The Fantasy of Brexit Britain Is Over
The Boris Johnson era is over. But the turmoil has only just begun.
For the third time in under a decade, a crisis at the top of the Conservative Party has ousted a sitting prime minister. Whereas his predecessors had been brought down by Brexit, Mr. Johnson’s reign was broken by a series of crises. Some, such as chronic labor shortages and a surging cost of living, were material. Others, notably Mr. Johnson’s rule breaking through the pandemic, were ethical. By the end, the problem was fundamentally electoral: A string of defeats and miserable polling convinced Conservative lawmakers that Mr. Johnson’s electoral pulling power was at an end.
Yet the two candidates vying to replace him are unlikely to offer anything better. Both served in Mr. Johnson’s cabinet — Rishi Sunak as chancellor of the Exchequer and Liz Truss as foreign secretary — and are implicated, directly or by association, in the scandals that felled him. More pressingly, neither displays any idea of how to cope with Britain’s structural problems, offering either a cut in taxes or in spending. For the country, both options are bad. The chaos of recent months isn’t going anywhere.
But Mr. Johnson’s resignation also brings something to a close. For nearly two years after his election in December 2019, the country enjoyed an interlude of relative social peace and political stability. Buoyed by its delivery of Brexit and a successful Covid-19 vaccination rollout, the government enjoyed a substantial lead over a weak and demoralized Labor opposition. What’s more, the country — in the strange, suspended time-space of the pandemic — appeared to coalesce. In this brief interregnum, it appeared that Britain, nourished by nationalism and an interventionist state, was undergoing a revival.
No longer. Economically stagnant, socially fragmented and politically adrift, the country is being cut down to size. The right’s Brexit fantasy — of a revitalized Britain, freed from the shackles of Europe and able once again to confidently assert itself at home and abroad — is finished.
Though now giving way to a familiar nightmare, that fantasy seemed for a while to envelop the country. The strange cultural and emotional feel of high Johnsonism is captured by two of the most watched broadcasts in British history, both of which took place during his tenure. The first was Mr. Johnson’s address to the nation on March 23, 2020, declaring a national lockdown. The second was the Euro 2020 final, in which England stood a realistic chance of winning against Italy, on July 11, 2021. Both broadcasts, watched by tens of millions of people, briefly synthesized a moment of national unity. Both portended the suspension of normality in the name of a national struggle, vaguely linked to folk memories of World War II.
The eerie quiet of lockdown — with its empty streets, visitations from wildlife and ritual clapping for essential workers — was matched by the flag-bedraggled, drunk and delirious mania of crowds roaming empty commercial streets and fervently chanting, “It’s coming home!” These were distinctly nationalist moments, but they were not identical. One nationalism was top down, the other grass roots. One was “British,” establishment nationalism, the other “English,” with more proletarian accents. Yet together they briefly manufactured a sense of nationhood.
It was, of course, hardly a time of national idyll. Tens of thousands of older Britons needlessly died in overrun hospitals because of delays in declaring lockdowns. Food bank use rose to an all-time high, with over 2.5 million people receiving packages. By the end of 2020, nine in 10 low-income families had experienced a serious deterioration in their income, and the proportion of people reporting clinically significant depression and anxiety tripled, to 52 percent from 17 percent. Even so, the precarious project of national unity, supported by enormous public spending to manage the pandemic, briefly worked: The Tories led in the polls, impervious to scandal and discontent.
In September last year, things started to shake loose. Fuel shortages, created by a dearth of truck drivers, began to corrode Mr. Johnson’s support. In December, the first accounts of illegal partying in 10 Downing Street, the prime minister’s official residence, emerged. By February, rising energy prices were squeezing living standards, and food banks were overwhelmed by soaring demand. Hospitals — overstretched and underfunded — struggled with a backlog of around six million patients, and understaffed airports canceled flights. At Westminster, the crisis enveloping the country was transmuted into a growing clamor to remove Mr. Johnson. He clung on for a while, but by midsummer, it was over.
The economy is now heading toward an abysmal period. High energy prices, runaway inflation, struggling exports and rising interest rates are, in the words of the economist Duncan Weldon, a “perfect storm.” In response, Ms. Truss, by far the favorite to win the contest to replace Mr. Johnson, has promised to cut taxes — to be paid for by deferring debt repayments rather than cutting spending. Mr. Sunak, by contrast, would continue in the short term with his current policy of raising taxes while signaling that spending cuts are coming down the line. Neither approach, from the Tory right or the Treasury, would address the underlying causes of the cost-of-living crisis. Lacking ideas, the Conservatives are reverting to type.
That may be fatally complacent. Oppositional currents, contained for a spell by Johnsonism, are gradually resurfacing. Scotland is once again promising to stage an independence referendum, putatively for as soon as next October. In Northern Ireland, the republican Sinn Fein has become the biggest party, weakening the Unionist establishment. And in England, a wave of symbolically significant strikes — at railways, call centers and airports — has broken out, offering hope for workers who’ve seen their living standards fall for over a decade. Government approval is at its lowest in three years, and neither potential leader enthuses the public. Tory Britain is unraveling.
But what even is Britain? The historian David Edgerton argues that the British nation existed only for a few decades after World War II. Until then, British identity was global, pinned to its empire. It became a nation only in the postwar years, when capitalism was organized by the state and citizens were offered “cradle to grave” welfare. Since then, as national industries were sold off and the City of London took center stage, Britain has become merely a hub for multinational corporations, denuded of any wider social or civic resonance. It was the dormant British nation of the postwar era — or at least the nostalgic memory of it — that Brexit was supposed to revive.
The exit of Mr. Johnson, Brexit’s most charmed cheerleader, marks the demise of that fantasy. In its place, unmistakable and unstinting, comes crisis.
Saturday, 6 August, 2022 -
Richard Seymour
The New York Times
Sunday, August 07, 2022
More strike action: Dockers will strike at Britain’s largest container port – reactions
“The company has prioritised delivering multi-million pound dividends rather than paying its workers a decent wage."
by Joe Mellor
2022-08-05 15:11
in News
LONDON ECONOMIC
Workers at the port of Felixstowe are to strike for eight days later this month in a dispute over pay.
Members of Unite will walk out on August 21 after talks at the conciliation service Acas failed to resolve the row.
Unite said more than 1,900 workers at Felixstowe, the country’s biggest container port, will be taking industrial action.
The strike was called after Unite said the Felixstowe Dock and Railway Company failed to improve on its offer of a 7% pay increase, describing it as “significantly below” inflation.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said:“Both Felixstowe docks and its parent company CK Hutchison Holding Ltd are both massively profitable and incredibly wealthy. They are fully able to pay the workforce a fair day’s pay.
Dividends
“The company has prioritised delivering multi-million pound dividends rather than paying its workers a decent wage.
“Unite is entirely focused on enhancing its members’ jobs, pay and conditions and it will be giving the workers at Felixstowe its complete support until this dispute is resolved and a decent pay increase is secured.”
The workers undertake manual roles at the docks including crane drivers, machine operators and stevedores.
Unite national officer Bobby Morton said: “Strike action will cause huge disruption and will generate massive shockwaves throughout the UK’s supply chain, but this dispute is entirely of the company’s own making.
“It has had every opportunity make our members a fair offer but has chosen not to do so.
“Felixstowe needs to stop prevaricating and make a pay offer which meets our members’ expectations.”
Further talks are scheduled to take place at Acas next Monday.
“The company has prioritised delivering multi-million pound dividends rather than paying its workers a decent wage."
by Joe Mellor
2022-08-05 15:11
in News
LONDON ECONOMIC
Workers at the port of Felixstowe are to strike for eight days later this month in a dispute over pay.
Members of Unite will walk out on August 21 after talks at the conciliation service Acas failed to resolve the row.
Unite said more than 1,900 workers at Felixstowe, the country’s biggest container port, will be taking industrial action.
The strike was called after Unite said the Felixstowe Dock and Railway Company failed to improve on its offer of a 7% pay increase, describing it as “significantly below” inflation.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said:“Both Felixstowe docks and its parent company CK Hutchison Holding Ltd are both massively profitable and incredibly wealthy. They are fully able to pay the workforce a fair day’s pay.
Dividends
“The company has prioritised delivering multi-million pound dividends rather than paying its workers a decent wage.
“Unite is entirely focused on enhancing its members’ jobs, pay and conditions and it will be giving the workers at Felixstowe its complete support until this dispute is resolved and a decent pay increase is secured.”
The workers undertake manual roles at the docks including crane drivers, machine operators and stevedores.
Unite national officer Bobby Morton said: “Strike action will cause huge disruption and will generate massive shockwaves throughout the UK’s supply chain, but this dispute is entirely of the company’s own making.
“It has had every opportunity make our members a fair offer but has chosen not to do so.
“Felixstowe needs to stop prevaricating and make a pay offer which meets our members’ expectations.”
Further talks are scheduled to take place at Acas next Monday.
Reactions
UK
Watch:
RMT Union leader; Mick Lynch, ‘dismantles media, Starmer & extreme right wing Govt coming our way’
'Integrity, clarity, honesty. All attributes Mick Lynch displays in abundance. Attributes completely absent in this self-serving, corrupt government."
by Joe Mellor
2022-08-05
in News
LONDON ECONOMIC EYE
Mick Lynch has been holding the government to account for the last few months and he has now been interviewed by Double Down News, where he ‘dismantles the media, Starmer & extreme right wing Govt coming our way.’
Strike
The upcoming August 19 strike is in between stoppages on the 18th and 20th on Network Rail and 14 train operators in the long running row over pay, jobs and conditions.
RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said: “Our members have asked for specific assurances on their concerns on jobs, pensions and working conditions.
“This latest letter from TfL does not address our central demands which is that there should be no job losses, no detrimental changes to pensions and no imposition of new working conditions.
Austerity
“TfL is having £2 billion cut from its budget and they have been asked to find savings.
“The mayor of London must focus his attention on the Tory administration which is cutting the funding to TfL, not take it out on Tube staff who keep the capital moving.
“We are prepared to work with TfL, but our members will not be sacrificial lambs on the altar of austerity.
“Strike action is scheduled to go ahead on the 19th of August, and we remain open to finding a negotiated settlement.”
'Integrity, clarity, honesty. All attributes Mick Lynch displays in abundance. Attributes completely absent in this self-serving, corrupt government."
by Joe Mellor
2022-08-05
in News
LONDON ECONOMIC EYE
Mick Lynch has been holding the government to account for the last few months and he has now been interviewed by Double Down News, where he ‘dismantles the media, Starmer & extreme right wing Govt coming our way.’
Strike
The upcoming August 19 strike is in between stoppages on the 18th and 20th on Network Rail and 14 train operators in the long running row over pay, jobs and conditions.
RMT general secretary Mick Lynch said: “Our members have asked for specific assurances on their concerns on jobs, pensions and working conditions.
“This latest letter from TfL does not address our central demands which is that there should be no job losses, no detrimental changes to pensions and no imposition of new working conditions.
Austerity
“TfL is having £2 billion cut from its budget and they have been asked to find savings.
“The mayor of London must focus his attention on the Tory administration which is cutting the funding to TfL, not take it out on Tube staff who keep the capital moving.
“We are prepared to work with TfL, but our members will not be sacrificial lambs on the altar of austerity.
“Strike action is scheduled to go ahead on the 19th of August, and we remain open to finding a negotiated settlement.”
Watch
Reactions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
\
UK
‘Pay was the tip of the iceberg’—Amazon striker writes
Dave is one of the hundreds of Amazon workers who’ve joined wildcat strikes. He reports on the wave of anger spreading across fulfilment centres
Amazon workers fight back in a series of wildcat strikes (Picture: twitter/@walkout20201)
By 'Dave', Amazon striker
Saturday 06 August 2022
I am one of the workers that walked out on Thursday at BHX4 in Coventry. The pay is only the tip of the iceberg of the issues we face at our fulfilment centre, and discontent has been brewing for a while.
We worked through the entire Covid pandemic, including the lockdowns, with little to no thanks for doing a dangerous job.
All we wanted was the £2 more than they paid us in the first lockdown. We get told that we are breaking records with how fast we work, but we don’t get any thanks.
The day they announced the pay rise, we were told to buy tickets for a summer party for which Amazon had hired an event centre. Of course, they didn’t ask us if that was what we actually wanted.
Managers are constantly watching us for drops in productivity or idle time. If anyone is caught using a phone, even if it’s an emergency or for a medical reason, we are automatically put into investigation meetings.
This is especially frustrating as we see management using their phones and laptops while walking around machinery with no punishment whatsoever.
When we walked out on Thursday, we did so peacefully and with a valid reason. The site manager came into the canteen area with a megaphone and told us we had 30 minutes to come up with the reasoning and send someone to him. We refused to do this as we were standing united.
He returned later, and we told him that the pay was our main issue. We were then told he would “take it away and try to get an answer” and “other sites have the same issue but can’t tell us when we are getting any answer back”.
After that we heard that if we refused to go back to work, we would be clocked out and would not be paid for the time we didn’t work.
On Friday morning about 100 associates walked out and protested outside. All of these associates have been told they will be sacked for this action.
Amazon made over £20 billion in profit in the last year while our bills continue to increase. In the four years I have been at BHX4, my pay has only gone up by £1 in total.
All we want is fair pay for our work, and the sooner Amazon management realises it, the better. Amazon uses the principle of “have backbone, disagree and commit.” Well, Amazon has tried to break our backbone, we disagree with the pay rise and commit to being heard. On Friday the GMB union said Amazon workers’ protests where workers slow down their work to one package an hour were taking place at Tilbury, Dartford, Belvedere, Hemel Hempstead and Chesterfield. This is in addition to walkouts and stoppages at sites including Tilbury, Coventry, Bristol and Rugeley.
Saturday 06 August 2022
SOCIALIST WORKER
I am one of the workers that walked out on Thursday at BHX4 in Coventry. The pay is only the tip of the iceberg of the issues we face at our fulfilment centre, and discontent has been brewing for a while.
We worked through the entire Covid pandemic, including the lockdowns, with little to no thanks for doing a dangerous job.
All we wanted was the £2 more than they paid us in the first lockdown. We get told that we are breaking records with how fast we work, but we don’t get any thanks.
The day they announced the pay rise, we were told to buy tickets for a summer party for which Amazon had hired an event centre. Of course, they didn’t ask us if that was what we actually wanted.
Managers are constantly watching us for drops in productivity or idle time. If anyone is caught using a phone, even if it’s an emergency or for a medical reason, we are automatically put into investigation meetings.
This is especially frustrating as we see management using their phones and laptops while walking around machinery with no punishment whatsoever.
When we walked out on Thursday, we did so peacefully and with a valid reason. The site manager came into the canteen area with a megaphone and told us we had 30 minutes to come up with the reasoning and send someone to him. We refused to do this as we were standing united.
He returned later, and we told him that the pay was our main issue. We were then told he would “take it away and try to get an answer” and “other sites have the same issue but can’t tell us when we are getting any answer back”.
After that we heard that if we refused to go back to work, we would be clocked out and would not be paid for the time we didn’t work.
On Friday morning about 100 associates walked out and protested outside. All of these associates have been told they will be sacked for this action.
Amazon made over £20 billion in profit in the last year while our bills continue to increase. In the four years I have been at BHX4, my pay has only gone up by £1 in total.
All we want is fair pay for our work, and the sooner Amazon management realises it, the better. Amazon uses the principle of “have backbone, disagree and commit.” Well, Amazon has tried to break our backbone, we disagree with the pay rise and commit to being heard. On Friday the GMB union said Amazon workers’ protests where workers slow down their work to one package an hour were taking place at Tilbury, Dartford, Belvedere, Hemel Hempstead and Chesterfield. This is in addition to walkouts and stoppages at sites including Tilbury, Coventry, Bristol and Rugeley.
Dave is a pseudonym
Amazon striker speaks out
Hundreds of Amazon workers across several fulfilment centres have walked out over pay
Wildcat strike at Coventry Amazon fulfilment centre (Picture: twitter/@Walkout20201)
By Sophie Squire
Friday 05 August 2022
SOCIALIST WORKER
Issue 2817
An Amazon striker says “everyone stayed out” after bosses tried to intimidate them back to work.
Ben, who works at the BHX4 fulfilment centre in Coventry, is one of the hundreds of Amazon workers who’ve joined wildcat strikes at sites across Britain since Wednesday. “Yesterday was the main event,” he told Socialist Worker. “We had people on the day and night shift walk out.
“We had over 300 people that stopped working. We only planned to strike two hours before it actually happened. When we did, the managers said we wouldn’t get paid unless we returned to work. But everyone stayed and didn’t go back.
“Today we had around 30 to 40 people who went on strike and walked out and marched into town.”
Ben added that he and other workers were inspired by the action in Tilbury. On Wednesday workers in the fulfilment centre in Tilbury, Essex, stopped working after being offered a tiny pay increase of 35p an hour.
Videos on social media showed workers sitting in the canteen after downing tools. When a manager tried to persuade workers to get back to work, they responded with anger and made it clear they would not be going back.
A manager is heard on social media saying that it “wasn’t safe to be gathered in the canteen”. To this, workers shouted back, “We are fine.” Amazon bosses also withdrew catering services and threatened to sack workers if they left the premises.
Ben explained why Amazon workers in Coventry decided to strike. “We were told on Wednesday that we would only get a 50p pay rise,” he said. “Of course people have been complaining about bills going up, then they offer us just 50p.
“We worked through the pandemic and have made the company so much money. But in three years we’ve only received a 75p pay rise—including the 50p the bosses have just offered.”
Meanwhile, workers in the Rugeley Amazon warehouse in Staffordshire walked out on Wednesday after also being offered a pay increase of just 50p an hour. A worker at the warehouse told Staffordshire Lives, “Amazon Rugeley announced a 50p wage increase citing the local Rugeley pay rate average.
“The news didn’t sit well with the associates, and more than 100 people walked out in the canteen as a protest, which affected a lot of customer shipments. It’s an embarrassment of an announcement that comes as a mockery towards current employees.”
The bosses were worried about action spreading to a warehouse in Bristol. They posted a sign outside that read that there would be no more “distribution of literature.”
Poor pay and terrible conditions are pushing, often non-unionised workers, to organise themselves and take part in wildcat strikes and sit-ins. Around 100 workers at Cranswick Continental Foods in Pilsworth, Greater Manchester, launched a wildcat strike last Thursday.
All of these strikes show a new mood of anger—and resistance—in the working class as the cost of living crisis deepens. Socialists, trade unionists and campaigners should go down to their nearest fulfilment centre to send solidarity to Amazon workers.
An Amazon striker says “everyone stayed out” after bosses tried to intimidate them back to work.
Ben, who works at the BHX4 fulfilment centre in Coventry, is one of the hundreds of Amazon workers who’ve joined wildcat strikes at sites across Britain since Wednesday. “Yesterday was the main event,” he told Socialist Worker. “We had people on the day and night shift walk out.
“We had over 300 people that stopped working. We only planned to strike two hours before it actually happened. When we did, the managers said we wouldn’t get paid unless we returned to work. But everyone stayed and didn’t go back.
“Today we had around 30 to 40 people who went on strike and walked out and marched into town.”
Ben added that he and other workers were inspired by the action in Tilbury. On Wednesday workers in the fulfilment centre in Tilbury, Essex, stopped working after being offered a tiny pay increase of 35p an hour.
Videos on social media showed workers sitting in the canteen after downing tools. When a manager tried to persuade workers to get back to work, they responded with anger and made it clear they would not be going back.
A manager is heard on social media saying that it “wasn’t safe to be gathered in the canteen”. To this, workers shouted back, “We are fine.” Amazon bosses also withdrew catering services and threatened to sack workers if they left the premises.
Ben explained why Amazon workers in Coventry decided to strike. “We were told on Wednesday that we would only get a 50p pay rise,” he said. “Of course people have been complaining about bills going up, then they offer us just 50p.
“We worked through the pandemic and have made the company so much money. But in three years we’ve only received a 75p pay rise—including the 50p the bosses have just offered.”
Meanwhile, workers in the Rugeley Amazon warehouse in Staffordshire walked out on Wednesday after also being offered a pay increase of just 50p an hour. A worker at the warehouse told Staffordshire Lives, “Amazon Rugeley announced a 50p wage increase citing the local Rugeley pay rate average.
“The news didn’t sit well with the associates, and more than 100 people walked out in the canteen as a protest, which affected a lot of customer shipments. It’s an embarrassment of an announcement that comes as a mockery towards current employees.”
The bosses were worried about action spreading to a warehouse in Bristol. They posted a sign outside that read that there would be no more “distribution of literature.”
Poor pay and terrible conditions are pushing, often non-unionised workers, to organise themselves and take part in wildcat strikes and sit-ins. Around 100 workers at Cranswick Continental Foods in Pilsworth, Greater Manchester, launched a wildcat strike last Thursday.
All of these strikes show a new mood of anger—and resistance—in the working class as the cost of living crisis deepens. Socialists, trade unionists and campaigners should go down to their nearest fulfilment centre to send solidarity to Amazon workers.
Ben is a pseudonym
Watch: Protesters storm Tory leadership hustings
"The Tory leadership contest is like a competition on who can unleash the biggest attack on working people", Fatima-Zahra Ibrahim said.
"The Tory leadership contest is like a competition on who can unleash the biggest attack on working people", Fatima-Zahra Ibrahim said.
by Jack Peat
Ms Truss said after they left the studio: “Can I just say a few words on the militant people who try and disrupt our country and who try and disrupt our democratic process and try and disrupt our essential services.
“I would legislate immediately to make sure that we are standing up to militant trade unions who stop ordinary commuters getting into work. And I would legislate to protect our essential services.”
She added: “And I will make sure that militant activists such as Extinction Rebellion are not able to disrupt ordinary people who work hard and do the right thing and go into work.
“I will never ever, ever allow our democracy to be disrupted by unfair protests.”
The disruption came as Ms Truss was in the middle of delivering her opening speech at the fourth of 12 official Conservative leadership hustings.
Another protester was later escorted out as Ms Truss was in the middle of a question and answer session with Tory members.
She joked: “I take it as a compliment that I’m so popular with Extinction Rebellion.”
The Foreign Secretary’s bid to become prime minister got a major boost after Conservative former minister Nus Ghani came out in support of her campaign at the beginning of the debate.
Ms Truss was introduced by Ms Ghani, who told Tory members that because of her role as the vice-chairwoman of the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservative MPs, she had not been able to back a candidate until this stage of the race.
She said: “Liz is straightforward. When she tells you she’s going to do something, you can trust her that it will get done. Liz listens.
“When colleagues come forward with ideas or problems to solve, she engages with them. She is inclusive.
“I’ve been a minister and now a backbencher. And my experience with Liz Truss is that she is both fair and honest.”
She added: “It’s Liz that is going to bring us together.”
The former chancellor Rishi Sunak was instead introduced by Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary Dominic Raab, who told members Mr Sunak is the best candidate to “beat Keir Starmer and to win the next election”.
LONDON ECONOMIC EYE
2022-08-06
in Politics
Liz Truss has vowed to clamp down on “unfair protests” after a small group of climate activists disrupted her speech at a Tory leadership hustings in Eastbourne, East Sussex.
The five protesters, believed to be from the Green New Deal Rising group, heckled Ms Truss over climate change and energy bills.
They could be heard shouting “shame on you” and calling for a Green New Deal.
The Foreign Secretary described them as “infiltrators”, before vowing to clamp down on “militant trade unions” and “unfair protests”.
2022-08-06
in Politics
Liz Truss has vowed to clamp down on “unfair protests” after a small group of climate activists disrupted her speech at a Tory leadership hustings in Eastbourne, East Sussex.
The five protesters, believed to be from the Green New Deal Rising group, heckled Ms Truss over climate change and energy bills.
They could be heard shouting “shame on you” and calling for a Green New Deal.
The Foreign Secretary described them as “infiltrators”, before vowing to clamp down on “militant trade unions” and “unfair protests”.
Ms Truss said after they left the studio: “Can I just say a few words on the militant people who try and disrupt our country and who try and disrupt our democratic process and try and disrupt our essential services.
“I would legislate immediately to make sure that we are standing up to militant trade unions who stop ordinary commuters getting into work. And I would legislate to protect our essential services.”
She added: “And I will make sure that militant activists such as Extinction Rebellion are not able to disrupt ordinary people who work hard and do the right thing and go into work.
“I will never ever, ever allow our democracy to be disrupted by unfair protests.”
The disruption came as Ms Truss was in the middle of delivering her opening speech at the fourth of 12 official Conservative leadership hustings.
Another protester was later escorted out as Ms Truss was in the middle of a question and answer session with Tory members.
She joked: “I take it as a compliment that I’m so popular with Extinction Rebellion.”
The Foreign Secretary’s bid to become prime minister got a major boost after Conservative former minister Nus Ghani came out in support of her campaign at the beginning of the debate.
Ms Truss was introduced by Ms Ghani, who told Tory members that because of her role as the vice-chairwoman of the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservative MPs, she had not been able to back a candidate until this stage of the race.
She said: “Liz is straightforward. When she tells you she’s going to do something, you can trust her that it will get done. Liz listens.
“When colleagues come forward with ideas or problems to solve, she engages with them. She is inclusive.
“I’ve been a minister and now a backbencher. And my experience with Liz Truss is that she is both fair and honest.”
She added: “It’s Liz that is going to bring us together.”
The former chancellor Rishi Sunak was instead introduced by Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Secretary Dominic Raab, who told members Mr Sunak is the best candidate to “beat Keir Starmer and to win the next election”.
Rage against the Tories at Eastbourne leadership hustings
Protestors and activists disrupted Tory leadership hustings on Friday demanding climate justice and Tories out
Eastbourne protests at the hustings united different groups and individuals
Protestors and activists disrupted Tory leadership hustings on Friday demanding climate justice and Tories out
Eastbourne protests at the hustings united different groups and individuals
(Picture: John Hesse)
SOCIALIST WORKER
Over 200 protesters confronted the Rishi Sunak-Liz Truss hustings roadshow on Friday in the Sussex coastal town of Eastbourne.
Speaking to camera outside the venue a bemused-sounding BBC journalist struggled to be heard above chants of “Tories out” and “Refugees welcome here”. “It seems that every protester in East Sussex is here,” he said.
Meanwhile inside the event half a dozen young people from Green New Deal Rising and Just Stop Oil had blagged their way into the Centre to successfully disrupt the event to call for climate action. Typically rather than address the climate emergency Liz Truss vowed to crack down on protests and strikes.
Local protesters had gathered at Eastbourne station to welcome groups arriving from Hastings, Lewes, Brighton, Newhaven and Seaford. Then they marched to the hustings venue behind the East Sussex RMT Coastway union banner.
Eastbourne Trades Council and Eastbourne Stand up to Racism (SUTR) initiated the protest. Organiser Louise Walton from SUTR said, “Once we called the protest we immediately reached out to environmental groups and refugee support groups across East Sussex including Extinction Rebellion (XR) groups and the local Bespoke campaign which fights for improved cycle facilities in the town.
“We didn’t wait until the venue was known before putting the call out.”
Rachael from the local XR group said “Some good connections were made with different groups. Working together is how we win!”
Chelsea heard about the protest from a friend. She said “I went straight to the Welcome Centre, the hustings venue. There was just me and small groups of right-wing people. I felt very alone but then I heard the protest coming round the corner. What a wonderful sight. I wasn’t on my own anymore.”
When the march arrived at the centre protesters took over the concourse which was the entry point to the hustings. They drowned out and sidelined small numbers of conspiracy theorists and UKIP supporters.
Tories attending the event had no choice but to make their way past the protest while the crowd chanted “Welcome every refugee, throw the Tories in the sea”, “Sunak, Truss hear us say—tax the rich and make them pay” and “What do we want? Climate justice.”
At one point a visibly shaken Caroline Ansell, the local Tory MP, emerged to remonstrate with police saying “this is unacceptable”.
After an hour or so of chanting, protesters held a short rally. Keith Mitchell from the RMT received a rousing reception and warned of Tory plans to outlaw effective strike action. Other speakers condemned the government’s Rwanda deportation policy and the support of both candidates for fracking.
Over 200 protesters confronted the Rishi Sunak-Liz Truss hustings roadshow on Friday in the Sussex coastal town of Eastbourne.
Speaking to camera outside the venue a bemused-sounding BBC journalist struggled to be heard above chants of “Tories out” and “Refugees welcome here”. “It seems that every protester in East Sussex is here,” he said.
Meanwhile inside the event half a dozen young people from Green New Deal Rising and Just Stop Oil had blagged their way into the Centre to successfully disrupt the event to call for climate action. Typically rather than address the climate emergency Liz Truss vowed to crack down on protests and strikes.
Local protesters had gathered at Eastbourne station to welcome groups arriving from Hastings, Lewes, Brighton, Newhaven and Seaford. Then they marched to the hustings venue behind the East Sussex RMT Coastway union banner.
Eastbourne Trades Council and Eastbourne Stand up to Racism (SUTR) initiated the protest. Organiser Louise Walton from SUTR said, “Once we called the protest we immediately reached out to environmental groups and refugee support groups across East Sussex including Extinction Rebellion (XR) groups and the local Bespoke campaign which fights for improved cycle facilities in the town.
“We didn’t wait until the venue was known before putting the call out.”
Rachael from the local XR group said “Some good connections were made with different groups. Working together is how we win!”
Chelsea heard about the protest from a friend. She said “I went straight to the Welcome Centre, the hustings venue. There was just me and small groups of right-wing people. I felt very alone but then I heard the protest coming round the corner. What a wonderful sight. I wasn’t on my own anymore.”
When the march arrived at the centre protesters took over the concourse which was the entry point to the hustings. They drowned out and sidelined small numbers of conspiracy theorists and UKIP supporters.
Tories attending the event had no choice but to make their way past the protest while the crowd chanted “Welcome every refugee, throw the Tories in the sea”, “Sunak, Truss hear us say—tax the rich and make them pay” and “What do we want? Climate justice.”
At one point a visibly shaken Caroline Ansell, the local Tory MP, emerged to remonstrate with police saying “this is unacceptable”.
After an hour or so of chanting, protesters held a short rally. Keith Mitchell from the RMT received a rousing reception and warned of Tory plans to outlaw effective strike action. Other speakers condemned the government’s Rwanda deportation policy and the support of both candidates for fracking.
Future Tory hustings are: Tue 9 August Darlington, Thu 11 August Cheltenham, Tue 16 August Perth, Fri 19 August Manchester, Tue 23 August Birmingham, Thu 25 August Norwich, Wed 31 August London
UK
Government support fails to offset losses for low-income households, report says
Sunday 7 August 2022
Government support fails to offset losses for low-income households, report says
Sunday 7 August 2022
British one pound coins on British bank notes
Government support for low-income households amid the cost-of-living crisis falls short of offsetting the losses they face, with some families up to £1,600 worse off a year, a report has found.
The additional £1,200 offered to the poorest in society this year will fail to compensate for three major blows to their income from October 2021 to October 2022, the analysis suggests.
The loss of the £20-a-week benefits uplift, an annual uprating out of line with inflation forecasts, and a jump in the energy cap will mean the worst-off families cannot bridge the gap, it says.
The report, commissioned by former prime minister Gordon Brown, found that the largest families would face the biggest losses.
It is the urgent task of the next prime minister to ensure that families have enough to live, through this crisis and beyondGordon Brown, former prime minister
This is because the flat-rate payments offered by the Government fail to take into account the different sizes and needs of different households, it says.
A couple with three children are losing almost as much again from rising prices as they did from last year’s cut in the Universal Credit uplift, the report says.
And the loss for an out-of-work couple with two children is nearly £1,300, or £1,600 if higher inflation for worse-off households is taken into account, according to the report.
This is based on an £800 rise in the energy price cap, and will be higher to the extent that it increases further.
An annual uprating in April 2022 of 3.1%, rather than the 9% that the Consumer Prices Index had risen over the past year, will add to the cost-of-living pressure, the analysis suggests.
In an introduction to the paper, Mr Brown called on the Government to take “immediate action” to bridge the gap.
“It is the urgent task of the next prime minister to ensure that families have enough to live, through this crisis and beyond,” he said.
“I am grateful that this paper outlines the gap the Government must urgently fill before the next wave of rising costs overwhelms people.”
There is now a very serious shortfall in support for families who are most seriously in need. Urgent action is neededIsabel Hughes, Food Foundation
He added: “We have heard from the families we’ve met and those highlighted in the report that the flat-rate payments offered by the Government won’t stretch far enough for families who each have different needs and circumstances.
“These must be the people the next prime minister prioritises as we look for solutions.”
The report, carried out by Professor Donald Hirsch at Loughborough University, has 56 signatories including charities, organisations and faith groups.
The Food Foundation, one of the organisations to endorse the findings of the report, described the conclusions as “alarming”.
Isabel Hughes, policy engagement manager at the charity, said: “There is now a very serious shortfall in support for families who are most seriously in need. Urgent action is needed.
“That is why we have repeatedly called for extended access to free school meals for the millions of children living in poverty who currently miss out on this vital safety net.
“Ensuring these children’s access to one nutritious hot meal a day is the quickest way to prevent an under-nutrition epidemic which will otherwise blight the education, health and future productivity prospects of a generation.
We understand that people are struggling with rising prices, which is why we have acted to protect the eight million most vulnerable British families through at least £1,200 of direct payments this year, with additional support for pensioners and those claiming disability benefitsGovernment spokesperson
“We hope the incoming government will take seriously Professor Hirsch’s authoritative analysis and understand the need for immediate intervention.”
A Government spokesperson said: “We understand that people are struggling with rising prices, which is why we have acted to protect the eight million most vulnerable British families through at least £1,200 of direct payments this year, with additional support for pensioners and those claiming disability benefits.
“Through our £37 billion support package we are also saving the typical employee over £330 a year through a tax cut in July, allowing people on Universal Credit to keep £1,000 more of what they earn and cutting fuel duty by 5p, saving a typical family £100.”
Government support for low-income households amid the cost-of-living crisis falls short of offsetting the losses they face, with some families up to £1,600 worse off a year, a report has found.
The additional £1,200 offered to the poorest in society this year will fail to compensate for three major blows to their income from October 2021 to October 2022, the analysis suggests.
The loss of the £20-a-week benefits uplift, an annual uprating out of line with inflation forecasts, and a jump in the energy cap will mean the worst-off families cannot bridge the gap, it says.
The report, commissioned by former prime minister Gordon Brown, found that the largest families would face the biggest losses.
It is the urgent task of the next prime minister to ensure that families have enough to live, through this crisis and beyondGordon Brown, former prime minister
This is because the flat-rate payments offered by the Government fail to take into account the different sizes and needs of different households, it says.
A couple with three children are losing almost as much again from rising prices as they did from last year’s cut in the Universal Credit uplift, the report says.
And the loss for an out-of-work couple with two children is nearly £1,300, or £1,600 if higher inflation for worse-off households is taken into account, according to the report.
This is based on an £800 rise in the energy price cap, and will be higher to the extent that it increases further.
An annual uprating in April 2022 of 3.1%, rather than the 9% that the Consumer Prices Index had risen over the past year, will add to the cost-of-living pressure, the analysis suggests.
In an introduction to the paper, Mr Brown called on the Government to take “immediate action” to bridge the gap.
“It is the urgent task of the next prime minister to ensure that families have enough to live, through this crisis and beyond,” he said.
“I am grateful that this paper outlines the gap the Government must urgently fill before the next wave of rising costs overwhelms people.”
There is now a very serious shortfall in support for families who are most seriously in need. Urgent action is neededIsabel Hughes, Food Foundation
He added: “We have heard from the families we’ve met and those highlighted in the report that the flat-rate payments offered by the Government won’t stretch far enough for families who each have different needs and circumstances.
“These must be the people the next prime minister prioritises as we look for solutions.”
The report, carried out by Professor Donald Hirsch at Loughborough University, has 56 signatories including charities, organisations and faith groups.
The Food Foundation, one of the organisations to endorse the findings of the report, described the conclusions as “alarming”.
Isabel Hughes, policy engagement manager at the charity, said: “There is now a very serious shortfall in support for families who are most seriously in need. Urgent action is needed.
“That is why we have repeatedly called for extended access to free school meals for the millions of children living in poverty who currently miss out on this vital safety net.
“Ensuring these children’s access to one nutritious hot meal a day is the quickest way to prevent an under-nutrition epidemic which will otherwise blight the education, health and future productivity prospects of a generation.
We understand that people are struggling with rising prices, which is why we have acted to protect the eight million most vulnerable British families through at least £1,200 of direct payments this year, with additional support for pensioners and those claiming disability benefitsGovernment spokesperson
“We hope the incoming government will take seriously Professor Hirsch’s authoritative analysis and understand the need for immediate intervention.”
A Government spokesperson said: “We understand that people are struggling with rising prices, which is why we have acted to protect the eight million most vulnerable British families through at least £1,200 of direct payments this year, with additional support for pensioners and those claiming disability benefits.
“Through our £37 billion support package we are also saving the typical employee over £330 a year through a tax cut in July, allowing people on Universal Credit to keep £1,000 more of what they earn and cutting fuel duty by 5p, saving a typical family £100.”
Overcome a Reactionary Supreme Court
|
Congress needs to add justices to the Supreme Court. Only Congress can check the power of the current six-justice conservative majority, a bloc determined to impose its extreme political views on the entire nation. Many have already called for Congress to pass statutes countering specific cases, including decisions eliminating a woman’s right to choose abortion, expanding rights to possess guns, undermining efforts to combat climate change, and weakening democratic government. These calls, though, overlook an enormous obstacle: the Court itself. The conservative justices are likely to invalidate any legislation undermining their own decisions. Even so, Congress can restructure the Court so that it is once again for justice rather than for an extreme right-wing agenda. To create a more balanced Court, Congress must add four justices, expanding the Court to thirteen seats.
The conservative justices have consistently shown disdain for democracy and disrespect for Congress. They have invalidated numerous statutes, diminished the scope of congressional power, allowed corporations and individuals to use their wealth to skew democratic processes, and refused to intervene despite egregious political gerrymandering. The Court’s 2013 decision, Shelby County v. Holder, struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), and triggered an avalanche of state laws restricting voting. Given the conservative bloc’s anti-democratic bent, one should not expect the Court to exercise judicial restraint and defer to the democratic process if Congress were to enact laws countering any of the Court’s recent decisions. For instance, the Court would likely invalidate a law protecting the right to choose. Likewise, if Congress were to pass a law protecting suffrage or combatting climate change, the Court would almost certainly conclude that Congress had exceeded its constitutional power.
Given this dire situation, Congress must fight the Court by increasing its size. One additional justice will not suffice. Congress must add four new justices to offset the current six-to-three conservative stranglehold. Significantly, despite the Court’s hostility toward congressional enactments, the Court would be hard-pressed to invalidate a statute expanding the Court. The conservative justices like to stress text and history when interpreting the Constitution, and text and history clearly support the constitutionality of Court expansion. While the constitutional text establishes the existence of a Supreme Court, the text does not provide guidance about its size. Consequently, during the nation’s first century, Congress enacted seven statutes changing the number of justices, ranging between six and ten. These changes were often in response to political pressures. In one decade, the 1860s, Congress changed the number of Court seats from nine to ten to seven to nine. From 1869 to 2016, the number remained unchanged, at nine. Yet from February 2016 to April 2017, Mitch McConnell and a Republican-controlled Senate de facto reduced the Court to eight justices when they refused to consider Democratic President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland. After the Republican Donald Trump was elected president, McConnell and the Republicans returned the Court to its nine-justice size by confirming President Trump’s substitute nominee, Neil Gorsuch.
Not only do the conservative justices disrespect democratic processes but they themselves manifest an affirmative and ongoing threat to democratic and constitutional government. The Court recently accepted certiorari in a North Carolina gerrymandering case, Moore v. Harper, which involves a conflict between the state legislature and the state’s highest court. Moore will give the conservative bloc an opportunity to constitutionalize a Trumpian argument insisting that state legislatures have plenary power over federal elections, beyond any judicial oversight. Within the parameters of the American constitutional system, Congress can respond to this rabid Court and should not hesitate to do so. Passing a statute adding four seats to the Court will bolster the Court’s legitimacy and safeguard the nation’s future.
Republicans learn the lesson of Kansas: Indiana takes repulsive abortion debate behind closed doors
Republicans rejected putting abortion on a state ballot, because they know voters would reject the ban
By AMANDA MARCOTTE
The whole debacle was a potent reminder to the American public of the deep misogyny and hate that fuels the anti-choice movement. It likely contributed to the high pro-choice turnout this week in Kansas, where a staggering number of people showed up for what would usually be a sleepy election in order to vote down a pathway to an abortion ban. But, as the debate in Indiana demonstrated, the lesson Republicans are walking away with is not to back away from being the party of forced childbirth on 4th graders. Instead, they've concluded that they must keep voters from getting in the way of plans to mutilate, torture and kill women in the name of right-wing Christianity.
The last thing Republicans want is for the voters to decide because they know that the voters will vote for abortion rights.
Much of Thursday's debate over Indiana's proposed abortion ban was over whether to remove language exempting rape and incest victims from forced childbirth. The majority of Republicans opposed the rape exception and were exasperated in the face of reminders that this is pure sadism. The aptly named Rep. Karen Engleman introduced the amendment to remove the rape exception and when she was reminded that means forced childbirth on small children she let loose a loud "I'm the real victim here" sigh.
She then tried to pretend that forcing childbirth on a 5th grader is doing the child a favor, saying, "I think it's harmful to put a minor in the position of being the new Jane Roe." This is nonsensical, of course, because Jane Roe sued for the right to get an abortion, something no minor would have to do if abortion remained legal.
"You cannot treat rape, one of the worst things that can happen to someone, you cannot treat that with abortion," Rep. Tim Wesco argued. It makes as much sense as arguing that if an arm is already broken, there's no point in putting in a splint. But such an argument resonates with misogynists, who still imagine that rape "ruins" a woman, and so any efforts to help a victim heal and recover are a waste.
As I've written about before, this attitude isn't surprising to anyone who has engaged with anti-abortion propaganda, which is rife with glowing stories about how wonderful it is when women are killed or maimed by childbirth. The romanticization of female death and pain is part of the larger right-wing Christian view of womanhood. Baked into their ideology is that women are put on Earth to suffer and sacrifice. Women exist only to serve the desires of others. Women shouldn't have wants and needs outside of self-sacrifice, which is why anti-choicers tend to insist that women should be glad to die in childbirth or happy to give birth to a rapist's child.
Of course, these are views rejected by strong a majority of Americans, as evidenced by the abortion ban being defeated even in ruby red Kansas. Indiana Republicans clearly understand this, which is why they soundly rejected a bill amendment putting the proposed abortion ban on the ballot in November. As a reminder, Republicans have routinely used "let the voters decide" as a justification for the overturn of Roe v. Wade. In the decision for Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, Justice Samuel Alito hammered at this "leave it to the voters" excuse by writing, "Women are not without electoral or political power" and "In some States, voters may believe that the abortion right should be even more extensive than the right that Roe and Casey recognized."
That argument was pure bad faith from the beginning — Alito's contempt for women's right to vote bristles under the surface of his writing — but Indiana Republicans are once again proving it.
The last thing Republicans want is for the voters to decide because they know that the voters will vote for abortion rights. As with Donald Trump and his Big Lie, they are only for "democracy" if it keeps people who disagree with them from participating. As I note in Friday's Standing Room Only newsletter, the fight for democracy and the fight for abortion rights are one and the same. Abortion bans are predicated on an assumption that over half of Americans are not full citizens, an inherently anti-democratic belief. Enacting abortion bans means keeping the voters as far away from weighing in as possible. This is why Republicans have embraced Trump's war on democracy. They know they can't get away with policies like banning abortion if they have to answer to voters, so they are doing everything they can to avoid letting the voters have their way again.
Amanda Marcotte is a senior politics writer at Salon and the author of "Troll Nation: How The Right Became Trump-Worshipping Monsters Set On Rat-F*cking Liberals, America, and Truth Itself." Follow her on Twitter @AmandaMarcotte and sign up for her biweekly politics newsletter, Standing Room Only.
Republicans rejected putting abortion on a state ballot, because they know voters would reject the ban
By AMANDA MARCOTTE
Senior Writer
SALON
PUBLISHED AUGUST 5, 2022
SALON
PUBLISHED AUGUST 5, 2022
Indiana State Capital Building in downtown Indianapolis, Indiana
(Getty Images/pabradyphoto)
The voters of Kansas just rejected a Republican effort to ban abortion on Tuesday — but that doesn't seem to have deterred Republicans elsewhere in the region. Instead, both the misogynistic and the anti-democratic views of the modern Republican Party were on full display in Indiana on Thursday as the state's GOP-led legislature debated over how hard they plan to ban abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade.
Indiana has been on the national radar recently after a story about a 10-year-old pregnant rape victim from Ohio became the center of the country's debate over abortion bans. Due to Ohio's draconian abortion ban, the girl was forced to travel to Indiana to avoid being forced to birth a rapist's baby. The entire story was horrifying on its own, but Republicans swiftly made the situation worse by spinning like tops to avoid admitting that these kinds of stories are the natural result of their preferred policies. First, the GOP noise machine denied that the story was real and accused the ob-gyn who performed the abortion of being a liar. When the alleged rapist was charged — which is still very rare in rape cases — Republicans pivoted. They played word games to confuse the issue and started a harassment campaign against the doctor, clearly for the purpose of intimidating other people with similar stories into shutting up.
The voters of Kansas just rejected a Republican effort to ban abortion on Tuesday — but that doesn't seem to have deterred Republicans elsewhere in the region. Instead, both the misogynistic and the anti-democratic views of the modern Republican Party were on full display in Indiana on Thursday as the state's GOP-led legislature debated over how hard they plan to ban abortion in the wake of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade.
Indiana has been on the national radar recently after a story about a 10-year-old pregnant rape victim from Ohio became the center of the country's debate over abortion bans. Due to Ohio's draconian abortion ban, the girl was forced to travel to Indiana to avoid being forced to birth a rapist's baby. The entire story was horrifying on its own, but Republicans swiftly made the situation worse by spinning like tops to avoid admitting that these kinds of stories are the natural result of their preferred policies. First, the GOP noise machine denied that the story was real and accused the ob-gyn who performed the abortion of being a liar. When the alleged rapist was charged — which is still very rare in rape cases — Republicans pivoted. They played word games to confuse the issue and started a harassment campaign against the doctor, clearly for the purpose of intimidating other people with similar stories into shutting up.
Related
The whole debacle was a potent reminder to the American public of the deep misogyny and hate that fuels the anti-choice movement. It likely contributed to the high pro-choice turnout this week in Kansas, where a staggering number of people showed up for what would usually be a sleepy election in order to vote down a pathway to an abortion ban. But, as the debate in Indiana demonstrated, the lesson Republicans are walking away with is not to back away from being the party of forced childbirth on 4th graders. Instead, they've concluded that they must keep voters from getting in the way of plans to mutilate, torture and kill women in the name of right-wing Christianity.
The last thing Republicans want is for the voters to decide because they know that the voters will vote for abortion rights.
Much of Thursday's debate over Indiana's proposed abortion ban was over whether to remove language exempting rape and incest victims from forced childbirth. The majority of Republicans opposed the rape exception and were exasperated in the face of reminders that this is pure sadism. The aptly named Rep. Karen Engleman introduced the amendment to remove the rape exception and when she was reminded that means forced childbirth on small children she let loose a loud "I'm the real victim here" sigh.
She then tried to pretend that forcing childbirth on a 5th grader is doing the child a favor, saying, "I think it's harmful to put a minor in the position of being the new Jane Roe." This is nonsensical, of course, because Jane Roe sued for the right to get an abortion, something no minor would have to do if abortion remained legal.
Related
"You cannot treat rape, one of the worst things that can happen to someone, you cannot treat that with abortion," Rep. Tim Wesco argued. It makes as much sense as arguing that if an arm is already broken, there's no point in putting in a splint. But such an argument resonates with misogynists, who still imagine that rape "ruins" a woman, and so any efforts to help a victim heal and recover are a waste.
We also got a reminder that, for anti-choicers, killing women is a feature, not a bug, of abortion bans.
As I've written about before, this attitude isn't surprising to anyone who has engaged with anti-abortion propaganda, which is rife with glowing stories about how wonderful it is when women are killed or maimed by childbirth. The romanticization of female death and pain is part of the larger right-wing Christian view of womanhood. Baked into their ideology is that women are put on Earth to suffer and sacrifice. Women exist only to serve the desires of others. Women shouldn't have wants and needs outside of self-sacrifice, which is why anti-choicers tend to insist that women should be glad to die in childbirth or happy to give birth to a rapist's child.
Alito's contempt for women's right to vote bristles under the surface of his writing — but Indiana Republicans are once again proving it.
Of course, these are views rejected by strong a majority of Americans, as evidenced by the abortion ban being defeated even in ruby red Kansas. Indiana Republicans clearly understand this, which is why they soundly rejected a bill amendment putting the proposed abortion ban on the ballot in November. As a reminder, Republicans have routinely used "let the voters decide" as a justification for the overturn of Roe v. Wade. In the decision for Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health, Justice Samuel Alito hammered at this "leave it to the voters" excuse by writing, "Women are not without electoral or political power" and "In some States, voters may believe that the abortion right should be even more extensive than the right that Roe and Casey recognized."
Related
That argument was pure bad faith from the beginning — Alito's contempt for women's right to vote bristles under the surface of his writing — but Indiana Republicans are once again proving it.
The last thing Republicans want is for the voters to decide because they know that the voters will vote for abortion rights. As with Donald Trump and his Big Lie, they are only for "democracy" if it keeps people who disagree with them from participating. As I note in Friday's Standing Room Only newsletter, the fight for democracy and the fight for abortion rights are one and the same. Abortion bans are predicated on an assumption that over half of Americans are not full citizens, an inherently anti-democratic belief. Enacting abortion bans means keeping the voters as far away from weighing in as possible. This is why Republicans have embraced Trump's war on democracy. They know they can't get away with policies like banning abortion if they have to answer to voters, so they are doing everything they can to avoid letting the voters have their way again.
Amanda Marcotte is a senior politics writer at Salon and the author of "Troll Nation: How The Right Became Trump-Worshipping Monsters Set On Rat-F*cking Liberals, America, and Truth Itself." Follow her on Twitter @AmandaMarcotte and sign up for her biweekly politics newsletter, Standing Room Only.
Biden admin sued for failing to protect grizzlies, lynx, elk and moose in Montana: report
Darrell Ehrlick, Daily Montanan
August 06, 2022
Clearcut on Forest Service public lands in Montana / Bob Brigham
Four Montana groups are suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Forest Service for a decision that they say abandons 10 wildlife standards those agencies have used for the past 30 years to protect grizzly bear, lynx, elk, moose and more animals in the region.
In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Missoula, Helena Hunters and Anglers Association, Western Watershed Project, the Sierra Club and Wildearth Guardians are suing the two federal agencies to stop a forest plan they say not only downplays but intentionally disregards any of the animals’ habitat in favor of logging projects.
The 10 standards were developed and designed to preserve big game habitat for animals in the Helena National Forest and connect different parts of land.
Some of those standards include:
Adequate cover and hiding in winter and summer for big game species.The minimum cover and size of cover for elk.A requirement that the Forest Service will follow the Montana Cooperative Elk-Logging Study Recommendations.A rule that says the Forest Service will map all summer, fall and winter ranges.The service will protect bighorn sheep and mountain goat range during “resource activities.”And that the service will maintain moose habitat to provide “adequate browse species.”
Cover is the amount of protection a species needs to survive or thrive, and mostly consists of trees forming a canopy. It gives cover for animals from predators or hunters, and is necessary for rearing the young of the species. It provides both living space and vegetation.
The lawsuit also raises concern about the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service’s ability to protect the endangered Canada lynx because of the changes that would allow more logging and less cover, which it argues would impact wild hare populations that are necessary for the cats’ survival.
“The standards thrown out by the Forest Service in its revised plan are crucial to protecting wildlife, and to enabling threatened grizzly bear populations in northern Montana and Yellowstone to connect with each other and reach full recovery,” said Bonnie Rice, senior representative with the Sierra Club in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Rockies region. “Grizzly bears, Canada lynx, elk and many others will pay a steep price if this decision is allowed to stand.”
Hunters groups are also worried that more logging will remove cover essential for elk hunting and the area will be disturbed by motorized vehicles if the standards are removed.
Road density is also a key factor in disrupting grizzly bear habitat, including leading to more bear mortality.
The revised plan allows forest managers to perform “fuel treatments” which includes logging and more road building.
“We are extremely concerned with the Service’s decision to abandon all the wildlife standards that were in the previous plan and were based on peer-reviewed science,” said Gayle Joslin of the Helena Hunters and Anglers and retired wildlife biologist. “The intent is clearly to preempt the public’s ability to hold the Forest Service accountable for its actions.”
Both the U.S. Forest Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service declined to comment on the story because of the pending lawsuit.
Daily Montanan is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Daily Montanan maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Darrell Ehrlick for questions: info@dailymontanan.com. Follow Daily Montanan on Facebook and Twitter.
Darrell Ehrlick, Daily Montanan
August 06, 2022
Clearcut on Forest Service public lands in Montana / Bob Brigham
Four Montana groups are suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Forest Service for a decision that they say abandons 10 wildlife standards those agencies have used for the past 30 years to protect grizzly bear, lynx, elk, moose and more animals in the region.
In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Missoula, Helena Hunters and Anglers Association, Western Watershed Project, the Sierra Club and Wildearth Guardians are suing the two federal agencies to stop a forest plan they say not only downplays but intentionally disregards any of the animals’ habitat in favor of logging projects.
The 10 standards were developed and designed to preserve big game habitat for animals in the Helena National Forest and connect different parts of land.
Some of those standards include:
Adequate cover and hiding in winter and summer for big game species.The minimum cover and size of cover for elk.A requirement that the Forest Service will follow the Montana Cooperative Elk-Logging Study Recommendations.A rule that says the Forest Service will map all summer, fall and winter ranges.The service will protect bighorn sheep and mountain goat range during “resource activities.”And that the service will maintain moose habitat to provide “adequate browse species.”
Cover is the amount of protection a species needs to survive or thrive, and mostly consists of trees forming a canopy. It gives cover for animals from predators or hunters, and is necessary for rearing the young of the species. It provides both living space and vegetation.
The lawsuit also raises concern about the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service’s ability to protect the endangered Canada lynx because of the changes that would allow more logging and less cover, which it argues would impact wild hare populations that are necessary for the cats’ survival.
“The standards thrown out by the Forest Service in its revised plan are crucial to protecting wildlife, and to enabling threatened grizzly bear populations in northern Montana and Yellowstone to connect with each other and reach full recovery,” said Bonnie Rice, senior representative with the Sierra Club in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Rockies region. “Grizzly bears, Canada lynx, elk and many others will pay a steep price if this decision is allowed to stand.”
Hunters groups are also worried that more logging will remove cover essential for elk hunting and the area will be disturbed by motorized vehicles if the standards are removed.
Road density is also a key factor in disrupting grizzly bear habitat, including leading to more bear mortality.
The revised plan allows forest managers to perform “fuel treatments” which includes logging and more road building.
“We are extremely concerned with the Service’s decision to abandon all the wildlife standards that were in the previous plan and were based on peer-reviewed science,” said Gayle Joslin of the Helena Hunters and Anglers and retired wildlife biologist. “The intent is clearly to preempt the public’s ability to hold the Forest Service accountable for its actions.”
Both the U.S. Forest Service and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service declined to comment on the story because of the pending lawsuit.
Daily Montanan is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Daily Montanan maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Darrell Ehrlick for questions: info@dailymontanan.com. Follow Daily Montanan on Facebook and Twitter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)