THIRD WORLD USA

10-year-old rape victim denied abortion after Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade

She was forced to travel to a different state to have the termination

by JADE BIGGS 

COSMOPOLITAN

5 JUL 2022

ELIJAH NOUVELAGEGETTY IMAGES

A 10-year-old rape victim, who was six weeks pregnant, was denied an abortion following the US Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade. The ruling means there is no longer a nationwide right to terminate a pregnancy and individual states now have the freedom to make their own laws on abortion access.

The girl, who lives in Ohio, was ineligible to have an abortion in her own state in light of Roe v Wade being overturned and was forced to travel to Indiana for the procedure. Currently, abortion in Indiana is legal, but lawmakers are expected to bring in tighter restrictions later this month when the state assembly comes together.

"It’s hard to imagine that in just a few short weeks we will have no ability to provide that care," Dr Caitlin Bernard, an Indianapolis obstetrician-gynecologist, told the Columbus Dispatch. Bernard had treated the girl after a colleague in Ohio who works with child abuse victims called and asked for help.

Abortion providers like Bernard say they have seen a sharp increase in the number of patients, from the nearby states where such procedures are now restricted or banned, coming to their clinics for abortion.

The case has further reignited conversation in the US about abortion rights, and has forced anti-abortion political figures to address how the rights of women and girls – including abuse victims – will be balanced against abortion restrictions.


SOPA IMAGESGETTY IMAGES

Yet some anti-abortionists have seemingly deflected on the matter, with Republican governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota – where abortion is now illegal unless "necessary to preserve the life of the pregnant female" – telling CNN that the public should be "addressing those sick individuals [who] do this to our children" adding that "nobody’s talking about the pervert, horrible and deranged individual that raped a 10-year-old."

As for whether she would push to change the law in South Dakota if a similar case occurred, Noem said: "I don’t believe a tragic situation should be perpetuated by another tragedy. There’s more that we have got to do to make sure that we really are living a life that says every life is precious, especially innocent lives that have been shattered, like that 10-year-old girl."

When asked if the 10-year-old should have had the baby, the Republican replied, "every single life – every single life is precious. This tragedy is horrific. But, in South Dakota, the law today is that the abortions are illegal, except to save the life of the mother."

Although, Noem did not rule out that performing an abortion on the 10-year-old could be classed as protecting the life of the pregnant female. "Yes, that situation, the doctor, the family, the individuals closest to that will make the decisions there for that family."

ABOLISH SCOTUS

AOC questions legitimacy of Supreme Court and calls Biden ‘historically weak’ on abortion

Sheila Flynn
Sat, June 25, 2022

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez has questioned the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and challenged president Joe Biden to “step up” on abortion rights.

Ms Ocasio-Cortez on Saturday forensically laid out, in a Twitter thread, many of the problems she had with Supreme Court judges, calling for Democrats to outline a clearer and more instructional plan for voters on how to codify Roe v Wade – less than 24 hours after the nation’s highest court reversed its 1973 ruling, leaving it up to states to now legislate on abortion.

“Election or not, the Supreme Court has a legitimacy crisis and the public reaffirms it: 75% of the US public reports lacking confidence in SCOTUS, & those numbers were *pre-Roe ruling*” she tweeted Saturday.

She said in reply to another tweet that Mr Biden has been “historically weak on this issue (supported Hyde until ‘19), but now is his chance to step up & grow.”

In addition to highlighting sexual assault allegations against justices and claiming a seat was “stolen,” she wrote that “7 of the 9 justices were appointed by a party that hasn’t won a popular vote more than once in 30 years” and “Several lied to Congress to secure their appointment.”

“In a legitimacy crisis, the solution Biden + Dem leaders must offer can’t just be one of voting, but of statue & authority,” she tweeted, later adding: “The ruling is Roe, but the crisis is democracy ... The President & Dem leaders can no longer get away with familiar tactics of ‘committees’ and ‘studies’ to avoid tackling our crises head-on anymore.”

She called for measures including a restrain on judicial review; the opening of abortion clinics on federal land; court expansion; and the expansion of federal access to and awareness of pill abortion.

To best achieve party goals, she said, Democrats must “be PRECISE with what we need and we will do with that power.

“How many seats does the party need to Codify Roe?” she tweeted. “Dems must SAY THAT. Not just ‘go vote’ or ‘give us $6 to win.’ That is demoralizing, losing, unfocused nonsense.”

Ms Ocasio-Cortez insisted that her party must tell voters which seats were needed, in which states and which races, in addition to outlining what the President and Congress would be “ACTUALLY willing+able to do at 52/60 seats?

“Be honest. Details motivate,” the 32-year-old tweeted, urging people to “stop the handwringing and get moving.”

AOC says Supreme Court justices who lied under oath must face consequences for 'impeachable offense'

Yelena Dzhanova

Sun, June 26, 2022 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.Drew Angerer/Getty Image

• Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday called for consequences for justices who "lie under oath."

• Ocasio-Cortez was referring to SCOTUS Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

• Two senators said the justices assured them they believed Roe v. Wade is law, but both voted to overturn it.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday said she believes it's an "impeachable offense" for a Supreme Court justice to lie under oath.

Following the overturn of Roe v. Wade, Sens. Susan Collins and Joe Manchin said they felt misled by Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch during their individual confirmation hearings. The two senators, both pro-choice, voted to confirm Kavanaugh and Gorsuch because they assured them that they believed Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision that made abortion a constitutional right nationwide, was law.

Both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, however, voted to strike down Roe earlier this week.

Ocasio-Cortez, speaking in an interview with NBC News' "Meet the Press," said she believes the court is facing a "crisis of legitimacy" and justices must face consequences if they lie under oath.

"If we allow Supreme Court nominees to lie under oath and secure lifetime appointments to the highest court of the land and then issue, without basis," she said, "we must see that through. There must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and a hostile takeover of our democratic institutions."

"To allow that to stand is to allow it to happen," she continued. "And what makes it particularly dangerous is that it sends a blaring signal to all future nominees that they can now lie to duly elected members of the United States Senate in order to secure Supreme Court confirmations and seats on the Supreme Court."

Ocasio-Cortez added that she believes that lying under oath is an impeachable offense.

"I believe that this is something that should be very seriously considered, including by senators like Joe Manchin and Susan Collins," she said.

The decision to overturn Roe v. Wade sparked protests nationwide. Since the decision was made public, a slew of prominent individuals from musician Jack White to lawmakers such as Ocasio-Cortez have blasted the ruling. Attorney General Merrick Garland condemned the court's decision, saying on Friday that it's a "devastating blow to reproductive freedom in the United States."

AOC Says Impeachment Possible 

If Supreme Court Justices Lied 

Under Oath

Murjani Rawls

Mon, June 27, 2022 

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) leaves after speaking to abortion-rights activists in front of the U.S. Supreme Court after the Court announced a ruling in the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization case in June 24, 2022, in Washington, DC.

During an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y) stated that she felt impeachment should be considered if certain Supreme Court Justices lied in their confirmation hearings about what they felt about Roe v. Wade, according to Axios. Ocasio-Cortez’s comments come after the Supreme Court overturned the abortion rights case on Friday, and Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) both have called the testimony of Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh being potentially misleading.

During the confirmation hearings of Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, each stated they would honor precedent. Specifically, when asked about Roe v. Wade, Justice Kavanaugh said it was “precedent on precedent.” This was interpreted as meaning if confirmed, he would uphold the right to an abortion because the case protections had stood the test of time. However, as we saw Friday, that didn’t happen. Ocasio-Cortez believes there should be consequences for this.

From Axios:

“If we allow Supreme Court nominees to lie under oath and secure lifetime appointments to the highest court of the land and then issue—without basis, if you read these opinions—rulings that deeply undermine the human civil rights of the majority of Americans, we must see that through,” the lawmaker said.

“There must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and the hostile takeover of our democratic institutions,” she added.

There are also questions surrounding the legitimacy of Justice Clarence Thomas concerning his wife and her involvement in trying to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential election. In his concurring opinion, Thomas hinted that the Supreme Court should look at other rights such as contraception and gay marriage with 14th amendment protections.

Again, from Axios:

“I believe lying under oath is an impeachable offense,” she added, referring to Trump-appointed Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. “I believe that violating federal law in not disclosing income from political organizations, as Clarence Thomas did years ago, is also potentially an impeachable offense. I believe that not recusing from cases that one clearly has family members involved in with very deep violations of conflict of interest are also impeachable offenses.”

There has been movement in the House to pass a Supreme Court “code of ethics” that would apply to judges and their employees. It has not been taken up by the Senate yet, primarily because Republicans would never vote for it

Ocasio-Cortez: SCOTUS justices should face consequences for misleading Roe testimony

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said that Supreme Court justices should face consequences including possible impeachment for misleading lawmakers about their stances on Roe vs. Wade during confirmation hearings.

File Pool Photo by Andrew Harnik/UPI | License Photo

June 26 (UPI) -- Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday said that members of the Supreme Court who misled Congress about their intentions to overturn Roe vs. Wade should face consequences including possible impeachment.

Appearing on NBC News' Meet the Press, Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., cited comments from Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, that "several Supreme Court Justices misled them" about their stance on Roe vs. Wade during their confirmation hearings and the lead-up to their confirmation.

"There must be consequences for such a deeply destabilizing action and a hostile takeover of our democratic institutions," she said, describing a "crisis of legitimacy" in the high court.

"What makes it particularly dangerous is that it sends a blaring signal to all future nominees that they can now lie to duly elected members of the United States Senate in order to secure Supreme Court confirmations and seats on the Supreme Court," she continued.

Ocasio-Cortez also said that Justice Clarence Thomas violated federal law by not disclosing income from political organizations and should have recused himself from cases representing "very deep violations of conflict of interest" due to his and his wife's conservative activism.

She said that both offenses as well as lying under oath are "impeachable offenses."

"I believe that this is something that should be taken very seriously considered, including by senators like Joe Manchin and Susan Collins," she said.

The Supreme Court's decision Friday set off a series of so-called "trigger laws" in which abortion would be outlawed in 13 states, immediately or shortly after the landmark 1973 decision in Roe vs. Wade was overturned.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem on Sunday defended her state's law, which allows abortion only when needed to protect the life of the mother, and provides no exception in cases of incest and rape, saying that one tragedy is not "a reason to have another tragedy occur."

"I believe every life is precious ... And we know so much more using technology and science than we did even 10, 15 years ago about what these babies go through, the pain they feel in the womb and will continue to make sure that those lives are protected," she told CBS News' Face the Nation.

Noem added that South Dakota would also invest in resources for women who will now be required to carry their pregnancies to term including mental health counseling and family services.

"I would prefer that we continue to make sure we go forward and that we're putting resources in front of these women and walking alongside them, getting them healthcare, the care, the mental health counseling and services that they should need to make sure that we can continue to support them and build stronger families far into the future as well," she said.

Some states, such as California and Minnesota, issued orders protecting women's rights in response to the decision and the laws that went into effect throughout the nation.

Friday's decision also launched protests throughout the nation that continued over the weekend.

In Rhode Island, Democratic state Senate candidate Jennifer Rourke shared video to social media, which she said showed her Republican opponent Jeann Lugo, an off-duty police officer, punching her in the face during a protest in the state on Saturday.

"Last night, after speaking at our Roe rally, my Republican opponent -- a police officer -- violently attacked me," Rourke wrote alongside the video. "This is what it is to be a Black woman running for office. I won't give up."



Rourke told the Providence Journal that she is also seeking to press charges for assault.

Lugo, a three-year veteran of the Providence police department, has been placed on administrative leave and is under criminal investigation, the City of Providence Police Department confirmed in a tweet.

In a Twitter post that was published before he deleted his account, Lugo wrote that he will "not be running for any office this fall," before appearing to close his account.

Before announcing he was dropping out of the race, he told The Washington Post that he found himself "in a situation that no individual should see themselves."

"I stepped in to protect someone that a group of agitators was attacking," he wrote. "At this moment, there's a pending internal investigation and as the facts of the incident come to light, I request that my family and I have privacy."

RIGHT TO LIFE STATES SHACKLE MOTHERS IN PRISON
More states are restricting the shackling of pregnant inmates, but it still occurs


April 22, 2022
JOE HERNANDEZ

NPR

A pregnant female inmate at the Western Massachusetts Regional Women's Correctional Center in Chicopee, Mass., poses for a portrait in the facility's visiting area in 2014.

Dina Rudick/Boston Globe/Getty Images

The Tennessee legislature gave its final approval to a bill on Thursday that would restrict the use of shackles and other restraints on pregnant inmates — the latest state to limit what medical experts say is a routine but dangerous practice for pregnant people and fetuses.

More than a dozen states have no laws restricting the shackling of pregnant inmates, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and those that do often make exceptions for public safety or other reasons.

It's unclear exactly how many pregnant inmates are shackled or restrained each year, but experts say it still occurs in U.S. prisons and jails, where an estimated 58,000 pregnant women pass through annually.

A 2018 study found that, among hospital nurses who said they cared for incarcerated women during pregnancy or the postpartum period, 82.9% reported that their incarcerated patients were shackled "sometimes to all of the time."

"It's a very demeaning and dangerous practice," Corene Kendrick, deputy director of the ACLU National Prison Project, told NPR.

"A lot of these policies that prison systems have about shackling people when they go to outside medical care are just absurd," Kendrick added.
Sponsor Message


The medical community opposes shackling pregnant inmates

Medical experts roundly criticize the practice of shackling pregnant inmates. National organizations — from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to the American Medical Association to the Association of Women's Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses — oppose it, or support restrictions.

Dr. Carolyn Sufrin, an associate professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, says having an inmate shackled during labor and delivery presents challenges for doctors and nurses.


SHOTS - HEALTH NEWS
Pregnant Behind Bars: What We Do And Don't Know About Pregnancy And Incarceration

For example, if medical staff detect a deceleration in the fetal heart rate and are worried about fetal distress, they may want to have the pregnant inmate change positions. In other cases, if an inmate requires emergency C-section, they'll need to be quickly transferred to the operating room.

"All of those things are impeded if that person is shackled to the bed, and we don't have time to be negotiating with an officer to unlock the restraints so that we can provide emergency, time-sensitive medical care," Sufrin said.

Even before labor and delivery, pregnant inmates who are shackled face other hazards, such as blood clots. Sufrin said restrained inmates are also at a higher risk of falling and are unable to break their fall, which could result in bleeding or even stillbirth.
The practice is not universally banned across the U.S.

Despite the widespread opposition to shackling pregnant inmates, not all states prohibit it by law.

At least 37 states have laws limiting the shackling of pregnant inmates, after Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed a measure into law last week.


LAW
Difficult Births: Laboring And Delivering In Shackles

Some of those states go as far as banning shackling throughout pregnancy as well as during labor, delivery and the postpartum recovery period.

Federal law also restricts the practice. The First Step Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2018, bars the use of restraints on pregnant people in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service.

Sufrin said these kinds of laws are necessary now because prisons and jails were never contemplated to house and provide health care for pregnant people.

Federal Legislation Seeks Ban On Shackling Of Pregnant Inmates

"The reason that we have to have a law, to me, is because our carceral system is fundamentally gendered to imagine the default prisoner as male," she said.

Even among the laws that do exist, there frequently are exceptions if officials believe a pregnant inmate may attempt to flee or harm others.
Tennessee is the latest state to move toward limiting restraints on pregnant inmates

According to Tennessee lawmakers, state officials already limit the practice of shackling pregnant inmates during labor at state-run facilities, but the proposal would enshrine that prohibition into state law and also apply it to county jails.

The state Senate approved the bill without opposition on Thursday. The House of Representatives passed it on Monday.

It now needs the signature of Republican Gov. Bill Lee to become law.

The measure restricts pregnant inmates from being put in restraints except under certain circumstances, such as if a corrections officer determines the inmate is a flight or security risk. Inmates can also be restrained "solely by handcuffs in the front of her body" during transport or outside their facility.


NATIONAL
Pregnant, Locked Up, And Alone

The law prohibits a pregnant inmate from being restrained around the ankles, legs or waist during labor and delivery. It also forbids restraining a pregnant inmate's hands behind their back or attaching them to another inmate.

"We want safe and healthy pregnancies for every mother and child," state Sen. Raumesh Akbari, the Democrat who sponsored the Tennessee bill, said in a statement.

"By restricting the dangerous and inhumane practice of shackling incarcerated women who give birth while in correctional custody, we are promoting better pregnancy outcomes," she added.

The Tennessee Sheriffs' Association took issue with an earlier version of the bill, arguing that pregnant inmates could still pose a threat to those around them, WPLN reported.


DISCIPLINE AND WOMEN IN PRISON
Federal Report Says Women In Prison Receive Harsher Punishments Than Men

"Just because an inmate's pregnant does not mean they're incapacitated, and we do not know what's in everyone's mind as to what their attempts or actions could be," the association's executive director, Jeff Bledsoe, testified at a recent committee hearing. "We have to prepare for the worst and hope for the best, and restraints help us to protect ourselves, to protect the inmate."

The bill was later amended to take into account those concerns as well as other feedback from the Tennessee Department of Correction, according to WPLN.

These Eight States Have Passed Laws Making It Nearly Impossible to Get an Abortion

Six states have passed laws this year that copy abortion bans in Mississippi and Texas.

ARIANNA COGHILL

Fellow

MOTHER JONES

Bio

POLITICS

APRIL 22, 2022

Gina M. Randazzo/ZUMA

With Roe v. Wade at risk of being overturned by the Supreme Court, 2022 is shaping up to be a historically bad year for reproductive rights. And while anti-choice lawmakers have been working toward this for decades, they’ve only gotten bolder with their moves in the past few years.

If the court does away with Roe, 26 states will put in place bans or severe abortion restrictions, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights think tank. Meanwhile, emboldened by the passing of other abortion bans in previous years, Republicans politicians have passed abortion bans left and right this year, setting reproductive rights back nearly half a century: In the first four months of this year alone, lawmakers across 42 states introduced a grand total of 536 bills restricting access to abortions—86 of which effectively banned abortion outright.

So far, six states have successfully passed versions of these bans, and most of them look eerily familiar. It appears as those legislators are taking a page straight out of either Texas or Mississippi’s playbook: In 2021, Texas passed a law that prohibited abortions only after six weeks of pregnancy, while three years prior, Mississippi passed a law preventing abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy.


The aftermath of these laws has been devastating. People seeking abortions in Texas have been forced to flee to other states—and sometimes other countries—to receive the procedure. Currently, there are eight states that have either banned or are attempting to ban abortions a maximum of 15 weeks after a pregnancy. Here’s a look at where they stand:

Arizona

On March 30, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed a bill that mirrors Mississippi’s, forbidding abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The law also makes no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. “In Arizona, we know there is immeasurable value in every life—including preborn life,” Ducey said. “I believe it is each state’s responsibility to protect them.” The law will go into effect in late June.

(Apparently, “the immeasurable value in every life” doesn’t include trans children: Ducey also signed several pieces of anti-trans legislation this year, including a bill that bars gender confirmation surgery for minors and prevents trans girls from playing on girls’ sports teams.)
Florida

On April 14, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the latest 15-week ban, one that has an exception only for medical emergencies—meaning victims of rape or incest would not be able to get an abortion. The law goes into effect on July 1.

Idaho

Two weeks before Idaho’s six-week abortion ban was supposed to take effect, the state’s Supreme Court temporarily blocked it. The law allows the father, siblings, grandparents, and other extended family members of a fetus to sue the providers of an abortion up to four years after the procedure. If successful, the family could receive $20,000. On April 20, the court allowed Idaho lawmakers to use their own private attorneys to defend their positions in the upcoming court case.

Kentucky

On April 14, Kentucky’s legislature managed to override a veto from the governor on a bill that bans abortions after 15 weeks. The only exception for abortion outside the 15-week timeframe is a medical emergency.

The ACLU and Planned Parenthood have filed lawsuits against the state, questioning the constitutionality of the law. Until the matter is sorted out in court, the state’s only two abortion providers have halted all procedures.

Mississippi

In 2018, Mississippi passed the 15-week abortion ban that started them all. The ban outlaws abortion in the state, with exceptions only for the mother’s life and fetal abnormalities. There are no exceptions for cases of rape or incest.

In December, the Supreme Court heard arguments about Mississippi’s law. The court is expected to hand down its decision in June.

Oklahoma

On April 12, Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt signed legislation that makes performing an abortion illegal in Oklahoma. There are no exceptions in cases of rape or incest. If found guilty of providing an abortion, a person could face 10 years in prison and a $100,000 fine. Upon signing the bill, Stitt declared Oklahoma “the most pro-life state in the country.” The bill will go into effect in August.

South Dakota

On March 23, Republican Gov. Kristi Noem signed a bill that restricts the use of abortion pills, forcing a pregnant person seeking medication abortions to wait three days after an initial screening before getting their first dose of the two-dose regimen. The person would then have to schedule a third visit before getting their second and final dose. The law also bans abortions via telemedicine. Currently, South Dakota’s law is wrapped up in a federal court case and won’t go into effect until an injunction is lifted.

Texas

Texas’ absolute monster of a law not only bans abortions after six weeks, but it also does not include any exceptions for victims of rape or incest. The bill also encourages people to sue anyone suspected to have helped someone get an abortion, with the promise of a $10,000 award. Gov. Greg Abbott signed this bill into law in May 2021, kickstarting an entire slew of copycat bills across eight states.

RENT INCREASES = INFLATION

States clash over rental assistance as the federal government reallocates funds




By —Michael D. Regan

NPR

Nation 

Apr 3, 2022 


In her office at a nonprofit in central Nebraska, Karen Rathke routinely encounters residents still stung by the pandemic and hoping to get help with their rent.

Rathke, president of the Heartland United Way, was hoping to tap into an additional $120 million in federal Emergency Rental Assistance to help them. But that money, part of what’s known as ERA2, is at risk after Republican Gov. Pete Ricketts said he doesn’t want it.

Many other states have in recent months returned tens of millions of dollars in unused rental assistance because they have so few renters — but only Nebraska has flat out refused the aid.

“I’m very concerned about not having anything,” Rathke said of the federal money, which can be allocated over the next three years for everything from rent to services preventing eviction to affordable housing activities.

“All these nonprofits, when people come to them asking for help, the bucket will be empty,” she said. “It is hard to tell people no, to tell people that we don’t have the funds to help them.”

READ MORE: California lawmakers agree to help cover some unpaid rent

The debate is playing out across the country as the Treasury Department begins reallocating some of the $46.5 billion in rental assistance from places slow to spend to others that are running out of funds.

States and localities have until September to spend their share of the first $25 billion allocated, known as ERA1, and the second $21.55 billion, known as ERA2, by 2025. So far, Treasury says $30 billion has been spent or allocated through February.

Treasury announced earlier this month that over $1 billion of ERA1 funds would be moved, for a total of $2.3 billion reallocated this year. Larger states like California, New York, New Jersey and Texas are getting hundreds of millions of dollars in additional money. Native American tribes, including the Oglala Sioux Lakota in South Dakota and Chippewa Cree in Montana, are also receiving tens of millions of dollars in additional help.

Those losing money are almost all smaller Republican states with large rural populations and fewer renters. Many were slow to spend their share as required by program rules, so they either voluntarily returned money or had it taken. Some, like South Dakota, Wyoming and New Hampshire, unsuccessfully pitched to use the money for other things like affordable housing.

Treasury officials, housing advocates and many Republican governors argue there is still plenty of money to help renters in these states and that the reallocation gets money where it’s most needed. Montana, for example, returned $54.6 million but still has $224.5 million. West Virginia returned more than $42.4 million but still has $224.7 million, according to Treasury.

READ MORE: Across the U.S., rents at ‘insane’ levels with no relief in sight

“We are trying to reallocate the best we can,” said Gene Sperling, who is charged with overseeing implementation of President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus rescue package. “This is a balancing act, but one that is rooted in commitment to getting the most funds to the most people in need as possible.”

North Dakota returned $150 million of its $352 million, saying it couldn’t effectively spend all the money by the deadline. The state believes the remaining funds are sufficient to meet the needs of those who are eligible.

Some Democratic lawmakers disagree.

“Outrageous and unacceptable: turning back rental assistance funds when applications are piling up and people are being evicted,” tweeted Democratic Rep. Karla Rose Hanson, of Fargo.

South Dakota was forced to return more than $81 million — though more than $9 million went to Native American tribes in the state. Gov. Kristi Noem suggested the money was not necessary, adding: “Our renters enjoy something even better than government hand-outs: a job.”

But Democratic Sen. Reynold Nesiba said there was a lack of awareness about the rental assistance and criticized the state for not doing more to promote it. He pointed to a $5 million tourism advertising campaign that was paid for with coronavirus relief funds and questioned why that level of promotion didn’t happen for pandemic relief programs.

Meanwhile, organizations that are helping administer the rental assistance still available expect a continued need. The state has long faced a run on affordable housing, which has only been exacerbated during the pandemic.

“Housing costs are just too high,” said Sandy Miller, who coordinates the rental assistance program for an organization called Community Action in the western half of South Dakota. “It’s harder for them to get in a home, it’s harder for them to stay in their home.”

Several states argued the reallocation addresses a flaw in the program, which created a funding formula based on population, not the number of renters in a state.

“Congress … did not take into consideration Wyoming’s small population, income levels, actual renters’ needs, and that the majority of Wyoming households — 70% — are owner occupied,” said Rachel Girt, the state’s rental assistance communication coordinator, after the state returned $164 million out of $352 million. Another $2.8 million was shifted to the Northern Arapaho Tribal Housing Program and Eastern Shoshone Housing Authority.

Josh Hanford, commissioner of the Vermont Department of Housing and Community Development, noted that the $352 million it received far surpassed the $25 million given to Memphis, which has a similar population.

“As long as we’re able to serve all our eligible households, hopefully folks will see that there is greater need in other parts of the country that have received a lot less assistance per household,” Hanford said when asked about the state returning $31 million.

In Nebraska, the loss of funds is projected to hit rural areas hardest.

READ MORE: States, cities running out of rental assistance funds

The state program already reallocated $85 million of its $158 million in ERA1 to its biggest cities of Omaha and Lincoln and their respective counties. It still has nearly $30 million. Without the additional $120 million in ERA2 money, an analysis by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Center on Children, Families and the Law found that tenants in Omaha and Lincoln will still have help after September, but those in other counties will not.

Ricketts, the Nebraska governor, defended the decision not to take the additional money.

The state “has received and distributed an unprecedented amount of federal funding to help Nebraskans weather the storm over these past two years,” he wrote in an opinion column. “But at a certain point, we must acknowledge that the storm has passed and get back to the Nebraska Way. We must guard against becoming a welfare state where people are incentivized not to work and encouraged to rely on government handouts well after an emergency is over.”

But housing advocates say his decision will leave many vulnerable tenants without a lifeline. Tenants in rural areas often have access to fewer resources, including affordable housing, internet access and reliable transport.

Lawmakers passed a bill last month requiring the state to apply for the money. But Ricketts vetoed the bill, saying the state “must guard against big government socialism.” If lawmakers don’t override his veto, the money is likely to be reallocated by Treasury to other states.

“We know from communities across Nebraska that the need is not only there, but is fairly severe,” said Erin Feichtinger, director of policy and advocacy for the social service agency Together.

“There is really no good reason to pass up these funds. It’s money that is allocated to Nebraskans,” she said. “Nothing bad will happen if we accept this funding, but lots of bad things can if we don’t.”

___

Associated Press reporters Stephen Groves in Sioux Falls, South Dakota; James MacPherson in Bismarck, North Dakota, and Lisa Rathke in Marshfield, Vermont, contributed.

‘Right At Home’: Tulsi Stakes Her Claim at CPAC

Corbin Bolies
Fri, February 25, 2022

Bill Pugliano/Getty

Former Democratic House Representative and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard on Friday night said she finally found where she belonged—at the 2022 Conservative Political Action Conference.

Gabbard spoke at the conference’s Ronald Reagan Dinner, walking out to thunderous applause. As she took the podium, she greeted the crowd with an “Aloha” and thanked everyone for a warm welcome, which came four days after she was announced as a CPAC speaker.

“You’re making me feel right at home,” she said with a smile.

In her 20-minute speech, Gabbard attempted to balance two opposing viewpoints: the idea of a “common foundation” in the American public, and the idea of a “powerful elite” aimed at canceling and silencing those who speak out against the government.

She touched on multiple themes prevalent throughout the 2022 gathering—free speech, an “authoritarian” Canada, and the idea that President Joe Biden views those who push back on him as “domestic terrorists.”

“What they’re telling us is you are an enemy of the state,” she said. “If you dare to oppose or even question the president, his administration, or his policies, ‘shut up, step back fall in line, or we’re coming after you.’ This isn’t some theory. This is reality.”

American Conservatives Union Chairman Matt Schlapp told The Daily Beast he first spoke to Gabbard about attending the conference a few weeks ago. The two were set up by South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, who he said was a friend of Gabbard, and that speaking at the conference wasn’t the purpose of the call.

“We started talking and had good conversations and seemed to be on the same page,” he said. “I didn’t request her speech, so I listened like everybody and I thought it was really well done.”

Gabbard also reinforced some of the conspiracies and cultural movements nearly all CPAC speakers have shared from the stage without ever using the word “conservative” to describe herself.

She praised special counsel John Durham’s probe of the investigation into Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election (which she portrayed as one into “Clinton corruption,” another conservative talking point about one of Gabbard’s political enemies). She hailed parents who have fought back against school boards who she said threatened how they were “raising their kids.” She also propped up the idea of “cancel culture” for those who tried to criticize the current administration.

But she said the CPAC attendees—still without using the word “conservative”—will lead the battle to fight back against Democrats.

“We have decided that we belong to no one but God,” she said. “We are not subjects or slaves of those who govern and by God’s grace, we are free and we will fight to remain free.”

2024 Hopefuls Audition at CPAC, Yet Trump Reigns Supreme

Three potential GOP candidates tried to stand out at CPAC this week—barely mentioning Trump—but the ex-president and party leader still loomed large over the confab.

Corbin Bolies
Breaking News Intern
Updated Feb. 25, 2022 

Photo Illustration by Luis G. Rendon/The Daily Beast/Getty

ORLANDO, Fla.—The first two days of the 2022 Conservative Political Action Conference served as a field test for 2024 presidential candidates, with rumored hopefuls like Ron DeSantis, Kristi Noem, and Mike Pompeo each pitching their own vision for America—to an audience that seemingly only wanted to live in Trump’s.

Trump’s presence loomed large throughout the confab even before he was scheduled to deliver Saturday evening’s keynote address. Throughout the conference’s main hall, exhibitors prominently displayed Trump’s likeness to sell their products, including a large golden statue of the former president hawking Patriot Mobile, “America’s only Christian conservative wireless provider,” along with the usual assortment of MAGA wares including hand-stitched hammocks embroidered with Trump’s name and “45.”

Still, that didn’t stop his presumed understudies from trying to use their roughly 20-minute slots as their auditions for the MAGA mantle.

Florida Gov. DeSantis spoke at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, an unusual midday slot for a figure widely regarded as the presumptive frontrunner if Trump chooses not to run. His speech centered on his vision to replicate Florida at the national level, touting his policies on COVID-19 and education as a model to fight a “scientific and technological elite.”

“If Florida had not led the way, this country could look like Canada or Australia,” DeSantis said to rapturous applause from a mostly full crowd. “The left does not want to honor our freedoms, and we have a responsibility to fight back on all fronts. People are coming to Florida because they want freedom.”

GREEN CPAC RECYCLING GOLD STATUE OF TRUMP

DeSantis, who has only announced a campaign for reelection so far, trained his rhetorical fire at not one of Florida’s three Democratic gubernatorial candidates but President Joe Biden himself. According to the governor, Biden hates the Sunshine State, citing the president’s move to halt FDA approval for two monoclonal antibody treatments, which DeSantis touted heavily in Florida despite it being proven ineffective against the Omicron COVID-19 variant.

“He does things like take our medication. He sniffs for victims of relief just because he doesn't like the governor,” DeSantis said. “He doesn't like Florida and he doesn't like me because we stand up to him.”

Notably absent from DeSantis’ speech was any mention of Donald Trump, whose likeness was featured on many attendees’ apparel and on trinkets outside in the exhibit hall.

Trump’s former CIA director and secretary of state Pompeo, meanwhile, presented his outlook on Friday morning, joking about his weight loss before diving into a pitch that leaned heavily on right-wing culture-war tropes, including some not-so-thinly veiled transphobia.

“We’ve seen governors that don’t wear masks but requiring 3-year-olds to do so. We've seen a man break swimming records in girls’ swimming races,” Pompeo said. “We've seen a Russian dictator now terrorize the Ukrainian people because America didn't demonstrate the resolve that we did in the four years prior.”

Pompeo framed his experience as Trump’s final secretary of state as credentials, referring to his tenure as a model for what American leadership should look like. He cited his former boss solely to refer to the Trump administration’s dealings with North Korea—referring to dictator Kim Jong Un in a colloquial “Chairman Kim”—and China, reminiscing on how much he missed serving, and declaring that he and his wife “are going to stay in this fight.”

“I’ve traveled from Tennessee to California—yes, even California,” he said to applause. “I’ve traveled all across the country to meet candidates who’ve decided to give themselves back to their communities,” he said—something a potential candidate themselves might say.

Trump Pals Beg Him to Stop Kissing Putin’s Ass
FORBIDDEN LOVE
Corbin Bolies,
Asawin Suebsaeng


South Dakota Gov. Noem seemed to do the same on Friday afternoon, using her slot to reiterate her own Twitter missives against Biden’s handling of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, rail against “cancel culture,” and call upon conservatives to fight back against the usual set of enemies: “The Democrat Party and their allies in big tech, Hollywood, and the media.”.

“The American people are being coerced,” she declared, later adding: “The question is, how much pain are you willing to go through to be free?”

Unlike Pompeo and DeSantis, Noem mentioned Trump more than a few times: Once to tout the misleading, conservative media-generated claim that Hillary Clinton “spied” on his campaign; and again to assure the audience “we have some great fighters, like President Donald Trump. But he’s not alone.”

It’s unclear whether any potential candidate can break through Trump’s grip on the party base regardless of their messaging. William Riggle, a 76-year-old rancher from Volusia County, Florida, drove in solely for CPAC’s first day to see DeSantis, whom he said he’s supported since the governor’s congressional days. However, he wasn’t sure he could bear a potential battle between Trump and the Florida governor in 2024.

“Donald Trump has done so much for this country and he's sacrificed so much,” Riggle said. “We are blessed to have him. If you’re asking me is a toss-up between the two, I really don't have an answer for that.”

White House slams Gov. Kristi Noem for saying she doesn't know why LGBTQ people in South Dakota have high rates of depression

Oma Seddiq

Fri, February 18, 2022, 

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem signs a bill Thursday, Feb. 3, 2022, at the state Capitol in Pierre, S.D., that will ban transgender women and girls from playing in school sports leagues that match their gender identity.AP Photo/Stephen Groves

• The White House slammed Noem for saying she didn't know why South Dakota's LGBTQ people have a high depression rate.

• "That makes me sad, and we should figure it out," Noem said.

• Noem signed a bill into law banning transgender girls and women from competing on female sports teams.

The White House on Friday derided Republican Gov. Kristi Noem because she was unable to answer a question about the high depression rate within South Dakota's LGBTQ communities.

"Here's a start for you, Governor," White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre tweeted in response to a clip of Noem. "1. Don't advance policies that attack trans youth, 2. Don't fund ads attacking LGBT youth, 3. support @POTUS' agenda to enhance support for youth mental health needs, with funding made available through the American Rescue Plan."

Around 87% of LGBTQ residents in the state reported experiencing feelings of depression, the highest rate in the country, according to a recent national study by HelpAdvisor. The clip in Jean-Pierre's tweet shows a reporter asking Noem about the issue at a news conference on Thursday.

"Why do you think that is?" the reporter asked Noem.

"I don't know," Noem replied. "That makes me sad, and we should figure it out."

Noem made national headlines earlier this month after she signed a bill into law banning transgender girls and college-aged women from participating on sports teams that match their gender identity. South Dakota is the first state to do so this year, and the 10th nationwide.

"This bill is about fairness," Noem said at the time. "It's about allowing biological females in their sex to compete fairly in a level playing field that gives them opportunities for success."

Prior to the bill's passage, Noem released an advertisement highlighting the legislation.

"In South Dakota, only girls play girls' sports," the ad says. "Why? Because of Governor Kristi Noem's leadership."

Opponents have condemned the GOP-led bans as discriminatory and dehumanizing toward LGBTQ youth. Many of the bills have faced legal challenges, as could South Dakota's.

More than 85% of transgender and non-binary youth reported that the news of such restrictions have negatively impacted their mental health, according to a survey by the Trevor Project, a suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization for LGBTQ youth.