Sunday, October 27, 2024

Government advisers call for 81% cut in UK emissions by 2035

Rebecca Speare-Cole, 
PA sustainability reporter
Fri 25 October 2024

UK greenhouse gas emissions should be cut by at least 81% by 2035 as part of global efforts to tackle climate change, Government advisers have said.

The Government is preparing to unveil plans for cutting emissions by 2035, under the global Paris Agreement which commits countries to take action on curbing temperature rises to prevent the worst impacts of warming.

The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has recommended the UK commit to cutting emissions by at least 81% on 1990 levels by the middle of the 2030s, under its Paris action plan – known as a “nationally determined contribution” or NDC.


In a letter to Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, the independent advisory committee said the target is “ambitious, deliverable and consistent” with the emission reductions required for the country to meet its own legally binding cap on the amount of carbon it can emit between 2033 to 2037.

“It is informed by the latest science, technological developments, and the UK’s national circumstances,” it read.


Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary Ed Miliband asked the committee for guidance (Ben Whitley/PA)

It comes after Mr Miliband asked the committee earlier this year for guidance on setting the UK’s next NDC emissions target as the Cop29 summit approaches in Azerbaijan in November.

Governments are legally bound to submit new NDCs every five years, outlining how they plan to cut emissions over the next decade.

Countries are due to table their new proposals for 2025 to 2035 ahead of Cop30 in Brazil next December.

In 2020, the then-Conservative government set a goal of 68% emission cuts by 2030 compared with 1990 levels, which was in line with the CCC’s advice at the time.

But the committee recently warned that the UK is off track to meet its 2030 climate targets, with only around one third of the emissions reductions required covered by credible plans – mostly in the electricity supply and surface transport sectors.

In its letter to the Energy Secretary, it said: “Setting a target is not enough. The UK must back up its international commitments through actions here at home.

“We welcome the actions already taken by the Government on renewable electricity, energy efficiency in rented homes, and carbon capture and storage.

“We need to see further urgent action to speed up deployment of low-carbon solutions such as electric vehicles, heat pumps and tree planting.”

The Paris Agreement commits countries to keeping temperature rises “well below” 2C above pre-industrial levels, and pursuing efforts to limit them to 1.5C, seen as the threshold beyond which the worst impacts of climate change will be felt.

To meet the 1.5C target, the world’s carbon emissions must fall to net zero by 2050, with significant cuts in pollution and any remaining emissions offset by planting trees or using technology to capture carbon.

Professor Piers Forster said: “With climate damages already felt around the world, targeting an 81% emissions reduction by 2035 sets the right level of ambition.

“Our analysis shows this can be achieved in a way that benefits jobs and the economy, provided we hit the country’s 2030 target – set in line with the CCC’s advice in 2020.

“The technologies needed to achieve it are available, at a competitive price, today.”

He added: “We need to see the Government’s commitment to climate reflected in the upcoming Budget.

“I have no doubt that the United Kingdom can once again be a leader on the international stage – in both deeds and words.”

Environmental groups have suggested the Government go further than the CCC recommendations, including calls for UK plans to include international aviation and shipping (IAS) emissions, which can be excluded in line with the UN convention.

Dr Doug Parr, policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “The Climate Change Committee has given ministers a useful benchmark for climate action but they may want to aim higher to show true global leadership and take full responsibility for the UK’s historic role as a major carbon polluter.

“Actions speak louder than words, and true leadership means the government must also set out tangible plans to deliver on its 2035 target.”

Isabella O’Dowd, WWF’s head of climate policy said: “We urge the UK government to show global leadership by going further and adopt climate targets for international aviation and shipping.

“Acting now will revitalise the UK economy, increase our energy security and support a just transition for all sectors.”

A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said: “Britain is back in the business of climate leadership because the only way to protect current generations in the UK is by making Britain a clean energy superpower, and the only way to protect our children and future generations is by leading global climate action.

“We are grateful to the Climate Change Committee for this expert advice, which we will consider carefully before we announce an ambitious Nationally Determined Contribution target at COP29 to help limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.”




Campaigners call for steeper cuts to UK greenhouse gas emissions

Fiona Harvey 
Environment editor
Fri 25 October 2024 

Campaigners want the government to go further than the Climate Change Committee’s recommendations in order to spur innovation and demonstrate global leadership.
Photograph: Murdo MacLeod/The Guardian


Climate campaigners have urged ministers to make steeper cuts in the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions after the government’s statutory adviser on the climate gave its verdict on new targets.

The Climate Change Committee, which advises the government, has written to Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, to advise cuts of 81% in the UK’s emissions, compared with 1990 levels, by 2035, if emissions from aviation and shipping are excluded.

Miliband now faces the choice of whether to follow the committee’s advice in setting the UK’s new international commitment under the Paris agreement at a forthcoming UN climate summit.

A cut of 81% as an international target would be broadly in line with the UK’s existing domestic carbon budgets for the 2030s, which are also set with advice from the CCC and are intended to deliver net zero emissions by 2050.

But campaigners urged the government to go further in order to demonstrate global leadership and spur innovation and a low-carbon economy. Mike Childs, the head of policy at Friends of the Earth, said: “With climate change spiralling dangerously out of control, the recommended 81% cut should be seen as the very minimum carbon reduction target the UK government should commit to. Ramping up ambition to make even deeper cuts in practice would show real leadership in global efforts to avert the worst of climate breakdown.”

Catherine Pettengell, the executive director of Climate Action Network UK, said: “[This] should be the floor, not the ceiling, of the UK’s ambition and action. A more ambitious and fair target could be achieved if the UK brings its full economic and political will to the table.”

Meeting the new target will be a stretch. The UK is far away from meeting the international target in place of a 68% reductions in emissions by 2030, which was set by Boris Johnson before the UK hosted the Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow in 2021, according to analysis by Friends of the Earth.

Doug Parr, the policy director at Greenpeace UK, said: “True leadership means the government must also set out tangible plans to deliver on its 2035 target.” He called for the fulfilment of Labour’s promise to end new oil and gas licences, at least triple renewables and double energy efficiency rates by 2030, and support workers to transition away from polluting industries.

Another key question for Miliband, in drawing up the UK’s international target – known as a nationally determined contribution, or NDC, under the Paris agreement – is how to account for emissions from international aviation and shipping to and from the UK.

These emissions are now included in the UK’s domestic carbon budgets, but were not explicitly in the 2015 Paris agreement, and previous international pacts, because of the difficulty of apportioning the emissions to particular countries. Some campaigners argue that aviation and shipping are implicitly covered by the Paris agreement, but there is disagreement over this and most countries exclude them from their NDCs.

Jonathan Hood, the UK sustainable shipping manager at the Transport & Environment campaigning group, said they should be included. “Passing responsibility for shipping emissions to the ineffective International Maritime Organisation and excluding them from the NDC makes no sense – particularly when the UK has already accepted legal responsibility for international shipping and aviation emissions by including them in the sixth carbon budget,” he said.

If aviation and shipping are included, in effect the headline target for an NDC would be likely to equate to a cut of about 78% by 2035, in line with the UK’s carbon budgets.

New NDCs are not due to be submitted to the UN until next February, but Keir Starmer promised that the UK’s would be unveiled early, at the forthcoming Cop29 UN climate summit, taking place in Azerbaijan from 11 November.

The prime minister told other leaders at the UN general assembly in New York last month: “The UK will lead again, tackling climate change, at home and internationally and restoring our commitment to international development. The threat of climate change is existential and it is happening in the here and now. So we have reset Britain’s approach.”

Delivering the NDC early is intended to spur other major economies to do the same. However, the big question mark hanging over Cop29 is whether Donald Trump will win the US presidential election, which takes place just five days before. Trump has vowed to dismantle the green industrial stimulus put in place by Joe Biden, boost fossil fuels, and withdraw the US from the Paris agreement.

The UK met the first three five-year carbon budgets set under the Climate Change Act of 2008, but current and future budgets look harder to meet. This carbon budget runs to 2027, and will be assessed at the end of this parliament in 2029. The fifth and sixth carbon budgets call for a cut of 58% in emissions by 2032, and 78% by 2037. The seventh carbon budget will be set by the CCC next year.

Robert Jenrick, the Conservative leadership candidate, has pledged to repeal the Climate Change Act, and his rival in the contest, Kemi Badenoch, is also hostile to the UK’s net zero ambitions.

A Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesperson said: “Britain is back in the business of climate leadership because the only way to protect current generations in the UK is by making Britain a clean energy superpower, and the only way to protect our children and future generations is by leading global climate action.

Britain's climate advisers urge steeper emissions cut target for 2035

Reuters
Fri 25 October 2024 

A seagull flies past the Big Ben clock on a foggy
SMOG  day in central London

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's climate advisers, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), has recommended in a letter to government that it should commit to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 81% by 2035 in its upcoming budget next month.

The new Labour government is expected to announce increases in public spending and taxes in its first budget in 14 years next week.

The emissions cut target recommended by the advisers is higher than the current target of a 78% reduction by 2035 compared with 1990 levels and excludes international aviation and shipping emissions.

However, it would make a credible contribution towards limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, the committee said.

"With climate damages already felt around the world, targeting an 81% emissions reduction by 2035 sets the right level of ambition," said Piers Forster, interim chair of the committee. "Our analysis shows this can be achieved in a way that benefits jobs and the economy, provided we hit the country’s 2030 target - set in line with the CCC’s advice in 2020," he said.

The government needs to set out an updated climate plan and targets for 2035 before a U.N. deadline of February 2025.

In July this year, the CCC said Britain might miss its 2030 emissions reduction target and was off track to meet a longer-term target of net zero emissions by mid-century.

The advice will also form part of the committee's seventh carbon budget plan covering the years 2038-2042 which is due to be published in February next year.

(Reporting by Nina Chestney; Editing by Tomasz Janowski)

“We are grateful to the Climate Change Committee for this expert advice, which we will consider carefully before we announce an ambitious nationally determined contribution target at Cop29 to help limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.”
Revealed: Farage-inspired plot to persuade Trump to veto Starmer’s Chagos Islands deal

David Maddox and Andrew Feinberg
Sun 27 October 2024 a

A Nigel Farage-inspired bid to persuade Donald Trump to veto Keir Starmer’s controversial Chagos Islands deal can be revealed today.


The Independent has seen legal advice on Starmer’s controversial deal to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius sent to Mr Trump that was requested after the Reform UK leader raised the issue directly with the former president’s team.

The advice was drawn up by legal experts who worked alongside Mr Farage in the Brexit campaign.

Mr Farage says he was not directly involved in the legal advice but his links with Trump are believed to have played a vital part in the initiative.

The aim of Farage and his allies is to persuade Trump to block the deal if he becomes president.


The UK/ US airbase on Diego Garcia (DoD/AFP via Getty Images)

While it is claimed the advice was “put into the former president’s hands” the Trump campaign has not confirmed he has seen the document.

It was drawn up by an official working for Tory Brexiteer European Research Group aided by pro-Brexit lawyer Martin Howe KC.

The revelation comes after Trump accused Labour of “election interference” for sending the activists to support Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign.

Allies of Farage – who has denounced the Chagos deal as a sell-out – are hoping Trump will back their calls to block it.

The legal advice from the barrister questions foreign secretary David Lammy’s assertion that the UK had no choice but to agree to hand over the islands to Mauritius and warns that it could have implications for US held territories like Guam.

Sir Keir’s government signed off on the deal less than three months in office after former Tory foreign secretary James Cleverly started the talks in 2022 before they were shelved by his successor Lord David Cameron.

And the current US administration has expressed support for the agreement.

President Joe Biden said the agreement would guarantee continued use of a joint British-American airbase in Diego Garcia “into the next century,” citing the facility’s “vital role in national, regional, and global security.”

Trump could try to veto the deal (AP)

But fears have been raised that the islands, which command a crucial strategic location in the Indian Ocean, may now be subject to influence from the Chinese government, which may want to build its’ own bases there.

The UK and US airbase has been used for clandestine operations and while the UK owned the islands, it is understood that the US’s interest in the base meant they had a potential veto over and transfer of sovereignty.

Earlier this month, Mr Lammy claimed he had no choice in international law but to hand over the islands to Mauritius. However, this is disputed in the legal note put together for Mr Trump.

Foreign secretary David Lammy agreed the deal (James Manning/PA) (PA Wire)

But the note claims that a decision by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to support Mauritius’ claim to the Chagos Islands is only “advisory”.

The advice also draws into question the 99-year deal.

“The proposed deal, involving a ‘lease back’ of one of the islands for 99 years, is less secure than sovereignty. Mauritius could change its constitution, re-litigate the matter in the ICJ to improve its terms and leave the UK/USA in a weak position in danger of continual shake downs. Importantly the lease does not contain all of the surrounding Chagos islands, which could, unprotected by British sovereignty, be vulnerable to Chinese pressure to instal listening posts.”

Biden supported the deal (Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved)

The talks started after Mauritus won an international court ruling that it should have sovereignty of the islands.

A source close to Mr Lammy said no approach had been made to the British Embassy in Washington by the Trump team on the issue and claimed that the issue is being pushed by political allies of Trump in the UK “who do not agree with the deal”. They also question whether Mr Trump could veto a deal which involved “British not US sovereign territory”.

The Independent has approached Donald Trump’s representatives for comment.

The White House did not respond to a query from The Independent on whether there is any concern about Mr Trump reversing the deal if he wins.




British lawmakers accuse Starmer of 'colonial mindset' in slavery reparations debate

Catarina Demony
Sun 27 October 2024 

Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting

LONDON (Reuters) - Some British Labour lawmakers on Sunday accused Prime Minister Keir Starmer of having a "colonial mindset" and trying to silence nations pushing for discussions on reparations for transatlantic slavery at this month's Commonwealth summit in Samoa.

Britain has so far rejected calls for reparations but some campaigners hoped Starmer's new Labour government would be more open to it.

However, ahead of the Commonwealth heads of government summit in Samoa, where Caribbean and African nations wished to discuss the topic, Starmer said the issue was not on the agenda and that he would like to "look forward" rather than have "very long, endless discussions about reparations on the past".

"(It) is very insulting (to) tell people of African descent to forget and move forward," said Labour lawmaker Bell Ribeiro-Addy at a cross-party reparations conference in London.

At the end the Samoa summit, leaders of the 56-nation club headed by Britain's King Charles agreed to include in their final communique that the time had come for a discussion on reparations.

"I'm very proud those nations refused to be silenced," Ribeiro-Addy said.

Another Labour lawmaker, Clive Lewis, said it was surprising Starmer thought he could take a "colonial mindset" to the summit and "dictate what could and could not be discussed".

At a news conference in Samoa on Saturday, Starmer said slavery was "abhorrent" and that the discussions agreed to in the communique would not be "about money".

A Downing Street spokesperson had no further comment on the remarks by Labour lawmakers on Sunday.

Proponents of reparations say slavery's legacy has caused persistent racial inequalities while opponents say countries shouldn't be held responsible for historical wrongs.

The lawmakers said that reparations could include a formal apology, debt cancellation, the return of artefacts or changing the school curriculum, not just financial payments.

Diane Abbott, Britain's first Black woman lawmaker, said Labour previously had plans to establish a national reparations commission but Starmer "seems to have forgotten that".

"Reparations isn't about the past, it is about the here and now," she said.

(Reporting by Catarina Demony; Editing by Alistair Smout and David Evans)

Commonwealth leaders say 'time has come' for discussion on slavery reparations

James Redmayne and Catarina Demony
Updated Sat 26 October 2024 



APIA, Samoa (Reuters) -Commonwealth leaders, ending a week-long summit in Samoa, said on Saturday the time had come for a discussion on whether Britain should commit to reparations for its role in the transatlantic slave trade.

Slavery and the threat of climate change were major themes for representatives of the 56 countries in the group, most with roots in Britain's empire, at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting that began in the Pacific Islands nation on Monday.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whose country has long rejected calls for financial compensation for nations affected by slavery, said summit discussions were not "about money".

On slavery, the leaders said in a joint statement they had "agreed that the time has come for a meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation towards forging a common future based on equity".

The push for ex-colonial powers such as Britain to pay reparations or make other amends for slavery and its legacies has gained momentum worldwide, particularly among the Caribbean Community and the African Union.

The statement also made reference to "blackbirding", a term for people from places including the Pacific Islands being deceived, coerced or kidnapped to work on plantations in Australia and elsewhere.

Those opposed to reparations say countries should not be held responsible for historical wrongs, while those in support say the legacy of slavery has led to vast and persistent racial inequality.

The joint statement did not mention what form reparations should take.

Starmer told a press conference the joint statement did two things: "It notes calls for discussion and it agrees that this is the time for a conversation.

"But I should be really clear here, in the two days we've been here, none of the discussions have been about money. Our position is very, very clear in relation to that," he said.

Professor Kingsley Abbott, director of the Institute of Commonwealth Studies at the University of London, said the statement was a sign of a potentially historic breakthrough on the issue.

"The commitment to conversations on reparatory justice wedges open the door for dialogue, and now the hard work really begins," said Abbott, who attended the summit.

The joint statement also referred to concern about "the severe consequences of the climate crisis, including rising temperatures and sea levels".

In a boost for Pacific Islands such as Tuvalu under threat from rising seas, they issued the Commonwealth's first Oceans Declaration, affirming that a nation's maritime boundaries should remain fixed even if climate change causes small island states to be submerged.

Fixing maritime boundaries means atoll nations can continue to reap the economic benefit of vast fishing grounds, even if populations must migrate as dry land area is significantly reduced. The declaration bolsters momentum for international law to recognise the perpetual statehood of sinking island states.

More than half of the Commonwealth's members are small nations, many of them low-lying islands at risk from rising sea levels caused by climate change.

NEW CHIEF

The Commonwealth members selected Shirley Ayorkor Botchwey as the group's new secretary-general. Botchwey, a supporter of reparations for transatlantic slavery and colonialism, takes over from Britain's Patricia Scotland, who has been in the job since 2016.

King Charles and Queen Camilla, who both attended the summit, flew out of Samoa after a visit in which the monarch acknowledged the Commonwealth's "painful" history.

Before leaving, the royal pair attended a farewell ceremony in heavy rain in the village of Siumu.

Charles said in a speech to the summit on Friday that he understood "from listening to people across the Commonwealth how the most painful aspects of our past continue to resonate".

"It is vital, therefore, that we understand our history, to guide us towards making the right choices in future," he said.

The king and queen's time in Samoa followed a six-day tour of Australia, where a large crowd turned out to see them at the Sydney Opera House. Charles also met with Indigenous elders in Sydney, after being heckled by an Indigenous senator in Canberra.

(Reporting by James Redmayne in Apia, Sam McKeith and Cordelia Hsu in Sydney, and Catarina Demony and William James in London; Writing by Alasdair Pal; Editing by Lincoln Feast and William Mallard)


Starmer pushed into reparation talks

Nick Gutteridge
Sat 26 October 2024 at 11:06 am GMT-6·2-min read


Sir Keir Starmer at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Samoa - Stefan Rousseau/PA

Sir Keir Starmer has been pushed into reparation talks with Commonwealth leaders after failing to block official calls for slave trade compensation.

Commonwealth heads made a formal request for “discussions” at a gathering of leaders in Samoa on Saturday, despite repeated efforts from UK negotiators for them to be left off the table.

This comes as a major blow to Sir Keir, who immediately ruled out paying any kind of cash compensation for Britain’s role in the slave trade.

The communique, signed by all 56 Commonwealth nations, noted “calls for discussions on reparatory justice with regard to the trans-Atlantic trade in enslaved Africans and chattel enslavement”.

It recognised “the importance of this matter to member states of the Commonwealth, the majority of which share common historical experiences in relation to this abhorrent trade”.

According to the statement, member states agreed that “the time has come for a meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation towards forging a common future based on equity”.

Sir Keir reiterated that ‘none of the discussions have been about money’ and that Britain’s position is ‘very, very clear’ - Stefan Rousseau/Reuters

Minutes before the communique was published, the Prime Minister admitted defeat at a press conference before he departed from Samoa.

Asked whether he had damaged his relations with Commonwealth nations in his attempt to take a hard line on the issue, the Prime Minister repeated that the slave trade was “abhorrent” but said, “We’ve actually had a very positive two days here in Samoa.”
‘Our position is very clear’

He downplayed the prominence of reparations on the summit’s agenda, saying: “The theme of the day was chosen by the prime minister here in Samoa, and she chose resilience and climate.

“So I think that gives you a clear sense of the absolute priority here, and that’s not surprising.”

He added: “I should be really clear here, in the two days we’ve been here, none of the discussions have been about money. Our position is very, very clear in relation to that.”

Sir Keir said the “next opportunity” to discuss the issue, as demanded by Commonwealth leaders, would be at a UK-Caribbean forum next year.

David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary who has previously backed the idea of paying reparations, will represent Britain at that gathering.

The row over reparations has dominated the Prime Minister’s two-day visit in Samoa.

A group of Caribbean nations have used the Commonwealth summit to demand that he reverse the Government’s current stance and agree to compensation.

Sir Keir has refused to do that but has opened the door to helping those nations seeking reparations secure cheaper finance for dealing with climate change.


-- -- -

colonial world without an engagement with Eric Williams's Capitalism and ... tion of the Slave Trade', was published as Capitalism and Slavery in 1944,.


- -- -
UK

MPs’ opposition to assisted dying bill grows amid criticism of lack of debate

Jessica Elgot 
Deputy political editor
THE GUARDIAN
Sun 27 October 2024 

Rachael Maskell said a five-hour debate would not be enough to explore the potential effects on healthcare.
Photograph: Parliament TV

Opposition to the assisted dying bill is growing in parliament after the interventions of the health and justice secretaries to call for caution – and a backlash among new MPs who are angered by the speed of the legislation.

Rachael Maskell, the former Labour shadow minister who chairs the Dying Well all-party parliamentary group against assisted dying, told the Guardian she and others had been meeting dozens of undecided MPs and hoped to persuade them to vote down the bill and push instead for a wide-ranging commission that would explore better palliative care.

The Guardian understands there is particular anger among new Labour MPs about the speed of the bill. The House of Commons will vote on the private member’s bill led by the MP Kim Leadbeater in five weeks’ time and there is growing concern that full details of the legislation are yet to be published.


Keir Starmer is known to be a keen supporter of the proposed change but has said there will be a free vote for MPs.

A number of senior politicians have expressed opposition to the bill in recent days. One key factor in the debate among MPs has been the decisions of the health secretary, Wes Streeting, and the justice secretary, Shabana Mahmood, to say they will vote against the bill.

Related: Should MPs legalise assisted dying? Our panel responds

Among those who are deeply torn there is a strong feeling that the vote should not take place until the government can show significant improvements to the state of the NHS – or risk sending a dangerous message. There are also grave doubts about the process of the private member’s bill, with just two Fridays to debate it. Several stressed, however, that they did not blame Leadbeater.

Maskell, who was part of a 14-month inquiry into assisted dying while she was on the Commons health select committee, said there were still key outstanding issues. She claimed there would be little time to press for clarity on issues such as whether doctors would have to opt out or opt in to carry out the procedure to end a life.

“It’s a very detailed, involved, complex area of healthcare and it’s got to be treated with that gravity, I think, and I just don’t get the sense that the five-hour parliamentary debate will even touch on that,” she said.

Maskell said MPs would be pushing for the government to instead announce a commission on palliative care, as a way to address many of the horror stories that have been raised as a reason to back assisted dying for those terminally ill and in great pain and distress.

Maskell said she and both of her former colleagues on the select committee who remained in parliament, Dr Caroline Johnson and Paulette Hamilton, were against the bill. “We’re the ones that have kind of really lived and breathed this for a significant amount of time,” she said.

Maskell, who is a religious Christian, denied that faith was the key factor for many opposed, saying there were many atheist MPs who were opposed and motivated by a human rights and equality perspective.

“Both Wes and Shabana are the two cabinet members that have the responsibility for implementing this, and when they’ve dug into the issue, they’ve expressed a concern,” Maskell said. “They really should be listened to.”

She said there was very little time for opponents to make their case. “The second reading on 29 November is really the day to defeat the bill and to say actually we don’t have to do this [in the] first six months of a Labour government. It isn’t the only vehicle in town, we can do something else.”

Streeting told MPs he had been persuaded because of the poor state of palliative care, despite having voted for assisted dying the last time around. Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, was also previously a member of the APPG against assisted dying. But other cabinet ministers have said they are in favour, including the work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, and the culture secretary, Lisa Nandy.

Among Conservative MPs, the issue is split down the middle. “I think that it’s very much a case of a core number of religious ones who are against it, a core number of people who through personal or constituency experience are very strongly in favour, and then a number who are very torn,” one senior Conservative said. “But I think there is a growing feeling of ‘is this the right way to do this?’.”

Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, who has a disabled son and whose wife has MS, has said he will vote against the bill.

Cabinet ministers are not expected to campaign on the issue. Earlier this month, the cabinet secretary, Simon Case, wrote to ministers to say they “should exercise discretion and should not take part in the public debate”.

Starmer’s support has been very influential for a number of MPs, however, and there are others in all the parties who are passionate supporters of the legal change, backed by three-quarters of the public, according to some polls.

Related: Doctor spared by Keir Starmer from assisted dying charges ‘is sure PM wants law change’

In a survey of MPs published earlier this month, just over half of those who responded backed legalisation in the case of terminal illness.

Esther Rantzen, the celebrity backer of the assisted dying law change, to whom Starmer promised he would hold a vote on the issue, wrote to Streeting late this week to say she was “deeply disappointed” in his decision and accused him of “ignoring the government’s request to stay neutral”.

She told the Express that Streeting should know “even the best palliative care cannot always protect patients from dying in agony, and their families and doctors watching helplessly”.

Maskell, a former physiotherapist, said taking part in the health and social care select committee inquiry into assisted dying had left her extremely concerned about the procedure. She said there were a significant number of her colleagues who remained undecided.

“We haven’t even seen the bill yet and we will have five weeks and then a five-hour debate – that feels like the process isn’t right for dealing with such a sensitive and challenging subject and complex subject,” she said.

“We’re in the context of a broken NHS. We know that social care is so fragmented and is just not functioning and massively under-resourced, and local authorities are climbing the wall around their finances. And we know that palliative care and the hospice service have been crying out for years about their underfunding.”

Maskell said for many MPs there was widespread support among their constituents for the change, and for those MPs who had their own doubts, they needed to explain an alternative to voting for the bill.

“We’ve got to think about end of life in a very different way if we are going to give people the very best of care,” she said. “There’ve been so many people who are just feeling they’re having to grab the first thing that comes along. I just think that lobby has been very successful and persuasive in trying to advance their agenda.”

Maskell said she had been having one-to-one discussions with MPs who were undecided. “I would say it’s certainly not the majority in favour yet. But the problem is that they don’t have an adequate response currently to give their constituents, to say: ‘I don’t want have to do this now, but I want to get palliative care right.’”


Hospices fear losing donations if they speak out on assisted dying

Janet Eastham
Fri 25 October 2024 at 10:50 am GMT-6·5-min read


The hospice sector is accused of opting out of the controversial debate to protect their precarious revenue streams - RAFFI MAGHDESSIAN/CAVAN IMAGES

Hospices fear losing donations if they speak out on assisted dying, doctors have claimed.

Palliative care consultants have accused the sector of opting out of the controversial debate to protect their precarious revenue streams.

Hospice UK and Marie Curie, two major end-of-life charities which together represent more than 200 hospices across the UK, have both taken a “neutral” stance on legalisation, despite overwhelming opposition from clinical staff.

According to the Association of Palliative Medicine (APM), which represents 1,400 palliative care doctors and nurses, 4 per cent of clinicians are prepared to implement assisted dying.

Consultants working in the hospice sector, including two former APM presidents, told The Telegraph that the sector’s caution stems from its precarious financial position.

With only a third of its funding coming from the Government, hospices are forced to rely on charitable donations to stay afloat – a funding stream that could be jeopardised if they oppose legalisation.

Ahead of next month’s vote by MPs on whether the law on assisted dying should be changed, medics have warned that the hospice sector’s neutral stance impedes public debate.

Kim Leadbeater, the sister of murdered MP Jo Cox, introduced her private members’ Bill on Oct 16 to legalise assisted dying for terminally ill people.

A free vote is scheduled for Nov 29, the first time MPs have debated the issue since 2015.

Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP, introduced her private members’ bill on Oct 16 in support of assisted dying for terminally ill people - Lucy North/PA

Clinicians have accused both Hospice UK and Marie Curie of refusing requests to survey their staff on the matter. They claim charities haven’t asked because they don’t want the answer.

A former president of APM said the profession has been “seriously compromised” by the hospice sector’s neutral stance and that “the majority of hospices will not want staff to speak out against assisted dying.”

According to the former president, the problem is that “there is good evidence in Canada that if you refuse to provide ‘medical assistance in dying’ in your hospice, then you lose funding. So the hospices are seeing that happening”.

Delta Hospice Society, a hospice organisation in British Columbia, lost $1.5 million (£1.8 million) in annual public funding over its refusal to offer assistive dying and was evicted from its 10-bed premises.

Dr Amy Proffitt, a palliative care consultant, said hospices “worry that if they oppose legalisation, and the general public wants it, then people won’t donate.”

A 2021 APM survey found that 11 per cent felt their organisation “actively encouraged” them to express their views on assisted dying.

Alex Schadenberg, the Canadian anti-assisted dying campaigner, said he was “disappointed” by the position taken by Marie Curie, having spoken to their policy team about the charity’s stance at the Conservative party conference in Birmingham last month.

He said: “I told them that this was a foolish thing to do, because, similar to Canada, the Canadian Medical Association went neutral ahead of time.

“They were always opposed, and then they went neutral, and their argument was, ‘Oh, well, this will give us a seat at the table.’ But in fact, it didn’t give them a seat at the table. It actually eliminated their argument.”

Mr Schadenberg added that Ms Leadbeater is going to “design a Bill that she thinks will get the majority of the members of the parliament to vote for it… So here’s the point. Do they need Marie Curie at the table? No, because they’re trying to create a Bill to get passed. They actually have lost their spot at the table”.

A Marie Curie spokesman told The Telegraph: “We remain neutral on assisted dying so that we can continue to focus on providing care and support to people that are at the end of their life as well as campaigning to improve palliative and end-of-life care.”

Hospice UK’s neutral stance has also been queried by doctors who pointed out the charity invited Liam McArthur, the Liberal Democrat MSP currently advancing a bill to legalise assisted dying in Scotland, to open their conference next month.

Hospice UK said in a statement: “It’s not our role to either support or oppose a change in the law on assisted dying. Rather, our aim is to make sure the experience and expertise of our members inform this important national conversation.”

They added: “There has not been a single concern or discussion within Hospice UK that our charity might lose donations over this issue.

“We are of course concerned that a sector already facing such a difficult financial situation might lose support over what could be a highly polarising debate and campaign.”
‘Public positioning may impact fundraising’

Slides used by Hospice UK when discussing assisted dying with hospices tell staff to “think carefully about how public positioning may impact fundraising” and stated there were “obvious risks of some loss of supporters of your hospice”.

Both charities acknowledged the particular complexities of the debate, with compelling arguments on both sides. Hospice UK said they “would not be reflecting the range of views that exist by taking anything other than a neutral position”.

Another former APM president said: “It’s incredulous that nobody with any ability to think does not have a view on this – it is risible.”

Hospice UK said they have spoken to staff and “don’t need a survey to know they have differing views”.


Why do people still back Trump, after everything? 5 things to understand about MAGA supporters’ thinking

Alex Hinton, Rutgers University - Newark
Sun, October 27, 2024 

Supporters watch Donald Trump speak at a rally in Uniondale, N.Y., on Sept. 18, 2024. Spencer Platt/Getty Images

For many people, especially those leaning left, Donald Trump’s disqualifications to be president seem obvious, prompting some to question: How could anyone still vote for Trump?

Some of the evidence Trump’s critics cite include his two impeachments, multiple criminal indictments at the state and federal levels and a felony conviction. Opponents also say that Trump is a threat to democracy, a misogynist, racist, a serial liar and a rapist.

About 78% of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independent voters say that Trump broke the law when he allegedly tried to overturn the 2020 election results. But less than half of Republicans think he did anything wrong.

I am an anthropologist of peace and conflict, and I have been studying what I call the Trumpiverse since 2015, when Trump descended a golden escalator and announced his candidacy for president. I later wrote a related book in 2021, called “It Can Happen Here.”

More recently, I have been examining toxic polarization – and ways to stop it. Many efforts to reduce people’s polarized views begin with an injunction: Listen and understand.
Why are people voting for Trump?

To this end, I have attended Trump rallies, populist and nonpartisan events and meetings where Democrats and Republicans connect and talk. Along the way, I have spoken with Trump supporters ranging from the Make America Great Again, or MAGA, faithful to moderate “hold the nose and vote for him” conservatives.

And indeed, many on the left fail to understand who Trump voters are and how they vary. Trump’s base cannot simply be dismissed as racist “deplorables,” as Hillary Clinton famously said in 2016, or as country bumpkins in red MAGA hats. Trump voters trend older, white, rural, religious and less educated. But they include others outside those demographic groups.

Many people have thoughtful reasons for voting for Trump, even if their reasoning – as is also true for those on the left – is often inflamed by populist polarizers and media platforms.

Here are five key lines of reasoning that, in varying combinations, inform Trump voters’ choice.


Donald Trump speaks at a rally on July 31, 2024, in Harrisburg, Pa. Spencer Platt/Getty Images


1. Media distortion

Where those on the left see Trump’s many failings, those on the right may see what some political observers call Trump Derangement Syndrome, sometimes simply called TDS.

According to this line of argument, the left-leaning media dissects Trump’s every word, and the media then distorts what he says. I have found that some Trump supporters think that people who feed too much on this allegedly biased media diet can get TDS and develop a passionate, perhaps illogical dislike of Trump.

I have also heard hardcore Trump supporters argue, with no evidence, that such “fake news” media outlets, like CNN, are part of a larger deep state plot of the federal government to upend the will of the people. This plot, according to those who propagate it, includes not just leftists, government bureaucrats and people who claim to be Republicans, but really aren’t, but also people in law enforcement.

Some Trump supporters also see merit in his contention that he is being wrongly persecuted, just like some see the Jan. 6 defendants being persecuted.


2. Bread on the table, money in the bank

“Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

For many Trump voters, the answer to Ronald Reagan’s famous question is clear: “No.” They accurately remember Trump’s term as one of tax cuts, economic growth and stock market highs.

It is true that overall employment numbers and average pay went up under President Joe Biden. But for some Trump supporters, that economic boost pales in comparison to the massive surge in inflation during Biden’s term, with prices rising almost 20%. While the inflation rate has recently abated, prices remain high – as voters are reminded of every day at the grocery store.

Polls also show that Trump has a strong lead over Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris on how they would handle the economy, which is a top concern for voters, especially Republicans.

3. A border invasion

Another reason some Americans want to vote for Trump: immigration.

Like inflation, the number of people illegally crossing the border soared under Biden.

This massive influx of “illegal aliens,” as Trump calls them, dropped to its lowest level in four years in July 2024. This happened after the Biden administration made it harder for immigrants to apply for asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, a policy measure that is in line with many Republicans’ approach.

In 2022, a poll found 7 out of 10 Republicans worried that “open borders” were part of a Democratic plot to expand liberals’ power by replacing conservative white people with nonwhite foreigners.

Trump has played into some people’s mostly false concerns that immigrants living illegally in the U.S. are freeloaders and won’t assimilate, as illustrated by recent – untrue – allegations that immigrants are eating pets in Ohio.

In 2022, 82% of Republicans said they viewed immigration as a “very important” issue. Trump continues to tout his proposed solution, which includes shutting the border, building a wall and deporting 11 million immigrants who are living in the U.S. without legal authorization.

People attend a Donald Trump rally in Uniondale, N.Y., on Sept. 18, 2024. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images


4. A proven record


Some Trump voters simply compare the records of Trump and Biden-Harris and find that the tally tilts firmly toward Trump.

And it’s not just about the economy and immigration.

There were no new wars under Trump. Biden-Harris, in contrast, are saddled with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s invasion of the Gaza Strip. Trump supporters’ perception is that American taxpayers foot a large portion of the bill, even though other countries are also giving money to Ukraine, and Israel is actually buying weapons from the U.S.

I have found that Trump supporters also think he is better suited to deal with the rising power and threat of China.


5. The MAGA bull in a china shop

While some Harris supporters lament Trump’s destruction of democracy and decency in politics, I have found that Trump voters see a charismatic MAGA bull in a china shop.

It is precisely because Trump is an unrelenting pugilist, or a fighter – as he showed when he raised a fist after the assassination attempt against him in July – that he should be elected, his supporters believe.

Some even view him as savior – who will save the U.S. from a “radical left” apocalypse.

For such Trump stalwarts, MAGA is not simply a slogan. In the Trumpiverse, it is a movement to save an America that is on the brink of failure.

Read more: Why would people vote for Kamala Harris? 5 things to understand about why her supporters back her

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Alex Hinton, Rutgers University - Newark

Read more:

How sheriffs define law and order for their counties depends a lot on their views − and most are white Republican men


I went to CPAC as an anthropologist to understand Trump’s base − they believe, more than ever, he is a savior


How a divided America, including the 15% who are ‘MAGA Republicans,’ splits on QAnon, racism and armed patrols at polling places

Alexander Hinton receives funding from the Rutgers-Newark Center for the Study of Politics and Race in America.



This independent candidate is worrying Republicans in deep-red Nebraska's Senate race

the core of Osborn’s appeal to his backers appears to be as a working-class everyman


MARGERY A. BECK and JOHN HANNA
Updated Sat, October 26, 2024 

Independent Dan Osborn, a challenger to two-term Republican Sen. Deb Fischer, chats with patrons of a brewery in Beatrice, Neb., July 30, 2024. (AP Photo/Margery Beck)

FILE - Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., speaks to media, Oct. 18, 2023, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Stephanie Scarbrough, File)

Political yard signs for Dan Osborn, an independent candidate for the U.S. Senate, sit outside a campaign event he held in Beatrice, Neb., July 30, 2024. (AP Photo/Margery Beck)

Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Key Takeaways
Independent candidate Dan Osborn is running for U.S. Senate in Nebraska, rejecting both major political parties as part of a broken system, and has emerged as a serious challenger to two-term Republican Sen. Deb Fischer, attracting significant support from Democrats.
Osborn, a working-class everyman and U.S. Navy and Nebraska Army National Guard veteran, has raised nearly $8 million total, twice as much as Fischer, and has received donations from political action committees that back independents and groups supporting Democratic candidates.
Fischer, a rancher from Valentine, Nebraska, is a two-term Republican senator who has been endorsed by former President Donald Trump and is expected to win in a state where Republicans hold all statewide offices, but Osborn's campaign has complicated Republican ambitions and buoyed calls to break up the nation’s two-party system.
See a mistake? Let us know.


BEATRICE, Neb. (AP) — In the back room of a brewery in southeastern Nebraska, more than three dozen people crowded together this summer to hear from Dan Osborn, a former cereal plant worker and independent running for U.S. Senate.

The standing-room-only crowd in the small town of Beatrice was larger than Osborn expected, but it stood out for more than its size. Those attending ranged from supporters of former President Donald Trump wearing “Make America Great Again” hats to voters firmly backing Vice President Kamala Harris and other Democrats.

Osborn’s message to all of them was that America’s two-party system has let them down.

“There’s nobody like me in the United States Senate,” he told the crowd. “Right now, the Senate is a country club of millionaires that work for billionaires.”

Osborn has cobbled together a campaign in deeply conservative Nebraska that rejects both major political parties as part of a broken system. For a guy who held his first campaign news conferences out of the garage of his suburban Omaha home, he has surprised pundits by emerging as a serious challenger to two-term Republican Sen. Deb Fischer in what had been considered a safe seat for the GOP only months ago.

The contest has attracted $21 million in spending from outside groups, favoring Osborn, and even Fischer's campaign acknowledges that the race is closer than expected. There is no Democratic candidate running, but a win for Osborn could disrupt Republican plans to reclaim a majority in the Senate. Osborn has said he won't caucus with either party.

That hasn't stopped Democrats from openly supporting him. During the first 16 days of October, after the national spotlight on him had intensified, Osborn raised more than $3 million, almost all of it from individuals and the bulk of it through Democrats’ Act Blue fundraising site, Federal Election Commission reports show. That was almost six times the $530,000 that Fischer raised.

Osborn has raised nearly $8 million total to Fischer’s $6.5 million, and with a little less than three weeks before the election, he had $1.1 million cash, twice what Fischer had.

Osborn has succeeded not only by rejecting political parties but through boots-on-the-ground campaigning across the state, backed by clever ads — in one he notes “I don't even own a suit” — that contrast his working-class roots with a system where he says politicians "are bought and sold.”

Osborn is a U.S. Navy and Nebraska Army National Guard veteran and industrial mechanic who gained national recognition three years ago when he successfully led a labor strike at Kellogg’s cereal plants, winning higher wages and other benefits. That background shapes his view that working families are being steamrolled by a growing wealth gap, he says.

A win by Osborn would be a giant upset in a state where Republicans hold all statewide offices and all congressional districts.



Fischer is a rancher from Valentine, a town of 2,600 people in northern Nebraska about 300 miles (483 kilometers) northwest of Omaha. She was a little-known state legislator when she ran as an outsider in 2012, winning a competitive primary and then defeating Bob Kerrey, a former Democratic governor and U.S. senator. Her campaign ads that year showed her leaning up against fence posts and called her “sharp as barb wire, tougher than a cedar fence post.”

“Nebraskans support me because I’ve delivered results,” Fischer said this week, mentioning national defense and road projects as areas where she's done right by her state. “I have a long, conservative record that’s helped build Nebraska and keep America strong.”

Fischer's pollster, John Rogers of Torchlight Strategies, a longtime national Republican Party operative, argued recently that the apparent closeness of the race is a “mirage.” Her campaign expects that Osborn won’t be able to build a big enough margin in Democratic areas of Omaha, the state’s largest city, to overcome the votes Fischer will win in the vast rural areas.

The pollster also predicted that Trump’s endorsement of Fischer in September will pull Nebraska voters back into her corner in a state he is expected to win handily. “SHE WILL NOT LET YOU DOWN!” Trump posted on his Truth social media site.



Trump labeled Osborn as “Radical Left” and likened him to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who runs as an independent but caucuses with Democrats and has become a leading spokesman for liberals. Fischer and her supporters reinforce that message.

Still, Osborn has gotten national attention, complicated Republicans’ ambitions and buoyed calls to break up the nation’s two-party system. That has broad appeal in an era when disgust for politics keeps rising.

“At least as an independent, you’re an open book,” said Jim Jonas, who managed Greg Orman's high-visibility independent U.S. Senate campaign in neighboring Kansas a decade ago. “You have the opportunity to go frame yourself, frame the race and run as a refreshing, different choice rather than the two broken parties.”

That’s exactly how Osborn is pitching himself.



“Congress is a complete misrepresentation of the demographics of our voters,” he told the crowd in Beatrice. “Less than 2% of our elected officials in both the House and Senate come from working-class people.”

Osborn has received donations from political action committees that back independents, like the Wyoming-based Way Back PAC, along with groups supporting Democratic candidates.

His independence hasn't kept immigration from becoming a key issue, just as it has all over the country. Osborn has said the U.S. border with Mexico is too porous. But he also says he favors some form of amnesty for immigrants in the U.S. illegally for a long time if they’re working and have not committed violent crimes.

Just as Orman did in 2014, Osborn supports abortion rights. That could help him in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the constitutional right to an abortion. Voters in seven states, including some conservative ones, have either protected abortion rights or defeated attempts to restrict them in statewide votes over the past two years. Fischer has alleged that Osborn won't support any restrictions.

But the core of Osborn’s appeal to his backers appears to be as a working-class everyman.

He is getting support from at least a dozen labor unions. Two weeks before the election, the national AFL-CIO brought in top officials to Omaha to lead a phone bank in support of Osborn. Around 30 union members and officials — including AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler — worked the phones to secure support and donations for Osborn.

“His message of backing working families is really resonating with people,” Shuler said.

As she spoke, a phone-bank worker nearby shouted out that volunteers had made 3,000 calls and secured fresh promises of support from Nebraskans they were calling.



“People now are so cynical about politics," Shuler said. "And he’s getting traction with those people because he’s one of them.”

___

Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas.

___

This story has been corrected to reflect in the second-to-last paragraph that a phone-bank worker shouted out that volunteers had made 3,000 calls, not that phone-bank volunteers had shouted out donations of up to $3,000.
Harris Promises a Wealth Boost for Black Voters Courted by Trump

Amara Omeokwe
Sun 27 October 2024 







(Bloomberg) -- Kamala Harris is seeking to persuade Black Americans that she can narrow America’s centuries-old racial wealth gap, a task that’s become urgent as Donald Trump makes inroads with a group that could tip the presidential election.

Harris in recent weeks has tried to tailor her broader vision of an “opportunity economy” — including support for first-time homeowners and would-be entrepreneurs — and talk up the benefits for Black men in particular. Her campaign website promises measures to give them “the tools to build wealth and achieve financial freedom.”

It’s a move aimed at bolstering support in a core Harris constituency as the knife-edge contest nears its end. Black Americans lean strongly toward Democrats, but some recent polls suggest the vice president – who’d become the first Black woman to lead the country if she wins – may struggle to rack up the numbers that recent party candidates have managed.

A New York Times/Siena survey this month found her support among Black men is down 15 points compared with the backing for President Joe Biden in 2020. The latest Bloomberg/Morning Consult survey of swing-state voters shows Harris supported by 77% of Black men compared with 88% of Black women, though both numbers have climbed since she replaced Biden atop the ticket.

The Harris campaign points to a platform that it says will improve the balance of racial wealth. For all the signs of progress in recent years, the gap has remained stubbornly wide.

‘President for Everybody’

The vice president is promising forgivable government loans of up to $20,000 to help entrepreneurs start businesses, and down-payment assistance for new homebuyers. Since Black Americans are under-represented in both categories – as home and business owners – the Harris campaign says they’d be among the biggest winners.

“I am running to be a president for everybody,” Harris said earlier this month at an event with Charlamagne tha God, co-host of the radio program The Breakfast Club, which is popular with Black audiences. “But I am clear-eyed about the history and the disparities that exist for specific communities, and I’m not going to shy away from that.”

Trump’s pitch to Black voters invokes the pre-pandemic economy he presided over, when prices were lower and sentiment more upbeat. Trump also says his proposed crackdown on immigration will help Black voters by easing pressure on jobs.

In the swing state of Michigan, Rhuben Crowley Jr. is a Black voter who’s open to both arguments. Active in Detroit politics but undecided who to vote for this time — if anyone — he went to a recent Trump rally to try to make up his mind.

Crowley echoes voters in general with his focus on the economy, calling it a “major, major, major” election issue. “Blacks are being locked out of the economy,” which was better under Trump with lower gas prices, he said.

He’s also hesitant to trust Harris’ proposals aimed at Black men because he blames her for the flow of migrants across the southern US border, which he said has cost his community jobs — echoing Trump’s rhetoric. On the other hand, Crowley says he doesn’t feel the former president has a plan specifically for Black Americans.

‘The Only Way’

Targeted policies are essential because the racial wealth chasm has persisted through good economic times and bad, say some economists who’ve studied the issue.

Biden’s administration highlights the rise in black wealth in recent years. Between 2019 and 2022, the wealth of the average Black family jumped more than 60%, according to Federal Reserve data. At the end of that period, the wealth gap between the median Black and White households — when measured as a ratio – was the narrowest in two decades.

In straightforward dollar terms, though, the gap rose by some $50,000 over the three-year period, to around $240,000 in 2022. That’s because the typical Black family had less wealth to begin with.

The size and persistence of wealth disparities have spurred some experts to call for fixes less timid than anything offered so far – such as reparations for historic slavery.

“The bottom line here is we have not given enough attention to substantial monetary transfers for the purposes of asset growth,” says William “Sandy” Darity, an economist and professor of public policy at Duke University and leading scholar on the topic. “Whether or not you call it reparations, the only way to alter these circumstances is through some form of direct transfer of resources to Black Americans.”

Asked about reparations during the event with Charlamagne tha God, Harris said the issue “has to be studied” and turned the conversation toward her “immediate plan” focused on small businesses, housing and other proposals.

‘Change the Fundamentals’

Home ownership has long been central to this policy debate, since it’s a major driver of household wealth. Just 45% of Black Americans owned their home as of June, versus 74% of Whites – and the gap has hardly shifted since the Fair Housing Act, a landmark measure to prohibit discrimination, was passed in 1968.

Harris’ platform includes as much as $25,000 in down-payment assistance “for first-time homebuyers who lack inherited wealth,” in the form of a tax credit. Citing a Moody’s analysis, the Harris campaign says the number of first-time Black homebuyers would more than triple per year by the end of her first term. She’s also promised steps to boost housing supply.

“In order to begin to address the racial wealth gap, you’ve got to change the fundamentals of housing affordability broadly,” says Jim Parrott a nonresident fellow at the Urban Institute who has informally advised the Harris campaign.

Housing is far from the only measure that matters, as both campaigns make pitches to Black voters that rely on their achievements while in office.

Household incomes and weekly pay for the group rose on Trump’s watch, says Janiyah Thomas, spokeswoman for the ex-president’s campaign. “A second Trump term would build on this progress by expanding access to capital for Black entrepreneurs, offering more job opportunities and driving growth in underserved areas.”

She also points to the so-called opportunity zones created under Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, saying they drew employment and investment to Black communities.

Tony Jones says his barber shop in Cleveland sits in one of those zones — as well as an “opportunity corridor” that local officials have touted as a way to spur investment in the city’s predominantly Black eastern neighborhoods. But the 65-year-old says he hasn’t seen much benefit from that: Business is slow. He’s already cast an early ballot for Harris.

Jones says his vote was largely one against Trump, who he argues has offered very few firm ideas. “I’ve got a hundred dollars in my pocket that I’ll mail to you if you could tell me what platform Trump is standing on,” he says. “Tell me one platform that Trump ran on other than try and over-talk and disgrace his competitor.” He notes that many Black men are wary of Harris’ past as a prosecutor, but likes what he’s heard of her economic plans.

‘Systematically Lower’

In addition to her new proposals, Harris’ campaign leans on the Biden administration’s track record. Officials point to strong wage gains for Black Americans, a long stretch of low Black unemployment during the post-pandemic recovery and a surge in the number of Black-owned small businesses.

Lael Brainard, a top economic adviser to Biden, also highlights efforts to combat bias in home appraisals. Fairer valuations would allow Black Americans to tap more equity in their homes, she said in an interview.

“If appraisals are systematically lower in those communities because of bias, then essentially it is preventing the kind of wealth building that has been so meaningful for intergenerational advancements in opportunity,” Brainard said.
Questions remain over the focus on home ownership and whether it comes at the expense of more liquid kinds of wealth that can be used to buy property but also for other things such as college fees. The racial gap in ownership of financial assets like stocks and bonds is even wider than for housing.

Darrick Hamilton, an economist and professor at the New School who’s written extensively on the wealth gap, says the Harris proposals lean in the right direction, by focusing on directing investment and capital toward Black Americans. It’s a step away from “that personal responsibility narrative that’s often directed specifically at Black people, often at Black men in particular,” he says.

“What remains to be seen, for her and any political candidate,” says Hamilton, “will be the actual policies to accompany once in office.”

--With assistance from Shawn Donnan and Hadriana Lowenkron.

©2024 Bloomberg L.P.
Can this Trump-backed car dealer unseat the Ohio Democrat and win Republicans the Senate?


Stephen Starr in Moraine, Ohio
Fri 25 October 2024  

Sherrod Brown is the only Ohio Democrat to hold state-wide office. His opponent sells luxury cars.Composite: Guardian Design/AFP/Getty Images/AP


When the Democrat Sherrod Brown was first elected to the US Senate in 2006, Ohio, with its large urban populations and manufacturing industries, was fairly reliable territory for Democrats.

Barack Obama claimed the state in 2008 and 2012 on his way to the White House. Democrats boasted strong representation in Ohio’s politics. Analysts zealously watched its voting patterns, such was its prominence as a bellwether state.

In the years since, the state has become older, whiter and more conservative. Manufacturing has shrunk and population has stagnated.


Brown is now the only Democrat holding a statewide seat in Ohio. And he is weeks out from a crucial Senate election against former luxury car dealer Bernie Moreno, a contest that could reshape US politics for years to come,

For one, keeping Brown’s seat is crucial if Democrats hope to maintain their control of the US Senate.

If Brown can win re-election, it would be notable in a state where Republicans have engineered a gerrymandering process to their advantage. They hold a supermajority in the state’s house of representatives and senate, and control the offices of the governor, secretary of state and attorney general as well as the state supreme court. Ohio’s second US senator is none other than Trump’s pick for vice-president, JD Vance.

Brown is facing his most formidable on-comer yet – not because his Republican challenger has resonated particularly effectively with the Ohio electorate, but because Brown has, until now, never run in a year when Donald Trump was also on the ballot.

For James Spencer, who has lived in Moraine, a working-class suburb of Dayton, for 27 years, the former president’s endorsement of Moreno is enough to secure his vote.

As a retired construction contractor, he was unhappy to see the nearby General Motors plant that once employed thousands of blue-collar workers taken over by a Chinese auto glass manufacturer, Fuyao Glass. He believes the perceived problems associated with the company, including a raid by the Department of Homeland Security and other law enforcement agencies investigating allegations of financial crimes and labor exploitation in July, have only worsened since.

In the past, he said, “Everything went around the plant. Your friends, your family. It was like a big GM community … We’ve lost so much in this area.”

The declining fortunes experienced by white working-class Ohioans such as Spencer have been seized on by Trump and Moreno.

However, Brown, the incumbent, is hoping his longstanding position as a champion of workers’ rights can carry him over the line.

His campaign and supporters have largely disassociated Brown from the Biden administration and Kamala Harris campaign, despite the former helping to bring billions of dollars in infrastructure funding to rural parts of the state.

“Brown has crossover appeal among Ohioans. The labor vote, which has increasingly gone to Trump, has also gone to Brown,” said Thomas Sutton, a political science professor and acting president of Baldwin Wallace University.

“He shares some of the same positions as Trump when it comes to protecting local industry, manufacturing [and] support for farmers.”

Ohioans have been bombarded with ads featuring Brown riding a speedboat while wearing a bullet-proof vest, a scene meant to depict his tough-on-immigration stance.

Critics of Brown say that despite him being an apparent champion of the working class, he has mostly never held a non-political job himself (he worked as a teacher for a few years in the 1970s and 80s).

A representative of Brown’s campaign said he was not available for comment for this article. Emails sent to Moreno’s campaign were unanswered.

Trump’s endorsement of Moreno, a relative political novice, has energized Ohio’s Maga electorate.

“Moreno is doing a pretty good job in handing his campaign over to the professional ad people. They’re using the scare tactics against Brown, tying him to the Biden administration,” said Sutton.

A cryptocurrency industry Pac has spent $40m on Moreno’s campaign, while polling conducted for Moreno’s campaign suggests their candidate has a three-point lead over Brown. Other polls suggest a very close race.

But Moreno’s run, and his record, are not flawless.

Last year, he settled more than a dozen wage-theft lawsuits and was forced to pay more than $400,000 to two former employees of his car dealership.

Recently, he has been criticized for telling attenders at a town hall that women over 50 shouldn’t be concerned about reproductive rights.

“When you take away women’s abortion rights, you take away healthcare, and we in Ohio have voted that that’s none of your business,” said Amy Cox, a Democrat who is running this year to unseat a Republican incumbent in the US House of Representatives in a district that includes Moraine, Dayton and Springfield.

Last year, Ohio Democrats and liberals were revitalized by a rare win at the ballot box when voters decided by a 13-point margin to enshrine abortion rights in the state’s constitution.

Related: Bernie Moreno says he fled socialism in Colombia for the US in 1971. What does history say?

“Women and men are really energized by the fall of Roe, and Project 2025 is really motivating people to get out and vote,” said Cox.

A bribery scandal involving a failing energy company and leading Ohio Republicans hasn’t helped them.The former speaker of the statehouse, Larry Householder, was jailed for 20 years last year for racketeering.

“This is going to be won and lost in the three C’s,” the cities of Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati, said Sutton.

And the election will be about “whether more typically Democratic areas have better mobilization and turnout to counteract what would be normal voter turnout in the Republican-leaning rural and small-town areas”, he added.

For Spencer, who lives near the Fuyao Glass factory in Moraine, Moreno’s attack ads that feature Brown’s alleged failures on immigration have hit home.

“I’m hoping that if Trump and JD Vance get in, they will deal with what’s going on over there,” he said.
DESANTISLAND HORROR SHOW

Florida biologists prove invasive Burmese pythons are swallowing deer, alligators whole

JULIA JACOBO
Fri 25 October 2024 

The scale at which the Burmese python is able to decimate the native wildlife population in South Florida continues to astonish biologists studying to eradicate the invasive species.

Researchers in the region recently proved that Burmese pythons are able to stretch their jaws wide enough to swallow large prey -- such as fully grown deer and alligators -- whole, according to a paper published in the journal Reptiles & Amphibians.

"Knowing the size of prey that predators can consume facilitates understanding and predicting their ecological impact," the paper states.


PHOTO: In December 2022, biologists stumbled upon a gruesome scene of a nearly 15-foot female Burmese python eating a fully-grown white tail near on private property near Naples, Florida. (Conservancy of Southwest Florida)

A group of biologists stumbled upon a nearly 15-foot female Burmese python in December 2022 in the midst of devouring an adult white-tailed deer, Ian Bartoszek, a wildlife biologist and science coordinator at the Conservancy of Southwest Florida in Naples, told ABC News.

Bartoszek and his team use radio telemetry -- a technique that uses radio signals to track the movement and behavior of animals -- to understand the pythons' behavior. Trackers placed on males help researchers find the reproductive females, Bartoszek said.

MORE: Invasive ocean species detected in Florida waters, scientists say

By the time they got to the scene, the python had swallowed about half of the deer, and it took about 30 more minutes for it to consume the other half, Bartoszek said. Had the deer still been alive, the scientists would have intervened. Instead, they got a front-row seat to the intricacies of the food chain.

"For us biologists, this was the most intense thing we've ever seen on assignment," he said. "This was as primal as it gets."


PHOTO: In December 2022, biologists stumbled upon a gruesome scene of a nearly 15-foot female Burmese python eating a fully-grown white tail near on private property near Naples, Florida. (Conservancy of Southwest Florida)

The female python weighed about 115 pounds, while the deer weighed about 77 pounds -- representing 93% of the snake's maximal gape area, the size of their mouth opening, according to the paper.

MORE: Key Largo tree cactus becomes 1st-ever US species to become extinct due to rising sea levels

Burmese pythons can consume meals equivalent to 100% of their body mass, according to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission. While parts of tailed deer had been found in python necropsies before, this was the first time biologists had witnessed it in the wild, Bartoszek said.

"In this specific example, it feels like we caught the serial killer in action," Bartoszek said.

PHOTO: In December 2022, biologists stumbled upon a gruesome scene of a nearly 15-foot female Burmese python eating a fully-grown white tail near on private property near Naples, Florida. (Conservancy of Southwest Florida)

The large nonvenomous constrictor captures its prey by ambushing it before coiling around it. The snake then squeezes until the animal goes into cardiac arrest, Bartoszek said.

In the case they witnessed, the python had bitten the deer in the neck before coiling around it, he added.

"When you see their anatomy firsthand, they are amazingly designed," Bartoszek said. "Mother Nature did a very good job with the species."

MORE: How experts are trying to save the Florida panther

Had that python lived, it probably would have "used" the feed from the deer over the course of a week, Bartoszek said. But since they are opportunistic hunters, the snake could have very well captured its next prey before then, he added.

A variety of species have been found in the gut contents of Burmese pythons during necropsies, including mammals, birds, reptiles, as well as federally protected species such as the wood stork and the Key Largo woodrat, according to the FWC.

PHOTO: A python is seen as Robert Edman, with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, gives a python-catching demonstration to potential snake hunters at the start of the Python Bowl 2020 on January 10, 2020 in Sunrise, Florida. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Burmese pythons are one of the most concerning invasive species in the region, according to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).

The species, native to Africa, Asia and Australia, established a breeding population in South Florida through intentional and accidental release, according to the USGS.

MORE: Python farming could offer one of the most sustainable sources of meat in the world, according to a new study

Severe declines in mammal populations throughout Everglades National Park have been linked to the species, according to the USGS. A 2012 study found that populations of raccoons had declined 99.3%, opossum populations declined 98.9%, and bobcats 87.5% since 1997. Other mammals have "effectively disappeared" over time, such as marsh rabbits, cottontail rabbits and foxes, according to the USGS.

"Imagine just thousands and thousands of pythons eating their way through the Everglades," Bartoszek said.


PHOTO: A hypothetical prey pyramid shows the diet necessary for a Burmese python hatchling to reach a size of 15 feet. (Conservancy of Southwest Florida)

Burmese pythons were added to Florida's Prohibited Nonnative Species List in 2021. The state also pays bounty hunters to catch Burmese pythons through the FWC's Python Patrol program.

The species, with its efficient reproductive capabilities and voracious appetite, is creating a cascading effect of loss within the ecosystem of the Everglades and surrounding areas, Bartoszek said.

"We didn't want to alarm people," Bartoszek. "We just want to showcase what our native wildlife is up against across the greater Everglades ecosystem."

Florida biologists prove invasive Burmese pythons are swallowing deer, alligators whole originally appeared on abcnews.go.com