LGBTQ dating ban at BYU probed in federal investigation




 Lorenzo Larios, left, and Danny Niemann chant "gay rights" as they join a student protest outside the student center at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah on March 4, 2020. The U.S. Department of Education has opened a civil-rights investigation into how LGBTQ students are disciplined at Brigham Young University, a private religious school. The complaint under investigation came after the school said it would still enforce a ban on same-sex dating even after that section was removed from the written version of the school's honor code, the Salt Lake Tribune reported. 

(Francisco Kjolseth/The Salt Lake Tribune via AP, File)More


Thu, January 20, 2022, 

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The U.S. Department of Education has opened a civil-rights investigation into how LGBTQ students are disciplined at Brigham Young University, a private religious school.

The complaint under investigation came after the school said it would still enforce a ban on same-sex dating even after that section was removed from the written version of the school's honor code, the Salt Lake Tribune reported. Students can be punished for holding hands or kissing someone of the same sex, harsher discipline than that faced by heterosexual couples at the school operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

BYU removed its written ban on “homosexual behavior,” in early 2020, prompting students to publicly come out as members of the LGBTQ community. But the school clarified a few weeks later that same-sex dating is still prohibited, even if it's no longer expressly written in the honor code. It also bans things such as alcohol consumption, beards and piercings.

Students protested the apparent reversal, saying they felt tricked into coming out. The federal investigation from the department's Office for Civil Rights started late last year under Title IX, the law that protects against discrimination on the basis of sex in schools.

A university spokeswoman acknowledged the investigation but said in a statement that BYU is within its rights to enforce the church’s policies against same-sex relationships and does not anticipate any further action.

“BYU is exempt from application of Title IX rules that conflict with the religious tenets of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” Carri Jenkins said in a statement.

The church has softened its approach in recent years but maintains doctrinal opposition to same-sex marriage and sex outside of marriage.

A Department of Education spokesperson confirmed an investigation was opened in October, but declined to comment further. As a private religious school, BYU does have religious exemptions from Title IX related to sexuality and gender expression.

Federal scrutiny like this is rare at church-owned schools, and typically happens only in places where there are believed to be potential systemic or serious issues, said Michael Austin, a BYU graduate and vice president at the University of Evansville, a private Methodist school in Indiana.


 A protester joins several hundred students gathered near The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints church headquarters on March 6, 2020, in Salt Lake City, to show their displeasure with a letter that week that clarified that "same-sex romantic behavior" is not allowed on campus at BYU. The U.S. Department of Education has opened a civil-rights investigation into how LGBTQ students are disciplined at Brigham Young University, a private religious school. The complaint under investigation came after the school said it would still enforce a ban on same-sex dating even after that section was removed from the written version of the school's honor code, the Salt Lake Tribune reported. (AP Photo/Rick Bowmer, File)

“It’s really significant that investigators are stepping in now,” he told the newspaper. The new investigation appears to be about whether those exemptions allow faith-based discipline for LGBTQ students even if the behavior is not directly related to education or expressly prohibited in its written honor code.

The school’s president argued those exemptions do apply, and everyone who attends or works at BYU agrees to follow the honor code and “‘voluntarily commit to conduct their lives in accordance with the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ,’” according to a letter Kevin Worthen wrote to the Department of Education in November 2021.

In a response obtained by the Tribune, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights affirmed the school does have some religious exemptions but the department had to investigate whether the complaint it received falls under those exemptions.

LGBTQ rights have been a major issue in recent years at the school located in Provo, Utah. A lawsuit filed by several students last year alleges discrimination, with one recent graduate who is a lesbian alleging she lost her job at the school because she didn’t look “feminine enough” to her boss.

The institution has also banned protests near its large letter “Y” posted on a mountainside after protesters lit the letter with rainbow colors. Last fall, a top-ranking church leader publicly criticized faculty members and students who challenge the faith’s teachings on same-sex marriage.

Conflicts between nursing home residents are often chalked up to dementia – the real problem is inadequate care and neglect

Eilon Caspi, Assistant Research Professor of Health, Intervention, and Policy, University of Connecticut

Fri, January 21, 2022

Conflicts between residents with dementia occur often in long-term care settings. CasarsaGuru/E+ via Getty Images

Frank Piccolo was a beloved high school chemistry teacher in Ontario, Canada, until his retirement in 1998. “His trademark was to greet all of his students at the door at the start of class to make sure everyone felt welcomed there,” wrote a former student. “He had extensive knowledge of his subject matter, passion for his craft, and empathy for his students.”

But after Frank’s retirement, he developed dementia. When his condition declined, his family moved him to a Toronto nursing home. One evening in 2012, another resident – a woman with dementia – entered Frank’s bedroom. She hit Frank repeatedly in the head and face with a wooden activity board. Staff found Frank slumped over in his wheelchair, drenched in blood. He died three months later.

The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care investigated. It found that the woman had a history of pushing, hitting and throwing objects at staff and other residents. But the nursing home didn’t address the woman’s behavioral expressions for weeks before the attack on Piccolo, the agency determined. “There were no interventions implemented, no strategies developed,” the report stated.

Frank Piccolo and his wife, Theresa, traveling together in Italy in 2001. 

Theresa Piccolo, CC BY-NC-ND

As a gerontologist and dementia behavior specialist, I’ve written a book on preventing these incidents. I also co-directed, with dementia care expert Judy Berry, a documentary on the phenomenon called “Fighting for Dignity.” The film sheds light on the emotional trauma experienced by family members of residents harmed during these episodes in U.S. long-term care homes.
Reporting and stigmatizing

Resident-to-resident incidents are defined by researchers as “negative, aggressive and intrusive verbal, physical, material and sexual interactions between residents” that can cause “psychological distress and physical harm in the recipient.”

These incidents are prevalent in U.S. nursing homes. But they are largely overlooked by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing care in approximately 15,000 nursing homes across the country. Consequently, such incidents remain untracked, understudied and largely unaddressed.

An elderly man with severe injuries, including cut marks and bruises, across his face and forehead.

These interactions don’t just result in injuries and deaths among residents. They also leave behind devastated families who then must fight for answers and accountability from nursing homes.

Making matters worse, government reports, research studies and media coverage commonly describe these episodes with words that stigmatize people with dementia. Researchers, public officials and journalists tend to label the incidents as “abuse,” “violence” and “aggression.” They call a resident involved in an incident a “perpetrator” or an “aggressor.” News outlets described the attack on Piccolo by the woman with dementia as “aggressive” or “violent.” And when reporting on the phenomenon in Canada, the Toronto Star called it “abuse.”

Getting to the root of the real problem

Most incidents, however, do not constitute abuse. A growing body of evidence suggests the true cause of these injuries and deaths is inadequate care and neglect on the part of care homes. Specifically, there is a lack of the specialized care that people with dementia require.

Two of every three residents involved in these incidents have dementia. One study found that the rate of these episodes was nearly three times higher in dementia care homes than in other long-term care homes. A recent study also found an association between residency in a dementia care home and higher rates of injurious or fatal interactions between residents.

But for these residents, the conflicts occur mostly when their emotional, medical and other needs are not met. When they reach a breaking point in frustration related to the unmet need, they may push or hit another resident. My research in the U.S. and Canada has shown that “push-fall” episodes constitute nearly half of fatal incidents.

Another U.S. study found that as residents’ cognitive functioning declined, they faced a greater likelihood of injury in these incidents. Those with advanced dementia were more susceptible to inadvertently “getting in harm’s way,” by saying or doing things that trigger angry reactions in other residents.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has stated that what it calls “aggression” between residents is not abuse. Instead, the CDC noted that these episodes may result when care homes fail to prevent them by taking adequate action. And a study on fatal incidents in U.S. nursing homes has shown that many residents were “deemed to lack cognitive capacity to be held accountable for their actions.”

How incidents often occur

In one study, researchers examined situational triggers among residents with cognitive impairments. The strongest triggers involved personal space and possessions. Examples include taking or touching a resident’s belongings or food, or unwanted entries into their bedroom or bathroom. The most prevalent triggering event was someone being too close to a resident’s body.

That study also found that crowded spaces and interpersonal stressors, such as two residents claiming the same dining room seat, could lead to these episodes. My own work and a different Canadian study came to similar conclusions.

Other research shows that when residents are bored or lack meaningful activity, they become involved in harmful interactions. Evenings and weekends can be particularly dangerous, with fewer organized activities and fewer staff members and managers present. Conflicts between roommates are also common and harmful.

Residents with dementia who are meaningfully engaged in activities are less likely to become involved in harmful incidents with other residents. Morsa Images/DigitalVision via Getty Images

A growing body of research suggests that most incidents between residents are preventable. A major risk factor, for example, is lack of adequate supervision, which often occurs when staff are assigned to caring for too many residents with dementia. One U.S. study found that higher caseloads among nurses’ aides were associated with higher incident rates.

And with poor staffing levels in up to half of U.S. nursing homes, staff members do not witness many incidents. In fact, one study found that staff members missed the majority of unwanted bedroom entries by residents with severe dementia.
Residents with dementia are not to blame

In most of these situations, the person with dementia does not intend to injure or kill another resident. Individuals with dementia live with a serious cognitive disability. And they often must do it while being forced to share small living spaces with many other residents.

Their behavioral expressions are often attempts to cope with frustrating and frightening situations in their social and physical environments. They are typically the result of unmet human needs paired with cognitive processing limitations.

Understanding the role of dementia is important. But seeing a resident’s brain disease as the main cause of incidents is inaccurate and unhelpful. That view ignores external factors that can lead to these incidents but are outside of the residents’ control.

Frank’s wife, Theresa, didn’t blame the woman who injured her husband or the staff. She blamed the for-profit company operating the nursing home. Despite its revenue of $2 billion in the year before the incident, it failed in its “duty to protect” Piccolo. “They did not keep my husband safe as they are required to do,” she said.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Eilon Caspi, University of Connecticut.

Read more:

Why the holidays are a prime time for elder abuse, and what you can do to thwart it

Webcams in nursing home rooms may deter elder abuse – but are they ethical?

I am a founding member and board member of Elder Voice Family Advocates in Minnesota.

I worked in reproductive healthcare, and ‘abortion’ is not a dirty word | Opinion



Monica Skoko Rodriguez
Thu, January 20, 2022

A dear friend called me out of the blue a few years ago. As a born and bred millennial, I know that a phone call without advance warning means something serious. On this phone call, she told me she was pregnant and asked me if I thought she should have an abortion.

At the time, I was working as a nurse for Planned Parenthood of South, East and North Florida (PPSENFL) helping to provide dignified abortion access to patients. I started blabbing about the safety of abortions. I got on my soapbox about how the movies get it all wrong — the majority of patients are incredibly confident in their decisions and that most abortions are either induced at home after consultation with a physician or take just a few minutes in a simple procedure.

I mentioned the hundreds of abortions I had assisted on and that not one had required care that wasn’t easily managed in clinic. I even threw in the trite statement that pregnancy is far riskier than abortion. I rambled that abortion will not affect fertility in the future nor the health of future pregnancies, nor will it increase risks of getting cancer — all these being frequent enough questions I had gotten from patients.

My friend stopped me during this dissertation and asked again, directly, if she should have an abortion. I answered with a question. “Do you want a child right now?”

Her “no” came swiftly and resolutely but her voice wavered with a follow up.

“But is it bad for me to have an abortion?”

This question shattered me. The existence of her question did not mean that she was unsure of what she wanted for herself, her future and her health, but that she was unsure that the world we live in would allow her to want it.
Lawmakers chipping away

Jan. 22, 2022, marks the 49th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision that ruled a pregnant person has the liberty to decide to have an abortion without excessive restriction, and yet here we are half a century later fighting about what that means. When I began working in reproductive health, I imagined a United States where the protections guaranteed by this decision were the floor, not a ceiling. I thought of myself working toward making reproductive healthcare more affordable and accessible and less stigmatized. This year, conservative lawmakers are resolved to chip away at the rights of patients to have autonomy over their bodies and their healthcare until the entire justice system caves in around us.

At PPSENFL, abortion nurses worked intake, procedure room or recovery room. We all rotated but recovery was my favorite by far because most patients would come out of the procedure room bathed in a glow of relief. Relief from the physical representation of a traumatic event. Relief that they can prioritize the children they currently have and attend school plays or pay for ballet lessons instead of taking on another job. In many cases, it meant they would still continue to struggle to make ends meet without figuring out how to feed one more mouth. I would see relief that they drove hours or flew to Miami and were able to access care.

Many times though, the relief had no tear-inducing story of difficult choices. The story was simply that a person wanted an abortion and got one because that is their right.
No caveats needed

We must roar as loudly as we can to deafen the stigma anti-abortion zealots have concocted and we need to shout as often as we can that abortion is healthcare and should be made unrestrictedly and equitably available, and fully funded.

“Abortion” is not a dirty word. Abortion does not need to be followed by caveats, explanations or shame. Everyone knows and loves someone who has had an abortion. From an aunt of mine who was secretly bused into the city in the 60’s and met in an alley by a stranger, to my friend who had projected society’s unfounded puritanism onto her bodily autonomy — may we continue to love them and continue to fight against those who refuse to respect or acknowledge the privilege and right of their decisions.

Monica Skoko Rodriguez is a former Planned Parenthood nurse and holds a master’s degree in public health from Johns Hopkins University. She is currently pursuing her doctorate in nursing practice from Duke University. She is the executive director of the Miami-Dade County Commission for Women and a board member of Ruth’s List Miami.

Cannabis CBD Might Be Highly Effective at Preventing COVID


Neel V. Patel
Fri, January 21, 2022

Unsplash

From the outset of the pandemic, the prospect that weed might be used to fight COVID-19 was tantalizing. After all, many people across the planet were getting high to pass the time during lockdown, and there is a long history of governments shunning the idea that cannabis might have health benefits, research be damned.

Still, the FDA and other health authorities were quick to say as far back as April 2020 there was no science to back up claims that weed was going to be useful in warding off the deadly disease.

That may have been premature. New, peer-reviewed research published Thursday in Science Advances suggests the popular non-psychoactive compound in cannabis known as cannabidiol, or CBD, can help prevent the novel coronavirus from replicating in human cells, reducing the chances of a full-blown infection. Another arm of the study also found that real-world patients who were prescribed CBD experienced lower rates of COVID-19.

Weed and Seven Benadryl: The Wild Lengths COVID Docs Are Taking to Get Sleep

“We just wanted to know if CBD would affect the immune system,” Marsha Rosner, a cancer biologist and expert in cell stress at the University of Chicago and a senior author of the new study, said in a statement. “No one in their right mind would have ever thought that it blocked viral replication, but that’s what it did.”

Rosner and her colleagues don’t yet recommend consuming CBD products—nor do they believe CBD could be a substitute for vaccination (still by far the best way to protect yourself). But the authors do advocate launching clinical trials soon to more rigorously probe whether it could be used as an additional therapeutic to prevent or slow down breakthrough COVID, an especially urgent task in light of the Omicron variant’s seemingly relentless spread.

In the first part of the study, authors exposed human lung cells in the lab to CBD for a couple hours before exposing the same cells to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). They found that while the virus was still able to enter the cells, CBD inhibited the virus from hijacking the human cell machinery to replicate its own viral genome—an essential step for an infection to spread. The authors believe CBD boosts the production of an antiviral cell protein and other host cell responses that basically put a lockdown on gene replication.

The effects were the same in tests of two other types of human cells, for three different SARS-CoV-2 variants altogether (unfortunately big variants like Omicron and Delta were not tested). The team also treated live mice with CBD for a week before exposing them to COVID-19, and witnessed the same suppression of infection.

The second part of the study was a survey of 1,212 human patients who’ve been prescribed an oral CBD solution for the treatment of epilepsy, and showed only 6.2 percent had returned positive tests for COVID-19, compared to 8.9 percent of similar patients not taking CBD. Among patients who reported taking CBD the day they went in for a COVID-19 test, only 4.9 tested positive, compared to 9 percent in the control group.

Could There Be a Non-Vaccine COVID Cure?

But don’t go making plans to stock up on weed gummies or other cannabis products to protect yourself from COVID. Rosner specifically emphasized that “the commercially available CBD powder we looked at, which was off the shelf and something you could order online, was sometimes surprisingly of high purity but also of inconsistent quality.”

Still, it’s becoming less and less tenable to oppose deeper study of the relationship between cannabis and COVID. The new findings come just a week after Canadian researchers published their own study finding that other cannabis compounds exhibited anti-COVID effects as well.

“We are very eager to see some clinical trials on this subject get off the ground,” Rosner said. “Especially as we are seeing that the pandemic is still nowhere near the end, determining whether this generally safe, well-tolerated, and non-psychoactive cannabinoid might have antiviral effects against COVID-19 is of critical importance.”

Buffett Eyes Largest Wind Power Project Ever In U.S.


Thu, January 20, 2022

Warren Buffett’s investment firm Berkshire Hathaway has proposed a plan for a renewable energy project comprising wind and solar power that would cost $3.9 billion to build.

The Wind Prime project, according to BloombergNEF analyst Ethan Zindler, stands to potentially be the single largest wind project ever built in the United States. However, Zindler told Bloomberg, there have been such massive projects before that had never gotten to the finish line, so “there’s a long way to go for this project.”

The Wind PRIME project will include over 5 GW of wind power and some 50 MW of solar power, to be built in Iowa, Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary MidAmerican Energy said in a statement.

The capacity of the project would be enough to power some 600,000 households, according to Bloomberg.

“Iowa is a renewable energy leader, thanks in large part to MidAmerican Energy’s proven track record of clean energy commitments and investments that are a true competitive advantage for our state,” said Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds.

“MidAmerican’s Wind PRIME is a commitment and investment on a whole new level, cementing Iowa’s clean energy leadership for many years to come.”

MidAmerican Energy said in its statement that since 2014 it had invested some $14 billion in Iowa renewable energy projects. Now, besides the $4-billion wind-and-solar combo, the company also plans to invest in feasibility studies on other low-carbon energy technology, including carbon capture, energy storage, and modular nuclear reactors.

Wind power is already a significant energy source in Iowa, contributing over 40 percent of the state’s total energy output in 2019. As of the same year, Iowa’s nameplate wind power capacity stood at close to 10 GW.

Wind power in Iowa is also already a big business for Berkshire Hathaway—and Buffett himself noted how wind power had made the electricity bills of the company’s customers in Iowa much lower than those for electricity supplied by competitors.

“The extraordinary differential between our rates and theirs is largely the result of our huge accomplishments in converting wind into electricity,” Buffett said back in 2020, as quoted by Forbes.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com

"It's the most horrifying thing that can happen to you as a musher": Truck strike kills and injures sled dogs in Willow


Zachariah Hughes, Anchorage Daily News, Alaska
Fri, January 21, 2022, 7:47 AM·4 min read

Jan. 21—UPDATE: On Friday morning, Foucher wrote on Facebook that her dog Felicity had returned home.

Jaye Foucher doesn't know the name of the man whose truck ran through her dog-team, severing the gangline and dragging half the animals four or five truck-lengths up the Parks Highway before coming to a stop.

The collision was a series of accidents, leaving one dog dead, several injured, another loose, and Foucher distraught, reconciling with the lengthy and uncertain road to recovery ahead.

"I'm definitely running on fumes. I haven't really been able to eat. I'm shattered," Foucher said on Thursday. "I'm just kind of alternating between numb and devastated. It's the most horrifying thing that can happen to you as a musher."

She was on a training run early Wednesday afternoon in Willow, about a mile from where she and her team have been staying this winter, mushing the same trails they've been using since the fall. A snowmachine trail beside the highway was buried under thick snow sloughed off by recent road plowing that made it hard for her dogs to run.

"They thought it was a little too deep and decided the road looked much more appealing to them," Foucher said.

She called them back, trying to get them off the highway. A pickup truck hauling a flat snowmachine trailer was heading toward them. Foucher frantically waved her arms at the driver to get him to stop or swerve.

"I don't know how he didn't see us," she said. "He just kept barreling toward the team full blast."

She estimates the vehicle was moving at 50 miles per hour when it tore through her line of dogs.

In the aftermath, Foucher said the older couple in the truck helped her regain control of her animals, as did another driver and other mushers who happened upon the accident. One dog was killed instantly. Others were badly injured and Foucher was desperate to get them to the nearest emergency veterinarian, an hour away, as fast as she could.

"I was also pretty hysterical," she said.

In the commotion, she did not get the name or information of the driver, assuming he would stick around until the Alaska State Troopers arrived at the scene. She left to bring her dogs to the animal clinic.

"We have no idea who the driver of the truck was. I really wish they would come forward," Foucher said.

An online report from the Department of Public Safety said the driver stayed to help after the accident. Alaska State Troopers had not released the name of the driver as of Thursday evening, and spokesman Austin McDaniel said no citation or charges had been filed. It wasn't clear from his response whether troopers spoke with the vehicle owner.

Foucher was running the 11 dogs she'd planned on mushing in the upcoming Willow 300 race next week. Seven were released from the veterinary clinic on Wednesday evening, some totally unharmed and three or four with minor injuries. Two more underwent surgery overnight and remain in serious condition, including one of her main leaders, who's tail had to be amputated and faces an uncertain mushing future. Another leader, Noddy, died at the scene. As of Thursday afternoon, a 35-pound cream-colored dog named Felicity is still loose.

"(I'm) just praying she finds her way to someone's kennel in Willow," Foucher said.

At her dog yard on Thursday, there was a pile of straw and food bowl beside the front door in case Felicity came back. Foucher worked hard to control raw feelings recounting Wednesday's tragedy, but broke into tears as pointed out an empty dog house belonging to Noddy.

She is still processing what the accident means for a race season she'd long planned out. A former rock musician who lives in New Hampshire, Foucher relocated her team to Alaska to train for a rookie run at this year's Iditarod.

"I'm just taking it a day at a time," she said.

Donations have poured into the clinic where her dogs are being treated to cover their care. A friend set up a Go Fund Me to help pay for the future costs she'll incur as her dogs are further rehabilitated. Someone in her native New Hampshire even sent a DoorDash delivery of coffee and donuts to the veterinary techs taking care of her team.

"I'm floored and really touched," Foucher said.

Daily News photographer Emily Mesner contributed to this story from the Mat-Su.

Steelmaker CEO Warns North America Market a ‘Falling Knife’




Joe Deaux
Thu, January 20, 2022, 

(Bloomberg) -- The North American steel market is in for some rough months ahead, with excess supplies, rising inventories and shrinking demand, according to the head of Stelco Holdings Inc. Steelmaker shares fell.

“It’s a falling knife,” Stelco Chief Executive Officer Alan Kestenbaum said Thursday in an interview. “The question is when does it go the other way and where are we in the economic cycle? I think it turns at some point, but I don’t know where it bottoms out.”

The grim view for 2022 follows a stellar year for the industry, with the largest U.S. steelmakers expected to post record full-year earnings after domestic steel prices surged as much as 94% to an all-time high of nearly $2,000 a short ton. Kestenbaum was the first steel CEO to publicly sound the alarm two weeks ago when he warned investors that his company’s steel shipments are taking a hit as the rapid spread of omicron accelerates absenteeism internally and even more among customers’ work crews.

Shares of Stelco fell alongside the major U.S. steelmakers following Kestenbaum’s comments. The Canadian producer fell 6.3% in Toronto, while Nucor Corp., U.S. Steel Corp., Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. and Steel Dynamics Inc. erased gains for the day. An index of 14 steel companies dropped 3.5% and is on pace for the biggest weekly decline since June.

The situation is especially negative delivering into the automotive and construction sectors, with those industries reporting inventories are rising and customer demand is drying up, the head of the Hamilton, Ontario-based steelmaker said.

“When I spoke two weeks ago, there was a lack of visibility. Now we have vastly more and it’s pretty clear what’s happening: significant oversupply and significant shrinkage of demand right now and you’re seeing it in the inventory numbers,” he said

Steel shipments in the U.S. and Canada have plunged 17% since August and inventories have climbed 15% in the same period, according to data from the Metals Service Center Institute. Benchmark steel prices are down more than 26% since touching an all-time high at the end of August. And analysts at Bloomberg Intelligence said inflationary pressures and demand slowdown could make it harder for steel sector stocks to outperform in 2022.

“I don’t think there will be a choice but for people to acknowledge in the next couple weeks we’re in a difficult environment,” Kestenbaum said.

A well-supplied North American steel market sits in stark contrast to other industrial metals that are currently surging in price. Investors are worried supplies of aluminum, nickel and copper are dwindling across the globe, leaving consumers without material necessary to make enough of everything from beer cans to washing machines and automobiles. The price of steel, currently about $1,440 a ton, is still well above recent historical levels of about $840 a ton.

(Updates with closing share prices in fourth paragraph and base metals performance in final paragraph)

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

Worker was scheduled as ‘Black boy,’ suit says. Now Louisiana meat company must pay up



Hayley Fowler
Thu, January 20, 2022, 3:29 PM·3 min read

A specialty meat supplier in southern Louisiana will pay a former employee $67,500 to settle allegations of pervasive racial discrimination at its two facilities outside Lafayette, federal officials said.

Don’s Specialty Meats, a purveyor of Cajun favorites like Boudin and Cracklin, is accused of allowing its general manager to routinely use derogatory language and racial slurs against a Black worker — one of two out of 79 employees, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said in federal court filings.

The EEOC is the federal agency tasked with enforcing anti-discrimination laws in the workplace and filed the lawsuit on the former employee’s behalf.

“Harassment based on race and the use of racial slurs is intolerable, and an employer must act to assure that harassment of this kind is prevented and, if it happens, is vigorously addressed,” EEOC trial attorney Peter Theis said in a news release announcing the settlement.

Lawyers and a representative from Don’s Specialty Meats did not immediately respond to McClatchy News’ request for comment on Thursday, Jan. 20.

Under the terms of the agreement, Don’s Specialty Meats has agreed to pay the employee $50,000 in damages and $17,500 in back pay, according to court documents. The company is also barred from discussing the litigation if asked for a job reference regarding the former worker and must wipe it from his personnel file.

Employees will additionally undergo training on anti-discrimination laws, and the company will revise its written anti-discrimination policies and provide compliance reports to the EEOC.

The federal agency first reached out to Don’s Specialty Meats in August after the former employee filed a charge of discrimination and the EEOC determined there was reasonable cause to believe the company had discriminated against him.

But attempts to resolve the dispute outside of court failed, the EEOC said, and a federal complaint was filed in the Western District of Louisiana on Sept. 24.

According to the lawsuit, Don’s Specialty Meats hired the now-former employee in 2018. He worked first at its facility in Scott, Louisiana, and later at its original location in nearby Carencro. Don’s was started in 1993 and opened a second location in 2005, according to its Facebook page. The meat supplier is famous for its Boudin, a mixture of rice, ground pork and seasonings stuffed into sausage casing.

The employee, whom the EEOC described as African American, was one of just two Black workers employed by Don’s Specialty Meats at each facility during his tenure.

The general manager repeatedly referred to him as “Black boy,” “the Black boy” or “little Black guy,” the EEOC said, and he was listed on the work schedule as “Black boy” while his non-Black colleagues were identified by name.

Racial slurs were also common at Don’s Specialty Meats, according to the lawsuit. The general manager was accused of routinely using the n-word and referring to another Black employee’s baby as such. When Don’s was looking for new hires, the employee was told applicants “just can’t be Black,” the EEOC said, and if trash needed to be picked up on the roadside, it was always “the Black boy” who was assigned to do it.

Things came to a head in early July 2020, when a supervisor repeatedly called the employee a racial slur and other insulting names in front of his coworkers, the complaint states.

The employee complained to management and was subsequently dismissed for the day, the EEOC said. When he returned to work, he was reportedly told the supervisor would not be punished. According to the lawsuit, the general manager then told the employee he loved him and referred to him by the same derogatory name the supervisor had used.

He quit the following day, the EEOC said, and the only discipline his supervisor ever faced was being told she couldn’t wear her Don’s Specialty Meats T-shirt for a day.

Ukraine got a signed commitment in 1994 to ensure its security – but can the US and allies stop Putin's aggression now?

Lee Feinstein, Founding Dean and Professor of International Studies, Hamilton Lugar School, Indiana University 

 Mariana Budjeryn, Research Associate, Harvard Kennedy School

Fri, January 21, 2022,

A Ukrainian soldier uses a periscope to view the positions of Russian-led forces on Dec. 12, 2021, in Zolote, Ukraine. Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images

Russia’s illegal annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in 2014 was the first change of internationally recognized borders in Europe through military force since World War II.

Russia proceeded to instigate and fuel a war in eastern Ukraine that has claimed some 14,000 lives so far. Last year, Russia began massing a force of more than 100,000 troops along Ukraine’s eastern and northern border and in the occupied Crimea, and taking other provocative actions. U.S. President Joe Biden said on Jan. 19, 2022, about Putin: “Do I think he’ll test the West, test the United States and NATO, as significantly as he can? Yes, I think he will.”

Ukraine as an independent state was born from the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. Its independence came with a complicated Cold War inheritance: the world’s third-largest stockpile of nuclear weapons. Ukraine was one of the three non-Russian former Soviet states, including Belarus and Kazakhstan, that emerged from the Soviet collapse with nuclear weapons on its territory.

The U.S., in a burst of diplomatic energy and at a time of unmatched global influence, worked to prevent the unprecedented collapse of a nuclear superpower from leading to history’s largest proliferation of nuclear weapons.

This diplomatic activity manifested in security assurances for Ukraine embedded in what has become known as the Budapest Memorandum. With the entrance of Ukraine into the international order as a non-nuclear state, Russia, the U.S. and the U.K. pledged to “respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.” The memo reaffirmed their obligation to “refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine.” The signatories also reaffirmed their commitment to “seek immediate” UN Security Council action “to provide assistance to Ukraine … if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression.” These assurances upheld obligations contained in the U.N. charter and the 1975 Helsinki Final Act.

Ukraine, in turn, gave up the nuclear weapons within its borders, sending them to Russia for dismantling.

In light of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its current threat to Ukrainian sovereignty, it’s fair to ask: What is the significance now of the Budapest Memorandum?

A soldier wearing a face mask and large helmet and carrying a rifle.

Ukrainian regrets

The memorandum, signed in 1994, is not legally binding.

Nonetheless, it embeds and reaffirms the solemn assurances that are the hallmark of the international system. These include respect for state sovereignty, the inviolability of international borders and abstention from the threat or use of force.

Ukraine’s decision to give up nuclear weapons signaled its desire to be seen as a member in good standing of the international community, rather than an outlier.

The decision was not just symbolic. While Ukraine did not inherit a fully fledged nuclear capacity – Russia still held important parts of the nuclear infrastructure – Ukraine had the necessary technological and industrial ability to close the gaps.

Many in Ukraine feel that the country’s 1994 decision to give up its nuclear arms was a mistake.

Popular support for nuclear rearmament rose to a historic high of nearly 50% in the wake of Russia’s invasion in 2014. Since then, that view has been supported by some Ukrainian public figures.

Vladimir Putin in a winter coat with a fur collar, speaking into a microphone at a rally and looking excited and happy.

‘No changing of borders by use of force’

Russia has blatantly violated the Budapest Memorandum. And the initial response to the annexation of Crimea by the other signatories, the U.S. and U.K., was hesitant and restrained.

The U.S. has committed more than US$2.5 billion in military assistance since 2014 to Ukraine, including lethal defensive arms. Legislation pending in Congress would increase military aid. The Biden administration has also threatened severe economic sanctions in the event of Russian aggression, backed by sustained efforts to build support among allies. The adminstration’s resolute approach is consistent with the security assurances of the Budapest Memorandum.

We are both foreign policy scholars; one of us is a former U.S. ambassador to Poland. The strong defense of the fundamental principle of the international system – no changing of borders by use of force – has consequence for all of Europe, for U.S.-Russia relations and for other potential flash points, including China and Taiwan.

Whether the strong actions – such as the promise of military support for Ukraine and the threat of sanctions on Russia, backed by diplomacy by the United States and its allies – will be enough to deter Russia is uncertain and, many say, unlikely.

The size and scope of Russian military buildup are deeply troubling: Shifting 100,000 troops across Russia’s vast territory is a costly operation. The Kremlin is unlikely to pull back that kind of force without any diplomatic or military wins, such as closing the door to Ukraine’s future membership in NATO, which the United States has ruled out.

International law matters, but it does not determine what states do. Strong deterrence, diplomacy and international solidarity can influence Russian decision-making. The U.S. is also actively working with Ukraine, an essential element to a successful diplomatic and deterrence strategy.

Ultimately, however, the de-escalation decision is Russia’s to make. The role of the U.S., its NATO allies, and Ukraine is to make sure the consequences of Russia’s decisions are clear to the Kremlin and that they can be carried out with strong and united Western backing in the event Russia chooses the path of war.


This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Lee Feinstein, Indiana University and Mariana Budjeryn, Harvard Kennedy School.

Read more:

How the Biden administration is making gains in an uphill battle against Russian hackers

5 things to know about why Russia might invade Ukraine – and why the US is involved

Still think voter suppression is a myth? This Republican bill proves otherwise

Elvia Díaz, Arizona Republic
Thu, January 20, 2022

Arizona Rep. Walt Blackman has proposed a bill to scale back 

early voting and ratchet up the ID requirements to vote.

Arizona state Rep. Walt Blackman is busting the Republican narrative that voter suppression is just a myth.

There are a flurry of bills being introduced at the Arizona Legislature that Republicans say deal with “election integrity” but are just tools to make it a lot harder for people to vote.

Don’t believe me? I give you Exhibit A.

Blackman is proposing that early voting occur only by request, and that non-early voting must to take place in a polling place or a center.

Blackman also wants to require a new voter ID card, which would require a passport or citizenship certificate and other documents, to vote. On top of that, anyone voting in person would also need either fingerprints or a “unique security code” issued to the voter.

It's a hurdle to keep people from voting

Don’t tell me this isn’t a blatant hurdle to discourage people, especially minorities, the poor and Native Americans from voting.

The proposed legislation, House Bill 2577, would replace existing voter ID requirements, including driver’s licenses and all forms of tribal IDs.

Arizona already doesn’t issue driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants, which means none of these people could vote illegally, as some Republicans have falsely claimed.

But even if we were to give them the benefit of the doubt and agree to extra layers of security, requiring fingerprints and a passport or naturalization papers is just over the top and nothing more than a hurdle to voting.

Why is this voter suppression if the requirements apply to everyone? Because so many people of color don’t have equal access to these types of ID.

Unfortunately, too many minorities still need multiple jobs to make ends meet and are more likely to rely on public transportation to go anywhere. They don’t have money to spare for a passport or may not even know how to navigate the system to get one.

Rural voters and Native Americans are particularly vulnerable to these types of hurdles. Arizona has 22 tribes, many in remote areas where residents already have to travel long distances just to vote.

And now, Blackman is proposing to invalidate their tribal ID card for the purpose of voting. You don’t call that voter suppression?

This isn't about 'election integrity'

Blackman’s legislation has nothing to do with “election integrity” and everything to do with keeping certain segments of the population from voting.

Republicans in Arizona and across the nation will keep invoking Trump’s “Big Lie” that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him to push through restrictive election laws.

They’re free to do so after the U.S. Senate failed this week to approve sweeping federal legislation that would have overridden state voter suppression bills.

Blame Democratic Sens. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin of West Virginia for that. They joined the 50 Senate Republicans in opposing changing the filibuster to approve the federal voting legislation.

Democrats like Arizona House Minority Leader Reginald Bolding are vowing to keep fighting, but the near future is bleak.

“History will remember those who chose to silence the voice of voters for their own political gains,” Bolding, who also is running for secretary of state, said in a statement about the U.S. Senate’s failed attempt to pass voting legislation.

“But like those before us, we cannot give up. We cannot sit down. We cannot tolerate the efforts by the Right to take away our most sacred American right, our freedom to vote.”

That sounds great. Meanwhile, though, Republicans like Blackman are free to try anything to discourage people from casting a ballot – the cornerstone of any democracy.