Friday, February 10, 2023

A ‘twisted’ experience: How KY’s abortion bans are depriving pregnant patients of health care

Alex Acquisto
Thu, February 9, 2023

On the way to her 20 week ultrasound, Amy English texted her family group chat inviting guesses on her baby’s biological sex.

“Baby boy English muffin!” her father in-in-law texted.

“I thought boy at first but I’m thinking girl now,” her sister-in-law said. “My official guess is a girl :).”

It was December 28. Earlier that morning, Amy, 31, her husband David, and their 20-month-old daughter Annie had celebrated a belated Christmas at their house in Louisville with family visiting from out of state.

Amy and David had planned this pregnancy, and it was, in a way, perfectly timed. Their baby’s due date was five days after Annie’s birthday. Her children would be two years apart almost exactly to the day — a reality Amy was “ecstatic about.”


Sitting in a fluorescent-lit room inside Baptist Health Louisville, Amy looked for familiar shapes on the screen as an ultrasound tech probed her abdomen. Familiar with radiology in her career as a physical therapist, she has a baseline understanding of how to read ultrasounds: gray shapes usually indicate fluid, and bone shows up as white.

Amy remembers seeing her baby’s arms, legs and the curve of its back. But there was no recognizable outline where the skull should be.

“I couldn’t see the top of my baby’s head,” Amy said in an interview with the Herald-Leader. “I kept waiting for the tech to move the probe in a way where we could see what we should be seeing. I could tell she was searching for it, too.”

Amy had also learned in school about anencephaly, a severe fetal birth defect impacting the brain and skull. A lack of folic acid early in pregnancy increases the likelihood of this happening. This possibility flashed in her mind but she quickly batted it down; she’d been taking her prenatal vitamins, rich in folic acid, for months even before discovering she was pregnant.

The tech paused, then spoke.

“What we’re looking for here is an outline of the baby’s head, and right now I’m not really seeing that,” the woman explained before calling in Amy’s longtime OBGYN.

Over the next few minutes, Amy remembers the room blurring as she heard her doctor use the word “acrania,” which is when a fetus matures through pregnancy without ever developing parts of its skull. It can spur anencephaly, when the brain, too, is underdeveloped and partially missing. Pregnancies with either of these conditions are nonviable.

Amy’s baby, which they learned was a boy, had both. He would not survive into childhood, likely not beyond a few minutes after birth.

This, alone, was devastating news. Her dismay was compounded the next day when she learned that terminating her nonviable pregnancy, even by way of an early induction — a commonplace and provider-recommended method of treatment for such a diagnosis — couldn’t happen.

Even though Amy’s baby would never survive outside her womb, the pregnancy still had a fetal heartbeat — a technicality, considering the diagnosis. Coupled with the lack of immediate threat to her health, her doctors explained they couldn’t induce labor, much less give her an abortion. Kentucky laws forbade it, they said.

“I don’t know what was more shocking: to find out the baby had anencephaly, or that I would have to go out of state to get this care,” Amy said.

Kentucky’s abortion bans do not legally permit the standard of care treatment for a nonviable pregnancy like Amy’s. As a result, doctors must refer patients needing otherwise medically-recommended terminations out of state in droves, along with people desiring elective abortions, according to interviews with seven providers across four hospital systems. Providers who terminate pregnancies in violation of the trigger law can be charged with a felony in Kentucky.

Though this scenario is increasingly common statewide, it’s one arbiters of the state’s laws have yet to remedy, and one lawmakers are not publicly working to resolve.


People gather near Robert F. Stephens Courthouse Plaza in downtown Lexington, Ky., on Friday, June 24, 2022 to protest the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Kentucky’s trigger law, enacted in late June 2022, criminalizes abortion except to prevent a “substantial risk of death,” or to “prevent the serious, permanent impairment of a life-sustaining organ of a pregnant woman.” The fetal heartbeat law also includes these exceptions but otherwise bans abortion except in a “medical emergency” once fetal cardiac activity begins, usually around six weeks.

Any time a pregnancy is terminated, each law requires a provider to document in writing why it was necessary to, in the case of the six-week ban, “prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.”

The law permits the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to audit any licensed health care facility to make sure its abortion reporting requirements are “in compliance” with the law.

Both bans allow physicians to use their “reasonable medical judgment” when deciding whether pregnancy terminations are medically necessary. But providers interviewed for this story said that guidance is antithetical with the rest of the law’s limits, which only permit terminations in medical emergencies. There are no exceptions for fetal anomalies, or for the gamut of conditions that may make a pregnancy nonviable but don’t pose an immediate or emergent health risk to a pregnant person.

Moreover, the lack of uniform guidance from the state on what’s considered an emergency means definitions across hospitals sometimes vary, the Herald-Leader found. This has created a legal thicket for health care institutions. As a result, the final say on some critical medical decisions affecting pregnant patients is falling not to medical experts, but to hospital attorneys and administrators, who are worried about legality, liability and reputation.

The Herald-Leader asked the University of Kentucky, UofL Health and Baptist Health for insight into how their respective risk management teams and providers are navigating the laws. None responded to multiple questions about respective protocols for deciding when terminations are legally defensible, or how risk management teams, administrators and providers go about deciding.

“Clinicians have a responsibility to provide compassionate, evidence-based care and counsel to their patients, and also comply with the law,” Baptist said in a statement.

“UofL Health is committed to provide comprehensive health care to all its patients and their families,” UofL said in a statement. “In the case of a nonviable pregnancy that poses a health risk to the mother, we explain options for care while complying with all state and federal laws.”

“Although we cannot discuss when or how our legal counsel gives advice,” UK HealthCare said, “in Kentucky, state law prohibits the University’s physicians and staff from performing abortions except when the mother’s life is in danger. In the case of a nonviable pregnancy, our health care staff work with patients to determine the best course of care for the patient that is consistent with state and federal law.”
‘We could not provide this service here’

The morning after Amy learned her baby likely had a fatal birth defect, the diagnosis was confirmed at a second ultrasound with a high-risk specialist. The buoyancy and excitement of the prior day was replaced with dread and grief. Amy remembers the quietness of the room during the second ultrasound, the hollow clicking of the keyboard keys and the intermittent clicking of the computer mouse.

Baptist Health refused to make Amy’s doctor available for an interview. But their conversation was outlined in Amy’s medical records, which were provided to the Herald-Leader.

“I discussed this finding with the patient and offered my sincerest condolences — that this was not compatible with life and that I am so sorry she and her husband are in this situation,” the doctor wrote in her notes. “She was understandably tearful.”

Amy listened as her provider explained her two options: Amy could carry her son to term and deliver him via C-section. He would immediately be taken to palliative care, where he would live a few minutes, maybe hours. Grief counselors would be on standby.

Her second option was to terminate the pregnancy early by way of an abortion or preterm induction. “Choosing not to continue the pregnancy: we discussed that this is also a loving choice for a baby that will certainly not survive,” her doctor wrote.

Pre-trigger law, termination under these circumstances would’ve happened in a hospital, and Amy’s health insurance likely would’ve covered it.

“No part of me wanted to be pregnant anymore,” Amy said. “Every flutter and kick he gave felt like a literal gut punch reminder that I would never get to take him home.”

Strangers were already approaching her at the grocery to ask to touch her stomach. Her patients at work often asked how far along she was. It seemed emotionally unthinkable to continue subjecting herself to a life where, at any moment, she would be forced to repeat that her growing body was nurturing a baby that wouldn’t live, she said.


Amy English poses for a portrait outside her home in Lousivlle, Ky., on Friday, Feb. 3, 2023.

Termination was what Amy wanted. She erupted into sobs when her doctor told her that under her current circumstances (her life wasn’t immediately threatened, and there was still a fetal heartbeat) it wasn’t an option.

“We discussed that due to our current Kentucky laws, we could not provide this service here,” her doctor wrote in her records.

“I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m so sorry,” Amy remembers the specialist saying.

She gave Amy a list of hospitals and clinics in surrounding states that might be able to terminate her pregnancy. Her doctor recommended calling Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, or another clinic in Illinois, where abortion is widely available.

“Am I just supposed to Google the number, call the front desk and ask, ‘How do I get an abortion at your hospital?’” Amy remembered thinking.

Over the next few days, she, her husband and sister-in-law cold-called a handful of clinics to request a dilation and evacuation abortion, common in the second trimester. But a combination of abortion restrictions in Indiana and Ohio, including gestational limits on when abortion is legal — Amy was 21 weeks along at this point — left her with few options.

Then, Amy’s sister, a nurse anesthetist at Northwestern Medicine Kishwaukee Hospital in Dekalb, west of Chicago, stepped in. Her hospital lacked the equipment for a D&E, but they agreed to induce Amy.

On January 4, after driving close to 400 miles, Amy was induced and gave birth to a son she and her husband named Soloman Matthew. He didn’t cry. His heart beat for about two minutes before it stopped.
‘Not knowing what to do’

The Republican-led General Assembly has made no moves to amend or further clarify either abortion ban since both took effect seven months ago, even though the combined impact has harmed patients, doctors have told lawmakers.

The Kentucky Supreme Court still hasn’t issued a preliminary opinion on whether either law infringes on a person’s constitutional right to bodily autonomy and self-determination. Deciding so would temporarily block one or both bans from being enforced. Convened for a regular session through March, the Republican supermajority has yet to file any bills related to reproductive health care access and likely won’t until the high court weighs in.

In the meantime, there’s disagreement about whether or not either ban infringes on providers’ ability to dole out the standard level of care to pregnant patients.

Kentucky Supreme Court Justice Michelle Keller and former Deputy Chief Justice Lisabeth Hughes raised this point during November oral arguments in the pending court case from the state’s two outpatient abortion clinics challenging the constitutionality of both laws.

The trigger law “doesn’t recognize an exception for women who are under the care of a physician who tells them that the standard of care would be to terminate the pregnancy,” Hughes told Solicitor General Matt Kuhn, arguing on behalf of the Attorney General’s office.

As a result, “What’s really happening is physicians in (hospitals) all over the commonwealth are calling the risk managers and attorneys for the hospitals not knowing what to do,” Keller added. “You’re obfuscating what this trigger statute says. There isn’t a strict life of the mother exception.”

Jace Peters-White of Lexington, center, joined others protesting at the Kentucky state Capitol in Frankfort, Ky., on Wednesday, April 13, 2022. Protesters chanted “Bans off our bodies” as they anticipated Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear’s veto of a sweepingly restrictive abortion bill, HB3, would be overridden.

The law’s proponents, including Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron, have cited the provision in the law that allows for use of “reasonable medical judgment” as protecting doctors’ autonomy, and that any challenge to that fact is overblown.

“The law has an explicit health exception, (which) depends on a ‘reasonable medical judgment’ from physicians,” Kuhn told Kentucky Supreme Court justices that day. There’s been “a lot of misinformation” suggesting the law doesn’t adequately protect a pregnant person’s health, he said, citing two advisories Cameron’s office has issued since both measures took effect. Both clarify that abortions for in vitro fertilization, treatment of miscarriages, preeclampsia and ectopic pregnancies don’t violate the law.

As for the host of other conditions not mentioned, “we are continuing to work with Kentucky doctors giving guidance on that,” Kuhn said.

But no written evidence of that guidance appears to exist. In response to an open records request from the Herald-Leader, Cameron’s office said this week it had no written or electronic records of communication between the Attorney General’s office and licensed health care facilities or providers regarding the trigger law or six week ban.
‘An unnecessary physical and psychological risk’

It was mid June when Leah Martin, 35, discovered she was pregnant with her second child.

Pregnancy at ages 35 and above is considered geriatric. Aware that her age meant she faced a heightened risk, she opted for genetic testing early on to gauge any abnormalities.

Her first ultrasound didn’t raise any alarm. At just over nine weeks, Leah took a prenatal genetic test. The results a week later showed “low fetal fractal numbers,” she said in an interview.

That result, her OBGYN told her, could mean there hadn’t been enough material collected to show a clearer result. It could also signal an abnormality.

Leah, wanting to be judicious, got a more exact genetic test just before 12 weeks. She quickly learned her fetus had triploidy, a rare condition that causes the development of 69 chromosomes per cell instead of the regular 46. It causes not only severe physical deformities, but triploidy stunts development of crucial organs, like the lungs and heart. It means a fetus, if it even survives to birth, will likely not live beyond a few days.

What’s more, Leah was also diagnosed with a partial molar pregnancy, which causes atypical cells to grow in the uterus and, as Leah’s doctors told her, could lead to cancer.

It was mid-July, and Kentucky’s trigger law and six week ban had been in effect for barely two weeks. Leah was familiar enough with what both laws restricted and assumed that because her pregnancy could cause her cancer and was nonviable, she would lawfully qualify as an exception.

So, she weighed her options with her doctors at Baptist Health Lexington, who included Dr. Blake Bradley, her longtime OBGYN.

Similar to Amy’s diagnosis, Leah’s doctors told her that even if she opted to carry the pregnancy to term, her baby “would live a short life in palliative care, most likely never leaving the hospital. It would really be a quite painful existence,” she said.

“I have a 2-year-old at home, and I’m 35, weighing how I would like to expand my family. It seemed like the safest option for me and the compassionate choice for my unborn child was to terminate the pregnancy,” she said.


Leah Martin poses for a portrait in her home in Lexington, Ky., on Tuesday, Feb. 7, 2023.


Like Amy’s, a medically-necessary abortion under these circumstances would typically take place at a hospital, doctors interviewed for this story said. Leah’s health insurance had already agreed to cover it. It was also the quickest way to help Leah to her end goal: getting pregnant again in order to birth a child that would survive.

It was July 21 and Leah was just over 12 weeks pregnant when she learned that Baptist’s legal counsel had blocked her doctors from giving her a dilation and curettage abortion.

“I was told the hospital refused to perform the procedure while the case was being litigated. I was dumbfounded,” Leah said. Hospital lawyers cited an ongoing lawsuit from Kentucky’s two outpatient abortion providers that’s pending before the Kentucky Supreme Court.

According to Leah, hospital providers, relaying the message from administration and risk management, reportedly said if her fetus died on its own, doctors would be able to terminate her pregnancy. But their hands were tied as long as it had a heartbeat.

“People minimize that pregnancy, even under its best circumstances, is associated with life-threatening risks, life-altering risks and emotional impacts,” Bradley told the Herald-Leader. “So, to compel a woman to continue a pregnancy that is by everyone’s assessment, doomed, by definition places that woman at an unreasonable and unnecessary physical and psychological risk, period.”

Baptist Health refused to make Leah’s high-risk doctor available for an interview.

The following Monday, July 25, Leah had an ultrasound at the hospital to confirm what she already knew. As an ultrasound tech probed her abdomen, a wheel of dizzying emotions spun in her head: she desperately wanted a baby, but she didn’t want to birth a child into a painful existence.

Already faced with a gutting dilemma, she felt further burdened by having such an intimate choice ripped from her. And she was furious at now being forced to remain pregnant despite there being no chance for survival, despite the risks continuing such a pregnancy posed to her own body.

She remembers staring at the ultrasound screen waiting to hear the muffled heartbeat of her fetus, racked with guilt because she hoped she wouldn’t.

“It was such a twisted experience being pregnant with a baby I desperately wanted, lying there hoping its heart had stopped,” she said shakily. “It was horrible to have to wish for that in order to receive care. It just felt so unsafe and cruel.”

Leah had already arranged to drive to Chicago to get an abortion when a Jefferson Circuit judge issued a preliminary injunction on July 22, temporarily blocking the state from enforcing both bans. She immediately called EMW Women’s Surgical Center in Louisville — one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the state — and made an appointment.

On Wednesday, July 27, almost 13 weeks pregnant, Leah paid $950 out of pocket for her abortion. Her insurance wouldn’t cover it, since it was considered elective. The following Monday, the Kentucky Court of Appeals overturned the circuit court injunction, reinstating both abortion bans.

After Leah’s abortion, she sent a message to her high-risk doctor. Her doctor responded the following day. Leah shared that correspondence with the Herald-Leader.

“You’ve been on my thoughts a lot,” her doctor wrote. “Words cannot express the dismay I feel right now. I’ve spent my whole adult life learning how to care for mothers in heart wrenching or dangerous situations like yours, and the politics now make it not only impossible, but to work to take care of patients like they deserve — with compassion and science — in these horrible situations is wrong and immoral.”

“I hope your procedure yesterday was smooth, though I know it was hard,” her doctor wrote. “I’m so sorry we could not (were not allowed, rather) to take care of you here.”
What does the Bible say about homosexuality? For starters, Jesus wasn't a homophobe

Gerald West, Senior Professor of Biblical Studies, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Thu, February 9, 2023 


Pope Francis was recently asked about his views on homosexuality. He reportedly replied:

This (laws around the world criminalising LGBTI people) is not right. Persons with homosexual tendencies are children of God. God loves them. God accompanies them … condemning a person like this is a sin. Criminalising people with homosexual tendencies is an injustice.

This isn’t the first time Pope Francis has shown himself to be a progressive leader when it comes to, among other things, gay Catholics.

It’s a stance that has drawn the ire of some high-ranking bishops and ordinary Catholics, both on the African continent and elsewhere in the world.


Read more: Pope Francis' visit to Africa comes at a defining moment for the Catholic church

Some of these Catholics may argue that Pope Francis’s approach to LGBTI matters is a misinterpretation of Scripture (or the Bible). But is it?

Scripture is particularly important for Christians. When church leaders refer to “the Bible” or “the Scriptures”, they usually mean “the Bible as we understand it through our theological doctrines”. The Bible is always interpreted by our churches through their particular theological lenses.

As a biblical scholar, I would suggest that church leaders who use their cultures and theology to exclude homosexuals don’t read Scripture carefully. Instead, they allow their patriarchal fears to distort it, seeking to find in the Bible proof-texts that will support attitudes of exclusion.

There are several instances in the Bible that underscore my point.

Love of God and neighbour

Mark’s Gospel, found in the New Testament, records that Jesus entered the Jerusalem temple on three occasions. First, he visited briefly, and “looked around at everything” (11:11).

On the second visit he acted, driving “out those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves” (11:15). Jesus specifically targeted those who exploited the poorest of the people coming to the temple.

On his third visit, Jesus spent considerable time in the temple itself (11:27-13:2). He met the full array of temple leadership, including chief priests, teachers of the law and elders. Each of these leadership sectors used their interpretation of Scripture to exclude rather than to include.

The “ordinary people” (11:32 and 12:12) recognised that Jesus proclaimed a gospel of inclusion. They eagerly embraced him as he walked through the temple.

In Mark 12:24, Jesus addresses the Sadducees, who were the traditional high priests of ancient Israel and played an important role in the temple. Among those who confronted Jesus, they represented the group that held to a conservative theological position and used their interpretation of the Scripture to exclude. Jesus said to them:

Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God?

Jesus recognised that they chose to interpret Scripture in a way that prevented it from being understood in non-traditional ways. Thus they limited God’s power to be different from traditional understandings of him. Jesus was saying God refused to be the exclusive property of the Sadducees. The ordinary people who followed Jesus understood that he represented a different understanding of God.

This message of inclusion becomes even clearer when Jesus is later confronted by a single scribe (12:28). In answer to the scribe’s question on the most important laws, Jesus summarised the theological ethic of his gospel: love of God and love of neighbour (12:29-31).
Inclusion, not exclusion

Those who would exclude homosexuals from God’s kingdom choose to ignore Jesus, turning instead to the Old Testament – most particularly to Genesis 19, the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Their interpretation of the story is that it is about homosexuality. It isn’t. It relates to hospitality.

The story begins in Genesis 18 when three visitors (God and two angels, appearing as “men”) came before Abraham, a Hebrew patriarch. What did Abraham and his wife Sarah do? They offered hospitality.

The two angels then left Abraham and the Lord and travelled into Sodom (19:1) where they met Lot, Abraham’s nephew. What did Lot do? He offered hospitality. The two incidents of hospitality are explained in exactly the same language.

The “men of Sodom” (19:4), as the Bible describes them, didn’t offer the same hospitality to these angels in disguise. Instead they sought to humiliate them (and Lot (19:9)) by threatening to rape them. We know they were heterosexual because Lot, in attempting to protect himself and his guests, offered his virgin daughters to them (19:8).

Heterosexual rape of men by men is a common act of humiliation. This is an extreme form of inhospitality. The story contrasts extreme hospitality (Abraham and Lot) with the extreme inhospitality of the men of Sodom. It is a story of inclusion, not exclusion. Abraham and Lot included the strangers; the men of Sodom excluded them.
Clothed in Christ

When confronted by the inclusive gospel of Jesus and a careful reading of the story of Sodom as one about hospitality, those who disavow Pope Francis’s approach will likely jump to other Scriptures. Why? Because they have a patriarchal agenda and are looking for any Scripture that might support their position.

But the other Scriptures they use also require careful reading. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, for example, are not about “homosexuality” as we now understand it – as the caring, loving and sexual relationship between people of the same sex. These texts are about relationships that cross boundaries of purity (between clean and unclean) and ethnicity (Israelite and Canaanite).

In Galatians 3:28 in the New Testament, Paul the apostle yearns for a Christian community where:

There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.

Paul built his theological argument on the Jew-Greek distinction, but then extended it to the slave-free distinction and the male-female distinction. Christians – no matter which church they belong to – should follow Paul and extend it to the heterosexual-homosexual distinction.

We are all “clothed in Christ” (3:27): God only sees Christ, not our different sexualities.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. Like this article? Subscribe to our weekly newsletter.

It was written by: Gerald West, University of KwaZulu-Natal.


Read more:

Using the Bible against LGBTQ+ people is an abuse of scripture

Homosexuality and Africa: a philosopher’s perspective


Biden’s forgotten promise to Cuba

Top surprises from a trip to Cuba: Yahoo Finance’s Rick Newman

Rick Newman
·Senior Columnist
Wed, February 8, 2023

Camilo Condis is the type of scrappy entrepreneur Americans normally cheer. He’s the co-owner of a small electrical company in Havana, Cuba that used to piggyback on the robust tourist economy, but made a pivot when COVID hit and tourism dried up. Condis, 37, is now trying to capitalize on the green-energy revolution by installing solar panels in a region that desperately needs energy self-sufficiency.

The problem is, Condis gets tangled in American politics in nearly every facet of his business.

Sixty years of U.S. sanctions on Cuba have left the island with almost no domestic production, so Condis must import everything he needs to do business. U.S. sanctions make it impossible to buy on credit or pay for purchases through a bank account. He used to visit the United States regularly, buy what he needed in cash and bring it back on the plane. But tighter visa restrictions and other strictures imposed during the Trump administration largely closed that supply chain.

“The economy is very, very bad right now,” Condis says of conditions in Cuba. “Our first ask is to differentiate the private sector from the Cuban government. If they want to sanction the Cuban government, that’s fine, but don’t sanction the civil society in general. There have to be ways for U.S. government to say, 'The Cuban private sector not going to be a target.'”


Electrical contractor Camilo Condis in Havana. Photo: Camilo Condis

To many visitors to Cuba, an easing of U.S. sanctions seems logical and long overdue. Cuba is no longer a client state of the Soviet Union, which dissolved in 1991, or its Russian successor. It poses no unusual national security threat to the United States. In 2014, President Obama began a rapprochement meant to boost U.S. trade with Cuba and export American influence. It seemed to be working, with Cubans in exile flocking home to be part of the new Cuba. Yet President Trump shut that down and imposed new sanctions even tougher than those in place before.

As a presidential candidate, Joe Biden promised to “promptly reverse the failed Trump policies that have inflicted harm on the Cuban people and done nothing to advance democracy and human rights.” But Biden’s only moves so far have been a minor easing of travel restrictions and a few other modest changes. The toughest sanctions remain in place, one factor triggering the largest flood of Cuban migrants to the United States ever.

I visited Cuba in January as one of 20 Americans on a fact-finding trip sponsored by the Global Interdependence Center, a Philadelphia nonprofit focused on economic cooperation among nations. Shortages were apparent everywhere. Locals wait in long lines for food and gas. Public bathrooms lack tissue paper and toilet seats. Internet service works at dial-up speed, if it’s even available. Buildings routinely collapse from lack of maintenance. There was a common refrain in meetings with government officials, local businesspeople and community leaders: End the sanctions. Reduce our misery. Give us access to American stuff.

[See 7 surprises from a visit to Cuba]

“There is no animosity in Cuba toward the United States,” Carlos Fernández de Cossío, the deputy foreign minister, told our group. The most important thing the United States could do, he said, is reverse Trump’s 2021 decision to put Cuba on the list of countries supporting terrorism, along with Iran, Syria and North Korea. “The United States could do this and no American would feel any pain. Acting on this would have no cost within the U.S.”

This isn't a war zone. Its just urban decay in Havana. Photo: Rick Newman

American business groups want the same thing. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports “barrier-free economic and commercial partnership between the United States and Cuba,” so American businesses can freely export to the island. Trade economist Gary Hufbauer of the Peterson Institute for International Economics estimates that U.S. exports to Cuba, barely $300 million per year now, could surge to $8 billion under normalization and $13 billion if the United States ever inked a free-trade deal with the country. That’s in the range of U.S. trade with Vietnam or Peru. Cuba wouldn’t be a huge market, but it would be a target-rich environment for certain U.S. exporters, such as poultry and rice farmers, telecom gear makers, technology service firms, cruise lines, tourism operators and real-estate developers.

More trade would also Americanize a land still clinging to Marxist ideology, normalization advocates say. “The premise is that you kill them with kindness,” says Juan Cruz of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who worked on Cuba policy in the Obama and Trump White Houses. “Put so many things in place that you discredit their system. Inundate them with good shampoo, soft towels and rock music. History shows that when you open those kind of things, no system can hold back.”

So what’s the problem?

Strident opposition to normalization from some Cuban-Americans whose families fled the country when Fidel Castro seized power in 1959. Many of those refugees lost homes, land, bank deposits and the majority of their possessions, or have relatives who did, when Castro nationalized privately-owned assets. Some are now members of Congress, mainly from Florida, where the Cuban-American population totals more than 1 million. “They were born there and had to flee, or saw parents or grandparents who had to flee,” says JP Chavez, co-founder of the Miami public-affairs consultancy Vocero. “It leaves quite a scar on some of these folks.”

[Follow Rick Newman on Twitter, sign up for his newsletter or sound off.]

Obama felt strongly about opening up to Cuba and disregarded opposition from anti-Cuba hard-liners, including Dem. Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey and a conservative Cuban-American voting bloc in South Florida. Trump was happy to reverse many Obama policies, and hard-liners got his ear. The new Trump sanctions hit as COVID was wrecking Cuba’s tourism business. Cubans couldn’t even get ventilators from the United States to help treat COVID patients, a slight many Cubans still bitterly bring up.

A Che Guevera mural in a Cuban government building.

Cubans don't say this outright, but the need for relief is becoming acute. The Cuban economy is in miserable shape, with Cubans debating whether it’s worse now than during the desperate days known as the “special period” in the 1990s, after the Soviet Union collapsed and Cuba lost its powerful sponsor. The Cuban economy shrank by 11% in 2020 and has barely recovered since then. Venezuela is a key ally that supplies Cuba with oil and other goods, but Venezuela’s own economy is foundering and supplies to Cuba have dwindled.

Cuba clearly needs better friends. But to some extent, it torpedoes its own interests. On July 11, 2021, thousands of Cubans fed up with deprivation hit the streets in nationwide protests, which the communist government, led by President Miguel Díaz-Canel, suppressed with force. Authorities put more than 700 protesters in jail, including many who were demonstrating peacefully, according to human rights groups. The crackdown neatly aligned with the hard-liners’ claim of a cruel authoritarian regime undeserving of democratic outreach.

Yet there’s also a latent industriousness in Cuba that seems worthy of American support. The Cuban government has allowed people to start private businesses during the last several years, and there are now 6,000 such businesses, roughly three times the number of government-controlled firms. Owners are allowed to keep the profits, after paying taxes and fees.

But barriers to success swamp what American entrepreneurs might be used to. “Importing raw materials is the biggest barrier to making anything in Cuba,” one business owner told the GIC group. “At moments you just want to scream.” The lack of financing means Cuban importers have to pay for everything up front, with dollars or euros often exchanged for Cuban pesos on a vibrant black market that operates largely on Telegram.

Barriers to prosperity are sending many Cubans packing. Nearly 300,000 Cubans—about 2.5% of the population—have left the island during the last two years, seeking better opportunities elsewhere, mostly in the United States. Many are educated young people who see no outlet for their skills in Cuba. But some want to stay. “I’m still here because I want us to change, and I want to see it first-hand,” says Condis, the electrical contractor.

The migration surge could be an impetus for Biden to act. Some Cubans get visas to come to the States legally, but many fly to Central America and then trek to the southwest border, where Cubans are now the second-largest group of migrants by nationality, after Mexicans. Improving conditions in Cuba would persuade more Cubans to stay or return home. Biden has the executive authority to ease sanctions, as Obama did, without Congressional action.

Biden seems less interested in Cuba than Obama was, however, and there's political risk to following through on his campaign pledges. Menendez, the New Jersey Democratic senator and the son of Cuban immigrants, was a crucial Biden ally during the last two years, when Dems had just a one-vote majority in the Senate. Biden may have been unwilling to cross him, given the support he needed for big bills such as the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. That could change now that Republicans control the House and no Democratic legislation is likely to pass.

A portrait of Fidel Castro hangs beside a government health care facility in Havana. Photo: Rick Newman

Florida politics are another factor. Obama won Florida in 2008 and 2012, when Florida was considered a swing state a presidential candidate needed to take to win the election. Florida then went for Trump in 2016. Chavez, the Miami consultant, thinks Obama’s opening to Cuba two years earlier cost Democrats Hispanic support in Florida, and elsewhere. “We’ve seen a significant shift among Hispanic voters toward the Republican Party,” Chavez says. “One big reason is cozying up with socialist regimes. Folks down here in south Florida don’t like that. Republicans have been able to capitalize on this anti-socialism movement, and Cuba is the cornerstone of that.”

Biden flipped the script in 2020, winning the presidential election without Florida, which is now more of a red state than a swing state. So maybe he could antagonize Cuban-Americans in Florida without much political blowback. Yet he still faces a problem even Cubans recognize: While there’s organized opposition to normalizing relations, there’s no powerful advocate in favor. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon plans to introduce a bill this year to end U.S. sanctions on Cuba. But he has floated that bill before, with Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and others blocking it.

Business lobbyists say they do expect Biden to roll out new efforts to ease up on Cuba, either this year or next. A White House spokesperson told Yahoo Finance, “We don’t have anything on this at this time.” Cuba, for its part, could entice Biden by offering concessions, such as the release of jailed protesters or other actions Biden could point to as a move toward democracy. But Cuba, 64 years after Castro's revolution, still rejects democracy.

Getting back together is hard to do.

Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Twitter at @rickjnewman
IT'S TOO LATE NOW
DeSantis Is Totally Ignorant of Why New College Is So Special

Malcolm Jones
Thu, February 9, 2023 

Photo Illustration by Kelly Caminero/The Daily Beast/Reuters

Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis likes to play rough. He also likes to pander by sticking it to the pointy heads. In New College of Florida, the honors college of the University of Florida, he surely thought he had the perfect target for his latest campaign to own the news cycle for a few days.

He wasn’t wrong. Once he appointed six new members to the college’s board, and once they got busy making mischief, the news stories followed, both locally and nationally. The new board majority forced the college’s president out, replacing her with a DeSantis ally, and immediately began talking about curriculum overhaul and getting rid of what it considered coddling, woke policies affecting minorities and the LGBTQ community.

“It is our hope that New College of Florida will become Florida’s classical college… more along the lines of a Hillsdale of the South,” said James Uthmeier, DeSantis’ chief of staff, referring to the conservative Michigan college that adheres to Christian principles and a traditional curriculum, i.e., no CRT, no DEI, or any other left-leaning garbage.

They Were Loving College. Then Ron DeSantis Got Involved.

And new board member Christopher Rufo, the right-wing apparatchik chiefly responsible for persuading the more mushwitted among us that Critical Race Theory was coming for your kindergartner, gleefully declared, “We’re going to be conducting a top-down restructuring” that will include “a new core curriculum from scratch.” He vowed that academically the school will “look very different in the next 120 days.”

Most of this was well covered in the news. But one thing was missing: any detailed explanation of what New College is actually about. And what would be lost if the college were to be changed.

I’m willing to cut some slack for the reporters who dodged this part of the story. It’s not easy explaining New College.

I should know. I went to school there.

I spent a lot of time trying to explain the college to my family, and I succeeded only insofar as they allowed me to attend and paid my tuition. I don’t think they ever lost their skepticism.

After all, it wasn’t easy understanding a school that’s all pass/fail, where the student is responsible for their course planning, where there are no required courses, where you were expected to spend some time studying abroad or at another college, where you had to write a senior thesis, and where you could graduate in three years (this was the old days, in the early ’70s, before the college became part of the Florida’s university system).

It’s not for everyone. There’s no party scene, no Greek life, almost no organized sports (currently there’s a sailing club and a rowing team). You’re stuck on the outskirts of Sarasota on a campus lodged between the Ringling Art Museum and the circus museum (part of the campus is lodged in what was a Ringling brother mansion; other buildings were designed by I.M. Pei). When I was there, the fun thing to do on Saturday night was go across the road to the Sarasota airport and lie at the end of the runway and watch the planes take off (acid was optional).

But far more important, then and now, New College demands intense focus and self-motivation from its students. It requires that every semester you draft a contract with your academic adviser in which you plot out what you’ll be studying, which can involve courses, tutorials, and independent study. The responsibility is on you, the student, to make all this work. It is not for dilettantes. If you want a school that charts your academic path for you, you’re in the wrong place. And a lot of students decide they are in the wrong place. When I attended in the early ’70s, New College had one of the highest attrition rates in the country. After a year, I became one of those statistics. (If you make it through a whole year, you get to call yourself an alum, I’m happy to say.)

I left for several juvenile, shortsighted reasons that are too embarrassing to go into. But what I want to stress is that I never blamed New College. I let the college down, not the other way around. And while I have almost no institutional loyalty, I’ll make an exception for that place.

So when I read comments by the pseudo-academic thugs DeSantis had unleashed on the college to the effect that these little woke snowflakes need a taste of good old-fashioned academic discipline, I knew right away that these idiots didn’t have a clue. New College may be the red-hot center of wokeness, but it is also the Parris Island of undergrad studies. You can be sensitive, but you must be tough.

If Florida’s governor wants to include a conservative college in the state’s higher education system, that’s pretty much his right, the governing of higher education having been thoroughly politicized since the Jeb Bush administration. Remaking New College into that conservative campus, however, just seems performative, not to mention utterly ignorant of history: New College’s academic program is already the most traditional there is, based on the European model enshrined at Oxford University, which includes the eponymous New College on its campus.

Consider this: New College has produced 86 Rhodes scholars since it was founded. Last year it was ranked 76 among all colleges and universities and fifth among public schools of higher learning by U.S. News and World Report—fifth, and this a school with fewer than 700 students. My high school was bigger than New College.

One thing I didn’t mention a lot around my family was the school’s financial frailty. Founded in 1960 as a private college, it struggled year after year, and somehow never shut down, although in the mid-’70s, the struggle just got to be too much and the school took a deal where it was absorbed into University of South Florida. This partnership endured for 25 years, until the state overhauled the public university system and New College emerged as an independent unit with the State University System of Florida. The college bought itself some autonomy with that move, but the price of its independence would ultimately prove to be increased vulnerability to political assault. State support was the devil’s bargain the school made with the state system 50 years ago. And now the devil’s come to collect.

DeSantis and his minions seem hellbent on destroying an utterly unique college and for no good reason, or at least none that’s been articulated so far. These are the sorts of people who always talk as though the people in their crosshairs are getting away with something without ever saying exactly what that something is, except the usual vague nonsense about politicized gender studies courses. Which is your only option, really, when your target is one of the most admired academic institutions in the country.

I try to be philosophical. At least the state bailout bought the school a few more decades of life, so… And all good things, etc.

But what keeps dismantling my complacency is the story of Derek Black. In 2010, Black enrolled at the school, and after a semester or so, it got out that he was the devoted son of a major white nationalist; Black’s mother’s first husband was David Duke, who was Black’s godfather. Black was ostracized on campus. Other students felt threatened by his presence and some of them demanded he be expelled. The school refused. In fact, the administration offered no guidance at all, leaving some students confused and fearful. It could’ve ended badly for everyone. But then, over time, an amazing thing happened. Other students began engaging Black in conversation. At the invitation of a Jewish classmate, he wound up going to Shabbat dinners every Friday night and those dinners spawned more discussions, and over time Black began to change his mind, slowly but inexorably. Today he will be the first to tell you that none of his arguments in favor of white nationalism held up to scrutiny. But here’s the thing to note: He wasn’t shouted down. He was talked around, a participant in an intellectual community that put logic and kindness on an equal footing.

To the news of DeSantis’ plans for New College, Black, who is pursuing a doctorate in medieval history at the University of Chicago, had this to say: “My experience goes so against the idea that this is some sort of ideologically driven institution, because the administration never acted against me in any way. If anything, they were supporting my right to be there.”

In a country as divided as ours, there are very few places where a story like this could unfold. If I were among those responsible for the fate of New College, I would think long and hard before demolishing such an environment. But I’m not one of those people, and I’m not holding my breath.

The Daily Beast.
France in new row with Germany and Spain over nuclear-derived hydrogen


Spain-France summit in Barcelona

Wed, February 8, 2023 
By Michel Rose, Belén Carreño and Kate Abnett

PARIS/MADRID/BRUSSELS (Reuters) - A new row has erupted between France, Germany and Spain over nuclear energy, with Paris furious about a lack of support from Berlin and Madrid for its efforts to have nuclear-derived hydrogen labelled as 'green' in EU legislation, sources said.

The dispute, which could block a multi-billion euro hydrogen pipeline from the Iberian peninsula via France to Central Europe, is also delaying Europe's green energy legislation and threatening to break out into the open at an European Union summit on Thursday.

France, which relies on its aging nuclear fleet to generate electricity, is leading a campaign to count hydrogen made using nuclear power -- known as "red" hydrogen -- in the EU's new renewable energy targets, which currently focus on green hydrogen made using electricity from renewable sources.

Paris is now accusing Spain and Germany of reneging on commitments France says their leaders made at meetings in Barcelona and Paris to consider 'low-carbon' energy, which is code for nuclear, as clean.

"These negotiations are not taking a good turn," Agnes Pannier-Runacher, France's energy minister, told a small number of reporters last week about the EU's new renewable energy targets, included in a bill known as the RED-3 directive.

"It would not be understandable for Spain and Germany to take different positions in Brussels and not keep their commitments," she said.

After much foot-dragging, French President Emmanuel Macron agreed to the hydrogen pipeline between Barcelona and Marseille in October, a deal formalised at a summit with Spanish counterpart Pedro Sanchez in Barcelona in January.

Germany was formally added to the project after a joint Franco-German summit in Paris a few days later, with Berlin wanting to import hydrogen from Iberia and further south as it weans itself off Russian gas.

Macron's green light for the so-called H2Med or BarMar project was, according to Paris, in return for Spanish and German commitments on red hydrogen.

French officials point to a joint statement signed in Barcelona that states "Spain and France recognise the importance of the production, transportation and consumption of clean hydrogen as produced from renewable and low-carbon energy sources".

In Madrid, officials say the row is a "misunderstanding" and they are willing to be flexible on red hydrogen in other legislation such as the gas market directive, but not in the renewables bill.

"Red hydrogen cannot be renewable because nuclear is not an energy that can be considered as such. It is impossible," a senior Spanish government source told Reuters.

Berlin's stance appears to mirror Madrid's. "I doubt it was ever a formal promise that red hydrogen would be accepted as 'green' if the pipeline from Spain is realised," a German official with knowledge of the negotiations said.

"Maybe the French calculation was that it would be more easily accepted by partners, but that's a different thing."

FRENCH THREAT

Macron will take the issue to Thursday's EU summit and two European officials said he could threaten to block the pipeline in retaliation.

"It is obvious that France would only give the OK to BarMar if it could use the pipeline in the future to send its (red) hydrogen to Iberia," an official from a southern European country said.

"The point is that without France there will be no BarMar," the source added.

Hydrogen is central to Europe's plans to decarbonise heavy industry, with the European Commission saying its green hydrogen aims require investment of up to 300 billion euros in new renewable electricity production.

At least six EU officials said they fear the dispute could spill over to a raft of other policies that are being expanded to cover renewable or low-carbon hydrogen, potentially delaying laws needed to meet the bloc's climate targets.

For example, the EU is updating its gas market laws to integrate more hydrogen into the grid and plans to propose a "hydrogen bank" to fund new projects. France wants this to include its red hydrogen but it must first be designated as renewable.

Negotiations on the RED-3 directive with the EU Parliament were postponed this week because the European Commission has still to agree a definition of "renewable" hydrogen.

"It's not a technical issue. It's a political question," one EU diplomat said.

(Reporting by Michel Rose in Paris, Belen Carreno, Aislinn Laing in Madrid, Kate Abnett in Brussels, Andreas Rinke in Berlin and Sergio Goncalves in Lisbon; Editing by Kirsten Donovan)
Opinion
Sarah Huckabee Sanders’s strange ‘woke’ rant reveals a big GOP problem


By Paul Waldman and Greg Sargent
Washington Post
February 8, 2023 

While delivering the Republican response to President Biden’s State of the Union address, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders tried to link the 80-year-old Biden to a “woke” mob and bragged of banning “CRT” in her state. Sanders didn’t define either term. She used the initials “CRT” without spelling out “critical race theory,” apparently certain most Americans know what that means.

Watching Sanders toss around those extremely online terms — only months after her party badly underperformed in the midterm elections while campaigning against those very things — vividly demonstrates a problem for the GOP. Republicans are extremely skilled at grabbing attention, leveraging their formidable media apparatus to turn the spotlight on the manufactured controversy of the moment. But these days they are far less good at persuading the broader public.

Given a rare opportunity to communicate a conservative vision to the entire country, Sanders delivered a message that was, as Matthew Sheffield put it, “filled with far-right buzzwords that were likely incomprehensible to most Americans who had bothered to watch.”

Biden, said Sanders, is “the first man to surrender his presidency to a woke mob that can’t even tell you what a woman is.”

Sanders calls Biden ‘unfit to serve’
3:02



On Feb. 7, Arkansas Gov. Huckabee Sanders (R) said the Democrats had failed the public in her official Republican response to the State of the Union address. (Video: The Washington Post)

To be moved by that argument, you’d need to know that “wokeness” refers to a constellation of contested views about race, sex and transgender rights. You’d need to know it’s a ubiquitous right-wing media trope to scoff that liberals can’t define the term “woman.” You’d need to know why this is supposed to be terribly threatening.

This rhetoric did little for Republicans in 2022. The New York Times reports that virtually all GOP spending on ads mentioning critical race theory was spent during primaries, a tacit admission it had little general election potency.

Last September, a polling memo from the Republican National Committee admitted that focusing on CRT was only exciting the “base.” To move independents, the memo said, GOP candidates should emphasize “parental rights.” That, too, was misplaced confidence after Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s victory in 2021: Many Republicans did run on such issues in the midterms, but the party dramatically underperformed expectations — including among independents.

Cartoon by Ann Telnaes: Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders does a Rubio

Yet, Republicans continue speaking mainly to their most committed supporters. More of this is coming: House Republicans are planning investigations of a menu of right-wing obsessions, from fantasies of conservative oppression by federal law enforcement to whether Twitter is conspiring to suppress the truth about Hunter Biden.

At a House hearing Tuesday, Republicans hammered border police officials with hallucinatory notions about immigration. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) pushed them to say many arriving unaccompanied minors are MS-13 gang members, and Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) prodded one official to say his testimony was doctored to make it less negative about the border. The officials politely shot down both assertions.

Still, the claims went viral, demonstrating the GOP skill at harnessing agitprop to compete in our attention economy. But at the same time, House Republicans have failed to persuade the moderates in their own caucus to support the party’s extreme new border security bill. They can demagogue an issue brilliantly, but they can’t persuade the middle to support their policies.

There does seem to be a theory guiding these efforts, one developed during Bill Clinton’s presidency. Pour enough wild accusations and feigned outrage into the discourse and whip the base into a frenzy, and swing voters might develop general unease about the opposition and the country’s direction. Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg calls this the right’s “negative sentiment machine.”

But how well has this worked for Republicans in recent cycles?

To be fair, all of us, liberals included, are prone to cherry-picking from electoral outcomes to convince ourselves that the public shares our cultural vision. We might be overreading how significant it is that Sanders failed the generally impossible task of delivering a cogent and effective State of the Union response, or what 2022 meant in terms of rejection of the right’s culture-warmongering. After all, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis won a big reelection victory in November as the foremost culture warrior on the right and plainly intends to take his approach national in 2024.

Still, recent focus groups of Florida swing voters found that few could define the term “wokeness,” raising doubts about how important it was to DeSantis’s reelection. And again, similar GOP candidates lost in many places outside Florida.

Yet DeSantis’s victory appears to have instilled a touch of hubris among right-wingers about the national potential of his type of cultural politics. On Tuesday night, Sanders seemed deeply in the grip of that hubris.

But consider what happened that night. Biden talked about protecting Social Security and the need to continue creating the green and tech manufacturing jobs of the future, many for Americans without a college degree. Then Sanders fulminated about confusing acronyms.

Democrats should relish taking that contrast into 2024.




Opinion by Paul WaldmanPaul Waldman is an opinion writer for The Washington Post. Twitter


Opinion by Greg SargentGreg Sargent is a columnist. He joined The Washington Post in 2010, after stints at Talking Points Memo, New York Magazine and the New York Observer. Twitter
9-year-old Black prodigy has already begun college – but schools often fail to recognize highly talented Black students

Donna Ford, Professor of Special Education, The Ohio State University
 The Conversation,
Tue, February 7, 2023 

Black students are underrepresented in gifted education programs.
ER Productions Limited via DigitalVision/Getty Images Plus

Editor’s note: Amid numerous reports about how Black students lag behind others in educational achievement, occasionally you may hear about a young Black “prodigy” who got accepted into college at an early age.

The latest example is David Balogun, a 9-year-old Pennsylvania boy who recently became the second-youngest person to graduate from high school, which he did after taking classes remotely. David, whose parents own and run a psychiatric clinic, has also already begun taking courses at a community college.

According to Donna Y. Ford, a an expert on gifted education and an education professor at The Ohio State University, there could be far more Black prodigies. But it would take the right support from families, who may not be familiar with some of the characteristics of gifted students and the existence of gifted programs, and from educators, who often overlook the talents of Black students. Indeed, while Black students represent about 15% of the student population in the U.S., they make up only 9.9% of all students in gifted and talented programs.

In the following Q&A with The Conversation’s education editor, Jamaal Abdul-Alim, Professor Ford – who has been a consultant for Black families thinking about sending their gifted children to college early – argues that public schools are holding back Black talent rather than cultivating it. The Q&A has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Jamaal Abdul-Alim: Why do public schools so often fail to identify gifted Black students?


Donna Y. Ford is a distinguished professor in the College of Education and Human Ecology at The Ohio State University. The Ohio State University

Donna Ford: The No. 1 reason for the underrepresentation of Black students in gifted education is the lack of referrals from teachers, even when Black students are highly gifted. I definitely think stereotypes and biases hinder educators from seeing Black students’ gifts and talents. In most schools in the U.S., if you are not referred by an educator, you will not move through the identification pipeline for gifted education programs and services, as well as Advanced Placement. It starts and stops with teachers.

This is why Black families have reached out to me. They’re saying, “This predominantly white-female discipline” – meaning teachers – “is doing my child an injustice.”

They’re also saying, “I’m frustrated, I don’t know what to do other than pull my child out and home-school.” You don’t see a lot of Black home-schooling. If the parents are able to do it, they have the means.

Abdul-Alim: Are these children really prodigies or do they have parents who are just really actively involved and concerned about their children’s education, and recognize the public schools are doing them a disservice?

Ford: There’s a lot of controversy in the field about how children become gifted, much less a prodigy. To me, it’s not just nature or nurture. It’s both. So nature is, they have the capacity, the potential. And then nurture is, they have the experience, the exposure, the opportunity and the access. That includes the families who have the means and wherewithal to advocate for their children or to nurture whatever potential is there.

But personally and professionally, I believe that the most important factor – for students being very gifted and prodigies – is the environment. That means their families, and their cultural, social and economic capital.

Abdul-Alim: But doesn’t that kind of point away from the idea of these children being “prodigies”? Because if the thing they have in common is well-educated parents who have high incomes, it seems like almost any child in that situation could achieve similar educational results.

Ford: A prodigy just means a child who is performing at the level of an adult; that’s the basic definition of a prodigy. So that has nothing to do with their income and families, education. It is about how they are performing. They’re playing the piano like an adult who has taken lessons. They picked up on these skills and skill sets very easily. Or they are inventing mathematical formulas that you would only see adults doing. They’re in middle school and can do the work of college-level students. You can have this potential, but if you don’t have these opportunities at home, at school, even in the community, then the gifts and talents that you have may not come to fruition at the highest level.

Abdul-Alim: When families come to you about whether or not to enroll their young child in college, what do you generally advise them to do or to consider?

Ford: There are a lot of variables to consider. One is the child’s emotional and social maturity. I think their size is important. Are they small for their age? That can contribute to some social and emotional issues, in particular bullying or isolation. Do they have siblings who are older who might be intimidated or negatively affected by their younger sibling’s being accelerated?

[Insight, in your inbox each day. You can get it with The Conversation’s email newsletter.]

Abdul-Alim: What is your advice to families who can’t afford to home-school, but who have children who could very well be higher-performing if given the opportunity? How does society provide opportunities for children who fall in that category?

Ford: I want the families to become familiar with what the barriers are. So when Black families contact me about their child not being identified as gifted or not being challenged like their white classmates, then I point them to the Civil Rights Data Collection website, which is run by the U.S. Department of Education. I have them look specifically at what the data says for representation in gifted programs and Advanced Placement classes. I ask them to look at suspension and expulsion by race and corporal punishment, if that exists in their schools, which it does in some states. And very last, take a hard and critical look at all the data.

You can go straight to data for your child’s district or school building. And so, parents can come armed with these demographic data showing underrepresentation in gifted and Advanced Placement, but overrepresentation in certain categories of special education as well as discipline, such as suspension and expulsion. And when parents come informed, then sometimes – not always – the educators are put on notice and do what they’re supposed to do anyway, which is share information with families about how to gain the resources and opportunities that their children need.

This is an updated version of a story that ran on Feb. 16, 2021.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. The Conversation has a variety of fascinating free newsletters.

It was written by: Donna Ford, The Ohio State University.

Read more:

Why do fewer black students get identified as gifted?

Black Americans homeschool for different reasons than whites

For parents of color, schooling at home can be an act of resistance

Donna Ford is a private consultant for school districts and professional organizations. She has in the past received grants from the U.S. Department of Education to study special education and gifted and talented programs. A full listing of prior grants can be found at https://www.drdonnayford.com/vitae--bio.
D.C. Judge Argues 13th Amendment Prohibiting Slavery May Provide Constitutional Right to Abortion

Ari Blaff
Tue, February 7, 2023 


Federal judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly proposed Monday that a constitutional right to abortion may be found in the 13th Amendment, an area she says was ignored by the Supreme Court when it overturned Roe v. Wade last June.

Weighing in on a case involving several anti-abortion advocates accused of blocking access to an abortion clinic in Washington, D.C., U.S. District Court Judge Kollar-Kotelly argued that the 13th Amendment outlawing “involuntary servitude” may guarantee the Constitutional right to abortion which the Court found did not exist in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

It “is entirely possible that the Court might have held in Dobbs that some other provision of the Constitution provided a right to access reproductive services had that issue been raised,” Kollar-Kotelly argued in a legal brief. “However, it was not raised.”

“The ‘issue’ before the Court in Dobbs was not whether any provision of the Constitution provided a right to abortion. Rather, the question before the Court in Dobbs was whether the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution provided such a right,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote.

The 13th Amendment was ratified at the end of the Civil War in 1865, outlining that neither “slavery nor involuntary servitude…shall exist within the United States.”

Kollar-Kotelly cited legal scholars such as Andrew Koppelman, author of Forced Labor: A Thirteenth Amendment Defense of Abortion, in making her case.

“Forced pregnancy’s violation of personal liberty is obvious,” Koppelman recently argued in The Hill. “Restrictions on abortion also violate the amendment’s guarantee of equality, because forcing women to be mothers makes them into (what so much tradition defined them as) a servant caste, a group that, by virtue of a status of birth, is held subject to a special duty to serve others and not themselves.”

Among the defendants in the case is Lauren Handy, founder of the organization Mercy Mission, known for protesting outside of abortion clinics. Because the group was arrested in March 2022, just months before the Supreme Court ruled that “the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion,” the defendants now insist the legal charges against them are no longer applicable.

“There is no longer a federal constitutional interest to protect, and Congress lacks jurisdiction,” Handy’s lawyers explained in a statement obtained by Politico. “The Dobbs court did not indicate that there is no longer a constitutional right to abortion; the court has made clear there never was.”

Kollar-Kotelly was appointed to the District Court for the District of Columbia in 1997 by President Bill Clinton. In 2017, Kollar-Kotelly blocked President Donald Trump’s order banning transgender people from serving in the military
Israel steps up Jerusalem home demolitions as OCCUPIER violence rises






A general view of the Jabal Mukaber neighborhood of east Jerusalem, facing home demolitions by Israeli authorities, Tuesday, Jan. 31, 2023. For many Palestinians, the accelerating pace of home demolitions is part of Israel's new ultranationalist government's broader battle for control of east Jerusalem, claimed by the Palestinians as the capital of their future state. Israel says it is simply enforcing building regulations. (AP Photo/Mahmoud Illean)

ISABEL DEBRE
Wed, February 8, 2023 

JERUSALEM (AP) — Ratib Matar’s family was growing. They needed more space.

Before his granddaughters, now 4 and 5, were born, he built three apartments on an eastern slope overlooking Jerusalem’s ancient landscape. The 50-year-old construction contractor moved in with his brother, son, divorced daughter and their young kids — 11 people in all, plus a few geese.

But Matar was never at ease. At any moment, the Israeli code-enforcement officers could knock on his door and take everything away.

That moment came on Jan. 29, days after a Palestinian gunman killed seven people in east Jerusalem, the deadliest attack in the contested capital since 2008. Israel’s new far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called not only for the sealing of the assailant's family home, but also the immediate demolition of dozens of Palestinian homes built without permits in east Jerusalem, among other punitive steps.

Mere hours after Ben-Gvir's comments, the first bulldozers rumbled into Matar's neighborhood of Jabal Mukaber.

For many Palestinians, the gathering pace of home demolitions is part of the new ultranationalist government's broader battle for control of east Jerusalem, captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war and claimed by the Palestinians as the capital of a future independent state.

The battle is waged with building permits and demolition orders — and it is one the Palestinians feel they cannot win. Israel says it is simply enforcing building regulations.

“Our construction is under siege from Israel,” Matar said. His brothers and sons lingered beside the ruins of their home, drinking bitter coffee and receiving visitors as though in mourning. “We try really hard to build, but in vain," he said.

Last month, Israel demolished 39 Palestinian homes, structures and businesses in east Jerusalem, displacing over 50 people, according to the United Nations. That was more than a quarter of the total number of demolitions in 2022. Ben-Gvir posted a photo on Twitter of the bulldozers clawing at Matar's home.

“We will fight terrorism with all the means at our disposal,” he wrote, though Matar's home had nothing to do with the Palestinian shooting attacks.

Most Palestinian apartments in east Jerusalem were built without hard-to-get permits. A 2017 study by the U.N. described it as “virtually impossible" to secure them.

The Israeli municipality allocates scant land for Palestinian development, the report said, while facilitating the expansion of Israeli settlements. Little Palestinian property was registered before Israel annexed east Jerusalem in 1967, a move not internationally recognized.

Matar said the city rejected his building permit application twice because his area is not zoned for residential development. He's now trying a third time.

The penalty for unauthorized building is often demolition. If families don't tear their houses down themselves, the government charges them for the job. Matar is dreading his bill — he knows neighbors who paid over $20,000 to have their houses razed.

Now homeless, Matar and his family are staying with relatives. He vows to build again on land he inherited from his grandparents, though he has no faith in the Israeli legal system.

“They don't want a single Palestinian in all of Jerusalem,” Matar said. Uphill, in the heart of his neighborhood, Israeli flags fluttered from dozens of apartments recently built for religious Jews.

Since 1967, the government has built 58,000 homes for Israelis in the eastern part of the city, and fewer than 600 for Palestinians, said Daniel Seidemann, an Israeli lawyer specializing in the geopolitics of Jerusalem, citing the government’s statistics bureau and his own analysis. In that time, the city’s Palestinian population has soared by 400%.

“The planning regime is dictated by the calculus of national struggle,” Seidemann said.

Israel's city plans show state parks encircling the Old City, with some 60% of Jabal Mukaber zoned as green space, off-limits to Palestinian development. At least 20,000 Palestinian homes in east Jerusalem are now slated for demolition, watchdogs say.

Matar and his neighbors face an agonizing choice: Build illegally and live under constant threat of demolition, or leave their birthplace for the occupied West Bank, sacrificing Jerusalem residency rights that allow them to work and travel relatively freely throughout Israel.

While there are no reliable figures for permit approvals, the Israeli municipality set aside just over 7% of its 21,000 housing plans for Palestinian homes in 2019, reported Ir Amim, an anti-settlement advocacy group. Palestinians are nearly 40% of the city's roughly 1 million people.

“This is the purpose of this policy,” said Aviv Tatarsky, a researcher at Ir Amim. “Palestinians are forced to leave Jerusalem."

Arieh King, a Jerusalem deputy mayor and settler leader, acknowledged that demolitions help Israel entrench control over east Jerusalem, home to the city's most important religious sites.

“It’s part of enforcing sovereignty," King said. “I'm happy that at last we have a minister that understands," he added, referring to Ben-Gvir.

Ben-Gvir is now pushing for the destruction of an apartment tower housing 100 people. Trying to lower tensions, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delayed the eviction that was planned for Tuesday, Israeli media reported.

King contended it was possible for Palestinians to secure permits and accused them of building without authorization to avoid an expensive bureaucracy.

When the al-Abasi family in east Jerusalem found a demolition order plastered on their new breeze-block home last month, they contemplated their options. The government had knocked down their last apartment, built on the same lot, eight years ago. This time, Jaafar al-Abasi decided, he would tear it down himself.

Al-Abasi hired a tractor and invited his relatives and neighbors to join. The destruction took three days, with breaks for hummus and soda. His three sons borrowed pickaxes and jackhammers, angrily hacking away at the walls they had decorated with colored plates just last month.

“This place is like a ticking time bomb,” said his brother in law, 48-year-old Mustafa Samhouri, who helped them out.

Protests over the demolitions have roiled east Jerusalem in recent days. Two weekends ago, Samhouri said, the family's 13-year-old cousin opened fire at Jewish settlers in the neighborhood of Silwan just across the valley, wounding two people before being shot and arrested.

“The pressure just grows more and more,” Samhouri said. “And at last, boom."

___

Associated Press writer Sam McNeil contributed to this report.
James Carville Attacks GOP, Marjorie Taylor Greene As 'White Trash'


Lee Moran
Thu, February 9, 2023

Democratic political consultant James Carville on Wednesday described Republican lawmakers who heckled President Joe Biden during his State of the Union speech as “white trash.”

“I tell people I have the equivalent of a PhD in white trashology, and we saw real white trash on display,” Carville told MSNBC anchor Ari Melber.

Carville singled out far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), saying she “dresses like white trash” and should take fashion advice from serial liar Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), in a video shared by Mediaite.

“The level of white trashdom in the Republican Party is staggering,” Carville added. “I mean, for somebody that has observed it for a long time like I have, I’ve never seen it manifest itself on a level that it’s manifesting itself.”

Ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, Carville slammed the GOP for fielding “very low-quality candidates” and suggested the reason:

“They have a lot of stupid people that vote in their primaries. They really do. I’m not really supposed to say that, but it’s obvious fact. And you know, when stupid people vote, you know who they nominate? Other stupid people.”