Anti-choicer gives surprising warning about 'devastating' impact Roe v Wade decision will have on conservatives

Tom Boggioni
June 19, 2021

Demonstrators celebrate at the Supreme Court after the court struck down a Texas law imposing strict regulations on abortion doctors and facilities. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

In a column for the Daily Beast, conservative Matt Lewis -- who admits he opposes abortion -- warned fellow conservatives and Republicans alike that, should the Supreme Court strike down the landmark Roe v Wade ruling, it could have a long-range and devastating impact on the GOP's political future.

Lewis, who had previously applauded the appointment of conservative justices to the Supreme Court, claims it is likely some or part of Roe could be dismantled and warned conservatives to prepare for the blowback.

"It's been a month since we learned that the Supreme Court will take up a case that could result in weakening—or even reversing—Roe v. Wade, the 1973 precedent that legalized abortion; it's clear that the general public has not fully comprehended (a) the likelihood this will happen, (b) the timeframe, or (c) the political ramifications. I know this is true because I was shocked recently to discover that some of my smarter and better-connected conservative friends are increasingly hopeful Roe will be reversed. This simultaneously pleased and, I must confess, frightened me," he wrote before cautioning, "That's because the media outrage and potential political backlash could be explosive, and this could turn out to be not exactly a pyrrhic victory for opponents of abortion but certainly one that inflicts more damage than they currently seem to be anticipating."

As Lewis explains, he believes Roe was decided on "shaky grounds" which makes it a ripe target for being taken apart by the current conservative court -- but he also fears what will happen after.

"Short of completely overturning Roe, I think the most likely decision would allow states to ban abortions after 15 weeks. (This may surprise readers, but this law would still be more liberal than cosmopolitan France!),": he explained. "Regardless, this would still create a firestorm of backlash. To fully appreciate this, it's important to understand how important this hot-button issue has been for nearly 50 years, with public opinion remaining divided even as it's shifted dramatically on things like gay rights and interracial marriage."

"The long-term implications of all of this could involve white college-educated suburbanites fleeing the GOP in even larger numbers than we have seen, as well as ironically removing what is one of the few remaining reasons NeverTrump conservatives might have had for staying in the party. (To be sure, those who believe that this is a life-or-death moral issue should be willing to suffer political consequences, but suffer, they may)," he predicted. "It's also important to note that overturning Roe would not ban abortion, but rather, send the decision back to the states. Interestingly, though, this, too, could pose a political problem for Republicans. Gaming out what might happen there, it's possible that conservative voters (who wrongly assumed all this would actually ban all abortion) will be disenchanted and feel misled by a corrupt system and its establishment elites."

With that he warned a ruling against Roe could lead to a wave of furious voters turning out for the 2022 midterms.

"Right now, history suggests that Republicans will reclaim the House and Senate, but all bets are off if this political atomic bomb hits… and if it does hit, it will likely be just months before the voting. What if Joe Biden actually gains seats in the midterms?" he asked before adding, "Now, I'm not suggesting that the short-term political fallout means that people who oppose abortion on principle should abandon the fight. It's just that they should gird their loins. People have no idea how likely this variable is to occur. If you think 2020 and 2021 were interesting, you ain't seen nothing yet."

You can read more here

When a grifter gets swindled: Former GOP chairman accused of stealing from Paul Manafort's PAC

Zachary Petrizzo, Salon
June 19, 2021

Paul Manafort (Photo: Screen capture)

Former Colorado Republican Party chairman Ryan Call allegedly stole nearly $280,000 from a pro-Trump super PAC over the course of three years while he was the committee's treasurer, according to a newly filed complaint.

This article first appeared in Salon.

"The allegations against Ryan Call, who served two terms as state chair of the Colorado GOP between 2011 and 2015, were disclosed in a complaint filed against him this month by the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, a division of the Colorado Supreme Court that handles attorney disciplinary matters," Colorado Newsline first reported on Wednesday. The complaint, filed on June 2 by the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel, details that the former treasurer took cash from the Rebuilding America Now PAC through the course of 37 self-dealing transactions from 2016 to 2019.

"Respondent knowingly misappropriated $278,169.45 from (Rebuilding America Now)," the filing further stated. "Specifically, he transferred $278,169.45 of RAN funds to himself, knowing that the funds belonged to RAN, and knowing that he was not entitled to the funds and that RAN had not authorized him to take the funds for his own purposes."

The filed complaint alleged that Call "knowingly misappropriated" funds intended to go to the pro-Trump PAC founded by former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was also hit over failing to report a hefty contribution of $1 million during his tenure. That million-dollar contribution would later be reported by Call to the FEC in November of 2018. Over the course of June 2016 and November 2016, the pro-Trump super PAC raised north of $23 million, according to FEC records reviewed by Newsline.

The now public complaint against Call was filed by the Denver-based law firm Hale Westfall, according to Colorado Newsline, after Call "entered into a contract with Rebuilding America Now 'in his personal capacity,' and 'signed for both parties.' The contract awarded him a fee of $5,000 per month for "political strategy and fundraising support and assistance.'"
Report Advertisement

It will be up to Presiding Disciplinary Judge William Lucero to decide on Call's fate. An email associated with Call's name out of Colorado didn't return a Salon request for comment.

Trump Commerce Boss Wilbur Ross Hoovered Up $53 Million While In Public Office


Trump Commerce Boss Wilbur Ross Hoovered Up $53 Million While In Public Office

Then he slipped out of public life and into a business he set up in the Cayman Islands while reportedly still commerce secretary.

By Mary Papenfuss

HUFFPOST
POLITICS
06/19/2021 

Former U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross.

Donald Trump’s commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross, earned at least $53 million from private companies while he was collecting a taxpayer salary and supposed to be looking out for the public instead of his own profits.

Ross reported making somewhere between $53 million and $127 million during his four years as head of the Commerce Department. The federal government only requires officials to report broad ranges of outside income

It’s possible that Ross earned “significantly more” since he was not required to specify certain income totals over $1 million, noted watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which reported Ross’ financial disclosure filings earlier this week.

Ross’ many and profitable entanglements with private companies while he was supposed to be looking out for the American taxpayer triggered concern and criticism.

“Even in an administration characterized by corruption, Ross became notorious for mixing personal business with his government role,” CREW said in a statement.

News of Ross’ income while serving in the Trump administration follows a bombshell report in The Washington Post last month that an “obscure” security office within the Commerce Department served as an aggressive “counterintelligence unit,” collecting information on hundreds of Americans, including the department’s own employees.

The Investigations and Threat Management Service covertly searched workers’ offices at night, conducted searches of their emails in a hunt for foreign influence, and pored over citizens’ social media posts for criticism of the census, which is run by the Commerce Department, the Post reported.

In one instance, the unit opened a case on a Florida retiree who simply tweeted that the census would be twisted to “benefit the Trump Party,” records show. The Biden administration has suspended ITMS investigations, according to the Post.

Ross is already engaged in a new enterprise, a special purpose acquisition company that reportedly attracted $300 million from investors. He established the company in the Cayman Islands in January while he was still in public office, Forbes reported.

Lawmakers, CREW and the Campaign Legal Center raised concerns about Ross’ business entanglements even as he negotiated in his government capacity with officials and other national leaders about issues likely to affect his profits.

CREW demanded a probe in 2017 into whether he fully divested from the Bank of Cyprus and recused himself from trade negotiations with China that could have affected his financial interests linked to Navigator Holdings and Diamond S Shipping.

CREW also filed a complaint against Ross the following year for possible insider trading and other violations when he reportedly shorted Navigator stock after learning that a negative story was coming out in The New York Times about his links to the company. In addition, the watchdog organization filed a complaint against Ross seeking an investigation into whether he violated criminal statutes by participating in several government meetings with companies that he had not divested from.

A report by the Commerce Department’s Inspector General’s Office late last year cleared Ross of insider trading accusations, but concluded that he violated the federal standard of failing to avoid the appearance of ethical and legal breaches.

The Doors’ Jim Morrison: 10 profound, bizarre and brilliant quotes

The Lizard King's finest quips
ByThomas Smith
22nd May 2018




The Doors’ debut album is undeniably one of the greatest psych-rock records of all time, producing both powerful rock classics like ‘Break On Through (To The Other Side)’ and mind-melting freakouts in the shape of ‘The Crystal Ship’ and ‘The End’. Not only that, but it was the world’s first introduction to Jim Morrison, the band’s enigmatic, bonkers and game-changing singer, one who was full of quotes to both inspire you and leave you utterly dumbstruck. Here are 10 of his finest.

1 On his birth
PSYCHOPOMPOUS
“I don’t remember. It must have happened during one of my blackouts.”


2 On his life philosophy
DIONYSIUS
“I believe in a long, prolonged derangement of the senses in order to obtain the unknown.”


3 On drugs


ALICE IN WONDERLAND
“I was testing the bounds of reality. I was curious to see what would happen. That’s all it was: curiosity.”




4 On drinking
BACCHUS

“Being drunk is a good disguise. I drink so I can talk to assholes. This includes me.”


5 On rebellion
ANARCHISM
“When you make your peace with authority, you become authority.”


6 Onstage in LA
NIHILISM

“I don’t know what’s gonna happen, but I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames”


7 On his place in history
SOLIPSISUM

“I see myself as a huge fiery comet, a shooting star. Everyone stops, points up and gasps, “Oh, look at that!” Then – whoosh, and I’m gone… and they’ll never see anything like it ever again – ever.”

8 On being The Lizard King  
 OPHIDIAN GNOSIS
“I used to see the universe as a mammoth snake, and all the people and objects, landscapes, as little pictures in the facets of their scales. I think peristaltic motion is the basic life movement.


9 On how he wrote ‘The End’
FREUDIANISM
“I had this magic formula to break into the subconscious. I’d lay there and say over and over, ‘Fuck the mother, kill the father.”


10 On describing The Doors

YIPPIE!REICHIAN
“Think of us as erotic politicians.”


RELATED TOPICS
The Doors

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLy5yrMKIAvv_9nh5II8r56eZEtfkVVTGU

This Jupiter Retrograde Is Going To Mean Major Changes — Are You Ready?

The luckiest planet in the sky is about to begin its backwards dance in outer space — aka, Jupiter retrograde is here. Starting on June 20, the same day as the Summer Solstice, Jupiter will begin its four month-long retrograde in the sign of dreamy Pisces, and then dip back into intellectual Aquarius on July 28 until it turns direct on October 18.

© Provided by Refinery29

“Jupiter is the planet of expansion, luck, and abundance, which is why astrologers are always tracking in which part of our individual charts it is bringing growth,” Narayana Montúfar, senior astrologer for Astrology.com, tells Refinery29. And because Jupiter is all about growth, when it goes retrograde, Montúfar says we get a valuable opportunity to internalize our own personal development. It’s a pretty great transit for self-reflection and self-actualization as it also allows us to “reconsider if the ways in which we have been growing and expanding are in line with our higher self or the person we are becoming,” she says.

But our growth may feel a little stunted, says Madi Murphy, co-founder of The Cosmic RX and The Cosmic Revolution. “Jupiter is normally a generous and benevolent planet — think of it like your friend that’s always treating the crowd to an extra round of shots,” she says. “However, when retrograding it can feel slightly restricted. Expansion and growth can feel like it’s going in reverse gear in some areas of life.” Murphy says that this transit is a good time to review your habits and choices, and notice where you may be taking on too many responsibilities or putting forth extra effort that may not be worth it. “Jupiter retrograde can give you the chance to reflect and get things under control,” she says.

Personal growth is usually a positive, but there are a few negative happenings we should be on the lookout for during this transit. “When expansive, philosophical, and lucky planet Jupiter goes retrograde, it makes our morals more questionable,” Lisa Stardust, the author of Saturn Return Survival Guide and The Astrology Deck, tells Refinery29. During this time, Stardust says that greed or arrogance can stand in the way of us reaching our goals. During this time, she advises us to “second-guess our choices and to use our inner moral compass” to “make sure that we are living up to our highest and truest versions of ourselves.” The key here, she says, is open mindedness, and to really feel out all of our potential options before making any hasty decisions. Or, in other words, just relax!

When Jupiter retrograde moves from Pisces to Aquarius on July 28, we’ll be getting some much needed clarity, says Leslie Hale, psychic astrologer at Keen.com. “While Jupiter was direct in Aquarius we saw many new ideas being presented that affect the collective,” she says. “During its retrograde, details will be worked out, and we will learn just how much benefit we will all reap from new ideas and approaches.” Hale says we could be tested during this time, so be on your toes — it could happen at any moment.

Retrogrades often have us rethink the ways in which we’ve been living our lives, and there’s no better time than Jupiter’s backwards dance to reassess how we want to move forward. “It’s a great time to rethink any plans, review your big-picture goals that you set into place in the beginning of 2021, and reflect on what you want to innovate and imagine creating in the remainder of 2021,” Murphy says. It’s almost like we’re getting an energetic second wind to carry us through the rest of the year — what will you do with it?

 Elizabeth Gulino 

Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?

Mars Is In Leo & We're Already Sweating

Is Jupiter In Pisces The Best Transit Of 2021?

Obsessed With Astrology? Thank TikTok — & COVID

SEE 

AFN ELECTIONS
First Nations must be included in Canada’s recovery plans as country emerges from pandemic, say candidates


First Nations must be top of mind for the federal government as Canada moves out of the COVID-19 pandemic, say the seven candidates running for national chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

“Coming out of the coronavirus we need to be part of rebuilding Canada’s economy. We need to be included as … equal partners at the table. We need to be sitting at those decision-making tables for all sectors,” said Dr. Cathy Martin.

Martin, an elected member for the Listuguj Mi'gmaq Government for three terms, says the AFN’s role is to be “that of support”. Consultation with the federal government, however, must be done at the grassroots level and if that means with all 638 First Nation communities across Canada “then that's what needs to be done.”

Reginald Bellerose, former chief of the Muskowekwan First Nation, Sask., points to an economy that is changing and moving away from the brick and mortar business model of pre-COVID-19 towards a strong digital presence.

“First Nations need to get into that market. One of the areas that's becoming very important (in communities) is the lack of connectivity,” he said.

That lack of connectivity became abundantly clear as northern and remote First Nations children found themselves disadvantaged as classes moved online when schools were closed in order to fight the spread of COVID-19, he said.

Bellerose doesn’t want to see businesses experience those same disadvantages.

“We've got to get our communities connected. The AFN’s role is to play a supportive role, a facilitating role, helping to understand the lobby effort that's going into all of this rebuilding of the Canadian economy,” said Bellerose.

“It's rebuilding and (First Nations) need to be right in there, not an afterthought,” he said.

Many First Nation leaders expressed concerns when the pandemic first hit and the federal government started rolling out economic and personal support packages in March 2020.

It was unclear if First Nations businesses qualified for the support and if First Nations employees could access the Canada Emergency Relief Benefit.

Later, $305 million was set up in an Indigenous Community Support Fund, part of a much larger $27 billion initiative from the federal government in direct support to Canadian workers and businesses.

The Indigenous fund initially offered no details or clarity as to how the money would roll out. It only provided a promise to deploy “modest emergency funds” until a formula could be established. There was also no guarantee that more money would be coming if the pandemic continued.

First Nations again found themselves left behind last year when Ottawa announced funding for the remediation and reclamation of orphan wells in the western provinces.

The federal government flowed $1.7 billion of support through the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, requiring First Nations to access that money through the provincial governments for their own oil servicing companies to do the work on First Nations’ land. None of those federal dollars were allocated specifically for First Nations’ work.

When $182 billion in federal infrastructure was given to the provincial governments, First Nations once more had to access those dollars through the provinces.

It was a battle that former Manitoba regional chief Kevin Hart fought as co-chair of the AFN’S COVID-19 national task force.

“We have many First Nations whose businesses do not fall under regular $180 billion announced in stimulus to regular Canadians. I'm going to fight to ensure that those economic benefits and stimulus are entitled to our First Nation people as well,” said Hart.

He says this work will be part of his 100-day action plan if he wins the election.

Nishnawbe Aski Nation Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler says his “recovery framework” will address the post-pandemic needs and adds, “I envision the national organization, the AFN, to be able to support the work of our communities, making sure they have financial resources first of all to do the work.”

A recent survey released by a group of Indigenous economic organizations indicates that 72 per cent of the 825 Indigenous businesses that responded said they needed more financial support. However, 42 per cent said they did not apply for government programming because they needed grant support and not loans, because they were unable to take on additional debt. The data was collected between mid-December 2020 and February 1, 2021.

Fiddler points out that the work AFN has to facilitate is not limited to economics. The pandemic has taken a toll on the mental health of children and families, he said.

Former Ontario regional chief RoseAnne Archibald said that as an advocacy organization, the AFN should support First Nations as they build their economies coming out of the pandemic and tackle the increase in mental health and addictions that have come to the forefront.

“This pandemic has changed the way that we socialize, changed the way that we interact. We need proper resources and services to make sure that our people can emerge from the pandemic and rebuild their emotional and mental strength so that we can move forward in a good way,” said Archibald.

Along with increased addictions, Jodi Calahoo Stonehouse says isolation has also led to increased levels of domestic violence.

“The AFN needs to be a space for resources to support our chiefs. That we are making sure every resource is available that they can connect with. We know that this is a critical time in recovery,” said Stonehouse, who is a councillor with the Michel First Nation in Alberta.

Former Tsuut’ina Nation Chief Lee Crowchild emphasizes the medicine chest clause in Treaty 6 and the famine and pestilence clauses. A 2018 submission by the Maskwacis Cree to the United Nations’ Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that the medicine chest clause is “understood as providing a guarantee of all health care services, delivery, medicines, and supplies as required by Indigenous peoples;” while the famine and pestilence clause is “understood as providing a guarantee of appropriate and expedient support … in the face of famine or pestilences … such as chronic diseases, outbreaks, epidemics and other similar health matters.”

“We have to always remind the government of what their responsibilities are … (and) under treaty they have an obligation… they have a responsibility to us,” said Crowchild.

He gives credit to the First Nations who have demanded vaccines and have been “really pragmatic” about their approach in dealing with the coronavirus, which has included erecting checkpoints and implementing curfews.

Right now, an emergency situation on the Kashechewan First Nation “shows more work needs to be done,” said Hart. “There’s still a whole lot of unknowns when we talk about COVID-19.”

According to the Indigenous Services Canada website, as of June 15 there were 889 active cases on First Nations. As of June 1, the rate of reported active cases of COVID-19 in First Nations people living on a reserve is 188 per cent of the rate for the general Canadian population.

Chiefs will vote virtually for the next national chief of the AFN on July 7. Present National Chief Perry Bellegarde is not seeking a third term.

Windspeaker.com

By Shari Narine, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Windspeaker.com, Windspeaker.com

Only a quarter of the 59 labs that handle the world's deadliest pathogens have top-level biosecurity, experts warn. They fear lax rules could lead to another pandemic.

sankel@businessinsider.com (Sophia Ankel) 12 hrs ago

Virologists Lisa Oestereich (R) and Toni Rieger work in the new Biological Security Level 4 laboratory of the Bernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine (BNI) in Hamburg, Germany, on January 25, 2013. Christian Charisius/picture alliance via Getty Images

There are 59 biosafety level 4 labs (BSL-4) in the world, but only a few scored high on safety.

A new report revealed only a quarter of countries with these labs have high biosecurity scores.

The labs are where researchers work with the most dangerous pathogens on the planet.

Only around a quarter of countries with biosafety level 4 labs - where researchers work with the world's deadliest pathogens - have high biosecurity scores, according to a new report.

As US intelligence agencies are investigating the possibility that COVID-19 leaked from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology, more questions are being raised about the safety and security of similar such labs around the world.

Gregory Koblentz, an associate professor of biodefence at George Mason University, and Filippa Lentzos at King's College London recently mapped out all of these facilities using open-source research. Their findings can be found here.

Read more: How DNA-testing startup Helix became one of the nation's leading coronavirus tracking labs

According to their report, there are at least 59 maximum BSL-4 labs that are currently in operation, under construction, or planned around the world. They span 23 countries, including the UK, US, China, and India.

The largest concentration of BSL-4 labs is in Europe (25) while North America and Asia have roughly equal numbers, with 14 and 13 respectively. Three-quarters of the labs are based in urban centers.

But only about one-quarter of the countries with BSL-4 labs received high scores for biosafety and biosecurity as measured by the Global Health Security Index, the report found.

"Our study also revealed that there was significant room for improvement in the policies in place to ensure that these labs were operated safely, securely and responsibly," Koblentz and Lentzos wrote in the Guardian.

"The vast majority of countries with BSL-4 labs do not conduct oversight of the type of gain-of-function research that has been a central feature in the debate on COVID-19's origin, as potentially responsible for the possible leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology," they added.

The report has some experts worried that lax controls and regulations at some locations could lead to another pandemic.

"The larger the number of institutions and the larger the number of individuals with access to these dangerous agents, the greater the risk," Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University, told the Financial Times. "Accidents and leaks already happen in very large numbers, especially in places that have weaker biosafety standards."

"We need to strengthen biosafety and biosecurity rules around the world" Ebright added.

BSL-4 labs are built so that researchers can safely work with pathogens that can cause serious diseases and for which no treatment or vaccine exists. Researchers working there are highly trained and must wear personal protective equipment.

To date, more than 176 million cases of coronavirus have been reported worldwide, according to a tracker by Johns Hopkins University. More than 3.8 million people have died.
Read the original article on Business Insider

OUTSOURCING FAILS
The US is scrambling to send promised vaccines abroad after the production plant that ruined millions of J&J vaccines may have tainted AstraZeneca shots

salarshani@businessinsider.com (Sarah Al-Arshani) 

A person receives the AstraZeneca vaccine in Bologna, Italy on March 19, 2021. Michele Lapini/Getty Images

Emergent BioSolutions in Baltimore ruined at least 15 million Johnson & Johnson vaccines earlier this year.

100 million AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines from the facility are under safety review.

The US is scrambling to send vaccines from other manufacturers abroad, The New York Times reported.

The US is working to replace vaccines meant to be sent to other nations after problems at a production plant ruined AstraZeneca shots promised by the Biden administration, The New York Times reported.

More than 100 million AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines made at Emergent BioSolutions in Baltimore are being reviewed to see if they're safe to use after several issues at the plant. If, after vetting by the Food and Drug Administration, the shots are deemed safe they will be shipped abroad.

In April, Biden promised 60 million of AstraZeneca's vaccine, all that it had produced at the time, and then added another 20 million vaccines from other manufacturers in May. Altogether, the administration said it would share 80 million doses by the end of June.

Last week, Biden's administration also pledged to share 500 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine.

Sources familiar with discussions on the shipment told The Times that officials are working to replace the tens of millions of AstraZeneca shots that were a part of the donation with others from Pfizer and BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson. Though they may need the manufacturers' permission, The Times notes.

AstraZeneca is not currently authorized for use in the US, as the company did not apply for emergency authorization. Pfizer and BioNTech, Johnson & Johnson, and Moderna's shots all have emergency authorization in the US.

More than 176 million people in the US have already received at least one dose, which is over 53% of the entire population, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Emergent BioSolutions also ruined at least 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine earlier this year, due to human error when employees mixed up ingredients for the J&J and AstraZeneca vaccines.

Additionally, the plant had several "systemic failures" including a report by the FDA that said some staff at the plant failed to shower or change their clothes that may have contaminated the J&J doses.

Emergent BioSolutions did not respond to Insider's request for comment at the time of publication.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Appeals court panel orders review of EPA decision in Alaska

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — A split federal appeals court panel has sent back for further legal review a 2019 decision by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw proposed restrictions on large-scale mining in Alaska's Bristol Bay region.

A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sent the matter back to a lower court to determine whether the agency's action “was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or contrary to law.” The appeals court panel expresses “no view on that question," the decision dated Thursday stated.

The EPA during the Obama administration proposed but never finalized restrictions on large-scale mining in response to the Pebble Mine project.

In 2019, during the Trump administration, the agency withdrew the proposed restrictions, removing what it called an “outdated, preemptive proposed veto of the Pebble Mine” and allowing the project to be vetted through the permitting process.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers last fall rejected a key permit for the proposed copper and gold mine. Pebble's developer, the Pebble Limited Partnership, is appealing that decision.

Trout Unlimited and other groups sued over the EPA's 2019 decision. U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason last year dismissed the case and determined the agency's action was not reviewable. That ruling led to the appeal.

Nelli Williams, Alaska director for Trout Unlimited, in a statement called the ruling “an important step toward providing immediate Clean Water Act safeguards for Bristol Bay.”

Mike Heatwole, a Pebble partnership spokesperson, said the ruling means the case “will be subject to further review by the district court.”

Exxon, union try new approach to resolve increasingly bitter dispute


HOUSTON (Reuters) - Exxon Mobil Corp and the United Steelworkers union (USW) hope to break an increasingly bitter dispute over a Texas refinery contract next week by taking a different approach of sending one negotiator each to contract talks instead of a whole team, company and union officials said on Friday.

Exxon seven weeks ago locked out 650 union workers at its Beaumont, Texas, refinery and lubricants plant after failing to reach agreement on a new contract. On Thursday, negotiators met for only the second time since the lockout but failed to make any headway and stopped talks after about two hours.

Talks have turned fractious. The union has accused Exxon of trying to dissolve seniority provisions, colluding to break the union and falsely claiming the union's seniority terms are unique.

After Exxon tweeted the job-seniority terms it wanted were no different than those at the company's Baytown, Texas, refinery, local 13-2001 union President Ricky Brooks called the tweet "factually untrue."

Exxon said the USW has failed to negotiate seriously on its proposal. "We expect the union to come prepared to bargain in good faith," the company said ahead of Thursday's talks.

The USW has filed a complaint with the U.S. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) claiming Exxon violated labor laws by improperly monitoring employees and used company resources to launch an effort to dissolve the union.

An employee has circulated information to gain support for a petition to decertify the USW local that represents Beaumont workers, according to the NLRB complaint. Exxon told employees seeking information to contact its human resources department or the NLRB. A vote can be called if 30% of covered employees sign a petition and file it with the NLRB.

"We continue to meet and bargain in good faith with the union," said Exxon spokeswoman Julie King. "The company has at all times acted lawfully and will continue to do so."

In another sign of tensions, the USW this month filed a federal lawsuit in Houston claiming Exxon refused to accept an arbitrator's decision involving two workers.

The lawsuit asked the U.S. court to enforce a ruling calling for two union workers fired from its Baytown refinery to be reinstated and given back pay.

(Reporting by Erwin Seba in Houston; Editing by Gary McWilliams and Matthew Lewis)

Mexico accepts U.S. request to probe Tridonex autoparts plant for labor abuses

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexican officials said on Saturday they would look into alleged worker rights violations at the Tridonex autoparts factory in northern Mexico, after the U.S. government requested a review under the terms of a new trade pact.

Commuter buses are parked outside the Tridonex auto-parts plant, owned by Philadelphia-based Cardone Industries, in Matamoros (MURDER CITY/FREE TRADE ZONE)

The complaint from the U.S. Trade Representative's office (USTR) last week marked the second time the United States has flagged potential labor abuses in Mexico under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaced NAFTA. 

(WE CALL IT NAFTATOO)

Mexican officials said they have accepted the U.S. request for a review of Tridonex in the border city of Matamoros to determine if workers had the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

"The Economy Ministry, in coordination with the Labor Ministry and other involved parties, will review the case to determine with legal elements and facts if there exists or not a denial of the referenced labor rights," the ministries said in a statement.

Mexican authorities have until July 24 to submit their findings to U.S. counterparts, the statement added.

Cardone Industries Inc, the Philadelphia-based parent company of Tridonex, has said that the allegations are inaccurate and that it respects worker rights.

General Motors Co has also come under scrutiny in Mexico after the USTR in May filed a USMCA complaint against the company's pickup truck plant in Guanajuato state over possible rights abuses during a union contract vote.

(Reporting by Daina Beth Solomon; editing by Diane Craft)

IT'S WHAT ALBERTA OIL PATCH WORKERS MAKE
60% of millennials earning over $100,000 say they're living paycheck to paycheck

hhoffower@businessinsider.com (Hillary Hoffower)

 

Provided by Business Insider High-earning millennials are stretching their paychecks. Edward Berthelot/Getty Images

60% of millennials earning over $100,000 say they're living paycheck to paycheck in a new survey.

Some of these millennials - known as HENRYs - prefer a comfortable, expensive lifestyle.

But $100,000 also doesn't go that far in today's economy.

High-earning millennials are feeling broke.

Sixty percent of millennials raking in over $100,000 a year say they're living paycheck to paycheck, according to a new survey by PYMNTS and lending company LendingClub which analyzed economic data and census-balanced surveys of over 28,000 Americans.

It found that the more than half (54%) Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. And nearly 40% of high-earners - those making more than $100,000 annually - say they live that way.

That means high-earning millennials aren't the only ones feeling stretched thin, but they feel that way more than their six-figure making peers. Living on constrained budgets may therefore have less to do with income and more to do with expenses, the report says.

That's partly due to lifestyle choices. Many of these millennials are likely HENRYs - short for high earner, not rich yet. The acronym that was invented back in 2003, but has come to characterize a certain group of 30-something six-figure earners who struggle to balance their spending and savings habits.

HENRYs typically fall victim to lifestyle creep, when one increases their standard of living to match a rise in discretionary income. They prefer a comfortable and often expensive lifestyle that leaves them living paycheck to paycheck.

Read more: Here's why so many millennials making 6-figure salaries still feel broke

Video: From $0 income to a $97,000 salary, here's how this CEO spends his money (CNBC)

A $100,000 salary isn't what it was

The economy is also a huge factor behind six-figure-earning millennials feel so broke.

As the report reads, "Living paycheck to paycheck sometimes carries connotations of barely scraping by and of poverty. The reality of a paycheck-to-paycheck lifestyle in the United States today is much more complex, and the current economic environment has made it even more complicated."

It cited the example of a college-educated 35-year-old earning more than $100,000 while juggling a mortgage, student-loan debt, and a child, which could leave them with little savings for big purchases or unexpected emergencies.

The generation is facing an affordability crisis. Income increases simply have not kept up with an exponential increase in living costs, and the pandemic hasn't helped matters by throwing job loss and pay cuts into the mix.

The cost of education has also more than doubled since the 1970s, leaving many millennials racked with student debt. Priya Malani, the founder of Stash Wealth, a financial firm that works with HENRYs, previously told Insider that 40% of her clients had student loans - they owe $80,000 on average.

As a byproduct of this increased cost in living, the middle class has been shrinking. Pew Research Center defines the US middle class as people earning two-thirds to twice the median household income, earning about $48,500 to $145,500 in 2018, per most recent data available.

That means a six-figure salary is no longer what it used to be. In today's economy, $100,000 is considered middle class in the US.

Read the original article on Business Insider

NO UNION? DIRECT ACTION GETS THE GOODS

A McDonald's worker reportedly quit their job by posting an angry sign at a local drive-thru, as the 'rage-quitting' trend continues to rise

ztayeb@businessinsider.com (Zahra Tayeb) 

 The sign was apparently posted in Louisville, Kentucky. Twitter/Great Ape Dad

A McDonald's employee reportedly resigned by posting an angry note in a local drive-thru.

The worker apparently hated the job so much, they closed up shop early Saturday night.

The note captures the trend of employees 'rage-quitting their jobs in a tightening labor market.

A McDonald's employee who worked at a branch in Louisville, Kentucky, apparently quit their job by posting a sign at a drive-through on Saturday night.

A photo of the sign read: "We are closed because I am quitting and I hate this job." It was shared on Twitter by a user, Great Ape Dad, who spotted the posting the following morning.

He later explained in a follow-up tweet that the sign was stuck up by a night shift manager who had "suddenly quit" the night before and closed up shop early, Today reported.

Great Ape Dad told Today he was en route to pick up the new BTS meal for his wife, when he came across the note. "I took a picture, uploaded it to Twitter, not thinking much of anything about it," he said. "And much to my surprise, it's had quite a success."

Apparently, employees were unaware of the note until he pointed it out to them.

"I used to work in the service industry myself," the user added. "I think that people are just frustrated, especially the working-class people who are there in the front line … things that are in a boiling point where I can definitely see where someone on a Saturday night that doesn't want to be working the drive-thru - wants to just call it quits."

McDonald's did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment on this story.

US employees are increasingly "rage-quitting" their jobs as a tightening labor market means that companies must reckon with the often unfavorable conditions and low pay they are offering.

Frustrated employees are often choosing to depart their roles, rather than wait around and hope things will change.

In an interview with Insider's Áine Cain, a former employee at Dollar General rage-quit her job in the springtime of 2021, after finding her drowning in an increasingly fraught work environment.

"By the time you get down to that lowly stay-at-home mom that just wanted a part-time job - who is earning less than a hundred dollars a week because she's making $7.25 an hour and only working 10 hours a week - it's not worth it," the employee told Insider.

Read the original article on Business Insider

A MINIMUM WAGE IS NOT A LIVING WAGE

An Amazon worker says she's homeless because she can't afford NYC rent with the $19 she's paid per hour: Report

tsonnemaker@insider.com (Tyler Sonnemaker) 22 hrs ago

Amazon has touted its $15 minimum wage and pushed for increases at the national level.

But Vice reported that a worker in New York City making $19.30 per hour still can't afford rent.

The woman says she lives in her car in the company's parking lot and struggles to make ends meet.

An Amazon employee who works at the company's warehouse on Staten Island in New York City says she lives in her car in the building's parking lot because she can't afford rent in the city with the $19.30 she makes per hour, Vice News reported Friday.

The woman, Natalie Monarrez, has been homeless since 2019 after struggling to find affordable permanent housing while working for two other Amazon warehouses in New Jersey that paid her even less, according to Vice.

"Jeff Bezos donates to homeless shelters for tax write-offs and PR. He needs to know that some of his own workers (without family or a second income) can't afford rent," Monarrez told Vice.

"Jeff Bezos has no idea that his workers are homeless, especially in New York, and I'm not the only one. I'm hoping executives will agree to pay workers more and that they know older workers have the right to be promoted like everyone else," she added.

While rents in New York City have fallen about 12 percent since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, it remains one of the most expensive places to live in the country. The median asking rent for a one bedroom in New York City in June was about $2500, according to a Zumper analysis.

Amazon did not respond to Insider's request for comment on this story.

Amazon has frequently touted its $15 per hour minimum wage, which it introduced in 2018 following pressure from Sen. Bernie Sanders, as evidence that it treats workers well.

But Bloomberg reported in December that in 68 counties where Amazon opened its largest type of warehouse, average industry pay dropped by 6%, and that a study from the Government Accountability Office found that more than 4,000 Amazon employees are on food stamps in just nine states - trailing only Walmart, McDonald's, and two-dollar store chains. Amazon disputed Bloomberg's analysis, telling the publication that most of its hires come from retail jobs that typically pay less than warehouse jobs.

Amazon has also avoided paying taxes that fund food stamps and other social safety net programs from which its workers benefit.

Despite earning more than $10 billion in annual net income every year since 2018, Amazon paid little or no federal income taxes in those years. Amazon previously told Insider that it "pays all the taxes we are required to pay in the US and every country where we operate."

CEO Jeff Bezos, despite growing his wealth by $127 billion from 2006 to 2018, paid zero federal income taxes in at least two of those years, ProPublica reported.

Amazon has also been plagued by extensive reports over the years of grueling working conditions, injury rates far higher than the industry standard, and labor law violations.

In April, Bezos said that the company was working "to do a better job for our employees" and that it would invest over $300 million in 2021 to make warehouses safer. He added that the company needed "a better vision for how we create value for employees - a vision for their success.

Last year, workers spoke out repeatedly about what they said was Amazon's failure to protect them during the pandemic - and in some cases, faced racially-charged smear campaigns as well as illegal retaliation and terminations.

Following an unsuccessful attempt by Amazon workers in Alabama to unionize, workers at Monarrez's warehouse, which Amazon calls JFK8, have also sought to unionize, led by Chris Smalls, an organizer the company fired in March 2020.

Read the original article on Business Insider

THIRD WORLD USA
Meet 2 Americans who just lost unemployment benefits as thousands of workers are cut off from $300 per week

insider@insider.com (Juliana Kaplan,Joseph Zeballos-Roig)   

Carlos Ponce joins a protest in in Miami Springs, Florida, asking senators to continue unemployment benefits past July 31, 2020. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

As of June 19th, a dozen states have prematurely ended their federal unemployment benefits.

Those $300 weekly benefits weren't set to expire until September, but 25 GOP-led states have opted out.

Workers in Missouri and Alabama, two states where benefits ended, tell Insider they need assistance.

Eight more states are ending their federal unemployment benefits today, June 19th, cutting off between 400,000 and 500,000 people from government aid ahead of their scheduled expiration in September.

Those states are Alabama, Idaho, Indiana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming. That means a dozen have pulled out of enhanced unemployment insurance early. At least 13 more will join them in the coming weeks.

It's setting up a premature fiscal cliff for approximately 4 million workers, many of whom were set to receive federal benefits through September. But federal pandemic-era programs also expanded who's eligible to receive benefits, and the duration. That means some Americans won't just lose $300 a week. They'll lose their entire incomes.

Karen Allen, 52, of Missouri, lost all of her benefits last week. "I kind of feel like the rug got jerked out from under me, and now people want to point fingers at me like, well, why don't you go to work at the gas station for $9 an hour?"

She said she doesn't feel like she's above working such a job, but she doesn't want to work part-time with no benefits "and take a chance on dying, basically. I just feel like I'm stuck." She's not alone.
Some states have already ended their benefits

Missouri ending federal unemployment benefits yanked aid for 340,000 people.

Allen, 52, had been collecting unemployment since January 2020, after the staffing firm she worked for closed down her branch in late 2019; she stopped working in November.

But Allen has a rare auto-immune disease. She said that her neurologist told her to lay low during the pandemic and self-quarantine. She was also advised to hold off on getting a vaccine

© Courtesy of Karen Allen Karen Allen. Courtesy of Karen Allen

"Here I am, absolutely willing and able to work. It's just it could kill me," she said. She was hoping that extension of expanded benefits through September would give her some leeway in terms of vaccine or safety progress. She was on Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC), a federal program that expands how many weeks workers can receive benefits. On June 12, that program expired in Missouri.

Video: 4 states cut off unemployment benefits early, others states expected to follow (TODAY) Duration 2:02

Benefits are winding down today in Alabama. Shaina Cruz, 34, will lose all of hers. A graphic designer, Cruz was laid off in March 2020. She said it took about a month-and-a-half for her to start receiving unemployment benefits. She's been on PEUC up until now, and said the benefit cut-off comes at a "horrible" time.

She's facing down eviction at the end of the month - which is also when the federal eviction moratorium is set to end. She already lost her car because she couldn't keep up with payments, and said it's difficult to apply to a job when she has no idea where she'll be in two weeks

.

Courtesy of Shaina Cruz Shaina Cruz. Courtesy of Shaina Cruz

"I'm frustrated with it, just because I feel like the whole reason it's been ended is just because of all these people on Facebook saying, 'Oh, nobody wants to work anymore,'" Cruz said. "And it's like, that's not the case. I would gladly be working. I cried when I lost my job."

Possible legislation on the way

Some lawmakers and advocates have argued that the Department of Labor is obligated to continue paying out PUA, including Sen. Bernie Sanders.

But the Labor Department has concluded that there's likely not much it can do, and the White House has said that states have "every right" to cut off aid in a sharp change of course after defending benefits a month ago.

Some Democrats are eyeing revamping the dilapidated systems as part of Biden's multitrillion-dollar infrastructure package.

"We ought to cut to the bottom line here," Wyden said in an interview. "This highlights the need for a comprehensive unemployment reform package."

"I talk to the administration about these unemployment reforms constantly," he added. He previously suggested he wanted to draft a legislative fix but did not specify if he was still pursuing that measure.

Some are already taking legal action. In Indiana, two law firms have filed a lawsuit against the state for prematurely terminating benefits - and have asked for a preliminary injunction to pause benefits being halted as the case progresses.

But in Alabama, there's no relief on the way.

"I'm still just screwed, basically," Cruz said. "Like I literally have no idea where my family is going. I'm trying to get enough money to rent a storage unit right now just to put all my stuff in."

 Business Insider

NATIONALIZE UI BENEFITS

The US job market is about to turn into a giant science experiment - with millions of Americans as guinea pigs

george@bespokeinvest.com (George Pearkes) 

© Joe Raedle/Getty Images Carlos Ponce joins a protest in in Miami Springs, Florida, asking senators to continue unemployment benefits past July 31, 2020. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Half of US states are cutting off enhanced unemployment benefits over the next few weeks.

This is going to throw millions of Americans into a real-world economic experiment that could hurt many people.

Biden and the federal government could step in, but America's misguided tradition of a hands of federal government is stopping them.

This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author.

Partisan politics, Congress' legislative language, and interest group lobbying are about to turn America's 160 million workers into guinea pigs. We're all about to be part of a huge study on whether unemployment insurance keeps people out of the labor market.

The biggest variable in this 50-state experiment is the new unemployment benefits created during the pandemic. Republican governors in nearly two dozen states are rolling back key benefits that helped people through the downturn: expansions in unemployment insurance to workers not previously covered, increased length of coverage for unemployed workers, and topped-up weekly payments are some of the initiatives

These GOP lawmakers argue that the benefits are no longer needed now that the pandemic is receding and ending them will push Americans back to the labor market. On the other hand, some economists and progressive Democrats argue that the benefits are not generous enough to discourage people from finding work, and that removing them is needlessly cruel to beneficiaries.

While experimentation within states can generate superior solutions, it can also have its downsides in states that eschew equity. In these cases, federal power is the last line of defense for marginalized people, but Washington has a long history of abandoning them instead of taking a stand.

50 laboratories: a Brandeis legacy

In 1932, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis noted "It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country."

This notion that policy experimentation at the state level could land on the right answer faster than top-down public policymaking from Washington has been a popular justification for a light touch from the federal government. The "50 laboratories" theory has also helped social scientists study the effects of policy change by observing the differences between states.

Brandeis' famous quote came in a dissent to a Supreme Court decision which effectively rolled back a state's effort to forge its own path, in this case Oklahoma was attempting to set new regulations on businesses operating in the state. Brandeis disagreed with the majority, which said Oklahoma could not impose its own rules on an ice manufacturer.

Brandeis was the son of an abolitionist Kentucky family and a progressive Boston lawyer, arguably the father of the legal concept of "right to privacy" in the United States and a key anti-corporate voice who supported government intervention against concentrated monopoly power. He played a role in the development of the Federal Reserve and defended workplace and labor law in court.

Brandeis supported the idea that Oklahoma be allowed to regulate an ice manufacturer, but argued for it in a language more consistent with conservative ideals of state sovereignty or business supremacy that has since been co-opted in the popular imagination. No need for federal intervention if a state enacts harmful policy - they'll eventually see the light! This attitude was also visible late in Brandeis' career in several decisions that took teeth out of The New Deal during the Roosevelt Administration.
Progressive passivism in policy

The American system is generally loath to enforce national standards on states. One good example is Medicaid, the country's low-income healthcare system. Instead of being run by the federal government, Medicaid is technically voluntary and administered by states. The federal government only encourages participation in its various programs through substantial funding incentives.

This has left some states to ignore Medicaid programs that could be a huge help to their citizens. As recently as 1981, Arizona did not participate in Medicaid at all and 13 GOP-run states have refused to implement a huge expansion of the program passed in 2010 as part of the Affordable Care Act.

A similar situation is now playing out with the stepped-up funding for unemployment insurance programs administered by states. These new efforts expanded eligibility for unemployment insurance to gig workers, raised payouts, and extended the number of weeks that workers would be eligible for income support.

With labor markets still sorting through the giant shock of COVID, these benefits have been the target of businesses who rely on large pools of low cost labor. Restaurants especially have railed against the payouts, arguing that the benefits are causing a "labor shortage" and raising their labor costs. Service industry groups have lobbied aggressively to kick people out of the UI system so they can get back to their preferred labor market - one where there is a large pool of people who are willing to accept low wages.

Evidence from the JP Morgan Institute and Indeed.com show little evidence that cutting off expanded UI is likely to fuel large increases in labor supply. But that hasn't stopped more than half of the governors in the country from refusing free money from Washington and halting payments to the unemployed in a brutal form of economic shock therapy.

As the various phase-outs of expanded UI roll in over the next few months, we will be able to compare labor market outcomes in states that do or don't phase out benefits. The 50 laboratories will be working away to the benefit of greater labor market understanding. But the small gain of having a few real-world experiments for academics to be able to write papers about pales in comparison to the human cost of culling unemployment insurance.

Biden and Brandeis: birds of a feather

Allowing this sort of experiment - with American workers as the subject - isn't set in stone. The Biden Administration could at least be pitching a fight against this outcome but has so far not stepped into the fray. As noted by Senator Bernie Sanders in May, the text of the CARES Act -which the UI expansion is built on - says the Department of Labor "shall provide" benefits to individuals, which could be interpreted as mandating payments regardless of what states want. But nobody in the administration has tried to force this issue with states refusing payouts.

Both Brandeis and Biden share a belief that the right argument will win out eventually, and that outright exercise of power by the federal government should be used carefully. Their cautious and light touch approach has direct costs that must be acknowledged in an era where exercise of political power on behalf of those without it is a forgotten habit.
Read the original article on Business Insider