required by EU law and promised by the EU/U.S. “Privacy Safe Harbor” self-regulation regime. Accordingly, the Safe Harbor was deemed inadequate, and data transfers by companies between the EU and the U.S. were forbidden.

Since that original decision, multinational companies, the U.S. government, and the European Commission sought to paper over the giant gaps between U.S. spying practices and the EU’s fundamental values. The U.S. government made clear that it did not intend to change its surveillance practices, nor push for legislative fixes in Congress. All parties instead agreed to merely fiddle around the edges of transatlantic data practices, reinventing the previous Safe Harbor agreement, which weakly governed corporate handling of EU citizen’s personal data, under a new name: the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield.
EFF, along with the rest of civil society on both sides of the Atlantic, pointed out that this was just shuffling chairs on the Titanic. The Court cited government programs like PRISM and Upstream as its primary reason for ending data flows between Europe and the United States, not the (admittedly woeful) privacy practices of the companies themselves. That meant that it was entirely in the government and U.S. Congress’ hands to decide whether U.S. tech companies are allowed to handle European personal data. The message to the U.S. government is simple: Fix U.S. mass surveillance, or undermine one of the United States’ major industries.

Five years after the original iceberg of Schrems 1, Schrems 2 has pushed the Titanic fully beneath the waves. The new judgment explicitly calls out the weaknesses of U.S. law in protecting non-U.S. persons from arbitrary surveillance, highlighting that:


Section 702 of the FISA does not indicate any limitations on the power it confers to implement surveillance programmes for the purposes of foreign intelligence or the existence of guarantees for non-US persons potentially targeted by those programmes.

and


... neither Section 702 of the FISA, nor E.O. 12333, read in conjunction with PPD‑28, correlates to the minimum safeguards resulting, under EU law, from the principle of proportionality, with the consequence that the surveillance programmes based on those provisions cannot be regarded as limited to what is strictly necessary.

The CJEU could not be more blunt in its pronouncements: but it remains unclear how the various actors that could fix this problem will react. Will EU data protection authorities step up their enforcement activities and invalidate SCCs that authorize data flows to the U.S. for failing to protect EU citizens from U.S. mass surveillance programs? And if U.S. corporations cannot confidently rely on either SCCs or the defunct Privacy Shield, will they lobby harder for real U.S. legislative change to protect the privacy rights of Europeans in the U.S.—or just find another temporary stopgap to force yet another CJEU decision? And will the European Commission move from defending the status quo and current corporate practices, to truly acting on behalf of its citizens?

Whatever the initial reaction by EU regulators, companies and the Commission, the real solution lies, as it always has, with the United States Congress. Today's decision is yet another significant indicator that the U.S. government's foreign intelligence surveillance practices need a massive overhaul. Congress half-heartedly began the process of improving some parts of FISA earlier this year—a process which now appears to have been abandoned. But this decision shows, yet again, that the U.S. needs much broader, privacy-protective reform, and that Congress’ inaction makes us all less safe, wherever we are.

Unions slam British Gas-owner's 'fire and rehire'plan: 20,000 staff told to accept new working conditions or risk losing their jobs
By FRANCESCA WASHTELL FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 16 July 2020

Centrica could demand 20,000 staff accept new working conditions or risk losing their jobs.

The British Gas owner has been in talks with unions over the terms of contracts, which include cutting overtime pay.

The utility group – which is led by boss Chris O'Shea,– insists the changes would make it more competitive and keep jobs secure in the long term.

+1
Working conditions: British Gas owner Centrica has been in talks with unions over the terms of contracts, which include cutting overtime pay

But unions have slammed the move as a 'fire and rehire' strategy that is a 'smoke screen' for letting go of even more employees than already planned.

Centrica said last month the group would cut 5,000 roles and multiple management layers in a major cost-cutting drive.

Now it has proposed making widespread changes to its terms of employment by giving staff notice they were in line to lose their job – and offering it back to them on the new contracts.

Employees would keep the same base pay and pension. But unions and workers are concerned because the company has also issued legal notices that mean if they don't strike an agreement on the contract, and workers refuse to sign them, it would trigger a fresh wave of redundancies.

The firm insists this is a last resort, but has also made it clear that it must hammer out a deal before the busy winter period.

Centrica – which is led by boss Chris O'Shea (pictured),– insists the changes would make it more competitive and keep jobs secure in the long term.

Centrica has around 27,000 employees – about 20,000 of whom are in the UK – and said it has around 80 different contracts with 7,000 variations of terms.

One of the major changes being proposed is to fix overtime pay at the same rate as regular hours. Overtime wages could be as high as double the standard hourly rate, though the precise difference depends on a workers' contract.

Engineers are often asked to work longer hours over winter, including Christmas and New Year. Unions and workers were concerned about the plans – and about how they had been timed during lockdown.

One long-time British Gas engineer told the BBC: 'They are using this as an excuse because they know we can't even have discussions and meetings. This really is a divide-and-conquer moment.'

Unite regional officer Mark Pettifer described the plans as 'deplorable' and said Centrica had been in consultations with unions for two weeks before unveiling the proposals.

Pettifer said: 'It smacks of blackmail: 'If you don't do what we want, we will issue notice of dismissals'.'

Centrica had been struggling long before the pandemic struck.

British Gas has lost more than a million customers in the last two years, with many switching to cheaper 'challenger' energy suppliers.

But the Covid-19 crisis has piled more pressure on the company, with energy demand falling close to record lows during lockdown, as a mixture of warm weather and the mass closure of business and industry outweighed people needing to use more electricity at home.

A Centrica spokesman said the company wanted to 'continue with constructive talks' and the possibility of further redundancies would be an 'option of last resort if it turns out we can't work together to achieve this'.

Shares were up 0.2 per cent yesterday.

Vietnam is among a handful of countries to have reported no fatalities from the coronavirus pandemic. Timothyna Duncan reports on how the country, which shares a porous land border with China, defied the odds.

Magic mushroom compound provides anti-anxiety and antidepressant effects lasting years, study finds

Single dose of psilocybin leads to decreased demoralisation and improved spiritual wellbeing among cancer sufferers, long-term research indicates

Harry Cockburn
Tuesday 28 January 2020

A single dose of psilocybin, a compound found in psychedelic mushrooms, can result in “significant improvements” in reducing stress and anxiety in cancer patients for as long as five years after it was administered, a new study suggests.

A research team at New York University‘s Grossman School of Medicine, who were following up a landmark 2016 study into psilocybin, found that in conjunction with psychotherapy, cancer patients experienced improvements in emotional and existential distress.

In the earlier study, the team reported that the use of psilocybin produced “immediate, substantial, and sustained improvements in anxiety and depression and led to decreases in cancer-related demoralisation and hopelessness, improved spiritual wellbeing, and increased quality of life”.

After a follow-up assessment, six-and-a-half months later, psilocybin was associated with “enduring anti-anxiety and antidepressant effects”.

The new study — a long term follow up of the same set of patients — found the positive effects had continued.

“Participants overwhelmingly (71 to 100 per cent) attributed positive life changes to the psilocybin-assisted therapy experience and rated it among the most personally meaningful and spiritually significant experiences of their lives,” the researchers said

“Adding to evidence dating back as early as the 1950s, our findings strongly suggest that psilocybin therapy is a promising means of improving the emotional, psychological, and spiritual wellbeing of patients with life-threatening cancer,” said the 2016 parent study’s lead investigator, Dr Stephen Ross.

“This approach has the potential to produce a paradigm shift in the psychological and existential care of patients with cancer, especially those with terminal illness.”

The researchers said psilocybin could become a useful tool for enhancing the effectiveness of psychotherapy and ultimately relieving these symptoms.

Although the precise mechanisms are not fully understood, scientists believe the drug can make the brain more flexible and receptive to new ideas and thought patterns. In addition, previous research indicates the drug targets a network of the brain, the default mode network, which becomes activated when we engage in self-reflection and mind wandering, and which helps to create our sense of self and sense of coherent narrative identity.

‘Absurd’ magic mushrooms and MDMA are class A drugs, expert tells MPs

In patients with anxiety and depression, this network becomes hyperactive and is associated with rumination, worry, and rigid thinking. Psilocybin appears to acutely shift activity in this network and helps people to take a more broadened perspective on their behaviours and lives.

The follow-up study is the longest-spanning exploration of psilocybin’s effects on cancer-related psychiatric distress to date, the authors say.

“These results may shed light on how the positive effects of a single dose of psilocybin persist for so long,” said Gabby Agin-Liebes, lead author of the long-term follow-up study.

“The drug seems to facilitate a deep, meaningful experience that stays with a person and can fundamentally change his or her mindset and outlook,” she said.

The research is published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology.

Magic mushroom compound psilocybin found safe for consumption in largest ever controlled study

‘Clinically reassuring’ results boost development of psychoactive ingredient as depression treatment, researcher says


Andy Gregory
Wednesday 18 December 2019 

The largest controlled study of psilocybin – the psychoactive ingredient in magic mushrooms – has found the compound safe for human consumption, bringing researchers one step closer to developing a psilocybin-based treatment for depression.

Volunteers who received doses of the psychedelic compound experienced no serious adverse effects in phase one clinical trials at Kings College London (KCL).

Psilocybin has been tipped as a potentially groundbreaking treatment for mental health disorders that could replace antidepressants, with some research suggesting it could also aid those dealing with addiction.

“The results of the study are clinically reassuring and support further development of psilocybin as a treatment for patients with mental health problems that haven’t improved with conventional therapy, such as treatment-resistant depression,” said KCL’s Dr James Rucker, the study’s lead investigator.

Most of the minor adverse events recorded were of the expected psychedelic nature, researchers found, with changes to sensory perception and mood, but no negative effects on cognitive and emotional functioning.

The phase one trials – which sought to test the compound’s safety, not its therapeutic value – compared the effects of varying doses of the psilocybin-based drug COMP360 and placebos in 89 healthy volunteers

There were 25 dosing sessions in total. In each session, six participants would receive either 10mg or 25mg doses or a placebo during a one-on-one session with a therapist lasting roughly six hours, with a follow-up period of 12 weeks.​

Research by the company behind the trial, Compass Pathways, into using psilocybin as a treatment for depression has been fast-tracked in the US, receiving special “breakthrough therapy” status from the Food and Drug Administration.

Watch more

Magic mushrooms ‘could be replacing antidepressants within five years’

It is currently running phase two studies across Europe and North America involving 216 patients who suffer with depression that hasn’t responded to treatment.

“This study is part of our overall clinical development programme in treatment-resistant depression,” Compass Pathways’ co-founder Dr Ekaterina Malievskaia said.

“We wanted to look at the safety and tolerability profile of our psilocybin, and to look at the feasibility of a model where up to six one-to-one sessions are held at the same time.

“We are focused on getting psilocybin therapy safely to as many patients who would benefit from it as possible [and] are grateful to the many pioneering research institutions whose work over the years has helped to demonstrate the potential of psilocybin in medicine.”

In June, The Independent reported that participants in the first trial comparing psilocybin to antidepressants at the world’s first psychedelic research centre, at Imperial College London, described a cathartic emotional “release” and “reconnection” during psilocybin therapy.

As the study’s lead Dr Robin Carhart-Harris pointed out, this is the polar opposite of antidepressants, which patients often complain leave their emotions “blunted”.

Jackdaws can identify “dangerous” humans from listening to each other’s warning calls, scientists say. The highly social birds will also remember that person if they come near their nests again

THIS IS AN ABILITY SHARED WITH OTHER CORVIDS; CROWS AND RAVENS

Magic mushrooms and LSD give sustained boost in mood after recreational use, study concludes

Scientists document ‘afterglow’ effect in vast festival study

Andy Gregory
Tuesday 21 January 2020

The recreational use of psychedelic drugs can provide a sustained improvement in mood and leave users feeling closer to others even after the initial high has worn off, a study of more than 1,200 festivalgoers has found.

Those who had recently taken substances like LSD and magic mushrooms were more likely to report having “transformative experiences” profound enough to radically alter their moral values, which subjects associated with feelings of increased social connectedness and mental wellbeing, Yale University scientists discovered.

By surveying 1,242 UK and US festival goers over a four-year period, the researchers were able to characterise the psychological effects of the “afterglow” often documented in laboratory-based research into psychedelic experiences, publishing their findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal.

“Our results show that people who take psychedelics ‘in the wild’ report positive experiences very similar to those observed in controlled laboratory studies,” said lead author Matthias Forstmann.

The most pronounced effects were reported by those who had used psychedelics within the past 24 hours, as opposed to within the past seven days.

Voluntary participants at six festivals were asked questions on their substance usage and took tests to measure how socially connected they felt after taking psychedelics, and whether they had positively impacted their mood. Subjects were no longer under the influence of psychedelics at the time of answering.

Those who had abstained from using psychedelics, drank alcohol or took other drugs such as cocaine or opioids did not report transformative experiences, increased connectedness with others or positive mood to the same degree, researchers found.

The study was not designed to assess negative reactions to the use of psychedelics, and further research is necessary to assess which environmental factors are associated with positive versus negative psychedelic experiences, said Yale’s assistant professor of psychology Molly Crockett, who led the research.

Read more

Consider decriminalisation to tackle drug death ‘crisis’, urge NGOs

Magic mushrooms ‘could be replacing antidepressants within five years’

Legal heroin prescribed to hundreds of UK drug users, figures reveal

While researchers were unable to verify which substances participants had taken, as they would be able to in laboratory studies, they were less limited in that they were able to observe a far larger cohort in a more natural environment.

The findings add to a body of evidence suggesting psychedelic substances may have potential as therapy for mood disorders.

The new research could even lend credence to the idea of extending psychedelic therapies to healthy recipients, to boost their psychological wellness, the head of Imperial College London’s Centre for Psychedelic Research, Robin Carhart-Harris, told Newsweek.

Scientists should see the study as further evidence to challenge any preconceptions about psychedelics that they are particularly dangerous or harmful drugs, said Dr Carhart-Harris, who did not take part in the research.

“However, and this is an important caveat, beyond the simple fact that the psychedelics were likely taken in a festival setting, the present study hasn't isolated the role of specific contextual factors, such as inter-personal trust at the time of use, expectations or intentions for use, which we know to be very important for predicting how people respond to psychedelics,” he said.

“It would be wrong to assume from these findings that if you take psychedelics at a festival you're going to have a great time and improve your mental well-being in the process.”

Congress debates decriminalising magic mushrooms in DC as representative claims it would make area ‘drug capital’

Activists have focused on health benefits of natural hallucinogens
James Crump @thejamescrump


Representatives on the House Appropriations Committee have debated the status of magic mushrooms and other psychedelic drugs in Washington, DC, after activists called for them to be decriminalised in a petition.

Last week, activists submitted a petition with 36,000 signatures to the Board of Elections, that they say is enough to get the decriminalisation of natural hallucinogens in the district on the ballot in November, according to the Associated Press.

If the motion is successful, then it would follow similar laws passed in Denver, Colorado, and California cities Oakland and Santa Cruz, where natural hallucinogens, have been decriminalised in recent years.

Melissa Lavasani, who proposed the initiative and claimed using the mushrooms helped treat her postpartum depression, said the activists are focused on promoting the therapeutic and medical benefits of the drugs.

“DC could really lead the way on this,” Ms Lavasani told the AP. “You shouldn’t bear the repercussions of the drug war while you are healing yourself.”

However, Maryland representative Andy Harris, proposed forbidding a voter initiative on the policy on Wednesday, and argued that “we certainly — I would hope — don’t want to be known as the drug capital of the world.”

Watch more

Magic mushroom compound ‘has anti-anxiety effect lasting years’

His amendment, which also called for the use of psychedelics to be still be banned without a doctors recommendation, was backed by other Republicans, who suggested that decriminalising the drugs would be dangerous, according to the New York Post.

“We all can agree that policies that increase the availability of psychedelic drugs in the nation’s capital — that’s dangerous,” said Republican representative Tom Graves.


“As the nation’s capital, the District of Columbia, it should be a place where Americans come to see their government at work, for history and to go to a Braves-Nats game. It shouldn’t be a destination for illegal drugs,” he added.

However, Democrats on the committee criticised Mr Harris’ proposed amendment and said that the vote is a choice for the public, not politicians.

“If the district’s residents want to make mushrooms a lower priority and focus limited law enforcement resources on other issues, that is their prerogative,” Illinois congressman Mike Quigley argued.

The health benefits of using natural hallucinogens has long been debated, but a study at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine earlier this year found that a single dose of psilocybin, a compound found in psychedelic mushrooms, could have long-term positive effects.

The study into psilocybin, found that in conjunction with psychotherapy, cancer patients experienced improvements in emotional and existential distress five years after they had been administered just one dose.


“Participants overwhelmingly (71 to 100 per cent) attributed positive life changes to the psilocybin-assisted therapy experience and rated it among the most personally meaningful and spiritually significant experiences of their lives,” the researchers said of the study from 2016 to 2020.
Watch more

Magic mushrooms and LSD can give prolonged mood boost, study finds

Mr Harris later withdraw his amendment, but released a statement where he said he would revisit it if the motion is on the ballot in November.

“This is a new issue to the committee,” he said. “Between now and the meeting of the conference committee this fall, the issue of whether this will be on the ballot will be resolved.

“Fortunately, in that time, members will also have time to learn more about this complicated medical issue.”

MORE ABOUT:
MAGIC MUSHROOMS | PSILOCYBIN |

THIRD WORLD USA 

The average minimum wage worker has to work more than 2 full-time jobs to afford a 2-bedroom rental in any state in the US

A woman wears a T-shirt reading "One Job Should be Enough" during a rally calling for an increase in the minimum wage on Oct. 2, 2019, in Miami. AP Photo/Lynne Sladky

The average minimum wage worker in the US would need to work at least two jobs in order to afford rent in any US state, according to the annual "Out of Reach" report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

The minimum wage to afford a two-bedroom rental in 2020 is $23.96 per hour and $19.56 for a one-bedroom rental, according to the report.

The report was published amid an unprecedented health crisis, the economic impact of which has left millions of Americans without a job.

The researchers behind the report called on the federal government to take more action to "secure affordable homes" by funding federal rental housing programs, especially amid the coronavirus pandemic.

Full-time minimum wage workers can't afford to rent a two-bedroom rental in any state in the US, according to the annual "Out of Reach" report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC).

A MINIMUM WAGE SHOULD BE $15 AN HOUR

 A LIVING WAGE IS $25 AN HOUR

The coalition also found 95% of minimum wage workers cannot afford a one-bedroom rental.

The minimum wage to afford a two-bedroom rental in 2020 is $23.96 per hour and $19.56 for a one-bedroom rental, according to the report. However, the hourly wage of the average renter is $18.22, which is still $5.74 less than what is needed to afford a two-bedroom rental and $1.34 less to afford a one-bedroom.

The average full-time minimum worker needs to work at least 97 hours to afford a two-bedroom rental or 79 hours per week to afford a one-bedroom rental, according to the report.

"People who work 97 hours per week and need 8 hours per day of sleep have fewer than 2.5 hours per day left over for everything else — commuting, cooking, cleaning, selfcare, caring for children and family, and serving their community," the analysts behind the report wrote.

As the national housing wage becomes increasingly unattainable for minimum wage workers, the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic has left millions without a job.

A rental sign is posted in front of an apartment complex Tuesday, July 14, 2020, in Phoenix. Housing advocacy groups have joined lawmakers lobbying Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey to extend his coronavirus-era moratorium on evictions when it expires, when the 120-day order ending July 22 was supposed to ensure people would not lose their homes if they fell ill to COVID-19 or lost jobs in the pandemic's economic fallout. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin) Associated Press

"The economic downturn spurred by the virus further increases the risk of housing instability for millions of low-wage renters at a time when stable housing is vital," they wrote. "Millions of renters were one financial shock away from housing instability, and for many the pandemic and economic fallout is that shock."

The researchers behind the report called on the federal government to take more action to "secure affordable homes" by funding federal rental housing programs, especially amid the unprecedented health crisis.

"Housing is a basic necessity – an essential ingredient of individual and public health, stability, and dignity," the analysts wrote. "The COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated the recklessness of letting people's access to basic necessities like housing depend on the contingencies of the economy."

Congress has attempted to pad the financial ramifications of the pandemic by passing the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, also known as the CARES Act, a $2 trillion economic stimulus bill.

In May, the House of Representatives passed a $3 trillion coronavirus relief bill in May dubbed the HEROES Act, which stands for the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act. The bill, however, is not expected to pass in the GOP-controlled Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called the bill a "big laundry list of pet priorities" that has "no chance of becoming law."

Last month, the House passed another relief bill specifically geared towards housing affordability, known as the Emergency Housing Protections and Relief Act of 2020.

"The bill allocates $100 billion towards emergency rental assistance, establishes a $75 billion fund for homeowners, and extends an eviction and foreclosure moratorium," Business Insider's Rosie Perper reported.

A minimum-wage worker needs 1.5 jobs just to afford half the rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in most of the US
Hillary Hoffower and Andy Kiersz
Jan 30, 2019

To afford a two-bedroom apartment, a minimum-wage worker would need to work about 122 hours a week. Jeff Greenberg/Getty Images

Many minimum-wage workers can't afford a modest two-bedroom apartment, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition's annual report.
The national housing wage for a modest two-bedroom rental apartment is $22.10, while the federal minimum wage is $7.25.
A low-income worker earning the federal minimum wage would need three jobs to afford a two-bedroom apartment — or 1.5 jobs and a roommate.


A minimum-wage worker needs 2.5 full-time jobs to afford a one-bedroom apartment in most of the US, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition's (NLIHC) annual report.

But that's nothing compared to how many jobs they'd have to work to afford a two-bedroom rental apartment in most of the US — three.

However, that's only if they're living in a two-bedroom alone or are the only working spouse bringing home a check. It's likely they have a partner or roommate living there as well, in which case they would split the rent. If both residents are minimum-wage workers, they would need to work 1.5 jobs each to afford rent.

The report looked at the "housing wage," an estimate of the hourly wage a full-time worker — working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year — needs to earn to afford a rental home at the US Department of Housing and Urban Development's fair-market rent. That's defined as spending no more than 30% of their income on housing costs — experts' rule of thumb when budgeting for housing.


NLIHC found that the national housing wage for a two-bedroom rental apartment is $22.10. That's slightly more than three times the federal minimum wage of $7.25.

The map below shows the hourly wage needed to afford a fair-market rent, two-bedroom apartment by state, assuming a 40-hour work week, 52 weeks a year, as calculated by the NLIHC.

Every state's housing wage, or the hourly pay needed to afford a two-bedroom rental. Andy Kiersz

If a worker held three full-time minimum-wage jobs, they'd be earning $21.75, just under the $22.10 needed to afford rent and have 70% of income left over for other expenses. They would have to work about 122 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, just to cover rent, according to the report. To put that in perspective, there are 168 hours in the week — that leaves them with only 46 hours, less than two days, of nonwork time.

There is no state in which a minimum-wage worker can afford a two-bedroom rental home by working a standard 40-hour work week, according to the report.

This is true even in Arkansas, which has the lowest housing wage of $13.84. The state has a minimum wage of $8.50, which means workers would need to work a full-time job and a part-time job, or 65 hours a week, to afford a two-bedroom apartment.

Fourteen states have a housing wage exceeding the national housing wage of $22 — Washington, Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire, plus Washington, DC.

Of all these states, Hawaii is the most expensive with a $36.13 housing wage. Here, workers earn a minimum wage of $10.10. With three jobs, that's $30.30 — more than the national housing wage, but still not enough to afford a two-bedroom apartment in the state. A worker in Hawaii would need to work nearly four full-time jobs, or 143 hours a week, to afford a two-bedroom rental