Friday, January 13, 2023

Fentanyl killed 70,000 in US. With Biden in Mexico, can neighbors cooperate to stop flow?

Four days before President Joe Biden flies south to meet with Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, authorities in the northwest state of Sinaloa arrested the son of the infamous drug cartel leader known as "El Chapo," who is wanted by U.S. officials for contributing to the fentanyl epidemic that killed as many as 70,000 Americans last year.

At least 29 people, including 10 Mexican soldiers, were killed in shootouts with Sinaloa Cartel members during the operation to nab Ovidio Guzman on Thursday and fly him to Mexico City on a military plane.

Publicly, Mexican officials denied that the raid was timed to show Washington that its southern neighbor is an active partner in the politically fraught bilateral effort to stanch the cross-border flow of the lethal synthetic opioid.

More: Arrest of El Chapo's son Ovidio Guzman throws Mexico into chaos ahead of Biden visit

But some current and former American counternarcotics officials are suspicious, noting that another "most wanted" drug cartel leader, Rafael Caro Quintero, was arrested in Sinaloa just days after Biden and Lopez Obrador met in Washington last July to discuss a range of issues, including a drug war that has tested the two countries' security alliance for the past half a century.

"It certainly seems like politics. There's a lot of speculation now that it's all about the timing," former Drug Enforcement Administration official Derek Maltz told USA TODAY. "Biden announces he's going down to Mexico, so now they're going to go out and grab Ovidio," who has been facing U.S. criminal drug trafficking charges since his indictment in New York in 2018.

President Joe Biden meets with Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in the Oval Office of the White House on July 12.
President Joe Biden meets with Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in the Oval Office of the White House on July 12.

Based on his conversations with current DEA leaders, some senior U.S. counternarcotics officials believe Mexico also has been inflating the amount of fentanyl and other drugs it has seized at cartel "superlabs" where vast quantities of fentanyl and methamphetamine are produced just south of the border for easy smuggling into the United States, according to Maltz, the special agent in charge of DEA's Special Operations Division for almost 10 years before his retirement in 2014.

"I really don't know for sure," added Maltz, who helped lead the international effort to capture Ovidio's father, Joaquín Guzmán Loera. "But in my opinion, unless it's sustained attacks against the cartel leadership and the production labs, it's not going to make a difference. Meanwhile, we have 9,000 Americans dying every month."

More: Biden says Mexico to step up help with border security, plans trip to El Paso border

'No secret' what both sides want

It’s no secret what Biden will be asking of López Obrador, and vice versa, when they meet in Mexico City next week on the sidelines of the North American Leaders’ Summit.

López Obrador wants the same thing from Biden as Mexican leaders have been demanding for the past half a century: to reduce the voracious American demand for Mexican-made drugs that has created the multibillion-dollar black market economy in the first place. He wants Washington to stem the flow of U.S.-manufactured guns smuggled into Mexico, which have allowed Sinaloa, Jalisco New Generation and other cartels to accumulate more firepower than most government armies.

And Biden wants Mexico to stop  the flood of deadly narcotics coming into the United States, especially fentanyl, which killed more Americans last year than COVID-19, motor vehicle accidents, cancer and suicide. More discreetly, he will also push Mexico to do far more to attack the rampant government corruption and collusion that for decades has allowed the cartels to flourish.

Working hard for a deal

Aides to both presidents have been working behind the scenes to tee up some form of counternarcotics agreement, or at least signs of progress, that can be announced when the two meet.

On Friday, White House spokesman John Kirby said Mexico already has taken "significant steps" to crack down on fentanyl traffickers and referenced Guzman's arrest. "That is not an insignificant accomplishment by Mexican authorities, and we're certainly grateful for that," Kirby told reporters. "So we're going to continue to work with them in lockstep to see what we can do jointly to try to limit that flow."

Security analysts, however, told USA TODAY that the outcome is likely going to be the same as it has been after similar summits attended by almost every U.S. president since Richard Nixon established the U.S. “War on Drugs” just over 50 years ago. There will be promises made by both sides to do more, followed by the inevitable backsliding when it comes to turning those promises into reality.

A truck burns on a street in Culiacan, Sinaloa state, on Thursday. Mexican security forces captured Ovidio Guzmán, an alleged drug trafficker wanted by the United States and one of the sons of former Sinaloa cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, in a pre-dawn operation.
A truck burns on a street in Culiacan, Sinaloa state, on Thursday. Mexican security forces captured Ovidio Guzmán, an alleged drug trafficker wanted by the United States and one of the sons of former Sinaloa cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán, in a pre-dawn operation.

That’s especially the case because counternarcotics relations between Washington and Mexico City have been at an unusually low point since AMLO, as he is popularly known, became president in December 2018. Almost immediately, he threw out the bilateral playbook the two countries had been using to go after the cartels.

Even as Mexico's murder rate soared, López Obrador said he had no intention of going after the cartels, instead focusing on a more wholistic "Hugs, not bullets" approach that prioritized social welfare over law enforcement.

More: Biden plans to visit the U.S.-Mexico border for the first time in his presidency

“These issues are very difficult. They're very hard. But look, you’ve got to restart some of these conversations and have, again, a more constructive, honest dialogue between the two countries to beget a framework, and begin a process, that leads to greater action,” said David Luna, a former top State Department official who led bilateral efforts to fight the growing threat of transnational drug cartels.

“You can’t just focus on the cartels and the criminality," Luna said. "To make greater progress, with greater results, you need to be fighting the enabling corruption and organized crime that is helping to fuel the insecurity and cartel violence in Mexico."

Fighting corruption alongside criminality

The U.S.-Mexico security relationship became even more strained after U.S. drug enforcement agents arrested the former Mexican defense minister, retired Gen. Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda, on drug-trafficking-related corruption charges as he and his family arrived at Los Angeles International Airport on Oct. 15, 2020. That all but dismantled bilateral law enforcement operations between the two countries, especially over drug traffickers.

To move forward, Biden himself “needs to take a more direct role" in pushing Mexico to deal much more aggressively with the endemic corruption in the country, said Luna, the founder and executive director of the International Coalition Against Illicit Economies. “President Biden must place greater accountability on President Obrador to disrupt the illegal fentanyl production in Mexico and to disrupt the various illicit trafficking flows.”

Frame grab from video provided by the Mexican government shows Ovidio Guzman Lopez at the moment of his detention, in Culiacan, Mexico
Frame grab from video provided by the Mexican government shows Ovidio Guzman Lopez at the moment of his detention, in Culiacan, Mexico

Four demands Washington needs to make

Maltz, the former DEA Special Operations chief, outlined four demands that Biden should make – and that he says U.S. counternarcotics officials have been pushing for years.

The U.S. has indicted a “massive number” of senior cartel leaders who are still operating in Mexico, including in fentanyl trafficking, but who Mexico hasn’t captured or, more importantly, extradited to the United States to stand trial, Maltz told USA TODAY.

He also said Washington has shared intelligence with Mexico numerous times about the “superlabs” that are producing record-breaking amounts of fentanyl, methamphetamine and other drugs just south of the U.S. border that are then smuggled into the United States. “We’ve made historic seizures at the border and in this country, but they have to go after the border labs with their elite units like the Mexican Navy,” Maltz said.

He said the Cienfuegos arrest “set us back many, many years in Mexico, and they are not being cooperative and they are not working on joint operational successes. And the lab seizures are way down” in Mexico, Maltz said

And Mexico needs to stop the flow of chemical precursors from China and India that are used to make fentanyl and meth, and to take far more aggressive action against Chinese money launderers that are now working in tandem with the cartels.

“There’s really a lot of frustration on our side of the border,” Maltz said. “We are not getting enough from them.”

A 'very prickly nationalist'

Whether López Obrador will be responsive is anybody’s guess. He made headlines by not going to the Summit of Americas last July in what was seen as a major blow to the U.S.-Mexico relationship. He made his second visit to the White House in eight months soon after but tartly told Biden that he was meeting “in spite of our differences and also in spite of our grievances that are not really easy to forget with time or with good wishes.”

"López Obrador is a very prickly nationalist,” said former Mexico Ambassador to the United States Arturo Sarukhán Casamitjana. He noted that the Mexican president sent a letter to Biden before the summit in which he continued to insist that one of the key issues that he'll be pressing is to ensure that the U.S doesn't meddle in the domestic affairs of other countries in the Americas, including his own.

“This is part of his 1960s, 1970s vision of the world and the U.S.-Mexico bilateral relationship," Sarukhán said. “So given that this is also a Mexican government, that has really sort of ratcheted down the level of collaboration in terms of law enforcement and counternarcotics policy.”

Contributing: Rebecca Morin, Francesca Chambers

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Biden Mexico visit: Can US, AMLO halt deadly cartel flow of fentanyl?

Analysis-Capture of El Chapo's son gilds Mexican president's patchy record on crime


Mexico's President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador attend a news conference, in Mexico 
Fri, January 6, 2023
By Dave Graham

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - The capture of a drug cartel boss who embarrassed Mexico's government has given President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador a rare crime-fighting victory as he prepares to host a major North American summit and gears up to secure his succession.

The arrest of Ovidio Guzman, son of captured kingpin Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, was a timely reversal of fortune for Lopez Obrador. The president had ordered Ovidio to be freed to avoid mass bloodshed after he was captured previously in the state of Sinaloa in 2019, sparking a violent stand-off with cartel gunmen.

His release angered the armed forces and caused consternation inside the government and the United States, according to U.S. and Mexican officials, feeding criticism of Lopez Obrador's strategy of avoiding direct clashes with gangs.

But the recapture of Guzman, a leader of a cartel blamed for helping to fuel a surge in U.S. opioid deaths, just as President Joe Biden and Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are due to arrive in Mexico for the summit could hardly have come at a better time for Lopez Obrador, analysts and officials said.

"It's a plus for him domestically, and a plus for him with the Americans," said Jorge Castaneda, a former Mexican foreign minister and prominent critic of the president.

However, the arrest, one of just a handful of major scalps Lopez Obrador has claimed, is unlikely to herald a major sea change in the battle on organized crime unless the government is more aggressive about going after gangs, analysts said.

Lopez Obrador took office in 2018 vowing to get a grip on gang violence. Instead, the number of homicides rose on his watch, and is now on the verge of surpassing the total recorded in the entire preceding six-year administration.

And while Lopez Obrador is popular, his record on combating crime has consistently been viewed critically by voters.

In a poll by newspaper El Financiero published this week, security again emerged as his biggest weakness, with 52% of respondents saying the government was doing a bad job on it compared with just over a third arguing the opposite.

The president's overall approval rating has held close to 60% for months, and he is hoping to lend his popularity to help his party's candidate, due to be chosen this year, secure victory in the 2024 presidential election.

Mexican presidents can only serve a single term.

GOODWILL

Lopez Obrador's attitude to the Sinaloa Cartel has stirred up misgivings, particularly when he decided to greet El Chapo's mother on a trip to Sinaloa in 2020.

Raul Benitez, a security expert at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, said Ovidio's capture should help quell frustration the military felt at having to give up Ovidio during the botched attempt at nabbing him in 2019.

Mexican security forces were never persuaded by Lopez Obrador's stated policy of using "hugs not bullets" to combat crime and the successful sting against Guzman showed that a more robust approach was what yielded results, he added.

Now Mexico needs to pursue the Sinaloa gang's main rival, the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, or they would pick up any slack in the market for deadly opioid fentanyl, Benitez said.

John Feeley, a former deputy chief of mission in the U.S. embassy to Mexico, said unless authorities had a comprehensive strategy to dismantle cartels and their front businesses, little progress would be made against fentanyl traffickers.

"Any big dude you take down is always welcome," he said. "(But) until you have a coordinated take-down of first, second and third tier associates as well as ... 'legitimate' citizens who collaborate in the money laundering, all you're really doing is putting on a spectacle for a visiting dignitary."

Feeley was skeptical that enough pressure would come from Washington to build on Guzman's capture, arguing that U.S. governments tended to subordinate all other interests to securing the U.S.-Mexico border against illegal immigration.

There were signs of mutual goodwill after the capture.

Mexico's government said late on Thursday that Biden had decided to land for the summit at a politically contentious new airport and flagship project of Lopez Obrador north of Mexico City which has so far struggled to secure airline traffic.

Mexican officials had privately been skeptical that Biden would agree to touch down there.

(Reporting by Dave Graham; Editing by Alistair Bell)

Mexican capo's arrest a gesture to US, not signal of change


2 / 12
Traffic drive past a charred vehicle set on fire the day before, in Culiacan, Sinaloa state, Mexico, Friday, Jan. 6, 2023. The government operation on Thursday to detain Ovidio Guzman, the son of imprisoned drug lord Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, unleashed firefights that killed 10 military personnel and 19 suspected members of the Sinaloa drug cartel, according to authorities.

 (AP Photo/Martin Urista)
ASSOCIATED PRESS

CHRISTOPHER SHERMAN, MARK STEVENSON and FABIOLA SÁNCHEZ
Fri, January 6, 2023 

MEXICO CITY (AP) — Mexico’s capture of a son of former Sinaloa cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán this week was an isolated nod to a drug war strategy that Mexico’s current administration has abandoned rather than a sign that President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s thinking has changed, experts say.

Ovidio Guzmán’s arrest in the Sinaloa cartel stronghold of Culiacan on Thursday came at the cost of at least 30 lives — 11 from the military and law enforcement and 19 suspected cartel gunmen. But analysts predict it won't have any impact on the flow of drugs to the United States.

It was a display of muscle — helicopter gunships, hundreds of troops and armored vehicles — at the initiation of a possible extradition process rather than a significant step in a homegrown Mexican effort to dismantle one of the country’s most powerful criminal organizations. Perhaps coincidentally, it came just days before U.S President Joe Biden makes the first visit by a U.S. leader in almost a decade.

López Obrador has made clear throughout the first four years of his six-year term that pursuing drug capos is not his priority. When military forces cornered the younger Guzmán in Culiacan in 2019, the president ordered him freed to avoid loss of life after gunmen started shooting up the city.

The only other big capture under his administration was the grabbing of a geriatric Rafael Caro Quintero last July — just days after López Obrador met with Biden in the White House. At that point, Caro Quintero carried more symbolic significance for ordering a DEA agent’s murder decades ago than real weight in today’s drug world.

“Mexico wants to do at least the bare minimum in terms of counter-drug efforts,” said Mike Vigil, the DEA’s former chief of international operations who spent 13 years of his career in Mexico. “I don’t think that this is a sign that there’s going to be closer cooperation, bilateral collaboration, if you will, between the United States and Mexico.”

While capturing a criminal is a win for justice and rule of law, Vigil said, the impact on what he sees as a “permanent campaign against drugs” is nil. “Really what we need to do here in the United States is we need to do a better job in terms of reducing demand.”

That was a key talking point when the U.S. and Mexican governments announced late in 2021 a new Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health and Safe Communities, replacing the outdated Merida Initiative.

The pact was supposed to take a more holistic approach to the scourge of drugs and the deaths they cause on both sides of the border. But underlining the frequent disconnect between diplomatic speech and reality, just two months later the U.S. government announced a $5 million reward for information leading to the capture of any of four of El Chapo’s sons, including Ovidio, signaling the U.S. kingpin strategy was alive and well.

“The Bicentennial understanding was a change on paper with respect to attacking drug trafficking and violence with a more important focus on what were supposedly public health programs — (but) without any budget,” said Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera, an associate professor at George Mason University. In reality, “Mexico is bending to the United States’ interests.”

For decades, the U.S. has nabbed drug kingpins from Mexico, Colombia and points between, but drugs are as available and more deadly in the United States as ever, she said. “The kingpin strategy is a failed strategy.”

The U.S. Department of Justice declined to comment on Ovidio Guzmán's arrest.

López Obrador took office in December 2018 after campaigning with a motto of “hugs, not bullets.” He shifted resources to social programs to address what he sees as violence’s root causes, a medium- to long-term approach that did little for a country suffering more than 35,000 homicides per year.

“Something that has characterized, in my opinion, Mexico’s security policy in recent years is that it isn’t very clear. It has been a bit contradictory,” said Ángelica Durán-Martínez, associate professor at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. That ambiguity makes it difficult to determine if there has really been a change, she said.

López Obrador’s government benefits from the detention of Guzmán in several ways. The arrest eases the armed forces’ humiliation after being forced by cartel gunmen to release him in 2019. It may sooth ill-feelings after his administration strictly limited U.S. anti-drug cooperation two years ago. And it may help diminish perceptions that López Obrador -- who has frequently visited Sinaloa and praised its people — has gone easier on the Sinaloa cartel than on other gangs.

For four years López Obrador has continued to shred his predecessors’ prosecution of the drug war at every opportunity. Experts say the respite allowed the cartels to get stronger, both in terms of organization and armament.

Guzmán during that time took a growing role after his father was sentenced to life in prison in the U.S. The younger Guzmán was indicted in Washington on drug trafficking charges along with another brother in 2018. He allegedly controlled a number of methamphetamine labs and was involved as the Sinaloa cartel expanded strongly into fentanyl production.

Synthetic drugs have been impervious to government eradication efforts, are easier to produce and smuggle, and are much more profitable.

The Sinaloa cartel hardly missed a beat when Guzmán's father was sent to the U.S., so the capture of one of the so-called “Chapitos,” as the brothers are known, is never going to shake the operation.

Mexican security analyst Alejandro Hope said the detention of Ovidio Guzman probably came as the result of pressure or information from the U.S. government, and marks the tacit abandonment of López Obrador’s rhetoric about ditching the kingpin strategy.

For Hope, the detention is depressing, not only because it won’t fundamentally change the Sinaloa cartel’s booming export trade in meth and fentanyl, but because it reveals how little investigation Mexican authorities had done on Guzmán and the cartel since 2019.

“How great that they got Ovidio, applause, perfect,” Hope said. “What depresses me is that we’ve been at this (drug war) for 16 years, or 40 counting from the (murder of DEA agent Enrique) Camarena, and we still don’t have the ability to investigate.”

After Guzmán's capture, Mexican officials said he was arrested on an existing U.S. extradition request, as well as for illegal weapons possession and attempted murder at the time they found him. On Friday, Interior Secretary Adán López Hernández said there were other Mexican investigations underway that they couldn’t talk about.

“We keep betting on the muscle, the military capabilities and not on the ability to investigate,” Hope said.

Thursday, January 12, 2023

Republican Men Still Can’t Talk About Abortion and Rape Without Embarrassing Themselves


Kylie Cheung
Thu, January 12, 2023 

Photo: Brandon Bell (Getty Images)

It’s been well over a year now since Texas enacted its citizen-enforced abortion ban, S.B. 8, which offers no exceptions for rape. In September 2021, Gov. Greg Abbott famously defended this by proclaiming that he would simply “eliminate all rapists from the streets,” ostensibly by giving more funding to the same police officers who do little to nothing to prevent sexual violence—and often perpetrate it themselves.

And now, in the wake of some Texas Republicans expressing openness to adding a rape exception to the state’s abortion laws ahead of the 2023 legislative session, Lieutenant Gov. Dan Patrick (R) opted to give a revisionist history lesson on the issue on the podcast Y’allitics this week. Specifically, Patrick suggested Democrats are actually to blame for the cruelty that abortion bans inflict on rape victims. “Our original law that’s on the books now was written by Democrats—all Democrats,” Patrick said. “We had few Republicans back then, few Republicans in the state. They did not put in an exception for rape or incest when they passed that law.”

Patrick is referring to pre-Roe abortion bans and laws criminalizing abortion from the 1920s and as far back as the 1850s—you know, before the political realignment spurred by the New Deal era.

Because apparently it needs to be said, political parties took radically different stances 100 years ago! Today, Texas Democrats are challenging abortion bans and Republicans are upholding them—it’s not complicated.

Insipid as Patrick’s comments were (including his claim that “a child who is born should not be another victim of that crime,” referring to rape-induced pregnancies), what else, really, could he say? For over a year now, Texas Republicans—like anti-abortion lawmakers everywhere—have stumbled around talking about abortion and rape, relying on obfuscation, misinformation, and tough-on-crime rhetoric disregarding how law enforcement and the criminal legal system have historically victimized survivors, because they can’t justify their positions.



In recent months, Republican politicians have claimed people can’t be impregnated by rape because they “control that intake of semen.” Last year, Jezebel reported on a Michigan Republican candidate who said he told his daughters, “If rape is inevitable, you should just lie back and enjoy it.” An Ohio Republican in the state legislature called pregnancy from rape “an opportunity.” Notably, in post-Roe Ohio, a 10-year-old rape victim was forced to travel across state lines for abortion, prompting top Republicans in Ohio and Indiana to terrorize and investigate the doctor who provided her care for months.

In June, then-Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R) outright admitted that the state’s total abortion ban, which lacks a rape exception, could force rape survivors as young as 13 to carry their rapist’s babies—but he also refused to do anything about it. “I would prefer a different outcome than that, but that’s not the debate today in Arkansas. It might be in the future, but for now, the law triggered with only one exception ... in the case of the life of the mother.”

I truly can’t over-state that rape exceptions to abortion bans are almost worthless in practice, since the majority of victims don’t report their rapes, and any and all abortion bans already amount to state gender-based violence—being denied abortion places someone at greater risk of domestic violence. The top cause of death for pregnant people is homicide, often by abusive partners.

The only way to grant pregnant rape victims dignity and agency is to not ban abortion at all or subject survivors to extensive, retraumatizing verification processes to “prove” their rape to law enforcement. Yet, where anti-abortion lawmakers once overwhelmingly supported rape exceptions—to present themselves as “moderate”—nearly all abortion bans post-Roe now lack them. Because why pretend to care about pregnant people and rape survivors when you can just lie and blame the Democrats?

 Jezebel
Georgia nuclear plant startup delayed due to vibrating pipe


 In this image provided by Georgia Power, the outside of the Unit 3 reactor containment building at Plant Vogtle in Waynesboro, Ga., is shown on Oct. 13, 2022. Startup of the nuclear power plant will be delayed since its operator found a vibrating pipe in the cooling system during testing, Georgia Power Co. announced Wednesday, Jan. 11, 2023.

JEFF AMY
Wed, January 11, 2023

ATLANTA (AP) — Startup of a nuclear power plant in Georgia will be delayed since its operator found a vibrating pipe in the cooling system during testing.

Georgia Power Co., the lead owner of Plant Vogtle near Waynesboro, announced the delay Wednesday. The company said that the third reactor at the plant is scheduled to begin generating electricity for the grid in April. The unit of Atlanta-based Southern Co. had previously given a startup deadline of March.

The problem was found during startup testing in a pipe that is part of the reactor's automatic depressurization system, said Georgia Power spokesperson Jacob Hawkins. He said the pipe needs to be braced with additional support.

“It's not a safety issue,” he said.

Southern Nuclear Operating Co., which will operate the reactor on behalf of Georgia Power and other owners, must get approval for a license modification from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the company said in an investor filing.

The plant includes two operating nuclear reactors and the first two nuclear reactors being built from scratch in the United States in decades. The fourth reactor is still under construction and is supposed to start generating electricity sometime in 2024.

The delay will cost Georgia Power and other co-owners at least $30 million.

A third and a fourth reactor were approved for construction at Vogtle by the Georgia Public Service Commission in 2012, and the third reactor was supposed to start generating power in 2016. The cost of the third and fourth reactors has climbed from an original cost of $14 billion to more than $30 billion.

Other owners include Oglethorpe Power Corp., the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia and the city of Dalton. Oglethorpe and MEAG would sell power to cooperatives and municipal utilities across Georgia, as well as in Jacksonville, Florida, and parts of Alabama and the Florida Panhandle.

Radioactive fuel was loaded into the third reactor in October. Federal regulators gave approval after delays over faulty wiring and incomplete inspection documents.

Georgia Power customers are already paying part of the financing cost and state regulators have approved a monthly rate increase as soon as the third reactor begins generating power. But the Georgia Public Service Commission will decide later who pays for the remainder of the costs.

Vogtle is the only nuclear plant under construction in the United States. Its costs and delays could deter other utilities from building such plants, even though they generate electricity without releasing climate-changing carbon emissions.
Solar developers approached two NY farmers. Their choices reveal an industry in crisis

Thomas C. Zambito and Edward Harris, New York State Team
Wed, January 11, 2023 

The cows have all been milked and fed.

Ben Simons’ Holsteins are lounging in a field next to his home on Starr Hill in Remsen, the morning fog having given way to a warming early afternoon sun.

“Right now, they’re fat and happy,” Simons says, taking in the scene.

Ben Simons stands outside of his home and farm on Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.

Dairy cows have provided Simons a steady income through the years, ever since he and his wife Robin arrived in central New York in the 1980s, joining an exodus of farming families from New Hampshire in search of a place where they could work the land and raise a family.

They sell milk to yogurt maker Chobani in nearby Chenango County and Hood dairy products in Massachusetts.


But it’s physical work, up with the sun milking cows, planting corn and soybeans and, when the growing season is over, chopping firewood for sale in nearby towns. Simons is 61.

Buildout:NY created an agency to OK wind and solar projects quickly. Upstate towns aren't happy

Wind:'Where's the rural justice?' Turbine plans for Lake Ontario shoreline hit headwinds in WNY

Farm:Despite 5-year debate over eagle safety, Windsor, Sanford wind farm moves forward

A few years ago, while he was up on a tractor harvesting hay, Simons got an unexpected visit from a man who chased him down in the field with an offer.

He was a land agent for a developer checking his interest in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.

He mentioned the transmission lines that border the fields along the Starr Hill property. Those lines would carry energy down to a substation and onto the grid, helping the state achieve its goal of 70% reliance on renewables by 2030.

Ben Simons stands out on the back porch of his home with his farmland in the background atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.More

He tossed around a few numbers — Simons recalls about $1,000 an acre annually — and promised Simons he’d receive his first down payment after the agreement was signed.

And then he asked Simons, “Are you going to keep farming?”

It’s a question upstate farmers have been asking themselves a lot in recent years. Facing an uncertain financial outlook and a next generation unwilling to inherit the family farm, leasing land to a solar developer is a way out.

This is the story of two farmers. One who took the offer, another who turned it down.

Ben Simons stands out on the back porch of his home with his farmland in the background atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.More
An offer hard to refuse

Minimum wage increases, lower overtime thresholds for workers and the cost of doing business in New York — not to mention changing weather patterns — have made the farmer’s life a daily grind that has some looking for the exit. Dairy farmers like Simons have had to contend with plunging milk prices.

Enter renewable energy developers drawn to New York by financial incentives the state has put in place to achieve its ambitious slate of climate goals. They’ve been fanning out across upstate New York in recent years, searching for farmers willing to turn over their land for, in many cases, thousands of dollars an acre annually.

The state’s goal of 60 gigawatts of solar-powered energy by 2050 translates to roughly 180 million panels. That includes panels on commercial and residential properties as well as utility-scale arrays like the one envisioned for Simons’ farm.

A view of the transmission lines that border the fields along Ben Simons' Starr Hill property in Remsen, NY.

But just two small utility-scale solar farms currently deliver energy to the grid. There are more than 70 in the pipeline awaiting state approval. Most of those are planned for upstate towns where land is cheap and plentiful, with a goal of sending it downstate to offset the region’s heavy reliance on fossil fuels.

“Farmers, I talk to them every day, they are equally frustrated and concerned about their well-being,” said Jeff Williams, the policy director for the New York Farm Bureau. “I know a couple of farmers are making that calculation now because they just can't be competitive.”

And so, the question posed to Simons a few years ago — “Are you going to keep farming?" — takes on greater urgency.

“It gets your attention,” Simons said. “It really does.”
'Preserving our farmland'

Some 16 miles southeast of Simons’ farm, Richard Marko runs a 350-acre cattle farm called Hillside Meadows in Newport, north of Utica. It produces enough beef to feed about 30 families.

A few months ago, Marko was approached by a Canadian renewable developer named Boralex who wanted to put a solar farm on a portion of his 350–acre property on North Gage Road.

The Newport Solar Project, as it’s called, would saddle the Herkimer and Oneida county lines, covering some 900 acres in Deerfield and Newport.

Boralex approached Marko because they were looking for land flat enough to lay solar panels and fields close enough to the electrical grid. The Deerfield and Newport properties checked all the boxes, Boralex spokesman Darren Suarez said.

Fields of solar panel arrays would be mixed in with viable farmland that would remain in use during the 25-year life of the project, Suarez said.

“It’s integrated more into the community," he said.

Nuclear:NY's fossil fuel use soared after Indian Point plant closure. Officials sound the alarm

Rescue:Oswego rescued a nuclear power plant and thrived. A downstate village may not be as lucky.

Towns, counties and local school districts would reap an estimated $8 million in revenue. The 130-megawatt array would produce enough energy to power roughly 37,000 homes, with some of the energy remaining nearby and the rest sent out on the grid.

Marko and his wife Patty were raised on dairy farms and bought the Hillside Meadows property a decade ago. They have four adult children between the ages of 30 and 43 and hope one day to leave it to their son, who is currently on active duty in the Marines.

After the lease term expires, the land involved in the solar project would be returned to farming. That sold Marko.

“It’s not ruining our farmland," he said. "It’s preserving our farmland."
Balancing NY renewable energy goals with 'finite resources'

State Sen. Michelle Hinchey, a Democrat, chairs the agriculture committee and represents a district with more than 1,000 farms.

In recent years, the district, which includes Greene and Montgomery counties, has been flooded with proposals for largescale solar developments and Hinchey fears the state's renewable buildout risks creating "a secondary crisis" by removing prime soil from food production.

“Don’t get me wrong, we need renewable energy, we needed it 50 years ago,” Hinchey said. “But we cannot do it at the detriment and at the expense of our finite resources, especially our finite agricultural resources.”

A view of Ben Simon's farm atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.

Farmland, she said, should be the last resort.A bill Hinchey sponsored that would discourage renewable developers from using prime farmland passed both houses of the state legislature this year. But in late November it was vetoed by Gov. Kathy Hochul, who said it would hinder the New York State Energy and Redevelopment Authority’s agrivoltaic program — a way to use land simultaneously for renewable energy and farming.

Hinchey plans to introduce the measure again in 2023.


Ben Simons talks with his son Christopher who is sitting inside of a John Deere atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.

In an effort to steer developers away from viable farmland, the state recently began a program requiring solar developers to make an “agricultural mitigation payment” if their plan includes building on prime agricultural soil. A Hinchey-sponsored bill Hochul signed this month requires that the money go into a farmland protection fund.

Under the current setup, developers search out willing landowners, then try to win state approval. It’s led to showdowns pitting the state against towns who fear sweeping views of green pastures will be marred by fields of solar panels or wind turbines.

State Sen. Joseph Griffo, a Republican whose district includes the upstate counties of Oneida, Lewis and St. Lawrence, said the current system needs to change.

Ben Simons stands out on the back porch of his home with his farmland in the background atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.More

“They (developers) go in and say, ‘Hey, we'll take on most of your problem land and we'll leave you a little bit.’ And the farmers are jumping at it. But the communities are screaming, saying, ‘Well, wait a minute, you're gonna put all these things here.”

Several upstate towns have joined in a lawsuit challenging the state’s decision to create the Office of Renewable Energy Siting to streamline the approval process for renewable projects. Griffo sponsored a bill that would have eliminated ORES.

“I think these communities have legitimate questions and legitimate concerns and they should not only be dealt with fairly but they need to be addressed,” said Griffo. “Stop the power grab. It’s basically, in my opinion, a sham process.”
Paying for those idyllic views

Marko's taking Boralex up on their offer. He is currently working with the company on acreage amounts.

“The big thing that sold me," Marko said, "is when the project expires, it goes right back to farmland."

The project will need to clear a number of significant hurdles.

Boralex expects to apply for a state permit early next year with hopes of beginning construction at the end of 2024 and up and run by the end of the following year.

Marko’s agreement with Boralex has not been finalized and the payout will depend largely on how many acres of his property the company uses.

But the deal will help him enough financially that he can continue operations on the farm.

A view of Ben Simons' farmland atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. He was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.

Simons told the agent who chased him down in the field he wasn’t interested.

But another developer came around last year, asking about a property he owns in Westernville, some six miles to the west of Starr Hill.

He wanted to build on 30 acres.

The proposal promised an initial payment of $10,000 the first year, with payments of $1,000 an acre annually. Over 25 years, the payout would exceed $1.6 million.

Ben Simons and his son Christopher are pictured in front of their farm's welcome sign atop of Starr Hill in Remsen, NY. Ben was approached by a land agent interested in leasing acres of Simons’ land to build an array of solar panels to convert the sun’s energy into electricity and deliver it to the state’s electrical grid.

“Business-wise it is a stupid decision,” Simons said. “I’m not kidding you. It is. But we’re farmers. And I’m getting ready to retire. I’m not going anywhere but I’m slowing down.”

His son, Christopher, is 33 and has plans to take over the farm some day. He has little interest in the dairy business but wants to grow crops and work the land.

“We kicked it around,” Chris Simon said. “We considered it. But when you’re talking about the best prime farmland we have, then it’s a no. If you’re taking the marginal land, the small-odd shaped fields, the ones that are less productive, that’s a different story.”

Ben Simons understands the choices made by Marko and other farmers and doesn’t begrudge their decision a bit.

In the end, he was not convinced the land could be tilled again after solar panels were dug into the ground.

But when he stops to think about the current cycle of contention — developers making deals with farmers, communities fighting developers — he thinks perhaps the farmer has been forgotten in the debate.

This article originally appeared on New York State Team: NY solar buildout presents upstate farmers with tempting offers
Go to Texas to see the anti-green future of clean energy

THE ECONOMIST
Thu, January 12, 2023 

For more than 140 years John Davis’s family has owned the Pecan Spring Ranch on the prairie lands of West Texas. He has a photo of his great-great-grandmother, known as “the sheep queen of Texas”, sitting in a horse-drawn carriage beneath a tree that still stands in front of the hay barn. It’s a tough business to maintain, even with a valuable herd of Wagyu beef cattle to raise. Yet when a renewable-energy developer offered Mr Davis a large payment to put wind turbines on his land, at first the staunch Republican—and former state congressman—turned it down.

His opposition was knee-jerk. “Clean energy has been branded a liberal technology. People literally say, ‘this is AOC coming into town,’” explains his son, Samuel, referring to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the left-wing congresswoman whose name pops up with almost flattering frequency among conservative Texans. Eventually, though, economic sense prevailed. As the family points out, at an average return per acre, cattle generate $8, deer hunters $15—and wind hundreds of dollars. It assures the ranch’s future.

Now hosting seven turbines, the family embraces renewables as religious converts would. Samuel is a representative for the Texas Land and Liberty Coalition, which promotes wind and solar energy among ranchers. His parents have bought a filling station, ripped out the petrol pumps, and are converting it into an electric-vehicle charging station (with a farmers’ market on the side). Your columnist sat down with the clan last month over a breakfast of quiche and tomato-jalapeño jam, before bouncing across their ranch in an electric buggy. He learned lessons about clean energy that challenged his own philosophical assumptions.

The first is that you do not have to believe in climate change to support renewables. Quite the opposite. For a portion of conservative America, things like climate change and carbon taxes are still viewed as big-government malarkey. Even greenery is despised as a term co-opted by the left. “When someone says we are embracing green energy, it’s like shoving an ice pick through our ears,” says Matt Welch, head of Conservative Texans for Energy Innovation, another pro-renewables group. “We just say clean energy.”

This is not just Texan recalcitrance. Wind power is abundantly harvested in states run by Republican governments and over land owned by climate-sceptic ranchers. The message they prefer is a more free-market one: that wind and solar are increasingly competitive sources of energy, help reduce electricity costs, foster entrepreneurship, and are no less American than oil and gas.

It is a surprisingly effective mantra. You might think that California, which talks a good game about climate change and green energy, is on the forefront of renewables development. But Texas is far ahead. According to a study commissioned by Mr Welch’s organisation, in the second quarter of 2022 his home state had three times more wind, solar and battery storage under construction than California. The Energy Information Administration, a federal agency, predicts that this year the share of renewables in Texan power generation will for the first time exceed that of natural gas.

That helps explain the next lesson. For all the mockery of AOC, it is from their own Republican ranks that wind-energy ranchers face the most antagonism—especially from fossil-fuel producers who fear being undercut by renewables. Organisations like the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), which lobbies on behalf of oil and gas, and the Texas Landowners Coalition, backed by right-wing beneficiaries of the fracking boom, are fighting tooth and nail to curb wind development. The TPPF’s battle extends to proposed offshore wind farms as far away as New England.

Jason Isaac of the TPPF says his organisation helped convince the Texas government to let a school-district tax credit lapse on December 31st that encouraged renewables investment in rural Texas. He argues that such fiscal support distorts the power market, though that stance ignores other incentives for oil and gas producers. He blames wind for the blackouts across Texas in 2021 caused by storm Uri, never mind that an official report concluded that “all types of generation technologies failed”, including natural gas and coal. Republicans accuse liberals of “cult-like decarbonisation”, yet their policies hurt some fellow conservatives.

The third lesson is pragmatism. Even though Republican lawmakers unanimously opposed President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which provides hundreds of billions of dollars to curb America’s use of fossil fuels, red states like Texas plan to lap it up. The Davis family do not support the IRA, but they hope its expanded federal tax credits will entice more wind and solar to rural Texas. The state also expects to attract big hydrogen and carbon-sequestration projects. Other Republican states like Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee are welcoming billions of dollars of clean-energy investments spurred by the IRA. Even conservative businesses that lobby strongly for fossil fuels hope to benefit from the energy transition. For example, Koch Industries, an energy conglomerate, supported a big investment by Freyr, a Norwegian firm, in a battery factory in Georgia that will benefit from the law.

Don’t waste your breath

The upshot is that there are ways to promote clean energy that do not rely on convincing climate sceptics that they are bonkers. A better sales pitch may be to play up the cost advantages of renewables rather than the climate benefits, emphasise their contribution to cutting air pollution rather than carbon emissions, and acknowledge that, owing to intermittency factors, natural gas may have a role to play in power generation for years to come. As Michael Webber, a professor of energy at the University of Texas, puts it, “It’s not unusual for Texas to do the right thing for all the wrong reasons.” In the end, everyone’s aim is a better future. As the elder Mr Davis says, many ranchers lucky
THE VATICAN IS ALL ABOUT SECRETS
'Catastrophe': Cardinal Pell's secret memo blasts Francis




NICOLE WINFIELD
Thu, January 12, 2023

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis will deliver a final send-off for Cardinal George Pell during a funeral Mass on Saturday, the Vatican said, as revelations emerge of the Australian prelate’s growing concern about what he considered the “disaster” and “catastrophe” of the papacy under Francis.

The Vatican on Thursday said the dean of the college of cardinals, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, would celebrate Pell's funeral Mass in St. Peter’s Basilica. As is custom for cardinal funerals, Francis will deliver a final commendation and salute.

Pell, who had served as Francis’ first finance minister for three years before returning to Australia to face child sex abuse charges, died on Tuesday at a Rome hospital of heart complications following hip surgery. He was 81.

He had been dividing his time between Rome and Sydney after he was exonerated in 2020 of allegations he molested two choirboys while he was archbishop of Melbourne. Australia’s High Court overturned an earlier court conviction, and Pell was freed after serving 404 days in solitary confinement.

Pell had clashed repeatedly with the Vatican’s Italian bureaucracy during his 2014-2017 term as prefect of the Holy See’s Secretariat for the Economy, which Francis created to try to get a handle on the Vatican’s opaque finances. In his telegram of condolence, Francis credited Pell with having laid the groundwork for the reforms underway, which have included imposing international standards for budgeting and accounting on Vatican offices.

But Pell, a staunch conservative, grew increasingly disillusioned with the direction of Francis’ papacy, including its emphasis on inclusion and canvassing of the laity about the future of the church.

He penned a remarkable memorandum outlining his concerns, and recommendations for the next pope in a future conclave, that began circulating last spring and was published under a pseudonym, “Demos,” on Vatican blog Settimo Cielo.

The blogger Sandro Magister on Wednesday revealed that Pell indeed was the author of the memo, which is an extraordinary indictment of the current pontificate by a onetime close collaborator of Francis.

The memo is divided into two parts — “The Vatican Today” and “The Next Conclave” — and lists a series of points covering everything from Francis' “weakened” preaching of the Gospel to the precariousness of the Holy See’s finances and the “lack of respect for the law” in the city-state, including in the current financial corruption trial underway that Pell himself had championed.

“Commentators of every school, if for different reasons … agree that this pontificate is a disaster in many or most respects; a catastrophe,” Pell wrote.

Also Wednesday, the conservative magazine The Spectator published what it said was a signed article that Pell wrote in the days before he died. In the article, Pell described as a “toxic nightmare” Francis’ two-year canvassing of the Catholic laity about issues such as church teaching on sexuality and the role of women that is expected to come to a head at a meeting of bishops in October.


Referring to the Vatican's summary of the canvassing effort, Pell complained of a "deepening confusion, the attack on traditional morals and the insertion into the dialogue of neo-Marxist jargon about exclusion, alienation, identity, marginalization, the voiceless, LGBTQ as well as the displacement of Christian notions of forgiveness, sin, sacrifice, healing, redemption.”

Pell's anonymous memo, however, is even harsher and takes particular aim at Francis himself. While other conservatives have criticized Francis’ crackdown on traditionalists and mercy-over-morals priorities, Pell went further and devoted an entire section to the pope’s involvement in a big financial fraud investigation that has resulted in the prosecution of 10 people, including Pell’s onetime nemesis, Cardinal Angelo Becciu.

Pell had initially cheered the indictment, which stemmed from the Vatican’s 350 million-euro investment in a London real estate deal, given it vindicated his yearslong effort to uncover financial mismanagement and corruption in the Holy See. But over the course of the trial, uncomfortable questions have been raised about the rights of the defense in a legal system where Francis has absolute power, and has wielded it.

Pell noted that that Francis had issued four secret decrees during the course of the investigation “to help the prosecution” without the right for those affected to appeal. The defense has argued the decrees violated the suspects’ human rights.

Pell also came to the defense of Becciu, whom Francis removed in September 2020 before he was even under investigation. “He did not receive due process. Everyone has a right to due process,” wrote Pell, for whom the issue is particularly dear given his own experiences.

“The lack of respect for the law in the Vatican risks becoming an international scandal,” Pell wrote.
Anti-Abortion Groups Are Planning One of Their Dumbest Protests Yet

Caitlin Cruz
JEZEBEL
Wed, January 11, 2023 

Anti-abortion rights demonstrators protest during a Women's March in Washington, DC, US, on Saturday, Oct. 8, 2022. On October 8th, exactly one month before Election Day, women and their allies marched across the country for a massive nationwide "Women's Wave" day of action meant to rally supporters of reproductive rights ahead of the 2022 midterms. 
Photographer: Valerie Plesch/Bloomberg 

After the FDA announced last week it would allow retail pharmacies to carry the abortion drug mifepristone behind its counters, CVS and Walgreens said their pharmacies in legal jurisdictions would become certified to distribute mifepristone. This was, uh, obviously an affront to anti-abortion activists who are not letting the foot off the gas after getting the big thing they wanted at the Supreme Court.

Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising—the same group that claimed to have been given 115 sets of fetal remains from a medical waste truck—will be protesting at Walgreens and CVS locations in a range of cities across America on Saturday, Feb. 4. Members are hitting up the obvious sites—New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and San Francisco—but the organic, protester-led format (think about how satellite versions of the Women’s Marches were held around the country) means they’ll also be protesting at retail pharmacies in Boston, Mass.; Austin, Texas; Detroit, Mich.; Pittsburgh, Penn.; Indianapolis, Ind.; Sioux Falls, S.D.; Akron, Ohio; and Portland, Oregon, as of publication.

The group says the protests will have the same vibe as sidewalk “counseling” that anti-abortion activists do in front of abortion clinics to harass providers and patients. “We want people to be uncomfortable going into a CVS that has a demonstration going on and to consider going to a different pharmacy,” Caroline Smith, a Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising leader, told Politico. “We also want to put enough pressure on the companies to retract this decision and not get certified to sell abortion pills.”

As Smith’s statements says, retail pharmacies are not required to become certified, but activists saw it as heartening that two of the largest pharmaceutical chains chose to start the process. The group wants the protests to be a part of a national boycott and calling campaign to CVS, too. Walgreens and CVS have not issued statements about the upcoming protests.

The group is continuing the anti-abortion movement’s use of hyperbolic language about murder and killing to promote the events. “Both pharmacy chains are in the process of converting their retail locations to become abortion businesses by selling and dispensing the abortion pill,” PAAU posted on Facebook on Tuesday.

Though medication abortions make up more than half of abortions performed in America, it is highly unlikely that certified CVS and Walgreens will pivot their operations to being abortion clinics. Still, pharmacists are worried about the anti-abortion protests. After all, protests at clinics have been known to be injurious, if not just plain annoying. “The safety of pharmacy teams is really important, and that’s something they’re going to take into consideration when they decide whether or not to become certified,” Ilisa Bernstein, the interim CEO for the American Pharmacists Association, told Politico. “In some communities, that may be more of a concern than others, but it is a concern.”

Maybe the pharmacists are right to be concerned. Students for Life policy veep Kristi Hamrick said the activists are “much savvier” now. “If Walgreens wants to learn anything from more than 50 years of our abortion activism, it’s that we will not give up,” Hamrick told Politico.

But I do question how long and just how many anti-abortion crusaders will be willing to stand out in front of enough random CVS stores to get the corporation’s attention? The reason abortion clinic protests worked (and still work, even post-Roe) is that they are directly targeting patients. The goal (beyond abolition of abortion) is to make sure everyone has to walk past those protesters at an abortion clinic if they ever actually have an abortion.

Now, people will have to walk past these inflammatory fetus signs and prayer groups as they enter a Walgreens to pick up toothpaste. If that’s how these activists want to waste their time, so be it.




Arguments over masks aren't going away in 2023

Alexander Nazaryan
·Senior White House Correspondent
Thu, January 12, 2023

Commuters at the Times Square-42nd Street subway station in New York City. (Jeenah Moon/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — On a recent evening, comedian Jimmy Fallon devoted a segment of his late night talk show to launch into one of his ready-made-for-social-media ditties, this one devoted to the new XBB.1.5 variant of the coronavirus. Rendered in the campy style of the B-52s, the joking song contained a line many public health officials would like to see elected officials make with deliberate seriousness.

“Put on your mask when inside a facility,” Fallon crooned.

Three years into the pandemic, the question of whether to mask or not to mask shows no signs of heading toward a resolution, especially during a winter season that has seen a so-called tripledemic sweep across the United States. States dropped their mask mandates long ago; last spring, a court struck down a mask mandate on airplanes, planes and other forms of transit. Today, masking is still required in some institutions, like hospitals and theaters.


But for the most part, masking has become purely a matter of choice.


Dr. Ashish Jha, White House COVID-19 response coordinator, at a news conference on Dec. 15. (Oliver Contreras/Sipa/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Not even the appearance of XBB.1.5 has spurred a shift toward mandates. Some school districts in Michigan and Massachusetts required students to mask after they returned from the winter holiday break, but those mandates remain very much the exception, not the rule. So far, no major city has reimposed a mask mandate. Even the governors of the bluest states would rather talk about inflation than the pandemic, so gruelingly divisive has that topic become.

Still, the virus persists. The emergence of XBB.1.5 is especially concerning because this newest Omicron subvariant is so transmissible. And it arrived in the United States as winter set in, when people are much more likely to gather indoors.

“COVID is the thing that concerns us most as we look to the days and weeks ahead,” Dr. Ashish Jha, the White House pandemic response team coordinator, told NPR earlier this month.

For public health officials concerned with a new winter spike, masking is an obvious solution to a recurrent problem. “When it comes to individual decisions, masks are among the most low-cost and most effective steps that can be taken to broadly reduce transmission of a multitude of viruses,” University of Michigan epidemiologists Emily Toth Martin and Marisa Eisenberg argued in a recent op-ed.


New York City's health officials issued an advisory in December urging New Yorkers to use masks as COVID-19, flu and RSV cases rose. (Fatih Aktas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Some believe that masks should not be a matter of personal choice, pointing to evidence that masking is most effective when it is practiced by everyone. A recently formed activist group called the People’s CDC — its very title is an implicit criticism of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — has called for mask mandates to be implemented in schools and other institutions.

“The pandemic isn't over — and it's not going to be over for any of us until it's over for all of us,” People’s CDC member Dr. Zoey Thill, a New York physician, told Yahoo News. “We are only going to get through this pandemic with a collective approach.”

She and other masking advocates believe that Americans’ resistance to masking has been overstated and that, more broadly, too many Democrats have forsaken aggressive mitigation measures because of political concerns, not public health realities.

The White House recently announced it was making coronavirus diagnostic tests available for free again. But officials like Jha who work on the pandemic have ceased to emphasize masking as a matter of course, the way they did in 2020 and early 2021. Incentives for vaccination disappeared long ago, and many Americans who received their initial inoculations decided against booster shots that were updated to fight new variants of the coronavirus.

A medical worker administers a dose of flu vaccine at a medical center in Rosemead, Calif. (Xinhua via Getty Images)

To some, all this is merely society returning to normal. To others, it’s surrender.

“People don’t want to be dealing with this pandemic forever,” Thill acknowledged in a telephone interview. But she argued that unless measures like universal masking, improved ventilation and paid leave for sick workers were implemented, the coronavirus would continue to spread, giving rise to new variants and delaying the pandemic’s end.

Even though many Americans continue to support masking, the resistance to mask mandates has become a political movement of its own. “Mask mandates were brazenly wrong 3 years ago and they’re wrong today,” tweeted Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in response to the new school mandates. He and other Republicans have used disagreements over masking to launch culture war attacks that have galvanized the conservative base.

Sen. Ted Cruz at the Republican Jewish Coalition on Nov. 19, 2022, in Las Vegas. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

Politics aside, even some medical professionals believe that the efficacy of masking was overstated to begin with. “Masks certainly can work on an individual level to reduce viral transmission (i.e. infecting another person), but only if the mask is well-fitted, high-grade, and worn consistently,” Dr. Lucy McBride, a physician in Washington, D.C., wrote in a recent newsletter.

“In the real world, these conditions aren’t readily met — which explains why the real-world population data on mask effectiveness is weak.”

Even Jha, the White House coordinator, has become something of a mask skeptic. “There is no study in the world that shows that masks work that well,” he said in December, in a comment that cheered some and dismayed others. (The White House notes, correctly, that it has no power to impose mask mandates, though the bully pulpit of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue comes with no small amount of suasion.)

Washington physician McBride is one of the founders of Urgency of Normal, a group started last year to advocate for doing away with pandemic restrictions. Last week, Urgency of Normal called for an end to all school mask mandates across the country. In an open letter, the organization argued that “continued pandemic mitigation measures like mask mandates are not justified for respiratory viruses. It is in children’s best interests to normalize the daily school experience and put an end to unnecessary and harmful restrictions.”

Let Them Breathe, an anti-mask group, protests in Redondo Beach, Calif., in July 2021. (Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Urgency of Normal has plenty of detractors, who say its arguments cater to wealthier, whiter communities that benefit from high-quality health care and the ability to work from home. The People’s CDC has an information tool kit titled “The Urgency of Equity,” which serves both as an obvious allusion and a counterargument.

So far, though, the imperative for normalcy seems to be winning out over pandemic worries in many parts of the country, frustrating advocates who believe that individualized approaches to the pandemic are bound to fail.

“We all need to do our own part to minimize risk for everyone,” Thill said. “It’s only until we do that that we’re going to get through this."