Will updated COVID vaccines work against latest variant? Canadian scientists monitor global research
The Canadian Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
Federal scientists will be monitoring global research to determine the effectiveness of updated vaccines against the latest COVID-19 variant, Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada say.
Canada's first known case ofthe Omicron variantBA.2.86 was detected this week in British Columbia as the country became the seventh in the world to report its presence.
Health Canada is currently reviewing applications for Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech's new mRNA vaccines, developed against the dominant XBB.1.5 variantahead of a vaccination campaign set for the fall.
As of this week, there were only 13 sequences of the highly mutated variant BA. 2.86 available to analyze across six other countries — four in Denmark, three in the United States, two in Portugal, two in South Africa, one in Israel, and one in the United Kingdom, Health Canada and PHAC said in an email.
"Scientists are looking for signs that BA.2.86 lineages would change disease severity or spread, or impact the effectiveness of diagnostic tests, vaccines or treatments for COVID-19," they said.
"As this new variant was just detected in Canada, it is difficult to have an understanding of its prevalence. As laboratories' and clinical data is reported to PHAC, a more accurate picture will begin to emerge."
COVID-19 cases involving the XBB.1.5 variant are currently at a low to moderate level, with stable or increasing trends in all reporting provinces and territories, Health Canada and PHAC said.
However, a hospital in Windsor, Ont., and another in Montague, P.E.I., announced outbreaks of the illness this week.
The BA.2.86 variant was detected in a B.C. resident who had not recently been outside the country, provincial authorities said this week.
Provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry and Health Minister Adrian Dix said in a joint statement that there doesn't seem to be increased illness severity with the strain and the infected person was not in hospital.
Federal figures show that, as of mid-June, 80.5 per cent of Canadians had received their primary series of COVID vaccines. The highest uptake, at nearly 92 per cent, was in Newfoundland and Labrador. The lowest, at 75.5 per cent, was in the Northwest Territories, followed by Alberta, where 76 per cent of people were vaccinated.
Dawn Bowdish, an immunologist at McMaster University in Hamilton, said it's understandable that people are tired of COVID-19 amid a mostly normal return to social activities, but the mutating virus puts vulnerable populations, including the elderly, most at risk of infection.
However, only about 21 per cent of Canadians aged 80 and over have received boosters or completed a primary vaccination series in the last six months, she said.
The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) has recommended Canadians roll up their sleeves for a booster in the fall if it has been at least six months since their last dose or COVID-19 infection.
Bowdish said anyone starting chemotherapy or having major surgery may consider getting a booster before the reformulated vaccines are available but it's otherwise best to wait.
Parts of the Southern Hemisphere have faced a triple threat during its respiratory season, which usually starts in April and ends in September in that region.
"They had a lot of influenza, they had a lot of RSV. They had a lot of COVID and they reported a lot of health-care worker absences, which means care for all things is impaired," she said of Australia's recent experience.
However, Australians had access to the current bivalent COVID vaccines, not the reformulated ones.
"What I worry about is it doesn't need to be any worse or as bad as last year to still majorly impact health care for Canadians," Bowdish said of a respiratory season that saw shortages of children's pain relievers and long waits in emergency rooms.
Bowdish is hoping Canadians won't hesitate to get a booster this fall, when they could be vaccinated against influenza at the same time.
For people over 60, a vaccine for RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus, may also be available. Earlier this month, Health Canada announced the approval of a vaccine for RSV for those aged 60 and up, but it's up to the provinces and territories to decide if and when Arexvy will be included in their vaccination programs.
Eric Arts, a virologist at Western University in London, Ont., noted many Canadians are getting to the one-year mark since their last booster so it will be important to get vaccinated in the fall.
The updated vaccines' formula will be a minor change from current vaccines but with better protection against circulating Omicron variants, he said.
"Hopefully, the bureaucracy will be fast to get them out."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 1, 2023.
Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.
Camille Bains, The Canadian Press
Saturday, September 02, 2023
Online News Act could see Google, Meta pay combined $230 million to Canadian media
The Canadian Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
The federal government has put a price tag on how much it would like to see Google and Facebook spend under legislation that requires the tech giants to compensate media companies for Canadian journalism.
Federal officials estimate Google would need to offer $172 million and Facebook $62 million in annual compensation to satisfy criteria they're proposing be used to give exemptions under the Online News Act, a bill passed over the summer that will force tech companies to broker deals with media companies whose work they link to or repurpose.
Draft regulations released by the government Friday outlined for the first time how it proposes to level the playing field between Big Tech and Canada's news media sector, and which companies it will apply to.
"The goal of it is to make sure that those that benefit the most from the Canadian market fall under the bill," newly minted Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge said in an interview after the proposal's release.
The government said companies will fall under the legislation if they have a total global revenue of $1 billion or more in a calendar year, "operate in a search engine or social media market distributing and providing access to news content in Canada" and have 20 million or more Canadian average monthly unique visitors or average monthly active users.
For now, Google and Meta's Facebook are the only companies to meet the criteria, though officials said Microsoft's Bing search engine is the next closest to falling under the act.
Veronica Langvee, head of communications for Microsoft in Canada, said the company "intends to comply with the legislation as it applies to our products."
Instagram and Threads won't be captured by the proposed legislation because they have yet to reach 20 million or more monthly Canadian users, officials added.
"We know how technology evolves or how the market changes, sometimes at a rapid pace, and we want to make sure that this bill is relevant in five and 10 years," St-Onge said.
Companies meeting the criteria can receive an exemption from the act if they already contribute an amount laid out by a government formula to Canadian journalism.
The formula is based on the tech company's global revenues and Canada's share of global GDP. The government believes the calculation will deliver a contribution that is within 20 per cent of the earnings of full-time journalists working in a Canadian news organization.
Companies would be able to satisfy the criteria with both monetary and non-monetary compensation. While the draft does not specify what non-monetary contributions would count, officials said training and advertising could wind up meeting criteria.
The draft regulations will be subject to a further 30-day consultation, but Facebook and Instagram parent company Meta, which blocked news on its platforms in anticipation of the law coming into effect at the end of the year, immediately expressed its disappointment with the proposal.
The draft is based around a "fundamentally flawed premise," said Rachel Curran, head of public policy at Meta Canada.
"As the legislation is based on the incorrect assertion that Meta benefits unfairly from the news content shared on our platforms, today’s proposed regulations will not impact our business decision to end news availability in Canada," she said in a statement.
Google, which St-Onge has painted as more co-operative than Meta, has also threatened to pull Canadian news from its offerings.
"We’re carefully reviewing the proposed regulations to assess whether they resolve the serious structural issues with C-18 that regrettably were not dealt with during the legislative process," Google spokesperson Shay Purdy said in response to the draft.
The two companies have long lobbied against the legislation, with Meta claiming news is a tiny fraction of its business and removing it would result in little revenue loss for the social networking giant.
Google's president of global affairs Kent Walker, meanwhile, has said the legislation "exposes us to uncapped financial liability" and claimed the company being targeted just because it shows links to news, "something that everyone else does for free."
But St-Onge maintained the legislation is a "reasonable and predictable path forward for both media platforms and newsrooms.
"This is what we have said that we do," she said. "I think we delivered on finding a way forward that should please everyone."
The government said it is pushing forward with the act because Google and Meta have a combined 80-per-cent share of the $14 billion in online ad revenue seen in the country in 2022.
At the same time, news outlets have seen their advertising revenues shrink, forcing layoffs, a loss of media coverage in small and rural communities and 474 closures of Canadian news businesses between 2008 and 2023.
The government says 69 per cent of Canadians access news online but only 11 per cent pay for it.
After Meta made good on its threats to remove Canadian news, the federal government pulled $10 million in annual advertising spend from Meta's platforms. News and telecommunications businesses Quebecor, Bell Media, Torstar Corp., Cogeco, and Postmedia Network Canada Corp. replicated the move.
Paul Deegan, president and chief executive of News Media Canada, praised St-Onge's deft approach to the "tricky" issue and was pleased it provided "clarity and predictability."
"No regulatory framework is ever perfect, but clearly she has strived to be extremely fair and balanced to all stakeholders, he said in an email.
"This is something everyone acting in good faith should be able to live with."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 1, 2023.
Tara Deschamps, The Canadian Press
The Canadian Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
The federal government has put a price tag on how much it would like to see Google and Facebook spend under legislation that requires the tech giants to compensate media companies for Canadian journalism.
Federal officials estimate Google would need to offer $172 million and Facebook $62 million in annual compensation to satisfy criteria they're proposing be used to give exemptions under the Online News Act, a bill passed over the summer that will force tech companies to broker deals with media companies whose work they link to or repurpose.
Draft regulations released by the government Friday outlined for the first time how it proposes to level the playing field between Big Tech and Canada's news media sector, and which companies it will apply to.
"The goal of it is to make sure that those that benefit the most from the Canadian market fall under the bill," newly minted Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge said in an interview after the proposal's release.
The government said companies will fall under the legislation if they have a total global revenue of $1 billion or more in a calendar year, "operate in a search engine or social media market distributing and providing access to news content in Canada" and have 20 million or more Canadian average monthly unique visitors or average monthly active users.
For now, Google and Meta's Facebook are the only companies to meet the criteria, though officials said Microsoft's Bing search engine is the next closest to falling under the act.
Veronica Langvee, head of communications for Microsoft in Canada, said the company "intends to comply with the legislation as it applies to our products."
Instagram and Threads won't be captured by the proposed legislation because they have yet to reach 20 million or more monthly Canadian users, officials added.
"We know how technology evolves or how the market changes, sometimes at a rapid pace, and we want to make sure that this bill is relevant in five and 10 years," St-Onge said.
Companies meeting the criteria can receive an exemption from the act if they already contribute an amount laid out by a government formula to Canadian journalism.
The formula is based on the tech company's global revenues and Canada's share of global GDP. The government believes the calculation will deliver a contribution that is within 20 per cent of the earnings of full-time journalists working in a Canadian news organization.
Companies would be able to satisfy the criteria with both monetary and non-monetary compensation. While the draft does not specify what non-monetary contributions would count, officials said training and advertising could wind up meeting criteria.
The draft regulations will be subject to a further 30-day consultation, but Facebook and Instagram parent company Meta, which blocked news on its platforms in anticipation of the law coming into effect at the end of the year, immediately expressed its disappointment with the proposal.
The draft is based around a "fundamentally flawed premise," said Rachel Curran, head of public policy at Meta Canada.
"As the legislation is based on the incorrect assertion that Meta benefits unfairly from the news content shared on our platforms, today’s proposed regulations will not impact our business decision to end news availability in Canada," she said in a statement.
Google, which St-Onge has painted as more co-operative than Meta, has also threatened to pull Canadian news from its offerings.
"We’re carefully reviewing the proposed regulations to assess whether they resolve the serious structural issues with C-18 that regrettably were not dealt with during the legislative process," Google spokesperson Shay Purdy said in response to the draft.
The two companies have long lobbied against the legislation, with Meta claiming news is a tiny fraction of its business and removing it would result in little revenue loss for the social networking giant.
Google's president of global affairs Kent Walker, meanwhile, has said the legislation "exposes us to uncapped financial liability" and claimed the company being targeted just because it shows links to news, "something that everyone else does for free."
But St-Onge maintained the legislation is a "reasonable and predictable path forward for both media platforms and newsrooms.
"This is what we have said that we do," she said. "I think we delivered on finding a way forward that should please everyone."
The government said it is pushing forward with the act because Google and Meta have a combined 80-per-cent share of the $14 billion in online ad revenue seen in the country in 2022.
At the same time, news outlets have seen their advertising revenues shrink, forcing layoffs, a loss of media coverage in small and rural communities and 474 closures of Canadian news businesses between 2008 and 2023.
The government says 69 per cent of Canadians access news online but only 11 per cent pay for it.
After Meta made good on its threats to remove Canadian news, the federal government pulled $10 million in annual advertising spend from Meta's platforms. News and telecommunications businesses Quebecor, Bell Media, Torstar Corp., Cogeco, and Postmedia Network Canada Corp. replicated the move.
Paul Deegan, president and chief executive of News Media Canada, praised St-Onge's deft approach to the "tricky" issue and was pleased it provided "clarity and predictability."
"No regulatory framework is ever perfect, but clearly she has strived to be extremely fair and balanced to all stakeholders, he said in an email.
"This is something everyone acting in good faith should be able to live with."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 1, 2023.
Tara Deschamps, The Canadian Press
After nearly 30 years, Pennsylvania will end state funding for anti-abortion counseling centers
TAXPAYERS FUNDING ANTI ABORTION CULT
Fri, September 1, 2023
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — For nearly 30 years, Democratic and Republican lawmakers in Pennsylvania have approved millions of taxpayer dollars for an anti-abortion program. Now the state's new governor plans to end the contract as the organization that distributes those funds and other groups like it gain attention since the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
Pennsylvania plans to end on Dec. 31 its longstanding contract with the nonprofit Real Alternatives, the first organization in the nation to secure significant state and federal subsidies to support anti-abortion counseling centers. Under the program, Real Alternatives distributed the state and federal funds to dozens of Pennsylvania centers, including Catholic Charities, anti-abortion counseling centers and maternity homes, which provide support and housing for pregnant women.
Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro said in a statement his administration would not “continue that pattern” of subsidizing the organization, saying he was steadfast in defending abortion access.
“We will ensure women in this Commonwealth receive the reproductive health care they deserve,” he said.
The news shocked Eileen Artysh, the executive director of St. Margaret of Castello Maternity Home, which receives money through Real Alternatives to provide housing, materials and parenting counseling. While it's not their entire budget, the loss of funding will impact the center’s longevity, she said.
Artysh said many pregnant women who come to the maternity home have already made their choice to have the baby.
“Until there’s that last penny left, I’m in this for the long haul,” she said. “And the moms that we help — I can’t imagine deserting any of them.”
Pennsylvania was the first state to enact an official abortion alternative program in the mid-’90s. Helmed by then-Gov. Bob Casey, an anti-abortion Democrat, the state began funding alternatives in tandem with a preexisting program that subsidized Planned Parenthood’s services for women’s health. The funding for both programs had continued under both Republican and Democratic governors in the years since.
Real Alternatives’ network of centers has seen about 350,000 women at 1.9 million office visits in Pennsylvania, the organization said in a statement. Last year, Pennsylvania sent about $7 million to the group, which distributed those funds to more than 70 centers.
At one point, Real Alternatives was overseeing programs in Indiana and Michigan, and it inspired other states to find ways to fund organizations like it using taxpayer money. Even as Pennsylvania is poised to stop funding the program, the state's move continues to have an impact nationwide.
Michelle Kuppersmith, the executive director for Campaign for Accountability, a watchdog group that has filed complaints against Real Alternatives' use of taxpayer dollars, said Shapiro did the right thing by ending the contract.
“Now, just as many states unfortunately looked to Pennsylvania as a model for letting these programs into their states, we urge other states to follow suit in eliminating this spending that is not just wasteful, but actively harmful to the health of their citizens," she said.
Tens of millions of taxpayer dollars across the U.S. have been sent to such organizations, which are typically religiously affiliated. Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion last year, Republican-led states have sent more tax dollars to what are sometimes called “crisis pregnancy centers,” while Democratic-leaning states apply more scrutiny to them.
In Tennessee, which has a near-total abortion ban, legislators approved $20 million in funding for a grant program. Republicans said the money would support struggling families because women could tap into the centers’ parent counseling classes, diaper banks and other services.
Similarly, Republican Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds proposed doubling the funds for a state program designed to help fund the centers, which launched last year with $500,000 just before Roe was overturned.
In Florida, lawmakers upped the amount the centers could seek from $4.5 million to $25 million for the 2023-24 fiscal year. And governors in Arkansas and West Virginia signed off on spending $1 million on the centers over the next fiscal year.
Meanwhile, Democratic-led state have tried to thwart the centers, which for years have been accused of providing misleading information about abortion and contraception — for example, suggesting that abortion leads to mental health problems or breast cancer.
Colorado lawmakers made it a “deceptive trade practice” for an organization to advertise that they offer abortions or emergency contraceptives when they do not. But a similar law in Illinois was blocked by a federal judge, who said it violated the First Amendment.
Massachusetts set aside $1 million to launch a public education campaign focused on warning the public of potentially misleading claims from the centers. And in Vermont, pregnancy centers will now be subject to the state’s existing consumer protection laws – which prohibits false and deceptive advertising.
Even with the scrutiny, the centers have received strong support from those who benefited from their services.
Alyssa MacAfee, 26, was one of them. She was homeless, jobless and in early recovery when she found out she was pregnant. She came to St. Margaret’s in Pennsylvania six months pregnant and stayed until her daughter was around 5 months old.
“Everyone was definitely looking at my situation like, ‘You cannot bring a baby into the world right now,’ but I knew that I wanted to,” she said.
MacAfee said she found the organization to be welcoming; she felt it was for people that had already decided to pursue parenthood.
Since she's left, MacAfee has a job, an apartment and even some of the diapers provided by Saint Margaret.
“It turned out to be the biggest blessing life has ever given me,” she said.
About $8 million in state subsidies hangs in the balance this year as Pennsylvania completes its budget, with the Shapiro administration looking to send the money to other women’s health providers. Abortion opponents called Shapiro’s decision harmful, and Republicans said the option of using the money for other anti-abortion programs will have to be part of continued budget negotiations.
“It’s sad because this is a great program, and you take this program away, abortions will substantially increase in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,” said Kevin Bagatta, president and CEO for Real Alternatives.
Defunding the program was a key budget priority for some Pennsylvania Democrats, and abortion rights groups like Planned Parenthood PA Advocates hailed the decision.
Concerns over abortion access now outweigh the good intentions centers tend to tout, said Laura Antkowiak, a political science professor at University of Maryland, Baltimore County.
It’s “not so much about the substance of the work anymore, but who they’re aligned with and what their position is on abortion” that has politicized the centers, she said.
“In terms of the political context, I think this is part of a much larger phenomenon in which both sides of the abortion debate are battling over which service providers are going to gain access to public funding,” she said.
___
Kruesi reported from Nashville, Tenn. Brooke Schultz is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
Brooke Schultz And Kimberlee Kruesi, The Associated Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — For nearly 30 years, Democratic and Republican lawmakers in Pennsylvania have approved millions of taxpayer dollars for an anti-abortion program. Now the state's new governor plans to end the contract as the organization that distributes those funds and other groups like it gain attention since the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
Pennsylvania plans to end on Dec. 31 its longstanding contract with the nonprofit Real Alternatives, the first organization in the nation to secure significant state and federal subsidies to support anti-abortion counseling centers. Under the program, Real Alternatives distributed the state and federal funds to dozens of Pennsylvania centers, including Catholic Charities, anti-abortion counseling centers and maternity homes, which provide support and housing for pregnant women.
Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro said in a statement his administration would not “continue that pattern” of subsidizing the organization, saying he was steadfast in defending abortion access.
“We will ensure women in this Commonwealth receive the reproductive health care they deserve,” he said.
The news shocked Eileen Artysh, the executive director of St. Margaret of Castello Maternity Home, which receives money through Real Alternatives to provide housing, materials and parenting counseling. While it's not their entire budget, the loss of funding will impact the center’s longevity, she said.
Artysh said many pregnant women who come to the maternity home have already made their choice to have the baby.
“Until there’s that last penny left, I’m in this for the long haul,” she said. “And the moms that we help — I can’t imagine deserting any of them.”
Pennsylvania was the first state to enact an official abortion alternative program in the mid-’90s. Helmed by then-Gov. Bob Casey, an anti-abortion Democrat, the state began funding alternatives in tandem with a preexisting program that subsidized Planned Parenthood’s services for women’s health. The funding for both programs had continued under both Republican and Democratic governors in the years since.
Real Alternatives’ network of centers has seen about 350,000 women at 1.9 million office visits in Pennsylvania, the organization said in a statement. Last year, Pennsylvania sent about $7 million to the group, which distributed those funds to more than 70 centers.
At one point, Real Alternatives was overseeing programs in Indiana and Michigan, and it inspired other states to find ways to fund organizations like it using taxpayer money. Even as Pennsylvania is poised to stop funding the program, the state's move continues to have an impact nationwide.
Michelle Kuppersmith, the executive director for Campaign for Accountability, a watchdog group that has filed complaints against Real Alternatives' use of taxpayer dollars, said Shapiro did the right thing by ending the contract.
“Now, just as many states unfortunately looked to Pennsylvania as a model for letting these programs into their states, we urge other states to follow suit in eliminating this spending that is not just wasteful, but actively harmful to the health of their citizens," she said.
Tens of millions of taxpayer dollars across the U.S. have been sent to such organizations, which are typically religiously affiliated. Since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the right to abortion last year, Republican-led states have sent more tax dollars to what are sometimes called “crisis pregnancy centers,” while Democratic-leaning states apply more scrutiny to them.
In Tennessee, which has a near-total abortion ban, legislators approved $20 million in funding for a grant program. Republicans said the money would support struggling families because women could tap into the centers’ parent counseling classes, diaper banks and other services.
Similarly, Republican Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds proposed doubling the funds for a state program designed to help fund the centers, which launched last year with $500,000 just before Roe was overturned.
In Florida, lawmakers upped the amount the centers could seek from $4.5 million to $25 million for the 2023-24 fiscal year. And governors in Arkansas and West Virginia signed off on spending $1 million on the centers over the next fiscal year.
Meanwhile, Democratic-led state have tried to thwart the centers, which for years have been accused of providing misleading information about abortion and contraception — for example, suggesting that abortion leads to mental health problems or breast cancer.
Colorado lawmakers made it a “deceptive trade practice” for an organization to advertise that they offer abortions or emergency contraceptives when they do not. But a similar law in Illinois was blocked by a federal judge, who said it violated the First Amendment.
Massachusetts set aside $1 million to launch a public education campaign focused on warning the public of potentially misleading claims from the centers. And in Vermont, pregnancy centers will now be subject to the state’s existing consumer protection laws – which prohibits false and deceptive advertising.
Even with the scrutiny, the centers have received strong support from those who benefited from their services.
Alyssa MacAfee, 26, was one of them. She was homeless, jobless and in early recovery when she found out she was pregnant. She came to St. Margaret’s in Pennsylvania six months pregnant and stayed until her daughter was around 5 months old.
“Everyone was definitely looking at my situation like, ‘You cannot bring a baby into the world right now,’ but I knew that I wanted to,” she said.
MacAfee said she found the organization to be welcoming; she felt it was for people that had already decided to pursue parenthood.
Since she's left, MacAfee has a job, an apartment and even some of the diapers provided by Saint Margaret.
“It turned out to be the biggest blessing life has ever given me,” she said.
About $8 million in state subsidies hangs in the balance this year as Pennsylvania completes its budget, with the Shapiro administration looking to send the money to other women’s health providers. Abortion opponents called Shapiro’s decision harmful, and Republicans said the option of using the money for other anti-abortion programs will have to be part of continued budget negotiations.
“It’s sad because this is a great program, and you take this program away, abortions will substantially increase in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,” said Kevin Bagatta, president and CEO for Real Alternatives.
Defunding the program was a key budget priority for some Pennsylvania Democrats, and abortion rights groups like Planned Parenthood PA Advocates hailed the decision.
Concerns over abortion access now outweigh the good intentions centers tend to tout, said Laura Antkowiak, a political science professor at University of Maryland, Baltimore County.
It’s “not so much about the substance of the work anymore, but who they’re aligned with and what their position is on abortion” that has politicized the centers, she said.
“In terms of the political context, I think this is part of a much larger phenomenon in which both sides of the abortion debate are battling over which service providers are going to gain access to public funding,” she said.
___
Kruesi reported from Nashville, Tenn. Brooke Schultz is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
Brooke Schultz And Kimberlee Kruesi, The Associated Press
In Mississippi, a tiny fish is reintroduced to the river where it disappeared 50 years ago
Fri, September 1, 2023
PINOLA, Miss. (AP) — A species of tiny fish that once flourished in a river running hundreds of miles from central Mississippi into southeastern Louisiana is being reintroduced to the Pearl River after disappearing 50 years ago.
Wildlife experts say a number of factors likely contributed to the disappearance of the pearl darter from the Pearl River system, including oil and gas development, agricultural runoff, urban pollution, and dam construction. All are deemed detrimental to the pearl darter's habitat and survival.
And even though pollution and other threats to habitat remain today within the Pearl River, more than 400 miles (644 kilometers) long, officials say the 1972 federal Clean Water Act has helped make it cleaner. Clean enough, in fact, that Mississippi and the federal government wildlife experts say there are signs that the pearl darter may be able to thrive there again.
“This site has some of the highest species diversity in the entire Pearl River,” said Matt Wagner, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist who last month joined workers wading into the Strong River, a headwater tributary of the Pearl. They dipped bowls into buckets full tiny pearl darters from a private hatchery and eased them into the water.
“There’s more species here than most other places, and a lot of the species that we find here are what we call sensitive species. They are species that are not very tolerant of things like pollution, high disturbance and things of that nature.”
The presence of those species bodes well for the return of the pearl darter to the Pearl River, Wagner said.
The pearl darter is a bottom-dwelling fish that measures about 2.5 inches (6.4 centimeters) long. It is named for the iridescent coloring around its gills, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which listed it as a threatened species in 2017.
It had not vanished completely by 1973. It was still found in Mississippi's Pascagoula River system. But that accounted for only about 43% of its historic range.
Wagner is optimistic about its future in the Pearl River.
“This is the biggest win of my career as a biologist so far,” Wagner said. “It's very seldom that you get to restore a species back to its historic range. As a biologist, when you go to school, this is the type of day you're all dreaming about.”
There will be regular sampling of the waters to see how the species is surviving. The hope is that they will thrive and spread throughout the Pearl system and federal protection will some day no longer be needed.
“They should, ideally, get delisted from the Endangered Species Act,” Wagner said.
___
McGill reported from New Orleans.
Stephen Smith And Kevin Mcgill, The Associated Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
PINOLA, Miss. (AP) — A species of tiny fish that once flourished in a river running hundreds of miles from central Mississippi into southeastern Louisiana is being reintroduced to the Pearl River after disappearing 50 years ago.
Wildlife experts say a number of factors likely contributed to the disappearance of the pearl darter from the Pearl River system, including oil and gas development, agricultural runoff, urban pollution, and dam construction. All are deemed detrimental to the pearl darter's habitat and survival.
And even though pollution and other threats to habitat remain today within the Pearl River, more than 400 miles (644 kilometers) long, officials say the 1972 federal Clean Water Act has helped make it cleaner. Clean enough, in fact, that Mississippi and the federal government wildlife experts say there are signs that the pearl darter may be able to thrive there again.
“This site has some of the highest species diversity in the entire Pearl River,” said Matt Wagner, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist who last month joined workers wading into the Strong River, a headwater tributary of the Pearl. They dipped bowls into buckets full tiny pearl darters from a private hatchery and eased them into the water.
“There’s more species here than most other places, and a lot of the species that we find here are what we call sensitive species. They are species that are not very tolerant of things like pollution, high disturbance and things of that nature.”
The presence of those species bodes well for the return of the pearl darter to the Pearl River, Wagner said.
The pearl darter is a bottom-dwelling fish that measures about 2.5 inches (6.4 centimeters) long. It is named for the iridescent coloring around its gills, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which listed it as a threatened species in 2017.
It had not vanished completely by 1973. It was still found in Mississippi's Pascagoula River system. But that accounted for only about 43% of its historic range.
Wagner is optimistic about its future in the Pearl River.
“This is the biggest win of my career as a biologist so far,” Wagner said. “It's very seldom that you get to restore a species back to its historic range. As a biologist, when you go to school, this is the type of day you're all dreaming about.”
There will be regular sampling of the waters to see how the species is surviving. The hope is that they will thrive and spread throughout the Pearl system and federal protection will some day no longer be needed.
“They should, ideally, get delisted from the Endangered Species Act,” Wagner said.
___
McGill reported from New Orleans.
Stephen Smith And Kevin Mcgill, The Associated Press
Ongoing cost-of-living crisis should trigger another housing benefit payment: NDP's Singh
The Canadian Press
Thu, August 31, 2023
OTTAWA — The federal government needs to issue another $500 benefit payment for low-income families struggling to keep a roof over their heads, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Thursday.
Singh was in Sooke, B.C., on a cross-country summer tour where the national housing crisis and ongoing anxiety about the cost of living is taking centre stage.
In an interview, he said the federal Liberals have done an "abysmal" job dealing with the housing crisis and he intends to make the upcoming fall sitting of Parliament all about getting more housing built.
"They're a failure," he said bluntly of the Liberals.
He said the NDP have a long list of policies they want the government to implement, but chief among them is a second top-up to the Canada Housing Benefit targeting low-income Canadians who spend more than a third of their income on rent.
The first $500 top-up, which was announced in September 2022 alongside a temporary boost to the GST rebate, was rolled out just before Christmas.
The government budgeted $475 million for the program. Statistics reported by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. say 815,190 individuals and families applied for the benefit for a total cost of $402 million.
The one-time housing benefit payment was among the items in the supply-and-confidence agreement reached between the Liberals and NDP in March 2022. The agreement lists policy items the two will collaborate on in exchange for the NDP supporting the Liberals on key votes to prevent the minority government from being defeated.
The agreement says the government should consider a second round of the housing benefit payment if cost-of-living issues continue.
When asked if he thinks that applies now, Singh said: "Yes, absolutely."
Singh said the agreement has worked the way he had hoped it would, allowing for progressive NDP policies to be implemented, including a dental care benefit for children in low and middle-income families. He also agreed that the recent trouble the Liberals have had in the polls increases the leverage the NDP have to push for even more than was spelled out in the deal.
The Liberals have fallen below the Conservatives in most polls, and some have the Conservatives verging on majority territory. The change would suggest the Liberals have more at stake — such as losing their governing status altogether — if they don't keep the NDP onside.
Singh said the deal was never meant to be a complete list of what the NDP would demand, and he does anticipate pushing for more in the months to come.
He said he wants more co-operation between Ottawa, provinces and post-secondary schools to build student housing, as well as a fund to buy-up affordable homes that are at risk of being sold to developers and builders who won't keep them affordable.
Singh said the "housing acquisition fund" would "prevent us from losing the affordable homes that we do have."
"That would prevent a building being bought up by a developer and then the tenants being renovicted," he said.
"Instead, that building that does have affordable rent could then be kept in the hands of the community with this fund, and that would allow for a community group, a not-for-profit or even the residents to turn it into a co-operative."
The Liberals have said housing is their chief priority right now, as millions of Canadians face rising rents and increased mortgage costs on top of a housing market that has seen house prices soar in the last few years.
A recent cabinet retreat in Charlottetown was heavily focused on the issue, but the government did not announce any new policies there.
Many housing experts and economists say the main problem is a basic lack of housing supply. There are not enough houses in almost any category to keep up with demand.
Singh said he recently spoke to a family in Alberta with two good-paying jobs who were going to lose their home because they could not afford the rising rent.
He said for the Liberals to leave their cabinet retreat without any solutions on the table is not acceptable.
In an emailed response, a spokesperson for Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's office said the housing accelerator fund is "incentivizing municipalities to build more homes faster," and cited the new tax-free first home savings account program introduced in the federal budget.
"We knew we needed to provide important relief to the most vulnerable, particularly last year when inflation was elevated," said spokesperson Jessica Eritou. "While inflation has fallen to 3.3 per cent, down from its peak of 8.1 per cent in June of last year, we remain focused on making housing more affordable for Canadians."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 31, 2023.
Mia Rabson, The Canadian Press
The Canadian Press
Thu, August 31, 2023
OTTAWA — The federal government needs to issue another $500 benefit payment for low-income families struggling to keep a roof over their heads, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Thursday.
Singh was in Sooke, B.C., on a cross-country summer tour where the national housing crisis and ongoing anxiety about the cost of living is taking centre stage.
In an interview, he said the federal Liberals have done an "abysmal" job dealing with the housing crisis and he intends to make the upcoming fall sitting of Parliament all about getting more housing built.
"They're a failure," he said bluntly of the Liberals.
He said the NDP have a long list of policies they want the government to implement, but chief among them is a second top-up to the Canada Housing Benefit targeting low-income Canadians who spend more than a third of their income on rent.
The first $500 top-up, which was announced in September 2022 alongside a temporary boost to the GST rebate, was rolled out just before Christmas.
The government budgeted $475 million for the program. Statistics reported by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. say 815,190 individuals and families applied for the benefit for a total cost of $402 million.
The one-time housing benefit payment was among the items in the supply-and-confidence agreement reached between the Liberals and NDP in March 2022. The agreement lists policy items the two will collaborate on in exchange for the NDP supporting the Liberals on key votes to prevent the minority government from being defeated.
The agreement says the government should consider a second round of the housing benefit payment if cost-of-living issues continue.
When asked if he thinks that applies now, Singh said: "Yes, absolutely."
Singh said the agreement has worked the way he had hoped it would, allowing for progressive NDP policies to be implemented, including a dental care benefit for children in low and middle-income families. He also agreed that the recent trouble the Liberals have had in the polls increases the leverage the NDP have to push for even more than was spelled out in the deal.
The Liberals have fallen below the Conservatives in most polls, and some have the Conservatives verging on majority territory. The change would suggest the Liberals have more at stake — such as losing their governing status altogether — if they don't keep the NDP onside.
Singh said the deal was never meant to be a complete list of what the NDP would demand, and he does anticipate pushing for more in the months to come.
He said he wants more co-operation between Ottawa, provinces and post-secondary schools to build student housing, as well as a fund to buy-up affordable homes that are at risk of being sold to developers and builders who won't keep them affordable.
Singh said the "housing acquisition fund" would "prevent us from losing the affordable homes that we do have."
"That would prevent a building being bought up by a developer and then the tenants being renovicted," he said.
"Instead, that building that does have affordable rent could then be kept in the hands of the community with this fund, and that would allow for a community group, a not-for-profit or even the residents to turn it into a co-operative."
The Liberals have said housing is their chief priority right now, as millions of Canadians face rising rents and increased mortgage costs on top of a housing market that has seen house prices soar in the last few years.
A recent cabinet retreat in Charlottetown was heavily focused on the issue, but the government did not announce any new policies there.
Many housing experts and economists say the main problem is a basic lack of housing supply. There are not enough houses in almost any category to keep up with demand.
Singh said he recently spoke to a family in Alberta with two good-paying jobs who were going to lose their home because they could not afford the rising rent.
He said for the Liberals to leave their cabinet retreat without any solutions on the table is not acceptable.
In an emailed response, a spokesperson for Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland's office said the housing accelerator fund is "incentivizing municipalities to build more homes faster," and cited the new tax-free first home savings account program introduced in the federal budget.
"We knew we needed to provide important relief to the most vulnerable, particularly last year when inflation was elevated," said spokesperson Jessica Eritou. "While inflation has fallen to 3.3 per cent, down from its peak of 8.1 per cent in June of last year, we remain focused on making housing more affordable for Canadians."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 31, 2023.
Mia Rabson, The Canadian Press
Officials can't interfere with local Tennessee Pride festival under anti-drag law, judge rules
The Canadian Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A federal judge ruled Friday that law enforcement officials can't use a Tennessee law that strictly limits drag shows to interfere with a local Pride festival this weekend, favoring event organizers who sued after a district attorney warned he intends to enforce the new statute even after another federal judge ruled it unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Ronnie Greer in Knoxville granted a temporary restraining order that prevents District Attorney Ryan Desmond and other local law enforcement officials from enforcing the state law or interfering with the Blount County Pride festival scheduled for Saturday. That includes no discouraging of third parties from hosting or modifying the event, including the venue of Maryville College, the judge wrote.
Earlier this year, a federal judge across the state in Memphis ruled Tennessee’s anti-drag show law was “unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad,” and encouraged “discriminatory enforcement.” The ruling was celebrated by LGBTQ+ advocates, but it quickly sparked questions because the court declared the decision only applied to Shelby County, where Memphis lies.
While some legal experts have speculated district attorneys across the state wouldn’t enforce a law a federal judge said violated the First Amendment, others, including state Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, were quick to point out the law remained in effect outside of Shelby County. Skrmetti's office is appealing the ruling applying to Shelby County.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee and other civil rights lawyers brought the lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of the organizers. Drag performer Flamy Grant, who was hired to perform at the event, is also a plaintiff.
Desmond sent a letter to Blount County Pride organizers this week announcing he planned to enforce the state’s anti-drag law.
“It is certainly possible that the event in question will not violate any of the criminal statutes,” Desmond wrote. “However if sufficient evidence is presented to this office that these referenced criminal statutes have been violated, our office will ethically and justly prosecute these cases in the interest of justice.”
The letter was addressed to the Pride organizers, as well as the county mayor, law enforcement groups and other public officials.
In Friday's court ruling, the judge wrote the Memphis federal judge's previous ruling was "well-written, scrupulously researched, and highly persuasive." He also wrote that "the record strongly, and maybe even conclusively, suggests that District Attorney Desmond issued his notice in response" to Flamy Grant's inclusion in the festival's entertainment plans.
“This ruling allows us to fully realize Blount Pride’s goal of creating a safe place for LGBTQ people to connect, celebrate, and share resources,” Blount Pride Board President Ari Baker said in a news release. "We appreciate the community support and look forward to celebrating with you all on Saturday.”
Amy Wilhite, spokesperson for the attorney general's office, said they expect the issues raised in the Blount County case to be “decisively resolved” by the state's appeal in the Shelby County case.
In a court filing responding to the lawsuit, Desmond wrote his letter did not threaten enforcement.
The judge responded that Desmond did warn would-be violators of the law about his authority and intention to prosecute them. Additionally, the judge wondered why the district attorney sent the notice to multiple local law enforcement officials “if, as he now claims, his notice is merely a paper tiger and nothing more.”
In conservative Tennessee, drag performances and LGBTQ+ rights have increasingly been targeted by the Republican-dominant General Assembly.
The Legislature’s GOP supermajority and Republican Gov. Bill Lee enacted the anti-drag show law in March. Many supporters said drag performances in their hometowns made it necessary to restrict them from taking place in public or where children could view them.
Notably, the word “drag” doesn’t appear in the new law. Instead, the statute changed the definition of adult cabaret in Tennessee to mean “adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors.” Male or female impersonators are now classified as a form of adult cabaret, akin to strippers and topless, go-go, or exotic dancers.
The law banned adult cabaret performances on public property or anywhere minors might be present. Performers who break the law risk being charged with a misdemeanor or a felony for a repeat offense.
The ACLU of Tennessee has previously said drag shows do not inherently fall under the law’s narrow definitions, which include extreme sexual or violent content without artistic value. But the ACLU and other advocates for LGBTQ+ rights have feared that officials could use the law subjectively to censor drag artists.
Since the ruling affecting Shelby County, Lee has refused to weigh in on whether district attorneys should continue enforcing the law, saying he would defer to the attorney general.
The Blount County district attorney's office did not answer a phone call seeking comment on the decision.
Jonathan Mattise, The Associated Press
The Empress Theatre has been closed after it was damaged while hosting a drag show on Saturday,
The Empress Theatre closed after it was damaged while hosting a drag show last Saturday. (Justin Pennell/CBC)
Investigators are still seeking information regarding a second incident they say was targeted at Pride events in the community later that same Saturday. That's when RCMP say they were notified of five male suspects burning a Pride flag in Centennial Park.
"The Alberta RCMP takes any crimes directed against a specific group very seriously, urges the public to report any potential hate incidents, and responds to all such reports," police said in a statement.
They say reporting hate incidents allows them to provide anyone needing support services to receive the help. They say it may also assist with related investigations and document repeat behaviours.
"Reporting also sends an important message that these acts will not be tolerated in our communities," RCMP said.
The Canadian Press
Fri, September 1, 2023
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A federal judge ruled Friday that law enforcement officials can't use a Tennessee law that strictly limits drag shows to interfere with a local Pride festival this weekend, favoring event organizers who sued after a district attorney warned he intends to enforce the new statute even after another federal judge ruled it unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Ronnie Greer in Knoxville granted a temporary restraining order that prevents District Attorney Ryan Desmond and other local law enforcement officials from enforcing the state law or interfering with the Blount County Pride festival scheduled for Saturday. That includes no discouraging of third parties from hosting or modifying the event, including the venue of Maryville College, the judge wrote.
Earlier this year, a federal judge across the state in Memphis ruled Tennessee’s anti-drag show law was “unconstitutionally vague and substantially overbroad,” and encouraged “discriminatory enforcement.” The ruling was celebrated by LGBTQ+ advocates, but it quickly sparked questions because the court declared the decision only applied to Shelby County, where Memphis lies.
While some legal experts have speculated district attorneys across the state wouldn’t enforce a law a federal judge said violated the First Amendment, others, including state Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, were quick to point out the law remained in effect outside of Shelby County. Skrmetti's office is appealing the ruling applying to Shelby County.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee and other civil rights lawyers brought the lawsuit Wednesday on behalf of the organizers. Drag performer Flamy Grant, who was hired to perform at the event, is also a plaintiff.
Desmond sent a letter to Blount County Pride organizers this week announcing he planned to enforce the state’s anti-drag law.
“It is certainly possible that the event in question will not violate any of the criminal statutes,” Desmond wrote. “However if sufficient evidence is presented to this office that these referenced criminal statutes have been violated, our office will ethically and justly prosecute these cases in the interest of justice.”
The letter was addressed to the Pride organizers, as well as the county mayor, law enforcement groups and other public officials.
In Friday's court ruling, the judge wrote the Memphis federal judge's previous ruling was "well-written, scrupulously researched, and highly persuasive." He also wrote that "the record strongly, and maybe even conclusively, suggests that District Attorney Desmond issued his notice in response" to Flamy Grant's inclusion in the festival's entertainment plans.
“This ruling allows us to fully realize Blount Pride’s goal of creating a safe place for LGBTQ people to connect, celebrate, and share resources,” Blount Pride Board President Ari Baker said in a news release. "We appreciate the community support and look forward to celebrating with you all on Saturday.”
Amy Wilhite, spokesperson for the attorney general's office, said they expect the issues raised in the Blount County case to be “decisively resolved” by the state's appeal in the Shelby County case.
In a court filing responding to the lawsuit, Desmond wrote his letter did not threaten enforcement.
The judge responded that Desmond did warn would-be violators of the law about his authority and intention to prosecute them. Additionally, the judge wondered why the district attorney sent the notice to multiple local law enforcement officials “if, as he now claims, his notice is merely a paper tiger and nothing more.”
In conservative Tennessee, drag performances and LGBTQ+ rights have increasingly been targeted by the Republican-dominant General Assembly.
The Legislature’s GOP supermajority and Republican Gov. Bill Lee enacted the anti-drag show law in March. Many supporters said drag performances in their hometowns made it necessary to restrict them from taking place in public or where children could view them.
Notably, the word “drag” doesn’t appear in the new law. Instead, the statute changed the definition of adult cabaret in Tennessee to mean “adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors.” Male or female impersonators are now classified as a form of adult cabaret, akin to strippers and topless, go-go, or exotic dancers.
The law banned adult cabaret performances on public property or anywhere minors might be present. Performers who break the law risk being charged with a misdemeanor or a felony for a repeat offense.
The ACLU of Tennessee has previously said drag shows do not inherently fall under the law’s narrow definitions, which include extreme sexual or violent content without artistic value. But the ACLU and other advocates for LGBTQ+ rights have feared that officials could use the law subjectively to censor drag artists.
Since the ruling affecting Shelby County, Lee has refused to weigh in on whether district attorneys should continue enforcing the law, saying he would defer to the attorney general.
The Blount County district attorney's office did not answer a phone call seeking comment on the decision.
Jonathan Mattise, The Associated Press
UCP ALBERTA COUNTRY
Four youths charged after foul-smelling substance released during Fort Macleod drag event
CBC
Fri, September 1, 2023
The historic Empress Theatre in Fort Macleod, Alta., where a noxious substance was released during a Pride event last weekend. (Justin Pennell/CBC - image credit)
Investigators have charged four youths in connection to the release of a foul-smelling substance at a drag event hosted at the historic Empress Theatre in Fort Macleod, Alta.
RCMP say the youths have each been charged with one count of mischief under $5,000. They cannot be named due to the restrictions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
Police said their investigation found that last Saturday four people threw fisher and marten lure oil in the town's 112-year-old theatre, "causing a very foul smell."
The incident occurred during a performance of Drag Out the Love — a show organizers said was created out of a need to host a safe space for LGBTQ people and allies in Fort Macleod, a town located about 170 kilometres south of Calgary.
CBC
Fri, September 1, 2023
The historic Empress Theatre in Fort Macleod, Alta., where a noxious substance was released during a Pride event last weekend. (Justin Pennell/CBC - image credit)
Investigators have charged four youths in connection to the release of a foul-smelling substance at a drag event hosted at the historic Empress Theatre in Fort Macleod, Alta.
RCMP say the youths have each been charged with one count of mischief under $5,000. They cannot be named due to the restrictions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
Police said their investigation found that last Saturday four people threw fisher and marten lure oil in the town's 112-year-old theatre, "causing a very foul smell."
The incident occurred during a performance of Drag Out the Love — a show organizers said was created out of a need to host a safe space for LGBTQ people and allies in Fort Macleod, a town located about 170 kilometres south of Calgary.
The Empress Theatre has been closed after it was damaged while hosting a drag show on Saturday,
The Empress Theatre closed after it was damaged while hosting a drag show last Saturday. (Justin Pennell/CBC)
Investigators are still seeking information regarding a second incident they say was targeted at Pride events in the community later that same Saturday. That's when RCMP say they were notified of five male suspects burning a Pride flag in Centennial Park.
"The Alberta RCMP takes any crimes directed against a specific group very seriously, urges the public to report any potential hate incidents, and responds to all such reports," police said in a statement.
They say reporting hate incidents allows them to provide anyone needing support services to receive the help. They say it may also assist with related investigations and document repeat behaviours.
"Reporting also sends an important message that these acts will not be tolerated in our communities," RCMP said.
AVOIDING THE CHRISTIE MOMENT
DeSantis won't meet with Biden during president's trip to survey Idalia damage
Fri, September 1, 2023
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis ' office said Friday that he's not going to meet with President Joe Biden when the Democrat flies to Florida this weekend to survey damage from Hurricane Idalia, suggesting that doing so could hinder disaster response.
“In these rural communities, and so soon after impact, the security preparations alone that would go into setting up such a meeting would shut down ongoing recovery efforts,” DeSantis spokesman Jeremy Redfern said in a statement.
Idalia made landfall Wednesday morning along Florida’s Big Bend region as a Category 3 storm, causing widespread flooding and damage before moving north to drench Georgia and North Carolina. Biden is set to fly to Florida on Saturday to tour the damage personally.
But DeSantis preemptively heading off a meeting contradicts Biden himself, who, when asked after an event at the White House earlier Friday whether he would meet with DeSantis during his trip to Florida, replied, “Yes.”
It’s also a break from the recent past, since Biden and DeSantis met when the president toured Florida after Hurricane Ian hit the state last year, and following the Surfside condo collapse in Miami Beach in summer 2021. But DeSantis is now running for president, and he only left the Republican primary trail last week with Idalia barreling toward his state.
The politics of putting aside rivalries following natural disasters can be tricky. Another 2024 presidential candidate, former Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, was widely criticized in GOP circles for embracing then-President Barack Obama during a tour of damage 2012's Hurricane Sandy did to his state. Christie was even asked about the incident last month, during the first Republican presidential debate in Milwaukee.
Both Biden and DeSantis at first suggested that helping storm victims would outweigh politics. But DeSantis' sentiments began to shift as the week wore on.
“There’s a time and a place to have political season,” the governor said before Idalia made landfall. “But then there’s a time and a place to say that this is something that’s life threatening, this is something that could potentially cost somebody their life, it could cost them their livelihood.”
By Friday, though, the governor was telling reporters of Biden, “one thing I did mention to him on the phone” was “it would be very disruptive to have the whole security apparatus that goes" with the president "because there are only so many ways to get into” many of the hardest hit areas.
That eventually prompted the statement saying DeSantis would shun a meeting.
Such sentiment is consistent with a governor building his White House bid around dismantling what he calls Democrats' “woke" policies. DeSantis also frequently draws applause at GOP rallies by declaring that it's time to send “Joe Biden back to his basement," a reference to the Democrat's Delaware home, where he spent much of his time during the early lockdowns of the coronavirus pandemic.
Still, Biden suggested earlier in the week that he and DeSantis were cooperating easily. While delivering pizzas to workers at the Washington headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the president said he'd spoken to DeSantis so frequently about Idalia that “there should be a direct dial” between the pair.
Homeland Security adviser Liz Sherwood-Randall pointed to the experiences after Ian and Surfside when telling reporters at the White House this week that Biden and DeSantis "are very collegial when we have the work to do together of helping Americans in need, citizens of Florida in need.”
And yet, the post-Idalia politics could be complicated for both sides.
The president announced his bid for reelection in April but has mostly refrained from campaigning, preferring instead to lead by governing. The White House is now seeking an additional $4 billion to address natural disasters as part of its supplemental funding request to Congress — bringing the total to $16 billion and illustrating that wildfires, flooding and hurricanes that have intensified during a period of climate change are imposing ever higher costs on U.S. taxpayers.
DeSantis, meanwhile, is facing questions about whether his campaign can survive for the long haul, even as he helps Florida navigate not just Idalia's damage, but also a shooting the previous week in which a white gunman killed three Black people at a convenience store in Jacksonville in a racist hate crime.
Four months before the first ballots are to be cast in Iowa’s caucuses, DeSantis still lags far behind former President Donald Trump, the Republican primary's dominant early front-runner. And he has cycled through repeated campaign leadership shakeups and reboots of his image in an attempt to refocus his message.
The super PAC supporting DeSantis' candidacy has halted its door-knocking operations in Nevada, which votes third on the Republican presidential primary calendar, and several states holding Super Tuesday primaries in March — a further sign of trouble.
__
Associated Press writer Brendan Farrington in Tallahassee, Florida, contributed to this report.
Will Weissert, The Associated Press
DeSantis voted against Sandy aid a decade ago. Now his state needs the help.
Emma Dumain
Thu, August 31, 2023 at 3:27 PM MDT·9 min read
107
John Raoux/AP Photo
Ron DeSantis had just been sworn in as a member of the House in 2013 when he voted against sending $9.7 billion in disaster relief to New York and New Jersey, two states still reeling from the damage of Hurricane Sandy.
"I sympathize with the victims,” the Florida Republican said at the time, but objected to what he called Congress’ “put it on the credit card mentality” when it came to government spending.
Now, a day after Hurricane Idalia pummeled Florida less than a year since Hurricane Ian’s destruction, DeSantis is not objecting to federal borrowing when it’ll help his disaster-stricken state. As Florida’s governor — and a 2024 White House contender — he is in regular contact with President Joe Biden as the state seeks dollars from Washington to rebuild from the storm wreckage, assist rescue efforts and aid displaced residents.
This is part of a tradition: Florida Republicans have a history of supporting government assistance for their state’s natural disasters while frequently rejecting broader packages designed to lessen the impact of these emergencies — torn between their constituents’ priorities and their party’s position on reining in the federal debt.
DeSantis' vote a decade ago was based on his opposition to the Sandy package's "additional pork spending," a spokesperson for his presidential campaign said Thursday. Florida GOP lawmakers in both chambers frequently release similar statements after voting against disaster money, citing the country’s sky-high deficit as the determining factor.
But one Florida Republican calls that position increasingly untenable in a state that so frequently finds itself at ground zero for catastrophic hurricanes, just one of the litany of disasters that scientists expect to become worse as the planet warms.
“It’s always understandable why people, in theory, would vote against federal aid when it doesn’t affect them,” said Carlos Curbelo, a former Miami-area GOP member of Congress. “But when you live in Florida, that position is unsustainable.”
DeSantis probably “regrets” taking that vote on Sandy, he added. “He is now in a position of requesting federal aid for hurricane relief for the second year in a row. And these are major asks. These are billions upon billions of dollars."
It's been almost 11 years since then-New York Republican Rep. Peter King dared his GOP colleagues to meet their "moral obligation" to help natural disaster-torn communities — a plea that 179 House Republicans, including DeSantis, ultimately rejected.
But DeSantis — as a Republican and a Floridian — is not unique in his relationship to federal disaster spending. The state's congressional delegation has a history of idiosyncratic voting patterns on legislation that would seek to respond to, or mitigate the impacts of, extreme weather events that are direct results of the worsening climate crisis.
Republicans from Florida have repeatedly voted to send federal disaster relief to their own state, at times vocally pushing for it.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), for instance, has said he will demand “an immediate vote” next week on a bill to refill the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s coffers.
“I will not allow Washington to continue playing games with disaster aid and the lives of those needing our help,” Scott said in a statement.
More broadly, Florida Republicans in Congress have for the last decade largely toed the party line on climate politics, refusing to support legislation that could be perceived as hostile to the oil and gas industry while embracing measures that would help their state in more immediate and tangible ways respond to climate change.
Curbelo predicts it will soon become harder for Florida Republicans to cherry-pick what they are willing to accept and sacrifice.
While Florida has always experienced dangerous hurricanes, he said, it has become especially vulnerable to violent storms, sea-level rise, coastal erosion and heat waves.
“The state is under a lot of stress in terms of insurance issues,” said Curbelo, who spent his two terms in Congress working to push his party to acknowledge the climate crisis.
“Markets are not forgiving; they expose risk and weakness. … With every storm, with every major flooding event, the pressure on Florida members to support a broad climate policy agenda is going to grow.”
Lost 'bipartisan tradition'
The fight over Sandy funding marked a shift in the debate over what responsibility members of Congress owe one another when faced with natural disasters.
As lawmakers were preparing to adjourn the 112th Congress in the first days of January 2013 after an extended legislative session to address the “fiscal cliff,” House GOP leaders abruptly canceled a vote on Sandy aid amid outcry from conservatives who didn’t want to spend more government money.
After King and other Republicans revolted — and shamed their leadership — a vote was convened swiftly upon reconvening for the 113th Congress on Jan. 15.
The relief bill was passed, 241-180. All but three Florida Republicans voted “no” on the grounds it spent too much money — also DeSantis’ argument at that time.
Jeremy Redfern, a DeSantis press secretary, told POLITICO’s E&E News that “we have no time for politics or pettiness” when asked if the governor wishes he had voted differently in 2013.
“As a member of Congress, DeSantis supported emergency disaster relief funding for Hurricane Sandy, but he did not support the additional pork spending that ended up in the final relief bill,” Bryan Griffin, press secretary for DeSantis’ presidential campaign, added in a separate statement. (Republicans at the time complained that the Sandy package continued to fund a depleted National Flood Insurance Program with money the government didn’t have.)
“As governor," Griffin said, "DeSantis will of course marshal all available resources (state and federal) to aid those in need during recovery."
Dan Weiss, a veteran climate advocate, observed that “Sandy was the turning point” in what came next for how congressional Republicans have since approached disaster relief funding votes.
“It used to be extremely bipartisan, like so many other things involving money,” he said. “Peter King came from the bipartisan tradition of providing disaster relief to states based on need.”
Florida Republicans have, by and large, gone on to support sending money to avert weather catastrophes, but typically only if their own state was included — and only as stand-alone propositions, not as part of larger spending packages.
The state’s House GOP delegation, for example, unanimously supported an $81 billion disaster aid package in December 2017 to help Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and California rebuild after a series of natural disasters that year, including Hurricanes Irma, Harvey and Maria.
But the delegation split in February 2018, when that disaster money was folded into a larger government spending bill then-President Donald Trump eventually signed into law.
At that point, five Florida Republicans in the House voted against the bill while 11 supported it, siding with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and then-Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson in the other chamber.
In 2019, all but two Florida Republicans in the House backed legislation that would, among other things, mitigate the damage done to their state from Hurricane Michael. In the Senate, Rubio and Scott, who had by then unseated Nelson, voted “yes,” too.
Then came Hurricane Ian in 2022. Congress included language in the bill allowing FEMA to tap $19 billion to respond to a slew of natural disasters, including Ian. Every Florida Republican in the House voted against it. Scott opposed it in the Senate; Rubio didn’t vote.
Looming 'political liability'
Florida Republicans have rallied around other policies to protect their state’s specific environmental interests.
They have continued a time-honored tradition of joining with Democrats to oppose oil drilling in their state’s portion of the Gulf of Mexico, an activity some of them argue could hamper activities at nearby military bases and which all of them see as a risk to the peace, health and safety of Florida communities. But they've also criticized the Biden administration's efforts to limit the practice in other states.
GOP members of the Florida congressional delegation have also typically supported major federal investments to restore the Everglades, the largest subtropical wilderness in the United States.
At the same time, they have not fought back against specific development and mining projects in the area that the Environmental Protection Agency and Florida conservation groups say could threaten endangered species and fragile ecosystems.
Ultimately, said League of Conservation Voters vice president of political affairs Craig Auster, these positions won’t make a difference if Congress isn’t supporting policies to drive down greenhouse gas emissions.
“We’re not going to protect Florida coastal communities, and we’re not going to protect the Everglades, if we aren’t addressing climate change,” Auster said, “because climate change is the biggest threat to both of those things.”
There have been some occasions since 2013 when Florida Republicans in Congress engaged with Democrats on legislation that would have made targeted, long-lasting contributions to disaster preparedness and resiliency.
In 2019, the House passed the “Reforming Disaster Recovery Act,” which would have required that all post-disaster rebuilding projects funded by certain federal dollars comply with the newest construction codes, which account for the realities of climate change — elevating buildings and designing structures to withstand intense winds, for instance.
The measure advanced in a 290-118 vote, with five of the 71 Republicans favoring it hailing from the Florida delegation. But it has since languished after the Senate failed to take it up.
Yet in the fall of 2013, the Obama administration got little GOP buy-in when it established the Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience to advise on how the federal government could respond to the needs of communities at the forefront of the climate crisis.
Supporters had hoped Republicans would get involved, but not a single GOP federal or statewide elected official joined — not even then-New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Weiss noted, “even though his state suffered extensive damage due to Superstorm Sandy.”
Auster, the League of Conservation Voters vice president, sided with Curbelo: For Florida Republicans, and DeSantis, it’s going to become harder to stay on the sidelines.
“It’s all well and good to say, ‘the government shouldn't be fighting climate change,’ until your big insurance companies are going to stop providing insurance for unsafe places, and if people can’t get help when their homes are destroyed, and when people are losing their lives to wildfires and floods and hurricanes,” Auster said.
Reporters Ariel Wittenberg and Robin Bravender contributed to this report.
DeSantis won't meet with Biden during president's trip to survey Idalia damage
Fri, September 1, 2023
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis ' office said Friday that he's not going to meet with President Joe Biden when the Democrat flies to Florida this weekend to survey damage from Hurricane Idalia, suggesting that doing so could hinder disaster response.
“In these rural communities, and so soon after impact, the security preparations alone that would go into setting up such a meeting would shut down ongoing recovery efforts,” DeSantis spokesman Jeremy Redfern said in a statement.
Idalia made landfall Wednesday morning along Florida’s Big Bend region as a Category 3 storm, causing widespread flooding and damage before moving north to drench Georgia and North Carolina. Biden is set to fly to Florida on Saturday to tour the damage personally.
But DeSantis preemptively heading off a meeting contradicts Biden himself, who, when asked after an event at the White House earlier Friday whether he would meet with DeSantis during his trip to Florida, replied, “Yes.”
It’s also a break from the recent past, since Biden and DeSantis met when the president toured Florida after Hurricane Ian hit the state last year, and following the Surfside condo collapse in Miami Beach in summer 2021. But DeSantis is now running for president, and he only left the Republican primary trail last week with Idalia barreling toward his state.
The politics of putting aside rivalries following natural disasters can be tricky. Another 2024 presidential candidate, former Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, was widely criticized in GOP circles for embracing then-President Barack Obama during a tour of damage 2012's Hurricane Sandy did to his state. Christie was even asked about the incident last month, during the first Republican presidential debate in Milwaukee.
Both Biden and DeSantis at first suggested that helping storm victims would outweigh politics. But DeSantis' sentiments began to shift as the week wore on.
“There’s a time and a place to have political season,” the governor said before Idalia made landfall. “But then there’s a time and a place to say that this is something that’s life threatening, this is something that could potentially cost somebody their life, it could cost them their livelihood.”
By Friday, though, the governor was telling reporters of Biden, “one thing I did mention to him on the phone” was “it would be very disruptive to have the whole security apparatus that goes" with the president "because there are only so many ways to get into” many of the hardest hit areas.
That eventually prompted the statement saying DeSantis would shun a meeting.
Such sentiment is consistent with a governor building his White House bid around dismantling what he calls Democrats' “woke" policies. DeSantis also frequently draws applause at GOP rallies by declaring that it's time to send “Joe Biden back to his basement," a reference to the Democrat's Delaware home, where he spent much of his time during the early lockdowns of the coronavirus pandemic.
Still, Biden suggested earlier in the week that he and DeSantis were cooperating easily. While delivering pizzas to workers at the Washington headquarters of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the president said he'd spoken to DeSantis so frequently about Idalia that “there should be a direct dial” between the pair.
Homeland Security adviser Liz Sherwood-Randall pointed to the experiences after Ian and Surfside when telling reporters at the White House this week that Biden and DeSantis "are very collegial when we have the work to do together of helping Americans in need, citizens of Florida in need.”
And yet, the post-Idalia politics could be complicated for both sides.
The president announced his bid for reelection in April but has mostly refrained from campaigning, preferring instead to lead by governing. The White House is now seeking an additional $4 billion to address natural disasters as part of its supplemental funding request to Congress — bringing the total to $16 billion and illustrating that wildfires, flooding and hurricanes that have intensified during a period of climate change are imposing ever higher costs on U.S. taxpayers.
DeSantis, meanwhile, is facing questions about whether his campaign can survive for the long haul, even as he helps Florida navigate not just Idalia's damage, but also a shooting the previous week in which a white gunman killed three Black people at a convenience store in Jacksonville in a racist hate crime.
Four months before the first ballots are to be cast in Iowa’s caucuses, DeSantis still lags far behind former President Donald Trump, the Republican primary's dominant early front-runner. And he has cycled through repeated campaign leadership shakeups and reboots of his image in an attempt to refocus his message.
The super PAC supporting DeSantis' candidacy has halted its door-knocking operations in Nevada, which votes third on the Republican presidential primary calendar, and several states holding Super Tuesday primaries in March — a further sign of trouble.
__
Associated Press writer Brendan Farrington in Tallahassee, Florida, contributed to this report.
Will Weissert, The Associated Press
DeSantis voted against Sandy aid a decade ago. Now his state needs the help.
Emma Dumain
Thu, August 31, 2023 at 3:27 PM MDT·9 min read
107
John Raoux/AP Photo
Ron DeSantis had just been sworn in as a member of the House in 2013 when he voted against sending $9.7 billion in disaster relief to New York and New Jersey, two states still reeling from the damage of Hurricane Sandy.
"I sympathize with the victims,” the Florida Republican said at the time, but objected to what he called Congress’ “put it on the credit card mentality” when it came to government spending.
Now, a day after Hurricane Idalia pummeled Florida less than a year since Hurricane Ian’s destruction, DeSantis is not objecting to federal borrowing when it’ll help his disaster-stricken state. As Florida’s governor — and a 2024 White House contender — he is in regular contact with President Joe Biden as the state seeks dollars from Washington to rebuild from the storm wreckage, assist rescue efforts and aid displaced residents.
This is part of a tradition: Florida Republicans have a history of supporting government assistance for their state’s natural disasters while frequently rejecting broader packages designed to lessen the impact of these emergencies — torn between their constituents’ priorities and their party’s position on reining in the federal debt.
DeSantis' vote a decade ago was based on his opposition to the Sandy package's "additional pork spending," a spokesperson for his presidential campaign said Thursday. Florida GOP lawmakers in both chambers frequently release similar statements after voting against disaster money, citing the country’s sky-high deficit as the determining factor.
But one Florida Republican calls that position increasingly untenable in a state that so frequently finds itself at ground zero for catastrophic hurricanes, just one of the litany of disasters that scientists expect to become worse as the planet warms.
“It’s always understandable why people, in theory, would vote against federal aid when it doesn’t affect them,” said Carlos Curbelo, a former Miami-area GOP member of Congress. “But when you live in Florida, that position is unsustainable.”
DeSantis probably “regrets” taking that vote on Sandy, he added. “He is now in a position of requesting federal aid for hurricane relief for the second year in a row. And these are major asks. These are billions upon billions of dollars."
It's been almost 11 years since then-New York Republican Rep. Peter King dared his GOP colleagues to meet their "moral obligation" to help natural disaster-torn communities — a plea that 179 House Republicans, including DeSantis, ultimately rejected.
But DeSantis — as a Republican and a Floridian — is not unique in his relationship to federal disaster spending. The state's congressional delegation has a history of idiosyncratic voting patterns on legislation that would seek to respond to, or mitigate the impacts of, extreme weather events that are direct results of the worsening climate crisis.
Republicans from Florida have repeatedly voted to send federal disaster relief to their own state, at times vocally pushing for it.
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), for instance, has said he will demand “an immediate vote” next week on a bill to refill the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s coffers.
“I will not allow Washington to continue playing games with disaster aid and the lives of those needing our help,” Scott said in a statement.
More broadly, Florida Republicans in Congress have for the last decade largely toed the party line on climate politics, refusing to support legislation that could be perceived as hostile to the oil and gas industry while embracing measures that would help their state in more immediate and tangible ways respond to climate change.
Curbelo predicts it will soon become harder for Florida Republicans to cherry-pick what they are willing to accept and sacrifice.
While Florida has always experienced dangerous hurricanes, he said, it has become especially vulnerable to violent storms, sea-level rise, coastal erosion and heat waves.
“The state is under a lot of stress in terms of insurance issues,” said Curbelo, who spent his two terms in Congress working to push his party to acknowledge the climate crisis.
“Markets are not forgiving; they expose risk and weakness. … With every storm, with every major flooding event, the pressure on Florida members to support a broad climate policy agenda is going to grow.”
Lost 'bipartisan tradition'
The fight over Sandy funding marked a shift in the debate over what responsibility members of Congress owe one another when faced with natural disasters.
As lawmakers were preparing to adjourn the 112th Congress in the first days of January 2013 after an extended legislative session to address the “fiscal cliff,” House GOP leaders abruptly canceled a vote on Sandy aid amid outcry from conservatives who didn’t want to spend more government money.
After King and other Republicans revolted — and shamed their leadership — a vote was convened swiftly upon reconvening for the 113th Congress on Jan. 15.
The relief bill was passed, 241-180. All but three Florida Republicans voted “no” on the grounds it spent too much money — also DeSantis’ argument at that time.
Jeremy Redfern, a DeSantis press secretary, told POLITICO’s E&E News that “we have no time for politics or pettiness” when asked if the governor wishes he had voted differently in 2013.
“As a member of Congress, DeSantis supported emergency disaster relief funding for Hurricane Sandy, but he did not support the additional pork spending that ended up in the final relief bill,” Bryan Griffin, press secretary for DeSantis’ presidential campaign, added in a separate statement. (Republicans at the time complained that the Sandy package continued to fund a depleted National Flood Insurance Program with money the government didn’t have.)
“As governor," Griffin said, "DeSantis will of course marshal all available resources (state and federal) to aid those in need during recovery."
Dan Weiss, a veteran climate advocate, observed that “Sandy was the turning point” in what came next for how congressional Republicans have since approached disaster relief funding votes.
“It used to be extremely bipartisan, like so many other things involving money,” he said. “Peter King came from the bipartisan tradition of providing disaster relief to states based on need.”
Florida Republicans have, by and large, gone on to support sending money to avert weather catastrophes, but typically only if their own state was included — and only as stand-alone propositions, not as part of larger spending packages.
The state’s House GOP delegation, for example, unanimously supported an $81 billion disaster aid package in December 2017 to help Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and California rebuild after a series of natural disasters that year, including Hurricanes Irma, Harvey and Maria.
But the delegation split in February 2018, when that disaster money was folded into a larger government spending bill then-President Donald Trump eventually signed into law.
At that point, five Florida Republicans in the House voted against the bill while 11 supported it, siding with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and then-Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson in the other chamber.
In 2019, all but two Florida Republicans in the House backed legislation that would, among other things, mitigate the damage done to their state from Hurricane Michael. In the Senate, Rubio and Scott, who had by then unseated Nelson, voted “yes,” too.
Then came Hurricane Ian in 2022. Congress included language in the bill allowing FEMA to tap $19 billion to respond to a slew of natural disasters, including Ian. Every Florida Republican in the House voted against it. Scott opposed it in the Senate; Rubio didn’t vote.
Looming 'political liability'
Florida Republicans have rallied around other policies to protect their state’s specific environmental interests.
They have continued a time-honored tradition of joining with Democrats to oppose oil drilling in their state’s portion of the Gulf of Mexico, an activity some of them argue could hamper activities at nearby military bases and which all of them see as a risk to the peace, health and safety of Florida communities. But they've also criticized the Biden administration's efforts to limit the practice in other states.
GOP members of the Florida congressional delegation have also typically supported major federal investments to restore the Everglades, the largest subtropical wilderness in the United States.
At the same time, they have not fought back against specific development and mining projects in the area that the Environmental Protection Agency and Florida conservation groups say could threaten endangered species and fragile ecosystems.
Ultimately, said League of Conservation Voters vice president of political affairs Craig Auster, these positions won’t make a difference if Congress isn’t supporting policies to drive down greenhouse gas emissions.
“We’re not going to protect Florida coastal communities, and we’re not going to protect the Everglades, if we aren’t addressing climate change,” Auster said, “because climate change is the biggest threat to both of those things.”
There have been some occasions since 2013 when Florida Republicans in Congress engaged with Democrats on legislation that would have made targeted, long-lasting contributions to disaster preparedness and resiliency.
In 2019, the House passed the “Reforming Disaster Recovery Act,” which would have required that all post-disaster rebuilding projects funded by certain federal dollars comply with the newest construction codes, which account for the realities of climate change — elevating buildings and designing structures to withstand intense winds, for instance.
The measure advanced in a 290-118 vote, with five of the 71 Republicans favoring it hailing from the Florida delegation. But it has since languished after the Senate failed to take it up.
Yet in the fall of 2013, the Obama administration got little GOP buy-in when it established the Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience to advise on how the federal government could respond to the needs of communities at the forefront of the climate crisis.
Supporters had hoped Republicans would get involved, but not a single GOP federal or statewide elected official joined — not even then-New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Weiss noted, “even though his state suffered extensive damage due to Superstorm Sandy.”
Auster, the League of Conservation Voters vice president, sided with Curbelo: For Florida Republicans, and DeSantis, it’s going to become harder to stay on the sidelines.
“It’s all well and good to say, ‘the government shouldn't be fighting climate change,’ until your big insurance companies are going to stop providing insurance for unsafe places, and if people can’t get help when their homes are destroyed, and when people are losing their lives to wildfires and floods and hurricanes,” Auster said.
Reporters Ariel Wittenberg and Robin Bravender contributed to this report.
WAR CRIME
Exclusive-U.S. to send its first depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine -sources
BAN DEPLETED URANIUM WEAPONS
Fri, September 1, 2023
By Mike Stone
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Biden administration will for the first time send controversial armor-piercing munitions containing depleted uranium to Ukraine, according to a document seen by Reuters and separately confirmed by two U.S. officials.
The rounds, which could help destroy Russian tanks, are part of a new military aid package for Ukraine set to be unveiled in the next week. The munitions can be fired from U.S. Abrams tanks that, according to a person familiar with the matter, are expected be delivered to Ukraine in the coming weeks.
One of the officials said that the coming aid package will be worth between $240 million and $375 million depending on what is included.
The value and contents of the package were still being finalized, the officials said. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Although Britain sent depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine earlier this year, this would be the first U.S. shipment of the ammunition and will likely stir controversy. It follows an earlier decision by the Biden administration to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine, despite concerns over the dangers such weapons pose to civilians.
The use of depleted uranium munitions has been fiercely debated, with opponents like the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons saying there are dangerous health risks from ingesting or inhaling depleted uranium dust, including cancers and birth defects.
A by-product of uranium enrichment, depleted uranium is used for ammunition because its extreme density gives rounds the ability to easily penetrate armor plating and self-ignite in a searing cloud of dust and metal.
While depleted uranium is radioactive, it is considerably less so than naturally occurring uranium, although particles can linger for a considerable time.
The United States used depleted uranium munitions in massive quantities in the 1990 and 2003 Gulf Wars and the NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia in 1999.
The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, says that studies in former Yugoslavia, Kuwait, Iraq and Lebanon "indicated that the existence of depleted uranium residues dispersed in the environment does not pose a radiological hazard to the population of the affected regions."
Still, the radioactive material could add to Ukraine's massive post-war clean-up challenge. Parts of the country are already strewn with unexploded ordnance from cluster bombs and other munitions and hundreds of thousands of anti-personnel mines.
The Wall Street Journal reported in mid-June the U.S. was considering sending depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine.
Recent weapons aid packages for Ukraine have included artillery, air defense missiles and ground vehicles as Ukraine's counteroffensive grinds on. Reuters was unable to determine what else the package contained besides the depleted uranium rounds.
Funding authorization for the aid package comes through the Presidential Drawdown Authority, which authorizes the president to transfer articles and services from U.S. stocks without congressional approval during an emergency. The material will come from U.S. excess inventory.
The security assistance for Ukraine since the full-scale Russian invasion in February 2022 has been more than $43 billion.
(Reporting by Mike Stone in Washington; Additional reporting by Jonathan Landay; Editing by Don Durfee and Rosalba O'Brien)
Exclusive-U.S. to send its first depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine -sources
BAN DEPLETED URANIUM WEAPONS
Fri, September 1, 2023
By Mike Stone
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Biden administration will for the first time send controversial armor-piercing munitions containing depleted uranium to Ukraine, according to a document seen by Reuters and separately confirmed by two U.S. officials.
The rounds, which could help destroy Russian tanks, are part of a new military aid package for Ukraine set to be unveiled in the next week. The munitions can be fired from U.S. Abrams tanks that, according to a person familiar with the matter, are expected be delivered to Ukraine in the coming weeks.
One of the officials said that the coming aid package will be worth between $240 million and $375 million depending on what is included.
The value and contents of the package were still being finalized, the officials said. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Although Britain sent depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine earlier this year, this would be the first U.S. shipment of the ammunition and will likely stir controversy. It follows an earlier decision by the Biden administration to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine, despite concerns over the dangers such weapons pose to civilians.
The use of depleted uranium munitions has been fiercely debated, with opponents like the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons saying there are dangerous health risks from ingesting or inhaling depleted uranium dust, including cancers and birth defects.
A by-product of uranium enrichment, depleted uranium is used for ammunition because its extreme density gives rounds the ability to easily penetrate armor plating and self-ignite in a searing cloud of dust and metal.
While depleted uranium is radioactive, it is considerably less so than naturally occurring uranium, although particles can linger for a considerable time.
The United States used depleted uranium munitions in massive quantities in the 1990 and 2003 Gulf Wars and the NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia in 1999.
The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, says that studies in former Yugoslavia, Kuwait, Iraq and Lebanon "indicated that the existence of depleted uranium residues dispersed in the environment does not pose a radiological hazard to the population of the affected regions."
Still, the radioactive material could add to Ukraine's massive post-war clean-up challenge. Parts of the country are already strewn with unexploded ordnance from cluster bombs and other munitions and hundreds of thousands of anti-personnel mines.
The Wall Street Journal reported in mid-June the U.S. was considering sending depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine.
Recent weapons aid packages for Ukraine have included artillery, air defense missiles and ground vehicles as Ukraine's counteroffensive grinds on. Reuters was unable to determine what else the package contained besides the depleted uranium rounds.
Funding authorization for the aid package comes through the Presidential Drawdown Authority, which authorizes the president to transfer articles and services from U.S. stocks without congressional approval during an emergency. The material will come from U.S. excess inventory.
The security assistance for Ukraine since the full-scale Russian invasion in February 2022 has been more than $43 billion.
(Reporting by Mike Stone in Washington; Additional reporting by Jonathan Landay; Editing by Don Durfee and Rosalba O'Brien)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)